The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-01 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

ROLLS' COURT, Nov. 30.
WARD OF COURT ..-.-SCALYR V. SCALES.

This was the case.of a ward of Court, between
whom,,and a young man of the name of Saul, a clan-
destine mdrriage-had taken place in April last. The
young lady, still under age, was entitled under the
will of her father to a very considerable fortune. The
defendant was the son of a butcher, possessed of no
property ; and had no other means of obtaining a
livelihood than that of assisting his father in his
business. The marriage had been solemnized by
banns, in London, and it was row wished that a
proper settlement of the young lady's property might
be made.

Mr. PEPYS, who appeared on behalf of the guar-
dian of the young lady, and the executor of her fa-
ther's will, stated, all that was now desired was,
that a proper settlement of the property might be
made.

The MASTER of the RoLLs.—Then let there be
a reference to the Master to approve of a proper
settlement; and let the husband undertake to exe-
cute such settlement when prepared; otherwise hos-
tile proceedings must be instituted against him.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. SO.
GRAY V. Ca VIIIRIDCE......GRA 'I V. EDWARDS.

In these two cases the claim was for restitution of
money paid to the first defendant, an auctioneer, for
the purchase of an estate sold by auction, alleged by
him to have been paid over to the vendor, the second
defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff, subject to motion for set-
ting aside the trial and entering a nonsuit.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, GUILDHALL, N0v.30.

ZIEGILHIL V. RICMNANT.

Mr. BUSBY opened the pleadings.
Mr. Sergeant TADDY stated, that this was a case
in which he certainly felt much interest for his client,
who was a young lady, the daughter of a gentleman
resident in the country. The action was to recover
compensation for the very serious injury she had
sustained from the neglect of the defendant's ser-
vant. The defendant was himself a chemist and.
druggist, in a very considerable way of business,
and kept a horse and gig. On Sunday, the 12th of
August last, the plaintiff was walking down Alders-
gate, and was crossing at the end of Carthusian-
street. The defendant's servant was also driving
the horse and gig at a rapid rate in the same direc-
tion, and turned into Carthusian-street at the mo-
ment the plaintiff was crossing, and in so doing he
drove against her and threw her down, the shaft
striking her with very considerable violence : and,
had it not been for her presence of mind, in moving
a little, the wheel must have inevitably gone over
her. As it was, she was seriously injured, and had
lost several gold trinkets. The effect of the whole
was to throw her into such a state as entirely to in-
capacitate her to carry on her business of dress-
making. These were the facts of the case, but they
were considerably aggravated by the conduct of the
defendant when the father of the young woman
called on him to say that he should expect him to
make some remuneration for the loss sustained.
Mr. Wm. Smith—l am the son of the landlord of
the Three Cups, Aldersgate-street. On the 12th of '
August last, about one o'clock, I was standing at
my father's door, and saw the plaintiff crossing Car-
thusian-street. A chaise end 'horse were coming
down the street, at the rate of about nine miles an
hour, and turning round the corner, the shaft caught
the lady's breast, and she fell. The chaise and
horse, with the man in it, went on. I went after
him. He saw the lady fall. I followed, and he
stopped at the defendant's door in St. John-street.
I did not pick the plaintiff up. She was taken up
before. I think he ought to have called out to her
when she was crossing. There was time for him to
have done so.
Charles Heywood—l live in Carthusian-street. I
saw the lady and the hors, and gig. The gig had
passed by her. It drove on'and did not stop. I
called out to him, but he paid no attention.
Mr. Ziegler 4 am the plaintiffs father; and on
the Tuesday, after this accident, I called on the de-
fendant
ef
our man
" ,n You
hs are
fendimt at his house. I found him in his counting-
house. I said,
" Yes:' said he ; " and what have I to do with it ?
It is no business of mine. My man informed me:it
dpoen deoub to t informed
my
daughter.of,e
t
mischief
was more her fault than his." I said, " Sir, it was
your horse and chaise, and. therefore I shall look to
you. She has received considerable injury, and
likely to be under the surgeon's hands for some
time ;" and I said I hoped he would defray the ex-
gs;haifllyobue
pheatviesesa.nyHdeesmaaidn,d,"tlhesirieallidsomnyo smucalin2thhine
forthcoming." I said it was a mercy she was not
killed. He replied, "Well, if she had it was no
fault of mine,—l could not help it. But," he added,
" I see you prevaricate from what you told my
young man, to whom you said she had lost 101.
worth of trinkets." I said," No, Sir, I do not pre-
varicate ; when she went out, she had on two gold
lockets, and a chased gold key attached to a chain ;
when she came back, she had only the chain, which
was broken. I did not see her go out, but had seep
her in the course of the morning."
Mr. Robert Blake—l am a surgeon, and was called
in to attend the plaintiff. She was at her father's
house. She was much agitated from the shock she
had received, as well as from the bruises. I saw
her the next day, and examined her to find if any
ribs were broken, Her back and legs were very
much bruised. I continued to attend her up to the
middle of last month. She had a continued pain
in the back, arising from the , injury. I applied a
blister. The amount of my bill' was 61. 138.: that
has been paid.
Mr. Ziegler recalled—My daughter has been pre-
vented from carrying on her business from that time
to the present. She was totally confined far about
two or three weeks. At every attempt to work,
she experiences very severe pains in the arms and
shoulders.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE, in addressing the Jury for
the defendant, stated, that his client did not mean
to deny the facts of the case. He admitted that
the horse and gig were his, and also that the ser-
vant was in . his employ. A verdict must, conse-
quently, be given against him ; and the only duty
now remaining for the Counsel was to divest
the case as much as possible of the colouring
it might have 'received,' with a view to mitigate the
damages. The Learned Sergeant then went on to
comment on the evidence which had been given,
and observed that a great stress was laid on the fact
of the servant ,not -having called out when he saw
the plaintiff crossing the road. He (Mr. Sergeant
Wilde) knew, however, that in cases of women
and children it was not always, if ever, advisable
to call out. The other day, while riding in his
carriage, he observed that his coachman had driven
very near to some children, and feeling angry at his
having done so without calling out, he pulled
the check-string and asked him why he had not
done so ? If I had; said the man, I should cer-
tainly have driven over them ; for if you call out to
women and children, they invariably stand still
and scream out, and unless you have the horses in
good command there' is much difficulty in avoiding
them, This immediately struck the Learned Ser-
geant as being true, and he appealed to the Jury to
say, if they were in the habit of driving, if they had
not found it so. Another circumstance which might
have been instrumental in causing the accident was
the fact of this young lady's having been equipped
in one of those unfortunate bonnets which were now
so much in vogue, and which, doubtless, afforded a
very delightful retreat from the prying eye of vulgar
curiosity, but they were, nevertheless, exceedingly
inconvenient in narrow crowded thoroughfares, and
might frequently place the wearer in danger. The
Learned Sergeant concluded by saying, that al-
though the case might call for compensation, it was
not one which would subject the defendant to great
aid grievous moral censure.
Mr. Justice PARK, in summing up, said that the
d'Ffendant had acted very judiciously, bY instructing
his counsel as he had done : an attempted defence

would only have aggravated the case. Ifig
ship recollected not long since to have been crossin4
a road at the same time with 'an old woman, hold
was in danger of being run over, when he took hore
of her arm, saying, " My good woman, wht- B
you about, don't you see that carriage coming ?
had no sooner said the words," said his Lord4l4,',
" than she sprung from my arms, and threw heft
immediately under the horses' heads, iiher 0
e;
stood still and screamed. Very fortunately for 11r‘
however, the coachman pulled up, and she escar
unhurt." His Lordship, after having remarked 01
the language used by the defendant, which reflecteatu
no credit upon him, left it to the Jury to say whA
damages they thought the nature of the casc
manded. The Jury, without much hesitation, 're'

turned a verdict for 151.
WORKMAN V. NIONSKOUSE. the
.
This was an action of assault and battery •
defendant pleaded the general issue. On the JO too
which the assault complained' of was committed,
plaintiff was returning, with some companions, frjA
some houses at Camberwell, the erection Of W ;13-
he was superintending, and when passing theZ7d
berwell-grove Assembly-house, kept by the
fendant, they heard the inspiring sounds -(3` were
fiddle. Attracted by the merry notes that, et•
drawn from it, they went into the house to as $
taro what was going on, and there they foes'
number of gentlemen most appropriately ace's ed
in white trousers and boots, most actively elKler
in threading the mystic mazes of the dance. 7s. ,
were accosted at the door by the waiter, wh°.,o.
formed them that they could not join the partY,:A
less they produced a ticket; and he then ask .g
they wished any thing to drink, when the
asked for a glass of water, which he said he would
pay for as liquor. It appeared that at this timis,
defendant came up, and some words having pasLe.o
he.struck the plaintiff in the face,
and knocked
down stairs... This was the assault complaiPeu.,,,
sv
and a witness was called to prove that it egfil
but he did not give a very 'distinct accotint.:o
transaction. and
It appeared that the case was undefended, t
the Jury having considered the whole of the fact
400.
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damege9' 00-
In an action on a bill -of exchange, which w115,:`,.*
defended, Mr. Justice PARK examined the pleau,let
to ascertain whether the bill had been propel y
forth in them, and having carefully perused them,o
said to the Counsel, " Is this right? I see the
of the allegation in this declaration is, that "eoi
defendants made a certain bill of exchange,' matte.
of describing them all by their Christian 01,
This was not the manner of doing it in my.tirne•
Mr. JusTtcE observ"d, that this change was,fo
of the consequences of the " march of mind,
conspicuous in the present day.
°
to find fault with this practice. His only object Wes
:Mr. Justice PARK said, it was not his intents s
to know if it were correct, as it was not so Wl'
he was at the bar.