Star.
London, England, 1809-07-01 00:00:00

COURT OP COMMON MIA JUNE 30.

BERTHCCMIER V. POND.
This was an action for scandalous words, and the
damages were laid. at 42000. The plaintiff was a
teacher of the French language at Eaton College, and
the defendant an apprentice to a hatter at 'Windsor.
The action was brought more for the ♦indication of
the plaintiff's character from the charge imputed to
him by :he words in quesion, than for the recovery of
damages. Many witnesses of the highest respecta-
bility appeared in favour of the plaintiff, and no jus-
tification of the words was attempted. The Jury,
which was special, foundaiverdict for the plaintiff.—
Damages 4.05.

WAKEFIELD v. CHARLES.
This was an action on the case, for a breach of co-
venant, against one of the sureties of Saunders, the
late proprietor of the Riding School, in Tottenham-
street, Tottenham-court-road, formerly the King's
Concert Rooms. Saunders had covenanted to put
the roof in tenantable repair, and to give up, at the
expiration of the term, the premises is such repair—
reasonable allowance to be made for the use of the
same. To this covenant Charles was one of the
sureties; and, as such, against him the present action
was brought. Young, Watcock, Hall, Gago, and
several other carpenters, stated, that £360 were ex-
pended by Saunders ; but it appear6d, in cross-exa-
mination, that this sum was laid out in converting
the Concert Room into an Amphitheatre, for the ex-
hibition of equestrian performances, and not in re-
pairing the premises. Several witnesses we're called,
on the part of the plaintilL to prove the state in which
the premises had been given up to Saunders, in 1807,
and the state in which they were restored in 1808 ;
by which it appeared, that various articles of furni-
ture, forms, the orchestra, the chains by which the,
different chandeliers were suspended, the window-
shutters, lamp-irons, brackets, &c. &c. were not forth-
coming. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 2001.
being the amount of the penalty in the bond.

COURT OP EXCHEQUER, JUNE so.
BRANSCOMB V. WHITS.

The plaintiff and defendant in this cause are pro-
prietors of stage coaches on the Deptford-road, and
tile action was brought for the value of a horse which
was alleged to have been killed when the coaches got
entangled upon the road, by the defendant's negli-
gence in driving. Several witnesses swore that the
defendant was the cause of the coaches coming in
contact, and that the plaintiff's horse was struck by
the pole of his coach. On the other side, five passen-
gers who were in and upon the defendant's coach,
swore, that his coach, which the defendant drove
himself, was before the other on the road all the way
from Deptford, and that the plaintiff's driver was
whipping his horses furiously to get before it, and
drove the fore-wheel of his coach within the hind-
wheel of the defendant's ; that his off horse was never
touched by the defendant's coach, but was immedi-
ately seized with a strong shivering, and in two mi-
nutes fell down and expired. They also deposed,
that the plaintiff's horses were not in so good condi-
tion as those, of the defendant, and consequently
could not be expected to pull so well.
The 'Loan CHIEF BAIiON stated, that there was a
contradiction in the evidence which was given in al-
most every case which came before them where
horses were the subject of action ; but he thought the
defendant's witnesses, in the present case, entitled to
more credit than those of •the plaintiff, because the
former were passengers, and the latter the plaintiff's
servant, and others who were not so likely to know
the truth of the accident.

The Jury deliberated upwards of two hours, and
returned a verdict for the defendant. .