The Sun.
London, England, 1816-06-03 00:00:00

LAW iNTi.:,LLIGkNcr,.

• • toun'y bF BENcti, JUNE 1. -
-JUDGE V.cox.
The plaintiff, a baker, in Hal row, ,brought.
this action to recover thilliages for au injury he
sustained from. the bile of :+ doglieionging to the
defendant, a lady residing in the same neighbour-•
hood. The witnesses stat!d, that ht the time the
delandant.took the house in which she lived,;' the
dog-WAS OD the Treatises, brio;; recommended us
nn excellent s,ttegttttrtl : its CollbeqUeliCe tOf his
fierce diSpo3itiOn lte was always kept chained dur-
ing the day, aisd few persons even of the family
dated to approlcb The 'plaintiff had been
ill the practice of going to the house with bread,,
and- had never annoyed the clog iu ahy,way., On
the Ist Of February last the 1),(111441'J. having ,
vered his bread was returning tin n' an avenue,
whets an kilornl was given that the-t:O4 had'
'loose ; the animal was, however, for a time se-
cored by the defendant's son, but again escaped,
and colloWing the plaintiff, attacked him with great
fart* and very touch lacerated the calf •ot his right
leg. A medical gentlemen deposed to the extent
of the injury, which' had•confined the plaintiff for ;
about six weeks, to his bed,, and,..besioes this ex
• pence, he had been obliged to employ another
retina to attend to his busineSs. The Counsel for
the defendant contended, that the ittittost pains
had been, taken-lo confine the dog, but in
single instance ineffectually, fur it did lint appear
that it. had ever bitten any other pc6on : was
admitted that the dispositiou of the tliDlital iv as
tierce, ban hut more so than was DeCESSkity tot the
'protection of the act:Anima's property. It was
turthtr urged that Mrs. Cox was unacquailited
'with the temper of the dog.---Verdict tor, the.
plaintiff, damages 5.51.
MANTON V. MP.L.LISH.
The is al gun-maker; the defendant.is
a Colonel in the Arnty, and while serving in Spain
under .tive Duke of Wellington, its Assistaut
Mum-General, sent overto the pfaiutiff alt order
for theananufacture of a double•barrelled gin) ;
this older was delivered by Mr, T. Mellish. 'the
defendattes uncle ; and as soon as it was Coo 4—
plete6 iu parstiance. of further directions, it wits
bent 'to Pot tsmouth • to the care of a "Mr....Linde-,.
green, who was In transmit it to the Peninsula :
it wits6ent uu stint-hoard accurdiagly; bat -the
Agent at the ..port omitted to obtain the usual.
permissiirw"-ftecessary on Ate export of fire-arms,
and it was seized by the'Cuitoin-fionse Officers.
There war-nertniiiee—a-rto the value of the.
'gun which' was chargetrisir.s.2l. lOs ; hat the,
question was, whether, -tinder the circumstances,
Oreltefeatiat was liable' to pay, the gun never
ha virfpeonie into hi: pOssession.
Mr.ScS ttiLLTT, COl4ended that the plaintiffought
to have done all that was requiShe on 'the export
of fire-arms ; while the AifORNEi-GENERAL, for
the plaintiff, 'argued' that that duty bekinged to -
Or defendant's agent, Lindegreen,
ing executed all that he was bound' to periornrits
the manufaeture of the gun, ind its transaissioo
to Portsmooth : of this opiniem was' Mr. Justice
AlstioTT,, who sat . tor Lord Elleaborongli, cruel
the plaintiff acuotilinglyiecovered a verdict. •