Star.
London, England, 1808-07-21 00:00:00

LAW INT:ELEI6.ENG.E.

SUMMER ASSIZES.--NORTHF.RNCtn.
Mr. Justice CHATilitt—Mr. Baron Woos.
City of York, and County of the sunk City—Saturday, July Ws
at the Guildhall of the said City.
Yorkshire—The same day, at the Castle of York.
Durham—Tuesday, August 9, at the Castle of 1) ter haat.
Talon of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and Count.-of the samf town..
Saturday August 13, at the Guildhall octite said t6wn.
Ncrthumberland—The same day, at the Castle of Newcastle.
upon Tyne.
Cumberland—Friday, August 19, at the City of Carlisle.
"Westmorland—Thursday, August 25, at Appleby.
Lancashire—Monday, August 29, at the Castle of Lancaster.
OXFORD cutcurr.
Mr Justice LAWRtHC.X—Mr. Justice Ls BLANC.
Berkshire—Thursday, July 28, at Abingdon.
Oxfordshire--Saturday, July sO, at Oxford.
Glouceseershire—Wednesday, August 3, at GlouCester.
City of Gloucester—The same day, at the City of Gloucester.
Monmouthshire—Saturday, August 6, at Monmouth.
Herefordshire--Tuesday, August 9, at Hereford. ,
Shropshire—Saturday, August 13, at Shrewsbury.
Staffordshire.—Wedueaday, August 17, at Stafford.
Worcestershire--Saturday, August 20, at Worcester.
City of Worcester—The same day, at the City of Worcester.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT.
Mr. Justice Gcost —Mr: L'aron THOMPSON.
Nerthamptonshire-z-Tuesday, July 26, at Northampton.
Rutlandshire—Friday, July 29, at Oakharn. •
I.incolnshire-*--Saturday, July So, at the Castle of Lincoln.
City of Lincoln—Same day, at the City of Lincoln. '
Nottinghamshire—Thursday, August 4, at Nottingham.
Town of Nottingham—Same day, at the Town of Nottingham.
Derbyshire—Saturday, August 6, at Derby.
Leicestershire—Thursday, August 11, at the Castle of Leicester.
Borough of Leicester—Same day, at the Borough of Leicester.
City of Coventry—Saturday, August 19, at the City of Coventry
Warieicksbire—Same day, at Warwick.
NORTH WALES SUMMER CIRCUIT.
HUGH LRYCISTF.R, F.ll4l.—Sir THOMAS PLUMRR.
Merloneththire--Tuesday, August 23, at Dolgelly.
Carnarvonshire—Monday, August 29, at Carnarvon.
Anglesey—Saturday, September 8, at Beaumaris.
CHESTER CIRCUIT. •
Rosert DALLAS, Esq.—FRANCIS BURTON, Egg.
Atontgomeryshire--Thusday, August 25, at Pool.
Denbighshire--Wednesday, August 31, at Ruthin.
Flintshire—'cutvlay, September 6, at Mold.
lhosbire--Monday, September 12, at the Castle of Chester.
ISLE OF ELY ASSIZES.
EDWARD CHRISTIAN, Esq.
ly—Wednesday, July 27.

fendant was a poor man living at beat, and on his
s:paration from his wife, he settled on her 201. a year
as a separate maintenance, which was as much as his 1
circumstances could afford. She had a house in Rase- •
nary-street, Clerkenwell, and hid made some money
in letting lodgings. Having afterwards fallen into
ill health, she went to the house of the Plaintiff, who
was married to her sister, aad lived there for six 1,
months., The Trustees of the deed of separation had ,
paid the Plaintiff during that time the sum of 101. ,
being half a year's allowance ; but the Plaintiff con-
sidered himself entitled to bring his action against
the husband for necessaries furnished to his wife, ac-
cording to the fair and reasonable value.
A point of law arose upon this case ; whether an
action would lie against a husband from a tradesman
for necessaries furnished to a wife, when, it was known
by the tradesman that the wife war separated from
her husband?
Lord ELLENDORMIGII conceived that it was now
generally understood that the action would lie,but that.
the husband might be indemnified by the trustees to
the deed of separation. In the present case, however,
it appeared that the Defendant's wife had some money
when she went into the ilaintiff's house, which•money
was really the property of -her husba,-.J, and which
she ought to have applied, as far as it would go, to-
wards paying her necessary expences.
The Jury, after a short consultation, found a ver-
dict generally for the Defendant.

COURT OF COMMON FLEASOULY lE.
?REMELT v. MILES, KRT. AND ANOTHER.
This was an action of Traver, to recover back ,the
possession of certain goods which the defendants, She-1
riffs of Middlesex, had seized, by-virtue of g Writ of
Executioa. It appeared that the goods of a Mr. Whit.
tington had been detrained for the sum of 251.. arid
that the Plaintiff, who is a broker, paid the money
and took the goods. Whittington afterwards applied
to him to have the goods, which the Plaintiff agreed
to let him have, at the rate of 9s. per week.. He con
tinned, therefore, in possession of them up to the
month of August, when another execution was levied.
Itwas on this writ that the present action was brought.
There appeared, however,to be no agreement between
the parties, and
Sir JAMFS MANSFIELD -
observed, that the Sheriff
was not bound to know that the goods were not those
of Whittington's, against whom he had an execution.
Plaintiff Nonsoited.
FALSE I>IFIUSONMENT...--WARD t? UEOR v. ifOHNION.
This was an action for an assault and False Impri-
sonment. The circumstances of the case were as fol-
low :—Mrs. Ward is the wife of a weaver in Spital-
fields, and on Saturday, the 50th or Novemhnr, at
ten o'clock at night, went in company with five wo-
men, all in the employ of her husband, named
Mary Cornish, senior, Mary Cornish, junior, (the
daughter), Elizabeth Howard. Elizabeth aliock,
and Margaret Quince, to the shop of the Defen-
dant, a linen-draper, in Bi.hopsgate-street ; there
three of them made purchases, while Eliz. Bullock
stood at a short distance, after which they all left the
shop. On the Monday following the two Cornishes
and Mrs. Ward went again to the shop, and looked
at some cotton prints. The defendant's shopman
amused them while his master sent for a Police Offi-
cer, and charged Mrs. Ward and Mary Cornish, jun.
on suspicion of stealing, or being accessary thereto, of
a piece of cotton, on Saturday night preceding. They
were taken to the Police Office, and the result of the
examination was, that they were all discharged. The
whole of these u-omm were examined, and denied
that they stole the -,.)..t0n.
Masrm, the Officer, proved that when they were at
Worship-st. eet, Mrs. Ward twitched one of the young
women by the gown, in of der to induce her not to tell
where Elizabeth Fui,ock lived.
The def . 1,-:-ailed, that he had lost a piece of-
cotton, and he had probable reason for sitFect-
ing sonic one of the persons of stealing it, he there-
fOre justified on that ground.
He called several witnesses, consisting of his own
servants, to shew that this piece of cotton had been
cut off for Margaret Lannon, one of his servants ;
that it was placed on the counter near where Bullock,
one of the young women, stood ; that soon after they
had quitted the shop it was missed, and that search
was made all ever the house, but it could not be
found ; it was therefore supposed they must have
taken it. The shop was shut up before these pe..pie
entered, and the lamp was nearly out.
Sir JAMES MANSFIELD was of opinion the defendant
had made out his ground ofjustiszation, and therefore
the plaintiffs must be nonsuited.—PlaintiffsNonluited.

AN M l .../t.i.• 1,.
Rutlandshir
I.incolnshie
City of Lin,
Nottingham
fawn of N
Derbyshire
Leicestersh
Borough of
City of Coy
WariVicksh
1
Hui
Nferlonethi
Carnaryorts
Anglesey-
- Rol
Afontgome
Denbighshi
Flintshire-
Cheshire—
gly—Wed
. Gott
this
was an
as uncle
house, it
Mr. Ell'
r• conditio
beer.
ist a ren
the • Pia
in defau
be raise,
the a 2 1
The
tontine
aners cc
beer, at
him. '
Brewer
thence;
and as
to supi
of this
his old
increase
Elliot,
a distil
viz. 12
ditione
tiff rep
Defrnc
rlainti
The
was tie
in takii
being
The
ved, tl
misiste
bition
his spi
the el(
could
To
date's
agree,
howe'
said 1
bighe
Or
Mr. (
ted u
penal
anti t
ter of
cf co
It
to sh
with
I.(
t vide
it mt
with
*Li
the a
one,
()the,
i him
be h
tOlTli
• hay(
. beer
of 11
• Mes
i
thci
.
i
. that
Jury
Plai
Bre
.ti
dar
rily
1
the
It 1
li the
• ;
-,,