Star.
London, England, 1823-04-05 00:00:00

THE KING V.THE INHABITANTS OF STREATHAM.

This case stood first on the list of Special Juries.
Seven Gentlemen of the Special Jury had answered,
when the.LonD CHIEF BAnoN requested the list to
be read over a second time, observing that he would
fine those who were absentees without a reasonable
excuse. This was according done, and the following
Gentlemen not answering, were fined as follows
Sir J. 1). Broughton, Bart. 501. Thomas Langley,
Esq. of Kingston, 50/. Henry Wright, Esq. of Ham,
501. John Augustus Knight, Esq. of Wimbledon,so/.
John Garratt, Esq. of Kingston, 501.
A tides being prayed, the case proceedei. It was
an indict:nent against the parish of Streatham, for
not keeping one of the roads from Streatham to Clap-
ham, over Clapham-common, in good and sufficient
repair. As it possessed no public interest whatsoever,
we shall confine ourselves to stating that the indict-
ment failed.

TERRY V. THOMAS.
This was an action brought by Mrs. Terry, a widow
1 tdy, residing in Clapham, against %V L, Thomas, a
'common carrier, to recover the sum.of Dee, being
the value of certain goc.is, her property, intrusted to
his care, and lost by his negligence.
The facts on %%hick the plaintiff's ca'e turned ap
peared to be these:—Oa the 17th September last;]
Mrs. Terry, being on the point of setting out for
Brighton, sent four boxes from Clapham, by :VDU's
errand-car', to the waggon-office of Messrs. Sinning
and Co. Half-Moon Inn, Southwark to. be conveyed
to Brighion, by the defendaut's waggon of that dee,
so as to reach their destination ou the subsequent',
Friday. The direction on the boxes was " Mrs. Terry;
No. 70, Marine Parade ; to be delivered on Friday
afternoon, at Brighton." The book-keeper at Messrs.
Starring and Co. s positively declared that the goods
should be forwarded, as desired, by the waggon of
that day.• It turned out, however, that they were net
forwarded by the Tuesday's bat by the Friday's wag-
gon,a'nd that three Of LIIQHI never.re,achad the plain-
tiff; in. consequence of a rollbcry.that.was committed
upon it; on the Saturday night, at gpson,
cutest:races of g tertenegligence on the, part of the de-.
fendent.... it appeared. that about twelve. o'clock at
eighty'the waggon arrived at that own; .that it was
lelifor an hour .aud a half in the open streets, with.
'out any: perion.to look after it, except the driver, who
was at the .same time busily employed in tubbing
downlis horses; that -about iwo o'clock he got into
a 'place reserved .for the back of it, and slept
there !Or some hourseZind that on _waking in the
morning he diseoweradrAfast the. waggon lsaakbeen
nabbed %luring the night ef-aclnsciFierableqoantity of
property. All the Wien. Of Mrs. Terry -u ere it first
supposed to be among. t propM-ty stolen; but it
subsequently appeared that.otwoCtlatimatrived safe
at Brighton ;:sincl,thoirgiveletained . isi the possession
of the-deltodant for n'eensiderahla dale, was subse-
queue', restored 'wale plairnif about tho 7th of last
February. The piaintif estimated th.e:property she
had lost in the three byseg:n.o4l ►lr.Gtr« aver
contended that she watentitiedto recover that amount
on two grounds-0114,6n the defendant had been
guilty-of a rnisfeasiuseaisiieuding it by the Friday's
waggon instead of; `T.uesday's, as was Originally
,contracted • and Oy, that the goods were lost
owing to tae imps uponoper tragligence of the defendant.
Mr. MARRYAT COM-4ed alit the. plai utiff could
not recover on several grounds:—first•of all, because
there had been no misfeasance on the patt 'of the de-
fendant, he—never having proinieed, either by himself
or his agent, to Send them to Brighton by the Tues-
day's waggon.; secondly, because the gook a ere
above the value or SL. and not entered and paid for
as such, though these gas a notice in the waggon-
wasehouse tbat the proprietors would not consfrer
theniselves liable for the loss of any property above
51. unless it was paid 'for and entered as auch ; and
'thirdly, heels* therehad heed ho negligence on hii
part, the hostler at Epsom being constantly employed
by him to watch the waggon, whilst the driver slept
in it. If, however, the Jury ehould think that his de-
fence was not tenable on these grounds, still he main-
tained that the Jury ought not to value the property
lost at the price mentioned by the plaintiff, as they
must have suffered by the wear-and tear, to which
her witnesses submitted that they had been liable for
some years pait.
Mr. Manatee having called witnesses to substane
elate his statements,
! • Mr. GEIRtqY replied to them, and said, that the
defendant, in detaining from the plaintiff, till
bruary last, one of the boxes, which had conse to
his hand in September last, had acted as base and
infamous a part at he had over known acted by a
man who had dared to come into a Court of Justice:
indeed, instead of having an action brought against
him, he ought to have been indicted for a larceny.'
He contended, that the evidence peadeced by his
Learned Friend did-not shake in the slishteit degree,
the evidence he had submitted for the'plaintifi-; the
misfeasance and the negligence of the defendant were
pro*d beyond all doubt ; and as to IL- notice that

the prOprietors would not bt acconntahle rot the less
of sot parcel.ahOve five pounds-valise, unless it waa
paidfor aatil eitered as such, his tonfriett4fiead
well knew,•tliat though it might protect a paetzy
under many circumstances,.whiCh hesiould sit enu,
merate, itnever could protect him against the effects
of his own negligence.
The Lone Clime BARON was preparing to sum
up the evidence, when the Jury told him that it was
unnecessary, as their minds were made up on one
point, namely, that the plaintiff was entitled" to a
verdict. After a few minutes deliberation, they esti-
mated the damages which she had sustained at 1:84,
and returned a verdict to that effect.

enows count
Edward Haks was found guilty of a rape •on the
person of Maria Fenner, a child of eight years of age,
but was recommended to Mercy by the Jury. • .The
Learned Judge, in passing sentence of death upon
him, informed him that Le %taint employ the short
time he had to live in making his peace with Gap,
whom he had sb grievously offended, as be (Mr.
Baron GRAHAM) should have great "diffiCsdty in ap-.
plying the recommendation of thelury to so enormons
a crime as that of which he had been found guilty.
The prisoner, in leaving the dock, declared that
his life had been sworn away by perjtired witnesses.
Milford, who was stcquitted at the last
Assizes of the capital charge, was this day convicted
on the minor charge of having committed an assault
with the intent to commit a rape, on the body of a
child under ten years of age. He was sentenced to
twelve months imprisonment, and to hard labour at
the tread-mill during the whole of that time.