Star.
London, England, 1801-11-18 00:00:00

DAVIDSON V. t4UsLIROVIL.

This was a demurrer in 3n aftion of replevin.—
The dittrefs was a heifer, and two cogniaances
were made by the Defendant IR, That the Plain-
tiff being. reliant within the manor of Inglewood
fora, did nut attend the Court-Leet as a Juror,
when duly fummontd, and that lie was thereupon
tined by the Reward aos. which fum he refuted to
pay: ad, That there is within the Paid manor a
laudable cuftrun, that the Jury arc charged at the
Court held after Eafter ta make prefentments at
the Court-Legit held after Michaelmas ; that if any
fail to appear, they forteit the turn of 401. and that
the Plaintiff being fo charged had not appeared
with his cojurors. Both were demurred to, and
Mr. Littledale now argued with uncommon abi-
lity in favour of the demurrer. The firß cogni-
rince he completely overturned from various cafes
and old AEU of Parliament, that the Steward has
no right to fine, except for off-noes committed be-
fore his own eyes in open court. All mi:demea-
nours done without doors are to he prefented and
amerced by the hommage. For thi; he quoted
Saville 93-1 801. Abr. 219—Dyer 211$ 13.-4.
Intl. a6l.—lt had likewif: been cnafted, that fines
ihould he reafonable, and there was no averment
that this W:IS a reatOnable fine. If there raided
fetch a clutom as that Rated in the fecund cogni-
zance, it was an unreafonable oakum, and there-
lure void. 1. It would import an obligation upon
any one who had once been put upon the jury to
remain within the manor fur ever. 2. To charge
a jury at one Court but to prefent at another would
be perverting the ends of jullice, by allowing an
opportunity to tamper with the jurymen, and fur
various other obvious realms. And, 3. The
Itrw-
ard would thus be empowered to let finest...r non-
attendance, when the general law of the laud gives
him no fuch authority. From Hawk. cap. so
—a Init. 99—Stat. Marl's. cap. so—F. N. B. t6o
—Stat. Merton ao—Hen. iii. cap. to--3. Burr.
t 113.9-1 Wilfon 248—Andr• ay. he neatly cite-
billed the propothion ; and after a few words
from Mr. Wood (who contested he had but Lula
hope) be received judgtnent for his client. .

ststozos• Cn•LLI%OI.

An application was made for leave to hie a
criminal information againfi the Reverend Samuel
Hnnt, for (aiding a challenge.
It was Rated from an affidavit that Mr. Hunt
is a Clergyman in Leicefterlliire, and lives near a
a Mr. Newin, a gentleman of conliderable pro-
perty. Being a keen fportfman, he ore,' freqnently
to trefpafs upon Mr. N'sound, and continued
to fhoot over them even after be had teen fevcral
times warned cff. A few weeks ago, Ws!king nut
with his Jog and ,iron, he met Mr.Nes in near his
own houte. Mr. Nevin was accompanied by a
couple of greyhounds ; thete Mr. Hunt called off,
makin them believe he had darted a hare. When,
findingom out their error, they had returned to
their mufti-, he exclaimed " This is the way 1 Hull
afe you as often as you entre in my way." Mr.
Newin walked on hut the Parfon loon overtook
him and renewed his infults. At left Mr. N.
alked what he meant ? " You are a rafcal and a
blackguard," laid Mr. Hunt ; " 1 lhould like to
exchange a mot with you, and I am ready to wave
my cloth." Rule to thew caufe granted.

1'

'~

P"
1,4