Star.
London, England, 1809-06-23 00:00:00

COURT OF ICING'S 3114C8, MU O.

NASH V. HIND.
This wat an action to recover payment for a sow,
valued at six guineas, and two geldings, the one va-
lued at 351. and the other at 411.--jeold by the plaintiff
to the defendant ; as also for the recovery of twelve
guineas, being the balance due by the defendant to
the plaintiff, on the exchange of two other geldings ;
and for 51. 15s. being the price of twelve gallons ofl
gin, sold by the plaintiff to the defendant.
The two sons of the plaintiff•proved the selling of
the sow and geldings, and the prices of each, as
it
agreed to by the defendant.
It was stated by Mr. MARRY ATI', that the defendant
hal paid for the sow, by giving Nash a ton of po-
tatoes, but this was denied by oneof Nash's sons, who
said that he had heard Hiad say---,g that he would
char,,7e his father nothing for the potatoes, because he
had always found Nash behave so much like an ho-
nest man."
One White, a o roved, that Nash
lerk to a distiller, p
had bought the twelve gallons of gin at their distil-
lery ; and that the permit with which he removed it,
was such as to prevent its being carried or delivered
to any one but Hind.
Mr. MARRYATT also insisted that the action could
not lay, as one Freeman was a partner with Nash, in
al. his horse and cattle dealings ; that he was so at
the time of these bargains being made between Nash
and Hind ; and that consequently he should be a
j(,:nt prosecutor with Nash.
But on Freeman being called, he disclaimed hav-
ing any charge against Hind whatever. A verdict
was ilierefore given for the plan till' with costs.

BASTES v. GUNCAIRN.
This was an action for Ale purpose of recovering
20001. being money lent by the plaintiff to the defen-
dant (the Countess Dowager of Glencairn), on two
bonds, which one Fisher, an attorney, swore to hav-
ing the Countess sign.
Mr. GARROW .said, there was another count on
which the plaintiff wished to recover, and that was on
a pr.)miss. ry no.e of the Countess for 5001.
L(;rd ELLENBOROUGH said, that it was natural to
suppose, that the bonds in question were designed to
cover all the debts up to the time of theirbeing made
out ; and that unless they could prove they were
conscientiously certain that such, was the case, he
thOught the Jury could not find a verdict for the re-
cc*ery of the 5001. Besides money could not be re.
covered on a proniissory note, unless it was an ac-,
knowledgment of a debt ; as in law they are consi-
dered in the same light as bills of exchange.
The Jury then frond a verdict for the 'plaintiff on
the bonds ; and ci nil ,lebens., for the de!endant, on the
cduut ,for • .

•••••••

7 ,

wittiAms v. NURSE.
Mr. Neat stated that this was. an. action for an
assault. The Plaintiff 1.,..Ar5. a ,poor woman,..and the
Defendant kept a public house in ting-siteet,. Co-
vent Garden. The Plaintiff was at his house drinking'!
a pint of beer, and chancing to giveltimsotne °Fence,
what it was she knew not; the Defendant violently
thrust her out of doors, and gave her a kick, in a.very
improper place, by which she was considerably btuised.
She called a witness, who proved that he saw the
the Defen-
fant behind her, who had apparently been the cause
of her sapid exit.
Mr. GAnltow. stated that his friend had told the
Jury, the Defendant had kicked a woman in a very
improper place, but he had not condescended to
inform them which was the proper place to kick a
woman. But•he wholly denied the kicking ; for if
his poor client had been so minded, he was not in a
condition to do it, for at that time he had the gout in
both his feet ; and himself knew by painful experience
that that was not a time in which a man had a wish
to indulge himself in kicking others. The real fact
was, the plaintiff came to the defendant's house reel-
ing drunk, having swallowed a pint of Mr. Bekher's
best cordial gin to compose. her stomach overloaded
with Ivleux'sentire,.and. she was so noisy and trouble-
some that the defendant was forced to put her out of
his house, which he did as quietly as possible: The
servant of the defendanthaving proved this statement,
on the suggestion of the Court a juror was withdrawn.

ness.
Mr. Serjeant Cootie contended, that the glass was
the property of his Royal Highness, and had been
manufactured is consequence of an order from him ;
several of the articles were emblazoned with the goyal
arms. The Learned Serjeant contended, that such
a delivery had been made as vested tbe property in his
Royal Highness, and no aftcr,act, had been dons_ to
destroy that property. From the books of Mr. Col-
lins, it would appear that his Royal, ighttess had
been debited not for the hire, but for the, full value
of the articles in question.
The ledger, &c. of Mr. Collins was then preirced,
vi.ten it appeared, as stated by the LearnediSerjeant,
that his Royal Highness was made debtor td the (till
value of the articles.
Mr. Chapman, shoprnan to the plaintiff, 'stated, that:
a service of glass had been prepared was Royal
Highness, but never delivered; part. sent cicavn
to Kensington, and retuned. He had represented
.them as prepared for his Royal Highness, but never
considered them as his property. .
His Royal Highness was then 'Sworn and examin-
ed frorri the Bench.
His Royal Highness's evidence was to the follow-
ing effect I know Mr. Collins ; the glass in ques-
tion was ndt sent to me, it was sent to Kensington;ol-
it
was lent for a dinner I was about to give ; Mr. C
lins serves me constantly ; itis Usual with gentlemen
who have no establishment to be furnished with what
they want in this Way ; I had no establishment at that
time and I requested Mr. Collins to send me some
glas*Z.for a dinner ; he. sent me some of different sorts ;
among other circumstances, I had ordered a service
of glass, but had never seen it ;- I cannot say if any
part sof that service was among the ;trticles sera."
[Hire a list of the articles mentioned in the ledger
was handed-to his Royal Hinimess.l
Mr. Serjeant Coi;*Ler-4, Will your Royal High-
nessltave ttte gOOdnesslnsiy, whether any of the-ar-
ticks merilloned in that list *ere among them ?"
The Duke a Sussex—" I do not recollect ; it is
now more than two yars since, and I cannot clime
:my memory with: any. of the Particular- articles fur-
nished ; .but wexe,enly.a loan for the day."
Mr. Serjeanr. CocKt.r.--t4 . I will not trouble 'your
Tayal,}ligintess real, any ether question:"
• tr 4 ;Cara Highness then bowed and retired.
LORI) Culcr-Justim--,4 There is an end of your
case, brotbersCetlde. The entry in the ledger proves
•nothirig.; You rritiSt retorwthe articles, and refer.it
itoine-getilleriten tb say:what additional compneation
shall le flside.:-.-•-4rstko a verdict- for. the naittiff:
tAietao:tlie.awartt.".: . • , .
• NeitHcridr.tike:plaixt6ff-ferlthe amount of: the fcia-
-siliiiertVitlf2-)detlaktien subjeot Loth", award. •
• • .1:1;•:,;;,

~,

4

.. . .
COI:11.T OF EXCHEQUER', SC3OTLAND. • .
Wednesday, the 31st of May last, came, on, in the
1 Court of g.xchequer, at Edinburgh, the trial of an •
,
'4 ' information, at the suit of his Majesty's Advocate,
gd the
- 1 against James Coulter, Lieutenant of the Ballantrae
volunteers, for the statutory penalty of 0200; for ob-
1'
.1 a very strutting and biedetingMr. RobcrtWillianison, riding 1
.tended to officer of the:Cush:gas, la attempting to 4eiie a smaa
‘e to kick a
ricking ; for if vessel called the Tartar—, *of Strangford; 4hich ari-ii"ed-
he was not in a at Ballantrae, Ayrshire, from Irelani, in October 1807.
ehe had the gout in By the evidence, it was clearly proved, that Mr.
,r by painful experience , Williamson, on seeing the veas4 .arrive in the bar- .
shich a man had a wish boor, loaded with bags of salt,
.proceeded with ano-
.lng others. The real fact they officer, his assistant, and pushed thi4ttei: a
co the ,defendant's house reel- multitude of men and- wonien, (who were -asiernblied
•
allowed a pint of Mr. Bel Cher's on the -shore) -towards the eessel, 'on
.purpose to • i
compose her stomach overloaded seize her, with her cargo of salt, as being legalfly for-.
feited ; .but that he was', laid hold' off' by,. the l',?'*'
..
re,. and. she was so noisy and trouble- fondant, who, with the aid of a at-Maher of wonw4,, ,
aefendant was forced to put her out of \ dragged him from -the shore into a house; that the
nich he did as quietly. as possible: The 'other officer Was treated hy the deferidatit in' the SRI,* 1
the defendant-having preved this statement, manner; and both the•officers were confined by the
..tiggestion of the Court a juror was withdrawn.
defendant and others in the said housev.tillithe adoale
of the salt was landed. and tarried of the shoret The
O'MEILLT v. WILSON. Lord Chief Baron reeapittilated the evidence, aveit-
- TMs was an action for the recovery of a debt of ; ing to the unsuitableiaess of the defendant's conduct to
£5OO, incurred by the defendant to the plaintiff, I the character of a person bearing a commission) as he
while the latter was guiding in France, in 1803, where !. did, in a corps of volunteets, and entrusted with arms
he, was actually a partner in , a French mercantile ' for the preservation of peace and good ordcr. The
house.. • Jury, in conformity with the opinion of the Court, rem
ArrottwaY-GesznaL, for the,defendant, sta-. turned a verdict of conviction accordingly.
~
ted, that the plaintiff was a native of Ireland, and, The Court then proceeded to the trial of an mfor-
consequently. owed, allegiance .to Tte King of Great • motion against Sarah Rowan, who, having eci-Opert.i
Brit:kin ; shat ithottt 1.6. yelt;s 'ago*. he had gone to I, ed with JaniesCoulterin his illegal proceeding:a above-
America, where heliad becOrhe a naturalieed subject mentioned, was prosecuted for the like penalty. Pon
of the United States ; that beliad aftettiardi gone to confession made by her Counsel. of the offence, wi.
France in the suite of one of the American Antbassa-• which she was charged, the Jury returned a verdict
dors, where he has since become-a. partaer.in. a mer•-• of conviction accordingly.
cantile house ; that an action had been once already i ------.
set on foot against the defendant, while the plaintiff
was in France, to recover his debt, but that the plain- terday in Leman-street, Goodman's-fields, as the body
tiff had been non-suited of course, as his allegiance ConONERN INQursT.—An Inquisitiott wasteldi yet-
of Mr. Farnsworth, late a respectable ittlatahi4nt a ,
Was broken, and lie no4onger entitled to the rights of I
in Englishman. - • , • 1 tresses it appeared, that the deceased, abottehaptst
that vicinity.—Frorn the testimony of wvw4 iirit-
. .
MT. PARKE spol:e for the thintiff. 1 eleven on Tuesday n;ght, was •nding,' 'With 010101daer
Lora EtLatnoitouoti thotight,that now the plaintiff on the Mile End-road, soar the, Livery
et -a wa
had returned to his allegiance, it would he very hard person,
of _ _
Walks,.
where
loa
istables Mr.
.__ fr_oil
voroatiout
to shut'the doors of justice against him. • with timber, belonging ta Mr. Mimi
inches from the footway, from which one of the puce* .
L
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, said, he had only come , .
ofumber protected about three feet,'—lt Wit itther
with the view of succeeding in this action, and that 1,
duskdit the' deceased eloped fittioiaely
than 1 san4
he would in the successful event of that action return .
i his head came in• contact with the tiintwrowith
immediately to France, and carry the money along ,
violence, that a crash, -resembling. the •. •
.. at
with him, and thereby add to the strength of our '
door, was heard,' Awn he WaS. pricinita • 3:4.",, Is
enemy. horae, and killed on the spot. C. ... .
Mr.,Glennie, agent for the plaintiff in this trial, was on the culpable negligee of the ipropektiir a iihe
called, and stated, Abet Mr. OiMeillY- had been in waggon, in placing it'vehiele, 4 soiloaied,maiitkiNtin '
England two days before the writ of !seri faco: virps all night in a public road ; which was thit dan. ; ;
issued against the defendant. • ~ • , ,
• gerous, as such an impediment, wwl4 not lifvect- I
Lord Er.t.vasonotion then addressed the Jury, and •
,le e
el. 'flea result ha,a been,: that, a rest ec.o 4 ind 4a. •
toad than that it via-sqitte enough that the plaintiff •
I lnable member of the commiiititt iii torttivto Sinn-;
Was in England at the tune of bringing the actionias 1 tirnely death.. 'The wagg'ett'indttllitimber **iota- 1
hay been proved by tbe last witness ;-and that si re down, otherwise the Whole would hatsiaihofePoltior-'
the issuing the *rit Of frerifineies he haft& )elf an feittrattithaetowni."--ahneff ..t...1
opeor , . 14. k 1.416
4neirty.to cw. Ic*:',.'..,' ..—. .71, ~ ~ .
~, .. •
'- . -.3 fent:eta of clipioolitAr,*);# gpOs sscviti .7.09 oil
..- Vile JniT• then, by his LcirdshipVatsaak
_far thy catalog.; 164t,n, nstrahi solatarni ItAf .! ' ;1n tog!
per .fpritheipbSiiiifftior thc #1,04 etv 4An r.'. '' ea-14W r,isig idd by dillarwto, have,
l. ! • ,
C°S.4 b4P4.44/nageAl " 1 11.
' ."
• 1 .iiitlielttif bide AI iVabkWaStikli Cadial Dial
~. 1- - ~ . •, • ;Ti .!ilt 15..1.7 4 y , , I ~ •
. •. • ; . . . .t ' ')
, ft w
• '