The Sun.
London, England, 1866-12-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 6, 1366.

,SSE;

100
100
100
all
100
100

ISIONS.

102}

105 I

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and a Special Jury.)

COBBEN V. THE GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.

This case, which was expected to last the greater part
of the day, was arranged in court, and a verdict was taken
for the plaintiff by consent for £5OO for injuries sustained
through the alleged negligence of the defendants' servants.
(Before a Common Jury.)
BALL V. AXTEN.

This case was set down for hearing before a special
jury, but there was no appearance on behalf of the de-
fendant.

Mr. Pourle, Q.C., and Mr. 11. James were counsel for
the plaintiff. •

From the opening statement of the counsel it appeared
that the plaintiff was a farmer, at Amersham-common,
Buckinghamshire, and the defendant was a tailor of sport-
ing tastes, living in the same place. The alleged assault
took place on the 2d of January last, under the circum-
stances developed in the subjoined evidence.

Richard Ball said that he rented 20 acres of land at
Amersham-common, which he cultivated himself, and for
which ho paid £l5 a year. This land consisted principally
of arable ground, and by his industry ho had considerably
improved it. He suffered very much from his land being
ridden over by huntsmen. On the day in question Lord
Malvern and several huntsmen made their appearance on
his land, but on his remonstrating with them they wont
away. Shortly after a gentleman, whose name he under-
stood was Mr. Gurney, came up to his premises accompa-
nied by the defendant. He was determined not to allow
the huntsmen to ride over his land again. Ho told Mr.
Gurney so, but as that gentleman did not seem dis-
posed to go off his land, ho seized his horse by
the bridle and insisted on knowing his name. The gen-
tleman refused to give it to him, and then Mr. Axten
interfered. He requested Mr. Gurney to give him (Axton)
his whip, and said ho would split open plaintiff's head.
The plaintiff said he would not be deterred by threats, and
refused to relinquish his hold of the horse. While the
altercation was going on a small dog rushed out of the
house and caught Mr. Axten by the trowsers, but he did
not bite him, and he was harmless. Mr. Axton became
very excited, and snatching the whip from Mr. Gurney
began to beat the dog. His wife, hearing the
cries of the animal, came out of the house, and
took up the dog in her arms. Mr. Axton desired her to
lay it down, and on her refusal struck her with the
handle of a whip which was made of buckhorn. lie added
that the defendant wanted him to box him, but he said
that he would meet him in another way. (Laughter.)
Louisa Ball said she was the wife of the last witness, and
corroborated the particulars of his testimony, so far as re-
lated to the assault on her by the defendant. She added
that after'she was struck she became insensible, and still
suffered from the effects of the assault, particularly when
her hands became cold. She was unable to assist her hus-
band in the same way as previous to the assault.

A medical gentleman, named Frouse, living at Amers-
ham Common, proved to having attended Mrs. Ball and to
the extent of her injuries. Ho said that the defendant was
what he was described, a tailor, but was more addicted to
sporting than to following his business. Ito (defendant)
used to follow the hounds, but it was on a horse lent him
by a friend. (Laughter.)
The jury, after a short consultation, found a verdict for
the plaintiff, and assessed the damages at £5O.