Star.
London, England, 1825-07-11 00:00:00

• LAW firPORT.

~ . .. . _
...
.....covgr vit CRANdltjtt JULY a.
,ic ENOREV. Tat OLAMOROJASSitin Tetaltik‘Glaa
Ile LORD CDANCEI:I.O4I desired the pailio
•the minutes of The•two former isses,tti it
and,
!, nd, he would, in is few days, ivruitito 4
ikt
id isstie; Whickhe thought ought tabe.O4d
ist ifie‘Couris iti Wcftmosioi. (Jill. ;Mrs
therefore, which his, ham' dai io ..
4 t 7,•
end!ess•ditctosiop, ii,lOr'tlie preient,"set aL
BARKER V. RAY. . •
This motion for A new trial, especially aponittred for
hearing, occupied the remainder of the d.ty. Mr. Ts. ,1-
DAL spoke on the same side as Mr.l3nounttam and Ar.
EVANS, who were heard on a former day, in su;p .it or
the application. -
Mr. WILLI/Lids, Mr. SHADWCLL. Mt. DUCKW milt,
and Mr..Pa RK, were heard, at very considerable lefigris
in opposition to the motion, and in styper t of the . vet%
diet alrrady prlinounct-d. The question is one so dry
and uninteresting to all but the parties concerned, 411.1
has been so frequently ilisiussed, that 'it would be a
wa-te both of 'Doe atul space to follow the arguments
of the Learned Gentlemen. The further prnceedilgs
were p :stponed i but do day wad fixed, as the.convt-
nience of Mr. SCARLET?, who, is tetained in the case,
wAs to be constilte.l.

Ilk Lordship rose at two o'clock, to attend the Commission of
Inquiry into the Court of Chancery.
• COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 9.
HUNTER V. HUNTER.
this was an action to recover the value of certain
articles sent to the defendant, the keeper of the Quee I's
Head Inn, in the Borough, in.order to be conveyed by
his Waggon to 'Rye. It appeared that the defendant's
waggon stepped for two nights between London and
It fie; on the fist 'night, the waggoner was accustomed
to sleep for eight hours, between Seven 0 ks and Tun-
bridge, during which time the waggon was allowed to
terrain on the road side, opposite the door of the inn ;
on the second night, the custom was to lock up the
wagon in a barn or warehouse. The chest in question
was deliyered to the plaintiff at Rye, who conveyed
them to Winchelsea, upon his arrival at which place
he discovered that it had been opened, and goods taken
our, to the value of 191. 10s. mod.

Mr. BROUGUAM, in a long and ingenious speech, ar-
gued upon the probability that the chlst might .hare
been robbed by the porter conveying it frona:the prain-
tiff's house to the Queen's Head; or it might- havAltern
rifled after the defendant's servants had delivered it to
the plaintiff at Rye, in order to his convejoing•it to
Winchelsea. Tfie Learned Counsel further contended,
that the defendant was not liable to any loss above the
slim of 51. a board being put up in the office, annolmc
ing the irresponsibility of the defendant for any go ids
above that value, unless they were entered and insured.'
The LORD CIIIEff JUSTICE commented upon 'the gross
carelessness of the tiefendant in leaving the waggon
exposed, without any guard, upon an open road, during
a whole night, and at so short a distance from Lond )11.
With respect tolhe irresponsibility of the defendant for
losses above the value of five pounds, it appeared that
the contents of this chest had been described to the de.
fendant's.book-keeper, at the Queen's Head, upon their
delivery, and being of only an ordinary value, he' had.
declared it unnecessary to insure them.—The'Jnry,
without hesitation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages 101. 10s. 3d. Costs 40s.
COUItT OF COMMON PLEAS, JULY 9.

WHITT.&KER AND ANOTHER 'O.CAIIIPBELL AND ANOTHEn.
This was an action brought by the Sheriff of 1‘1..1-
dlesez against the sureties of an Officer named LeaEh,
to recover the losses which the plaintiffs had incurred
through his misconduct. The evidence on the l art of
the plaintiffs went to show, that Leach had iece:ved
the persons of several defendants from another (hiker,
named Selby, to whom he haligiven what are techni-
cally called " receipts" for the bodi s of these de-
fendants. From the.;e defendants Leach hid tither
taken no bail bonds, or had accepted- as bail, pei sons
who were in insolvent circumstances. ' In consequence
of this, the plaintiffs had been obliged to pay the
debt and Costs in each of those actions in which L-ach'
had so neglected his duty. The number of legalohjec-.
tions taken in this cause was so great, that .his
ship, on one occasion, observed, the parties fought every
inch ; and afterwards added, that the points in this:
case were as thick as in a von of thi-tles—(A laugh)..
The Jury, under his Lordship's directions, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff::, upon nesrly all the onuses or -
action ; subject, however, to the opinion of the tows
on the numerous objectives whiC.ll had been taken. •

.

it
- f
.Yl. • ." ,
tAi..%GlielloA v V.
oat:in 41:0 h%ileCt i
ii tr.ifikin tai ..1
*6 Olaf ft.H. a
4.44c1 at ;..ne
, ..._
4 SI 414.4 e a i.on,
~ ea.te..l, syci)
t,
at re .
. ,
r a pooiated lor
I.ty. NIT.TVN- ii