Star.
London, England, 1825-12-02 00:00:00

TA PSCOTT V. STOCKS.

The defendant in this action is the father of the ce-
lebrated female aeronaut who had so nearly lost her life
in her ascent with Mr. H tens. The action was brought
to recover the .um of St. and some shillings, for beer
and spirits furnished by the plaiintsff. It appeared did
the defendant had promi ed to pay this sum from the
proceeds of the collection which was made for Miss
Stocks at the time of the accident abovementioned.
The plaintiff's daughter was called, and proved that
beer, &c. bad been furnished, to the amount of 21. but
...he could not say hoiv much more.

There was no defence.
The Jury, after consulting together for a few minutes, returned.
a •erdict for the plaintiff—Damages, two guineas.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Drciniseß 1.
POPLET V. STOCKDALE.

Mr. Serjeant VAUOMAN stated the case to the Jury.
The plaintiff is a printer, and brought his action for the
sum of 961. for the printing of a certain celebrated wo' k
enti►led /he Mentoits of Harriette Wilson. According
to the contract between the parties,- Mr. Poplett was to
print three sheets per week, and Mr. Stockdale was
to advance SI. per week, and give his bill for the re-
mainder. The sale of the work encreased so rapidly,
that the thousand copies, originally agreed for, were at
length encreased to 17,000. Mr. Poplett, after the
seventh number, refused to continue the work, in con-
sequence of the nature of some of the passages, and it
was subsequently finished by other printers ; but Mr.
Stockdale never paid Mr. Poplin .the balance due to
him, for which the present action was instituted.

John Poplett, son of the plait.tiff, proved the agree-
ment between the p trues; but a written agreement being
put in by Mr. Serjeant Wilde, which was signed by
the witness as a principal, although he stated that in
signing it he acted for his father,
Mr. Serjeant WILDE objected to this evid nce, as, if
it were admitted, arty person might get rid of an ag. ee-
ment, and become a witness in his own cause.

Mr. CHITTY said, that in the City, brokers constaotly
signed their names as principals, although acting for
others whose claims they were subsequently permitted
to support by their evidence.
Mr. Serjeant Wzcos said that brokers in the City are
sworn not to act for themselves, and live security to the
Sky that they will not do so.
The LORD Cfrart Jvvrics felt the foil force of the
'distinction drawn by Mr, Serjeant Wilde; and notwith.
'trading Guildhall authority, entertained a strong
opinion as to the propriety of admitting such evidence
at all. As there was authority, however, be would
permit the evidence to be received; reserving the power
to Mr. Serjeant Wilde to have a nonsuit entered, if the
Court should be of opinion that the evidence should not
have been received.

the witness then proceeded, and stated the gradual
increase of the work until it retched the number of

10,000. When he took away the printing from the
plaintiff, there rt mained a balance against him of 961.
Mr. Rogan, a printer, was called to prove the reasonableness of
the charge.—This closed the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE addressed the Jury for the de.
fendant. He had received no instructions from Mr.
Stockdale, as to the line he was about to adapt ; but
unle_s he was restricted, he should think it his duty to
call the attention of the Court to the nature of the work,
which it was deeply to be deplored had ever issued
from the BlitiAr Press. The publication of the Me-
moirs of Harriette Wilson had reflected the highest
disgrace upon the character of the country, from the
eagerness by which it was sought for by vitiated appe-
tites. Unless then he was restricted, he should ask a
British Judge—
Lord Chief Justice BUT—Blether Wilde, you have
said enough to render it binding upon me, a guardian
of public morals, to consider the tutor* of this work,
and whether it is such as ought to entitle the printer to
compensation?
Mr. Serjeant WILDE proceeded to comment upon the
nature of the work in strong and forcible language. He
contended that its object WAS to expose the parent to the
child, and to render the son a disgrace to his f4mily,
and this for the purpose of extorting money, as might
be gathered from the very first page of the wrapper.
TAILD CUM JUSTlCE—Brother Vaughan, is not this work the
history of a prostitute?
Mr. Srrjeant VAVGIlax—My Lord, it is.
Losn•Ctttsr JUtTICE—And doss it not relate, or profess to relate,
her animus with certain individuals mentioned therein?

Mr. &rjeant VAUGHAN—My Lord, it would be affectation to
disguise it.
LORD CHIEV JUSTICE—Then, from what I have heard,
and Irons what I have lead of the numbers which have
been [lauded tip to me, I think it is a work calculated
to corrupt the morals 01 the public, and publi•hed for
the purpose of extorting money. I hope that iuch works
will not continue to disgrace the British press, and I
now dilect that the plaintiff Le nunsuited.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN said, he agreed in every observation
made by his brother Wilde, but he did think shat they ought not
to be beard from the mouth of Mr. Stockdak.—The plaintiff was
then nonsuited.
COURT OF REQUESTS, VINE-STREET.
lbw...moms OF HARRIETTE WILSON.
1 HARRIS O. STOCKDALE.

In this case, the decision of a point of some interest
to booksellers and publishers took place—being the
right of giving back perfect books, or parts, in exchange
fur imperfect copies.
Mr. J. Jr Stockdale was summoned by Mr. Harrir, a
bookseller, in King-sweet, Westminster, for refusing the
payment of 6s. in contravention of the custom of the
trade. It appeared, that Mr. Harris had purchased
three parts of /he Memoirs of Harriette Wilson of the
defendant,. for a • Gentleman, by whom they were re-
toured, as be:rig in 411 it:Teti:et stet. ComplAinant,

eonsetrnenee, applied to the defendant to exchange the
copies, which he positively refused to.do asset ting, that
he would only give the complainant the leaf, who might
afterwards make gond the deficiency himself, but the
complainant refused to take the book on that condition;
when the defendant said that he should charge com-
plainant 6d. at day, for warehouse-room.
Mr. Stnckdale, in defence, said, that it was a regular
thing for the venders of publications to make up such
defic.encies, and he objected to the part as being cut up:
Mr. Harris here submitted, that he recollected a
case quite contrary to the statement of the Menden,.
as to his liability to make good imperfections. He had
recently bought some publications of Mr. Limbird, in
the Strand, which happened to be imperfect, but upon
his application, they were exchanged immediately.
Mr. Stockdak.—But, Gentlemen, the entire parts were cut up
when returned:

Mr. Harris.—And bow could the Gentleman know they were
imperfect till he hand them up?
This closed the cue and an order was made for the payment of
6s. with costs, by the defendant; who seemed to be much discon-
certed at the decision of the Commissioners.

COURT OF DELEGATES. Menace 1.
BRISCOE V. BRISCOIL.

In this case the act of petition assigned on the last
Court day was delivered in on the part of Sir Wastril
Briscoe. The Court directed the warrant to be made
out to the Common Law Judge, for the purpose of hav-
ing the incidental issue tried with all convenient dispatch.
Dr. Lae now rose to renew his former application, and began
by complaining that he had not been heard in defence.
The Court, having esperlenced the enemy of a similar mat wavre
on a former day, moved off in a body, leaving the Learned Doctor
to himself.