The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-27 00:00:00

°Ws,. It. GRINYELL..

This was an action brought to recover the amount of a pro-
missory note at two months' sight, given by the defendant
to the plaintiff for goods sold and delivered. The
daintiff is a publican and maltater in Worcestershire ; the
Intendant at the time the debt was incurred, being a general
Water. The defendant, in a letter addressed to the plaintiff,
signed " Your unfortunate Creditor," admitted his liability to
.uty the amount, but that at that time he was unable to do so,
awing to his distressed circumstances. The counsel of the
lefendant complained of the extreme hardship of bringing the
lase from Worcester to London for trial, the expense of
ringiag the witnesses to town being more than the amount of
he debt. Witnesses were called to prove the delivering of the
"roods, and the signature of the promissory note.—Verdict for
the plaintiff, 261.
FEROCIOUS DOGS--ANDREWS V. SIMPSON.
Mr. Jervis and another appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr.
Thomas for the defendant.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, against the de-
fendant, to recover compensation for the injuries which he had
sustained, by having been bitten on the arm by a ferocious
dog belonging to the defendant. Both parties are hair-dressers,
the defendant being a master, carrying on business at No. 7,
Lower Marsh, Lambeth, and at two other places. The plaintiff
is a journeyman, and was employed by the defendant to
assist him in his business, at the rate of eighteen shil-
lings a week. A few days after entering his service,
he had occasion to go to the back of the premises, and
knowing that a ferocious and malicious dog belonging to
his employer was kept there, he desired a lad, who
was in the habit of feeding the dog, to go out and secure him
in a shed. Immediately on entering the yard the plaintiff was
seized by the dog, which fastened its teeth closely in his right
arm, and was dragged, without relaxing his hold, into the
shop, where the plaintiff bled profusely, and the wound be ng eon •
sidered dangerous he was taken in a cab to Guy's Hospital, where
he remained fora considerable time. On leaving which, though
cured, he was totally unable to gain his livelihood as a hairdresser.
The plaintiff'smother applied to the defendant for redress, or to
give her son some pecuniary aid, as her son, from the severe
injuries which he had sustained, was incapacitated from filling
his usual avocations. He told her she might "go to h-11 and
seek redress." The dog, for which the defendant gave 51. 55.,
had bitten a child in the hand, and was well known in the
neighbourhood as a ferocious and dangerous animal, and had
been ordered to be destroyed by the Magistrates of Union-hall.
On the part of the defendant it was contended that the dog
had seized the plaintiff whilst running across the yard, believ-
ing him to be a thief; that the dog was not at large, and that
considering the extreme poverty of the parties, a very small
amount of damages would be amply sufficient.
Verdict for the plaintiff, damages 2.51.

ITEttawr or CLOUDS.—Owing to its rarefaction,
the air beyond a certain height is incapable of sustain-
inK clouds. The principal masses of clouds are sus
feet,
tamed in he air
ezthewt,ertge
being
a iligtglihet
r. betweenmore
et 400
han,samuaen 7,00
.....d
Casm.
bridge Advertiser.