Star.
London, England, 1822-12-11 00:00:00

West to Batgotl, he -Irentld &Mkt *-liar profit ;' elaiteiff told him that he Ins 110 t fit
that the premises haring on serss previous mod- '. 4 sbip, end that he, plaintiff, would base a rope for
to be Captain of
••• • •
gages to the amount of- resM, find ae minnity of £3O hioefellikee be-got to Segland."
charged Mr then; were starctibfre-nifi Moe efferl Tisle'rern Mates of the ship were tailed to prove
' the other. inensithiarices were OM ; mod that Archer; theee'fiefi,: Which they dick' Ittlif atdded, that the
who professed to have received' this bill, wiskh l i
as plaintiff was not confined to Itii"4l so long as was
part of the EBO3. 181. for a .valuable consideration, asserted by his witnesses; but that he was well able
had only obtained his certificate' a fiery short time to do his duty, if he.hadshqien.
\
before it was given. It appeared, 1141tver, that the On their cross-eiaminat:ipn, they admitted that the
defendant had not entirely repuditeje the bargain, 'Captain struck the plaintiff several severe. blows, LS
but had retained the title deeds, andThaving paid off snot until after' he, plaintiff, had used the provoking
;one of the mortgages,Tirae obtained possession of that I.isiguage.—Mr. Serjeant Pst.t. replied, and
I part' of the premises of Aids the legal estate had been The lainn Cum itirrtms sumhvid up, leaving to
conveyed to the mortgagee, whom he satisfied. the Jury to say., ender all the circumstances, to what
• Without hearing the reply or evidence in answer damages the plaintiff* was entitled. In his Lordship's
to this ease, opinion, they ought to be temperate.
the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE was of opinion, that, The Jury, after consulting together for a few mi-
sitting in a Court of Law, be could not say that a nutes, returned a verdict for the plaintif—barnMes
sufficient defence had been offered to the action. In One Hundred. Pounds•
order to invalidate the bill, even. in the hands of A FAMILY SQUAKBLE.—MARTIN v. MARTIN.
Gray, it was necessary to shew that the considera- This was an action to recover damages foi slan-
tion had utterly failed ; bat he could not et), that it derous words limiters by the defendant,' affecting the
had'utterly failed, while the defendant retained pos. character of the plaintiff. It arose out of that very
session of the deeds, and, had acquired possession of fertile source of legal proceedings, a family squabble.
part of the prenriiest: If he suffered anything but a The parties are relatives, the defendanebeing nephew
- . l
ulling
a h
total failure of consideration to operate as a legal to the plaintiff; they are, inc ost of relatives
defence, he should encroach on the province of a who were involved in . the squabble, of the Jewish
Court of Equity. He therefore recommended the persuasion, confectioners and dealers in lollipops by
jury to find a verdict for the plaintiff, and leave ano- trade. The scene of the present action was laid in a
ther Court, armed With different powers, to act as, on public-house in Petticoat-lane, WhitechaPfls• . •
a view of the entire case, might be requisite. It appeared fromthe -evidence of ,the plaintiff i
Mr. GASELEE said, the
_parties were already in brother, that on the evening-in question, which we:-
equity. A bill had been sled against Mr. Archer, after the termination of the Sabbath, the plaintiff was
who bed put in his answer, and the voluminous ex- sitting at the King of Prussia public-house, Petticoat-
ception to that answer had been over-ruled. lane (now called INiddlesex,street); there were pre-
The Jul refound a verdict for the plaintiff-g-Da. sent on this occasion the witness, Jacob, his brother
mages £209. 10s. Joseph, his brother Isaac, his brother Moses, and his
BULLOCK V. MALLARD. brother Aaron, and 'several other persons. Some per-
This was an action against a gentleman of Essex, son having mentioned the name of his brother David
on the warranty of' a horse sold by him to the plain- (the plaintiff), the defendant said, " Is it my uncle,
tiff for sixty guineas. The warranty proved was, David Martin? I say that my uncle David Martin
that thehorse was perfectly quiet, and would go quiet is a thief; that he stole a pocket-handkerchief, and
in harness; and the witnesses for the plaintiff proved gave it to his brother; and that. he is a passer of
that, on two occasions, the horse, when driven in a forged notes. This I can prove." • Witness added,
gig, kicked violently, and became exceedingly restive. that this was said in the hearing of all present. ' A'
One of these, the groom of Mr. Bullock, admitted dispute occurred scme time after this, as the.parties
that he expected to receive a guinea from Mr. Mai- were proceeding from the Synagogue to the Taber-
lard at the time of the sale, and had received only nacle. It was" a bit of a quarrel.' On-that oece-
a crown. He had said "he would take care of the dim, also, the defendant repeated the same words
horse," by which he intended only to do his duty. ' respecting the plaintiff. . .
Mr GuneEe, for the defendant, urged the proba- Witness underwent a long .cross-examination• by
bility. that the restiveness of the horse had been Serjeant PELL, the object of which was to shew that
caused by the revenge Qf the groom, who expected this was a mere family broil. In the course of it,
a larger fee ; and called the defendant's coachman, the audience seemed not a little amused at the coin;
his son, and others, who stated that lie had always cidence of so many patriarchal names assembling" in
been quiet while they bad known him. They had, discord vile" at a pot-house in Petticoat-lane. •
however, seen him but little in single harness. The landlord of the public-house corroborated-the
The Loan Cum, Justice left the Jury to decide
testimony of the last witness-as to the use of the ob-
between' the positive evidence that the horse was not lectionable words by the defendant. .
quiet, and the inference that he must have been so Mr. Serjeant PELL addressed the Jury for the de-
from his previous habits. As the horse had been sold fendant, and contended, that if the Jury gave any
for 27 guineas, if they found for the plaintiff, they. more than nominal damages in this case (and which
would give the difference between that sum and 60 he admitted the plaintiff was entitled to), they would
'guineas, and such:additional sum for the horse's keep be holding out an encouragement to all persons of
as they might think proper. the description of the parties here, in Petticoat-lane,
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.— and .in every lane in the metropolis, to waste their
Damages 44. ' time and money in'bringing actions for words spoken
. in anger, whenever there happened among the mem-
BEEITON V. CAMPBELL. AND DOUGHTY. bees of the same &luny what the witness Jacob had
This was an action against two surgeons, carryinop
called e a bit of a quarrel." Now, when they had
on business in partnership in the Edgware road, for so'
such 44 bits of quarrels" in. future, he was sati,fied
negligently conducting themselves respecting a dish,- 1
that the verdict of the Jury on .his occasion would-
' cation of the plaintiff's shoulder, that she was deprived
of the use of her ann. teach them that the best way would be to settle them
amongst themselves, and not bring them to be settled
It appeared in evidence that the plaintiff, a dress-
by a decision in a Court of LEW.
maker by trade, and between fifty and sixty years of
age, fell down, and had the misfortune to dislocate The. Jury, after hearing his Lordship's summing
up, refurned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
her shoulder. This was not known at the time; 'but
One Farthing.
finding it in pain, she consulted Mr. Campbell, and
went several times to his house, when he advised with The appearance of both parties (who were flume,
roue) at leaving the Court, indicated (if it is fair -to-
her, and gave her lotions to apply. After some time
judge from appearances) that this will not be the last
she went to another surgeon, Mr. Hesidington, who
ecion of
d a Jury in their case.
discovered that her shoulder was dislocated, and that .
by the delay the reduction had 'become difficult and MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. DEC. 10. • •
dangerous. She therefore did not submit to an ope- A wretched looking maw, dressed in a dirty smock
ration, but continued deprived of the use of her arm. frock, of the name of Samuel Rogers, was indicted
Mr. Heddington wrote to the defendant, Campbell, for' obtaining from a poor-Irish women 20s. under
but received no answer. That Gentleman, Mr. Che- false pretences.
- •
valier, and Mr. Wood, gave their opinion, that the It appeared by the evidence, that the defendant
mode adopted by Mr. Campbell of discovering whe- had accomplished this fraud by giving the w°
ther there was dislocation was uncertain, and that man a check on 'the banking-house of P
- Mes:s.r Bar:
they would have adopted other means' of inquiry. clay, Tritton, and Co. signed John Lee, 'for 201.
Mr. SCARLETT addressed the Jury .for the de- This check was not drawn in the Usual ferns, 'bet-
fendants, urging that Me Campbell had no interest was sufficiently well -worded to deludeth' e ignorant
in maltreating the case, but strongly the reverse; that lower orders: 'Of course, when _the check was pre-
his attention had not been drawn to the case as one of sented it was not paid.
dislocation; and that, at last, the plaintiff might have A Clerk in the!rouse of Messrs. Barclay and Co.
recovered the use of her arm by submitting to an stated that upwards of thirty of these false checks had
•
operation, which she did net choose to encounter. been presented for payment by very poor people.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evi- They were all written in the same hand-writing, but
dence, and the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff— all bore different names.
Damages £lOO. • A witness of the name of Cushion proved the re-
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DECEMBER 10. ceipt of wine of these checks, or bills, from, the de-
FLETCHER V. BRIOHTMAN. fendittit, and had lost considerable Alums of money
'
by litn,The Jury found a verdict, Guilt
This was an action to recover damages for an as- .. #.
sault committed by the plaintiff upon the defendant. Mr,
,ABABIBt for the prosecution, stated that the
i the instance of the a-
Mr. Serjeant Past stated the case to the Jury.—'-ri prisonef hid
i
sh of St. Giles `sad thatd at
the man had artfully con-
The plaintiff was a surgeon on board a South' Sea ?
trived to get naof 'between 200 and•3oo of these
whale ship. The defendant'was, at the time of this
bills; clefeauding whomsoever were ignorant enough
transaction, the Captain of the ship. It appeared
to be deluded.
from the evidence of two witnesses, who were' on
board the ship at the time, that in 1821, while the
, The Couar sentenced the prisoner to seven years'
ship was at sea, on het way back to England, some transportation'
words arose between the plaintiff and another per-
son, on which the Captain interfered, and struck the
plaintiff several blows with a thick rope and knocked
him down, and then struck him when he was down.
Plaintiff was confined to his hammock fur several
days, in con§emience of the ill-treatment received
from the defendant.
These witnesses underwent each a long cross-exa-
mination ; the object of which wite•to elicit an adeois.
lion that they had heard the plaintiff use very pro-ii
yoking and distespectful language to the Captain ;
but neither of them could recollect that the plaintiff
had used such words; they were not near enough to
have heard all that passed. - •
, , • Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN, for the defendant, admit-
reed that a verdict must pass against his client, who
iiiid not enter a justification upon the record; but he
would adduce such evidence as would satisfy, the
'Jury that the plaintiff wai 'not entitled to more than
'nominal damages: It would appear that the defeat
dant had at first only intended to prevent therplain-
tiff front fghtidg -with another on board, as was his
duty as Captain, and that when he had done so, the

Yesterday morning, a Cororser's Inqnest.was held
in the Fleet. Prison, before Mr. Situvrou,.Cqtoner,
on the body of William Guy, a prisone.r„aged.44,
/di* Elisabeth Chewer, a Lady of resinecal?le .bigh
aaa'ionntico=4 but unfortunately cop qmpl cur con-
tempt of the' Court of Chancery, atitek. that she,
bad known the' deceased ever since)* came into'tbe
prison; his health had for a long eime hee.ck,evitleUtly
much impaired: About thForkwee)tl ago be was
brought from Devizes-, ijostrney which..was'ton Jong
for birh to have undertaker!. :On Wednesday:last be
grew worse than usuil, a.surgon eras .called 40, who:
seated him to be in imminent danger, and gave him
medicine ; but he liOgered in the most excruciating
'pains ell Sunday morntrielast, about f9Utt: o clock,,
when'he expired... vip hyitnyfe•
The Coroner said; the jealousy of the law was such,
that it required Inquests to be bell on aliversons that
dit In priglis. It appeared clear ,tbe deceaw!,
died a natural death.—VerdiCl—.“ Visitation of Cron ".
Vilia.—Friday morning a fire brae nut at Bontbyd: Farm.
near •Brietol, eccopied by Mr. Youia, when the witoie of the
.prendses were deetroyed, and meet allay dead ertick._ .