Star.
London, England, 1830-05-20 00:00:00

CORONER'S INQ UESTS.

Yesterday an inquest was held at the Workhouse,
Royal Hill, Greenwich, on the body of Ann White, aged
89, who was killed under the following circumstances
The deceased, who was an inmate of the workhouse, was
crossing the road at Royal Hill, on Wednesday after-
noon, when she was run over by a horse which was gal-
loping at a most furious rate, and rode by a boy named
Webb, who appeared to have no command over the animal.
It appeared that Webb was returning from Blackheath
Fair, at a gentle trot, when a boy, in a butcher's dress,
struck the horse a smart blow on the hinder part, and he
galloped off and rode over the deceased. The Jury re-
turned a verdict of " Manslaughter against some person
or persons unknown ;" and ordered the description of the
butcher's boy to be advertised, and a reward offered for
his apprehension.
Yesterday an inquest was held was held before Mr.
STIRLING, the Coroner, at the Wellesley Arms, Robert-
street, Chelsea, on the body of a fine new-born male in-
fant, which was found under circumstances that left no
doubt that it had, if not actually destroyed by violence,
been wilfully left to perish by its unnatural mother.
It appeared from the evidence, which was very lengthy,
that on Saturday night last, between the hours of
eleven and twelve, the infant was discovered wrapped
la a piece of cloth, in the passage of the house of
Mr. Wake, a coal dealer in Paradise row, Chelsea.
A lodger named M'Carthy, who first discovered the
child, communicated the circumstance to Mr. Wake, and

the latter gave information to a police-man of the divi-
sion B, who, with the inspector, accompanied Mr. Wake
back to his house, and subsequently Mr. Shaw, a medical
gentleman, was sent for, who examined the body, and
pronounced it to have been born alive. It further ap-
peared that there were several lodgers residing in Mr.
Wake's house, and that free ingress to the passage
could be obtained until a late hour at night, the door
being on the latch.
A great number of persons living in the neighbour-
hood were called by desire of the Jury, with the view of
ascertaining, if possible, who was the mother of the
child ; but no satisfactory information could be elicited
on that head.

Mr. Shaw, the surgeon, stated that there were no ma-
terial marks of violence internally, but that the head of
the child was slightly bruised. He had no doubt that the
infant was born alive, and had lived some time after
its birth. He was not prepared, however, to say that
the child's death was produced by violence.

. .
The Jury, after consulting a short time, returned a
verdict of " Wilful Murder against some person or per-
sons unknown."

A fire took place in a thatched house at Bridport, on
Friday night, and twelve or thirteen families were burnt
out before the flames could be arrested ; it was with some
difficulty that the inmates were saved. Very little doubt
exits that the fire was the work of an incendiary.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAT 19.
Sittings in Banco.
cox V. MITYORD, ESQ.

Mr. DODD stated the plaintiff's case. The action was
brought to recover 401. for commission and agency by
the plaintiff, a house-agent in St. James's-street, for ad-
vertising and disposing of the defendant's house, in
Clarges-street, to Colonel Fremantle. The defendant had
paid 51. into court ; but the plaintiff, it appeared, was not
satisfied with that sum, contending that the customary
charge was 51. per cent. on the first 1001. and 2i per
cent. up to 2,0001. on the amount for which the house
sold. Colonel Fremantle, in consequence of inquiries at
the plaintiff's office, had bought the house for 1,5001. and
the plaintiff, therefore, was entitled to 401. A card,
stating the plaintiff's terms, was given to the defendant
when he employed the plaintiff.
Several house-agents were called as witnesses, who
stated that there was no universal rate of charge for such
business. One of the witnesses stated bis own charges
to be more than the plaintiff had charged, and one (Mr.
Bates) stated his to be something less ; but this was less
than the trade in general charged.
Mr. DENMAN (with whom was Mr. DAMPIER,) for
the defendant, insisted that the 51. paid into court was
an ample remuneration for merely sticking a bill in the
plaintiff's windows, and referring inquirers to the defen-
dant's house.

Lord TENTERDEN summed up, and the Jury found a
verdict for the defendant.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MAT H.
Sittings in Banco at Westminster.
CLARKSON V. LAWSON AND OTHERS.

In this case, the plaintiff, a Proctor in the Courts at
Doctors' Commons, brought an action against the de-
fendants, the proprietors of the Times newspaper, to re-
cover a compensation in damages for the injury he has
sustained, in consequence of the publication of a libel in
that journal, which stated that he had been thrice sus-
pended from the office of Proctor for extortion. The de-
fendants had put in a plea of justification, stating that
the plaintiff had been once suspended ; to which the de-
plaintiff demurred, on the ground that it was an insuf-
ficient plea. On a former day, Mr. Serjeant Cross
argued the demurrer on behalf of the plaintiff, and con-
tended that it was no justification to the libel, which im-
puted to the plaintiff a suspension from his office for
criminal conduct, to say that he had been once suspended
for nothing at all, and he prayed judgment on that
plea.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE was now heard on the part of the
defendants, and he contended that the plea was good.
The libel stated that the plaintiff had been thrice sus-
pended ; and the defendants, on their pleas, averred that
one of the charges was true. Under the general issue,
the defendants were not to be allowed to prove the truth
of one of these charges, and therefore it was necessary to
plead it, so that they might give evidence on the trial of
'that fact. The plea only went to justify so much of the
libellous matter as imputes one suspension.
The Cul ErJUSTICE—The libel imputes three suspen-
sions for extortion, and the defendants' plea of justifica-
tion says there has been one suspension, but does not
say what it was for ; so that it may have been for some
trivial matter, and not for the grave offence of extortion.
Mr. Serjeant CROSS, in reply to Mr. Serjeant WILDE,
I said, that the defendants could not split the libel into as
many fractional parts as they pleased, and justify what
particular part they thought proper. They might have
pleaded 14 different pleas, if they had minded to do so.
If a jury should find a verdict for the plaintiff upon one
count, and for the defendants upon another, what would
the court do, when the record was again brought before
them ?

Mr. Justice PARK—If the jury found for the plaintiff'
on one count, they would have to say what damages the
plaintiff was entitled to ; but of course they would not
give such large damages as if the verdict was given upon
all the counts for the plaintiff.
The Clump JUSTICE, having stated the nature of the
libel, observed that there were three distinct charges of
suspension for extortion, viz. twice by Lord Stowell and
once by Sir J. Nicholl. It was objected by the Council
for the plaintiff that part could not be pleaded in justifica-
tion. The libellous matter was, in its nature, several and
divisible ; the suspensions had taken place by order of
different Judges, on different days, and as the principle on
which actions for libel were maintainable was, the malice
of the defendants and the injury done to the plaintiff, so
much ought to be struck off as lessened the damages. If
the defendants bad pleaded the general issue, they could
not have given evidence that the plaintiff had been once
suspended, and they could only do so by pleading the
fact on the record. If the libel in its nature could not
have been severed, the defendants could not have pleaded
the truth of a part of it ; they must have justified all or
none. This doctine was held in Styles and Nokes, and
as there were three distinct charges in the libel, the de-
fendants had a right to show that one of the charges of
extortionate dealing with a client on the part of the
plaintiff was true.
Mr. Justice PARIC—The plea of justification as to one
of the charges he held to be good. The libellous matter
being divisible into three charges, the defendants could
plead the truth of one of the charges. Ifs libel charged
a man with stealing three horses, and a plea was put
in by the defendant that he had stolen one horse, it
would be a good plea, and the fact would go to the
Jury in diminution of damages. So in the present case,
it covered so much of the declaration as to make it a good
plea.
Mr. Justice GAZELEE—If there were several criminal
charges contained in a libel, a defendant could plead the
truth of any one of the charges in justification, because
evidence could not be given of the truth of any part of the
libellous matter under the general issue. In this libel
there were three charges, and if the defendants could
prove the truth of one, the Jury would be likely to give
smaller damages than if all should be false.
Mr. Justice BOSANQUET—The defendants may jus-
tify any one of the charges—the libellous matter being
severable.

The Cutts Jurrlca--The demurrer is overruled. The
cue, of course, goes to trial on the present pleas.

DOE DEM. LORD TEYNHAM V. TYLER.

This cue was tried before last Term in this Court. It
was an action of ejectment, and the verdict was given for
the defendant. A motion was made for a new trial some
time ago by Mr. Serjeant Jones, on the ground that do-
cumentary evidence which was not legally admissible was
received by the Judge on the trial.
The COURT was occupied the greater part of the day
in reading the notes taken on the trial, and in hearing the
arguments of Mr. Serjeant WILDz against the rule.

The Dover mail, while on its way along Ludgate-hill
yesterday evening, came in contact with a man in a state
of inebriety, tad all the four horses ran over him, but,
providentially, without the least injury, owing to the exer-
tions of the coachman, who stained every nerve, and
with extraordinary ability saved him from the imminent
eager.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.