The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-18 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before the
Lord Chief Justice and a Special Jury,
FENNELL V. FORD AND ANOTHER.

Mr. Hawkins, Q. C., Mr. Pren tice, and Mr. Brandt
were for the plaintiff; Mr. Phinn, Q.C., and Mr.
Garth for the defendants.

The plaintiff is the husband of a lady well
known in the musical world as Madame Dotti
(Dotti being her maiden name), and he sued the
executors of a gentleman named Woodburn for
the amount due to her for attending► and singing
to his friends on several occasions at Brighton and
in London.
On Madame Dotti being placed in the witness-
box she expressed her inability to give her evidence
in English, and after some discussion a great
portion of her examination was conducted in the
following manner :—She was examined in chief
by Mr. Brandt, and cross-examined by Mr. Phinn,
in the French language; her answers were taken
by the learned judge and translated by him to
the jury. It seems that in the early part of last
year Madame Dotti was giving lessons in singing
to Mr. Turner, the proprietor of a first-class
boarding-house at Brighton. One evening in
February she was requested by Mr. Turner to
sing something in the presence of the inmates of
German-house (the establishment in question),
among whom was Mr. Woodburn, a rich, liberal,
and somewhat eccentric old gentleman. He was
pleased with the performance, and asked Mr. Tur-
ner what her terms were for singing at private
parties. He told him that he did not know, and
the next day Mr. Woodburn called on her, and on
her telling him that 10 guineas per evening 'Were

her lowest terms, he engaged her to sing at Ger-
man-house, promising to give her even more than
that sum. She sang for four evenings for Mr.
Woodburn and his friends, and soon after returned
to London. In April he sent for her to Brighton,
and she again performed for four evenings. Sub-
Sequently, at the Sabloniere Hotel, she attended at
a party given by Mr. Woodburn and again sang
for him. For these services she now claimed by
her particulars 184, although she said she was
really entitled to double the amount. She said that
Mr. Woodburn had on many occasions promised to
pay her handsomely, and that for every hour she
lost she would be amply remunerated. Once he
offered her a cheque for 1:15 on account, but she re-
fused to accept it, alleging that she would rather
have all that was due in one sum. He said he
would consult his banker, and she should be paid.
The evidence of Madame otti was confirmed by
Mr. Norris, member for Abingdon, who was staying
at German-house while she was fulfilling her
alleged engagement with Mr. Woodburn, who told
him that he (Mr. Woodburn) "stood champagne
and music," and that he should pay Madame Dotti.
This gentlemen spoke very favourably of the vocal
powers of the lady, as also did Mr. Beale, the well-
known musical publisher. Letters were read from
Lady Cowley, Lady Sudely, and other persons of
rank, who expressed themselves in high terms of
praise of Madame Dotti's accomplishments. Her
diploma from the College of St. Cecilia at Rome was
put in, and a certificate from Signor Rossini, the
famous composer, by whom she was selected to sing
at a fete given at his native place—Pesaro—on the
occasion of the inauguration of his statue.
Mr. Phinn having announced that he did not
intend to call witnesses for the defendant,

Mr. Brandt proceeded to sum up the evidence at
some length.
Mr. Phinn then addressed the jury for the defen-
dant, and commented upon the improbability of the
plaintiff's case, which he designated as the result of
an afterthought, and laid great stress upon the fact
that Madame Dotti had at first claimed only £5O.
The learned judge, in summing up, said that the
defendants were justified in taking the opinion of a
jury on the case, for that it was their duty as execu-
tors to protect the testator's estate. At the same
time it seemed to him to be a question of amount,
unless the jury thought there had been no contract.
The jury retired, and after a short absence found
a verdict for the plaintiff for £B4, the amount
claimed by the particulars.

SECOND COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice Byles and a Common Jury.)

PERCIVALL V. SHIRLEY.

Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Pearce were counsel for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Huddleston and Mr. Honyman
for the defendant.

The plaintiff, a horse dealer and livery stable-
keeper at Burton-street, Eaton-square, sued the
defendant, Mr. Shirley, a horsedealer at T wicken-
ham, to recover damages for breach of a warranty
of a horse sold in the month of December last. It
appeared that a Mr. Carter had informed the plain-
tiff of the horse in question, and on a day in Nov.
last the plaintiff went to look at it, when it was
slightly lame. Subsequently, on the parties meet-
ing at Tattersalls', the subject of the recovery of the
horse was talked over, and it was alleged that on
this occasion the defendant stated it was perfectly
sound and free from lameness, and that £5O was
the price. The plaintiff afterwards sent Mr. Carter,
who purchased it at £47 10s. The morning after
it had been brought to the plaintiff's stables he put
it in a break, and it was then found that the horse
was lame, and Mr. Mayor, the eminent veterinary
surgeon, who was examined as a witness on behalf
of the plaintiff, stated that such lameness arose
from chronic disease of the fetlock joint in the off
hind leg. The horse was immediately returned and
the defendant then asserted and now reiterated as
his defence that no warranty was given. The evi-
dence was of the usual conflicting character, and
the jury returned a verdict for the defendant.