Star.
London, England, 1813-02-16 00:00:00

•••••, 1•••.- 1:77"+" '
' ... • ' . ~. .
1 ' •
- A11..6111 • • /-•- -- - -,
LAW INTEL LIGANCS.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEBRUARY 114.,
MAYOR V. JOHNSON.
The plaintiffs in this cause were merchants residing
in London ; the defendants were bankers at Stam-
ford. The action was brought to recover the amount
of a ses Stamford bank-now. It appeared that the
note in'question had been cut in two by an agent of
the plaintiffs' ; and that be sent one half; together
with other securities, by mail, on the 26th of October,
and the other part on the 28th t the latter part came
to hand, and on it the demand was founded t the
other part had been taken out of the coach, the Leeds
mail having been robbed. The note had been made
payable at Ramsbottom and Co.'s, and the plaintiffs
presented the half note to them, but they declined to
pay, unless authorised by the defendants. Plaintiffs
then wrote to defendants, requesting payment, and
offering indemnity. Defendants' letter in reply was
to the following effect :—,4 Gentlemen, we are much
7
surprised at your impertinence, in putting us to the
expence of a letter on an inquiry concerning your-
selves. Should you have occasion to trouble us again,
we request you will pay the postage-of the next let-
ter, or we shall return them unopened, without fur.
ther notice."
I Lord ELLENBOROUGH observed, that he bad waited
some time for a kind of proof that would have gone
to fix the defendants with the right of paying the half
note ; but nothing of such a nature had been addu-
ced ; and, ho ever hard it might be deemed, he felt
himself bound to say that the plaintiffs had not esta-
blished any thing like a cax. Whatever the defen-
dants might be bound in honour to do, they certainly
were not bound in law to pay the note, unless it was
Ares elted to them in what might be deemed a perfect
1 e
t form ; for, if such a practice as was now contended
‘ for -were to be recognized, what security was there
0 ' that parties so circumstanced as the defendants were,
might not be called on to pay bills,rwice over, for, it
' .
the bona fide holders of the other halves were to ap-
.
L• pear, on what ground could their claims be resisted ?
Before the defendants could in law be made to pay,
the entire property of the note must be presented to
'l them, otherwise th,ere was no fair legal claim on them.
ill A nonsuit was accordingly entered.
i I Sir WILLIAM GARROW observed, that such result
would only have this effect—that if country bankers
in general should adopt such resistance to pay an in.
demnity, it would make the public very shy of taking
their notes.
. LA NEUVILLE V. BEAUMIER.
1
This was an action to recover the amount of six
.
hogsheads of claret. There was a special count in
* I the declaration, and also counts for goods sold and
delivered, and goods bargained for and sold : the sale
was stated in the declaration to have been in the
-month of March, and the terms of payment to have
' . been three months and three months; but the witness
called by plaintiff proved the agreement to have been,
1 one half to be paid in cash, and the other in nine
.1 months. Upon this, Lord ELLENBOROUGH desired
the plaintiff to be called ; and Mr. TOPPING wishing
, - to take a verdict on the common counts for that part
which was to be paid in cash, his Lordship said, that
1 if he did, he would he bound as to the remainder, it
being an entire contract, and plaintiff could not come
twice.—No unit.
'lt? FEB. 15.— BASSETT V DAVIES.
-This was an action to recover damages for an as-
sault and imprisonment, committed by the defendant
on the person of the plaintiff. The parties were
butchers ; and it appeared, that on the Bth of Sep-
tember last, the plaintiff sent his boy to the defen.i
dant's shop, which was not far distant, to request the
return of some articles, which he had previously lent
him ; the defendant, however, instead of returning
them, said he had never borrowed any, and came
across to the plaintiff's shop to tell him so in person.
Here some words ensued, and the defendant threatened
to 'pet the plaintiff; and did, in fact, do so, by
knocking him down. This was the assault corn-
, plained of, and the imprisonment was said to be the
• having prevented the plaintiff entering his own shop
when he got up from the ground.
On the part of the defendant three witnesses were
called, who swore, that the plaintiff had committed
the first assault, by dbowitig the defendant off the
pavement, before he struck him. It also appeared,
that. whilst the plaintiff and defendant were on the
ground together, the plaintiff's wife came out of the
shop with the saw used for cutting the meat, and struck
the defendant a blow on the head with it, which
wounded him severely, and confined him to the
i house for a fortnight. Verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
mages, One Farthing.
MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
These Sessions commenced yesterday, at the Ses.;ions-House, Clerkenwell-green, before WM. MAIN-
; WARING, Esq. and a Bench of Justices.
Robert Rote was indicted for an assault upon Mrs.
r.s 'Fisher, wife of Mr. Peter Fisher, a merchant and
ship-owner, who had lodged in the Defendant's
house in the City-road, in September last, when the
offence was committed. Some trivial dispute had
arisen, and the defendant had so ill used the prosecu;
trix, that she had not recovered for tour months.—
Guilty—Fined £2O.
.1. Tomiine was indicted for assaulting Sarah West,
an elderly woman, on the 10th of January last. The
prisoner was boots at Slaughter's Coffee-house, St.
Martin's-lane, and the prosecutrix was chambermaid
• at the same place. On the morning in question, a
Gentleman, who slept at the house, having expressed
a desire to have his boots cleaned at an early hour,
the prosecutrix, who attended upon him, went into'
the place where the prisoner usually cleaned shoes,
' and proceeded to use the brushes herself. While thus
employed, the defendant came in, and seizing her by
the throat, knocked her down, and struck her several
*, violent blows on the breast, by which she was so much
affected, as to be obliged to quit her service on the
''' Monday following.
The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty,. and the pri-
soner was fined JES, which the Court directed might
I ,
- . be given to the prosecutrix.

The Americans, if you will take their word for it,
are the only people upon earth who entertain proper
ideas (.1. Liberty. That their claim is well founded
will be rendered apparent by the fol:owing 3-lvertise-
new, copied from the last New York papers received
in this country : " A stout, heart) negro wench, with
a male child, to be told cheap—Apply," icc.