Star.
London, England, 1822-07-27 00:00:00

SUMMER ASSIZES.

CHELMSFORD, JULY 2.

BAINES V. SHEAR/4AB.
This was an action to recover a compensation in
damages for defamatory words spoken by the defend-
ant of the plaintiff, stating that he set fire to his mill.
Mr. Justice PARK summed .up the evidence with
the utmost impartiality. He considered the defendant
to have been aggravated into the expressions he had
used; and he thought there was sufficient in the con-
duct of the defendant to shew that he never believed
the plaintiff to have been guilty of setting fireto his mill.
The questions for their consideration were first, whe-
ther the
.words alleged to have been spoken were
proved, and, if they were proved, whether they were
spoken maliciously ? Both these circumstances must
lie made out to their satisfaction befote they could
give any damages; but, it they were satisfied upon
both these points, they would give such damages as in
tl:eir judgments the nature of the case demanded.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.—
Damages £lOO.
None of the capital convicts were left for execution.
CAMBRIDGE, JULY 24.
BATLEY V. BINGIIAM.
This was an action brought by. the plaintiff' to re-
cover the sum of 1:110, the price paid by him to the
defendant for four horses. The cause was tried at
the last Assizes, when a verdict was, returned for the
plaintiff; but on the motion of Mr. Serjeant FIRTH,
in the Court of King's Bench, leave was given for a
new trial. The defendant pleaded the general issue,
and thereupon issue was joined.
Mr. STORKS addressed the Jury. This was a horse
cause, and of a very extraordinary nature. The plain-
tiff, a respectable horse-dealer in Whitechapel, sought
to recover the sum stated in the declaration of the
defendant, mho was an opulent farmer, at Holbeck,
in that county. Witnesses were called to prove that
the horses were wilt ranted soltnd.
For the defendant, John Warner was examined by
Mr. ItoniNsox.—Witness saw Batley at Bingham's
house. a li!Ce before Thorney fair; plaintiff said, he
shoe:.; like the defendant's horses, but " he was such
n !lard old chap" he could not deal with him, when
wit:n:ss tendered his services to put them to rights,
and Batley ultimately agreed to give him £.:14.0 for
t !e three horses, he 'laving the old one into the bar-
gain ; nothing was said about warranty.
Mr. Srottxs cross-examined this witness at great
Imgth. Took the horses to Thorney, but discbvested
tio lameness ; had been in the habit of going tolhe
fair with Mr. Bingham for some years.
Mr. STORKS.—" Sa you carried the horses to
Thorney, from Holbeck, and never found they were
lame ?"—Witness—" I am not strong enough to carry
a horse—(A langh)—a horse carried me."
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE also examined him at
considcra .le ,ength, but he appeared consistent in his
testimony throughout.
John Greetham examined.—Witness lived at Port-
land, and occuried 200 acres of land ; he 1::-ew the
horses horn yearlings; the old black 'horse, said to
have been tell years at the fair,. could not have been
there as many times, as one of the witnesses bad
sworn, unless he was there beJre he was foaled. He
was firmly convinced tie horses were sound, except
the ore throw n in, which could not hold his water.

-His Lordship recapitulated the evidence, and left
it to the Jury to determine, amid so much conflict-
ing testimony, on which side truth lay. His Lord-
ship was of opinion, that there was great inconsistency
in the evidence of the plaintiff's witnesses.--Verdict
for defendant.

YORK, JULY vs.
jENNINGS D. DOBSON AND OTHERS.

The plaintiff is a coal-mei chant at Swilliogton, and
brought his action against the defendant, who is Cap-
tain of a vessel, for trespassing on a field of corn
which the plaintiff rented of the Marquis of llertford,
and also for an assault of a very aggravated nature.
John Jennings, son of the plaintiff, examined.—On
the Ist of September last he was in company with his
father, when the defendant, accompanied by two
others, and having adouble• barrelled gun in his hand;
was in the act of hunting his dogs, and treading down
his father's corn, which was nearly' ripe. Witness's
father remonstrated with the defendant, who, in re-
ply, demanded, " Where is your authority ?" adding.
" I know thee, and thou bust nothing to do with it.'
Witness's father said, " The crop is mine, and you
shall not go over it ;" upon which the defendant
seized the plaintiff by the collar, and they fell down
together. They defendant grasped the plaintiff's
cheek with his hand inside, by which his mouth bled
much. %%lien the defendant got up again, he called
to his servant, wbo held his gun, " Shoot him ! d—n
his body, shoot him!"
Here defendant's Counsel, having confetrei with
-bis chew, consented that a verdict should pass for the
plaintiff in £5O. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages
4.:.50, and costs.
_ _