Star.
London, England, 1827-08-28 00:00:00

*WILE INTELLIGENCE.

BRIDORW ATER. Morn 24.
Cm Um—Before Mr. Judea &sum:
DICZIIIIIOII V. ♦ALPY.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff as endor-
see upon a bill, against the defendant, A. J. Val py, Esq.
The bill was drawn by the country agent of the Corn-
wall and Devon Mining Company, for 3001. accepted
D y their secretary in town, and ultimately dishonoured.
TO plaintiff, in consequence, brought his action against
Mi..Valpy, who was merely a shareholder in the con•
cern, upon his liability, in that capacity, to be respon-
sible.

Mr. Sergeant WILDE, in stating the case, said that
this action was brought to recover SOOT., the amount of
a bill of exchange from the defendant, who had be.
come responsible as a shareholder in one of those com-
panies which had arisen in the metropolis in the year
1825. 'the company out of whose affairs this bill had
sprung. was designated the Cornwall and Devon Min-
sag Company. Like all companies of this kind, the
practical management devolved upon the hands of a
few, who like active partners dictated and controlled
the affairs of the company. By the authority of these
managers, bills were permitted to be drawn, and ac-
cepted, upon the faith of certain mining arrangements
which were undertaken between their agents in Corn-
wall and London. The Cornwall branch was under
the management of Mr. Rowland Wilk:, and he had
liberty to draw bills upon the London establishment.
In this way the pie,ent bill had been drawn on the
20th of March, 1826, by Mr. R. Wilks s it was dull
accepted by the London branch of the concern, but un-
fortunately never paid. What the defence would be he
could not say : there could be no doubt of the comma.-
dial regularity of the transaction as far as the plaintiff
was concerned, and of the regular existence of the part-
nership, and conjoint liability of the partners. Ile
should prove his case with the greatest facility, and
rhea wait to hear what answer could be tendered for the
defendant.

Mr. Currie, who had acted as Secretary for the Com-
pany, proved a letter from the defendant, applying for
a certain number of shares, and likewise that lie had
duly paid the first stipulated instalment upon them.—
The certificAte of this payment had been made out, but
by some accident not properly transmitted to the de.
tendmt, in the case of one of his SO shares.

Mr. Wood proved the course of business of this Com-
pany, and that this bill had been duly drawn, and ac-
cepted by the agent, in pursuance of a resolution of the
Directors, according to the provision made for the ma-
nagement of the Company.
Mr. CROWDIR, for the defendant, submitted that this
resolution assumed the shape and form of a power of
attorney, and ought to be stamped as such, before it
could be received as legal evidence. ,
Mr. Justice BUIIIIOUGH woulchiot reserve this point,
for he really thought there was nothing in it.
In the cross-examination of Mr. Wen d, he said there
were a great many other partners, whose names were
put down as belonging to the concern, but who had
never acted. The late Lard Donoughmore's name was
among the nominal Directors, but he never took any
part in their business, or had any connection with their
affairs; neither d d Sir John Perring, or several others,
whose names were published in the printed list. The
defendant was no party ..o the meeting where the reso-
lution to accept this bill was agreed to. He certainly
attended a meeting of proprietors in July, 1826. Upon
a question being put, whether at this meeting of July,
1826, it was not considered whether the whole business
of this Company was a gross delusion?—
Mr. sergeant WILDE objected to the question, and
contended, that whatever was the complexion of the
Company, this bill had reference to a bona fide transac•
tion with an individual, apart from its concerns
Mr. Justice Boastooost sustained the validity of the
objection, and held, that the conjoint act of the partners
themselves could not affect their individual liability to
the performance of a specific contract. Among them-
sclves the case might be different; nct so, however, as
between them and the public.
Mr. Caownea then took an objection to the technical
form of the declaration, and submitted that this was
neither a bill nor a promissory note, according to the
weaning of the Act of Parliament, inasmuch as, as-
sliming it to be a partnership concern, the members
could not draw upon each other. He also submitted,
that the provisions of the Bank Act, which interdicted
certain partnerships, applied in this case. He likewise
solicited for the admission of evidence to thew that the
defendant knew nothing of the acceptance of this bill—
that be had not had any idea of its existence until he was
sued upon it,—and that the whole frame of this Com-
pany was a mere bubble, for which he ought not to be
held answerable, who had no part in its management,

or knowledge of its affiirs, beyond the misfortune of
being .a shareholder.
The Court consented to reserve some mere technical
objections, but over-ruled the rest, repeeting, that what-
ever fraud mien be applicable to the constitution or
management of this Company, could not be pleaded by
one of its members against an individual of the public
who had given value for a bill of this description.
,The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for SOW.
and the interest upon the bill.

HEREFORD. Auause 44.
CIVIL &DZ.—Before UN Baron VavISSIL/L
RICICETT N. DIMLY!' PRIED' AND °THINS.

Mr. WHATILIM opened the pleadings, stating that
this was an action to ascertain whether the defendant
was entitled to a certain right of way which he claimed
'through the property of the plaintiff. The defendant
Was the purchaser of an estate from Lord Oxford, part
of which consisted of a wood known by the name of
Brand-hill-wood, and was situate on the summit of a
precipice, four miles from Presteign, in this county.
The plaintiff is a barrister, and the owner of certain
woods, situate on the same hill, below the defendant's
wood, and known by the names of Combe-woodAnd
Hope's-wood. The defendant having cut down his
wood and dragged the timber and cuttings thereof
through the plaintiff's wood, the present action was to
try whether be was entitled to that right of way? The
defendant had pleaded an immemorial right of way to
drag the produce of his woods, when cut, through the
plaintiff's; and it would be for the jury to determine,
on the evidence that would be offered to them, whether
that tight could be established.
Mr CAMPEELt (with whom was Mr. WHITC3/11$2)
ippeared for the defendants, and then commenced, as
it rested on the defendants, to maintain his claim to the
right of way in question. The learned counsel stated
that the real question-in this case was, whether the
defendant was by prescription entitled to convey or
haul trees. through the plaintiff': woods along certain
roads or courses celled racks, which had been imme-
;aerially used for that purpose? and as it was eviden ly
impossible for the defendant to convey away the pro.
duce of his land by any other means, there could be no
doubt the way in dispute was a way of necessity, which
had been immemorially used, and admitted to be used,
for that purpose, the woods originally having belonged
to one person. The defendant would be unable to
produce any deeds in support of that right, but
that was immaterial, as where a custom had been
exercised for a considerable period, the law pre-
sumed that it originated in some deed or grant which
had been loit or destroyed through the lapse of time.
He (Mr. Campbell) did not know who had drawn the
declaration in this case, or from what black letter book
he had extracted the precedent: he had not supposed
that even the maggot-eaten pages' of the Year-books
could have afforded such an example. He and the Jury
had now got into a wood together, but he trusted he
should be able to make the case so clear to them, that
they would have no occasion' to Milo before they got
out of it. He understood that it wa,s intended to contend,
that only a qualified right existed, viz. that none of the
produce of Brand-hill should be conveyed through
Combe Wood or Hope's Wood, while any timber of
twelve years growth was standing there; but he (Mr.
, Campbell) was prepared to maintain, that if the defend-
'ant was entitled to any right of way through the plain-
tiff's premises, it was an unqualised right of way, such
as the necessity of the case demanded. -Another objec-
tion which he believed would be raised was, that the
defendant was not entitled to convey any timber from
his wood through the plaintiff's property exceeding
thirty years' growth. Sa that trees that had attained the
age of 29 year:, 11 months, 29 days, 25 hours, 59 minutes,
and 59 seconds, might be so removed; but the instant
the clock struck, terminating the 30th year, the de-
fendant could not venture to cut his own trees, because
he could not, when cur, carry them away.
Mr. WHATELET disclaimed any intention to raise
such objections.
Several witnesses were then called, who proved the
right of way to convey t.t.e produce of Brand-hill-wood
I through the plaintiff's property.
Mr. Cuawooo, who led for the plaintiff, submitted
[that he was entitled to a verdict, as the prescription was
laid as a right to convey trees, Ece. through the plain-
tiff's premises, and that had not been proved ; for by
the evidence it appeared, that underwood only had been
permitted to pas.; and it was obvious, if large trees
were removed that way, they would greatly injure the
plaintiff's woods.
Mr. WHATzL&Y followed on the same side, contend-
ing that prescription meant immemorial usage as far
back as living memory would go. The prescription in
this case was for trees only, and the evidence applied to
underwood alone. The distinction was manifest, and
Dr. Johnson would never have had an opportunity of
venting his sarcssm during his tour through Scotland,
that he had seen only two trees there;' if young seed-
lings and suckers of trees could have been considered
as trees, as it was well known that at that time Scotland
abounded with numerous young plantations. The va-
riance, he therefore maintained, was fatal.
Mr. CAUPSILLL having been heard in reply,
Mr. Baron VAUGUAN overruled the objection.
Mr. Cvawooa than addre,sed the Jury for the
plaintiff.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN having recapitulated the evi-
dence, the Jury found a special verdict, viz, that an
immemorial right of way existed for the defendant to
convey the produce of his land through the property of
the plaintiff.

BLAXEMeRE V. THE GLAMORGAN/MINI CANAL COMPANY.

Before Mr. Justice LI , aad a Special Jury.

After calling an immense number of witnesses, whose
evidence was intended to prove the loss sustained by
the plaintiff by the obstruction of water from his works
by the defendants, the case on the part of the plain-
tiff closed yesterday. On cross-ex imination, one of
the witnesses for the plaintiff stated, that if the plain.
tiff had exerted the machinery of his works to the ut-
most extent, he might have manufactured more tin even
with the diminished supply of water complained of.
Atsthe conclusion of the evidence for the plaintiff, Mr.
TAUNTON addressed the Jury for the defendants at great
length, and the whole of this day has been occupied
with the examination of their witnesses, their evidence
tending to skew that the inconvenience sustained by the
plaintiff was occasioned solely by dry seasons ; that
there was no waste of water by the defendants ; and
that all the surplus water above what was required for
navigating the boats on the canal, was, by the Perlis.
mentary and other weirs, turned into the river Teak.
At eight o'clock this evening, the case on the part of
the defendants closed, ■nd the Court adjourned till
Monday, the greater part of which, it is expected, will
be occupied by the reply and summing up.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE. •
mANsiox•Housg.
A inan sassed ,berit was brought before the Loan Marna charged
with having accidentally assaulted a young man named Ryan, so
desperately, as to endanger his hi...
lhe defendant had been, It appeared, upon a ladder, and Ryan
had a piece of bent iron In his hand, with which, in a joke, he caught
hold of the defendant's leg. The defendant leaped down laughing,
and taking up the piece of Iron pursued the young man, dung it at
tam, and accidentally, and without Intending to do him the least
mischief, struck hint wide one of the points, which penetrated his
forehead. The boy said" You have caught me," and immediately
dropped down senseless. The poor boy's wound scarcely bled at
all, but upon being taken to the Hospital, the injury was pronounced
to be dangerous. A certificate to the tame elect wan handed to the
Lord Mayor.
A witness, who saw the whole transaction, stated that the In-
jured boy and the defendant had bees merely joking together, and
that there was not the slightest animosity existing between them.—
The defendant appeared to be very much dejected, and disavowed
any, the slightest., intention of doing the lad any harm.
The LORD MATO& said „it was evident that the defendant had
. . . . . .

committed no intentional offence. His Lordship believed the injury
to be merely accidental; but he could not help detaining the person
accused, as he had received such a certificate from the surgeon who
attended the young man.
The defendant was then taken batk to the Contra.
GUILDHALL.
-

Paul Bennett a miner, Edward Repaint, a porter, were charged
with assaults and itairt Barnicuat, • printer, with an attempt at
rescue.—Bennett. it seems saw one of the females of light charac-
ter adjusting her head-dress' in Paternoster-row, at twelve o'clock
on Sunday night, and running up to her, pulled her about by her
veil till he threw her down ; she called to the watchman. who tried
to lay hold of the prisoner ; but, receiving a staggering hit in the
mouth, contented himself with pursuing and springing his rattle. A
watchman at the top of the Row tried to stop him, but was knocked
down. Ito prisoner however was seized by a watchman, named
Randall, in Friday-street • a struggle towed, the prisoner bit him
twice on the head, kicked ithn in the groin, and finally knocked him
dawn. The prisoner then ran over to Milk-street, at the corner of
which be knocked a very powerful watchman down ; bat his career
was stopped in that streetby another guardian of the night named
Barker; but be ton was knocked down by Rapston. The heroes,
however, could escape no farther ; the pealing of the rattles spread
alarm far and wide, and orescairis watchmen were in the pursuit.
Mr. Mashy and Mr. Williams, two of the Common Councilmen,
new appeared to pray protection for their watchmen, and punish-
ment for the annoyance their constituents had undergone in having
their slumbers broken. However. Mr. Alderman Lucas did not
view the matter in a very serious light, and allowed the primaeval
to retire and make compensation. after giving them a 'event lecture.
This frialic cost them 31.