The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-15 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER.--(THIS DAY.)
(Sitting in Banco.)
CIRCUIT PAPER.

Their Lordships have agreed th.it the following shall be the
circuit paper for the ensuing Spring assizes :
Home—Lord Denman and Baron Alderson
Midland—Lord Chief Justice Tindal and Justice Coltman
Oxford—The Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Baron Rolfe
Norfolk—Mr. Baron Parke and Mr. Justice Maule
Northern—Mr. Justice Pattison and Mr. Justice Coleridge
North Wales—Mr. Justice Williams

South Wales— Mr. Justice Wightman
Mr. Justice Erskine and Mr. Justice Creswell remain in town.

BOARD V. COLEMAN.

This was a writ of inquiry directed to the Sheriff of Surrey,
to assess the damages due to the plaintiff from the defendant,
for holding over sonic premises in Lambeth after the expira-
tion of a lease, and was executed on 19th Dec. last, when the
jury found damages, amounting to 353/. Os. 4d.
Mr. BURTON moved the Court for a new writ of inquiry,
on the ground that the damages were excessive, and against
the evidence on the trial in the action of ejectment.
A rule nisi was granted to show cause why a new writ
should not be had.
WHARFAGE.—BENSON V. TE3IPERLEY.
This was an action on the case tried in this Court on the
lit December last, and was brought by the plaintiff to re-
cover from the defendant damages for having trespassed
upon the ground of the plaintiff, opposite to his ship-building
yard, abutting upon the river Thames, when the jury found
a verdict for the plaintiff, with damages amounting to 501.
The plaintiff was a shipwright, and occupied premises ad-
joining the river Thames, and claimed the frontage before
his yard over which the river ran for the purposes of his
business, and denied the right of any other person to place
their barges there. The plaintiff proved a prescriptive right
of forty-five years. The plaintiff also claimed damages from
the defendant for having injured the ground by digging
mud holes in it. The defendant traversed the plaintiff's
allegations, and denied the plaintiff's right to the sole use
of the ground in question, and put it in evidence that plaintiff
had allowed a man named Vesey to moor his barges on the
ground in question without interruption for two years.
Mr. GUNNING now moved the Court for a rule to show
came why a new trial should not be granted, or the damages
reduced to forty shillings; and contended, in support of his
motion that the plaintiff had failed to prove the antiquity of
his right to the exclusive use of the land before his ship-
building-yard, and that the plaintiff, by allowing the land
to be occupied for two years, was proof of his doubting the
validity of his right, and that the Lord Chief Baron in
charging the jury had misdirected them, by assuming that
the plaintiff's prescriptive right had been proved, whereas
that right was claimed by the defendant in common with
the plaintiff. The Learned Counsel also contended that the
damages were excessive, on the ground that the mud holes
were necessary for the purposes of wharfage, and useful to
the plaintiff.
The Loan CmEr BARON—If the defendant could have
proved an adverse usage of twenty years against the plaintiff,
there would have been some ground for the motion; and as
to the damages, perhaps Mr. Jervis would consent to their
being reduced to 201.
Mr. JEPXIS consented to the reduction on behalf of the
plaintiff, and a rule to that effect was granted.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)