The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-23 00:00:00

UMAN V. BULWAR.

This was an action brougut by the clerk of a wine-mer-
chant for salary, amounting to 13/., at the rate of 100/.
a-year. A nonsuit was entered, with leave to apply to the
Court to enter a verdict for the plaintiff for 151.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that the real question
for the Court was, whether a servant being hired for a
year, could quit his master's service without notice, and
still insist on being paid in proportion to the time he chose
to remain. The plaintiff in the present case had been
hired for a year, at the salary of 100/., he remained about
two months, and then left his situation abruptly, without
giving any notice of his intention. By the custom of Lon-
don, if that was relied on, he ought to have given a month's
notice, so that there was really no ground for the present
application.
Mr. Castratu., contra, denied that there had been any
contract on the part of the plaintiff to serve for a year. If
such a contract was made, he admitted that 43.15, action
could not stand ; but though the salary was nominally
yearly, the servant was not bound to stay the whole year,
nor the master to keep him for the year, if he thought pro-
per to discharge him.
The CovaT recommended that the case Should be com-

promised, and suggested that a verdict far lb/. should be
entered, both parties paying their own costs, and defendant
undertaking not to bring a cross action.

THE KING V. THE CORPORATION OF LONDON.

This case having been mentioned by the RECORDER, the
rule for a mandamus was made absolute, and upon its return
next term, the defendants are to set forth the custom of
the Corporation of London.

SIR WILLOUGHBY WOOLSTON DIXIE, BART.
In this case Mr. COMMON SERGEANT applied to the
Court to order that Sir W. W. Dixie, who was now in
confinement in Leicester gaol, should be let out on bail.
_ . _

Lord TENTERDEN—Whatis the offence with which he
is charged
The COMMON SERGEANT-He is charged, my Lord,
with an assault on his own daughter with a criminal in-
tent, but I have affidavits from the prisoner himself, who
aserts his innocence in the most solemn manner, and states
that the prosecution has been brought by his brother-iu-law,
the Rev. Mr. Andrews, not for the love of justice, but because
the deponent refused to put his children out to educate
and to allow certain salaries for their education in a man-
ner which had been proposed. The deponent further
swears, that it had been intimated to him by the attorney
for the prosecution, that-if he did not comply with the
wishes of his brother-in-law in those particulars, the pre-
sent prosecution would be commenced. The affidavit then
goes on to state, that the deponent had his children home
from school in consequence of chilblains, but that they left
his house on the 25th March last, since which he had not
seen them; and your Lordships will perceive that the pre-
sent charge was not preferred until the present month. I
have also the affidavits of the servants, who state their
utter disbelief that the charge against Sir Willoughby is
well founded, and particularly the affidavit of the woman
who had the care of Miss C. Dixie's wardrobe. There is
also the affigavit of a medical man, who states, that Sir
Willoughby is in a state of math, which makes it unfit
that he should be removed.

Their Lordships -having consulted together for some
minutes,

Lord TENTERDEN said, Mr. Common Sergeant, you
mats take a certiorari to remove the depositions, and take
a rule to serve on the prosecutor, to show cause why Sir
Willoughby Dixie should not be admitted to bail before the
local Magistrates.