Star.
London, England, 1810-02-16 00:00:00

KELLY V. CHRISTIE.

This was an action for damages for an assault. The plait-46'i
a harnessmaker in the Strand. On the 6th of August the defen•
dant, an underwriter at Lloyd's, came into his shop, and after
using some abusive language, struck him.
It came out in evidence, that the attack was intended for the
brother of the plaintiff, who had previously thrown out some itn•
proper aspersions on the defendant.
Lord ELLENBOROUGII thought that in this case very mails.
mages might sati►fy the law.
Verdict Inc

Forty Shillings.
WOLTZ O. TOMLINSON..
The Cuter JUSTICE said, that this was a motion in whithtk
Court Lai taken time to consider whether a rule should bergs,.
ed to shew cause why there should not be a new trial, and*,
Judges had taken the deed of partnership with them and abed*
affidavits to peruse; upon which they were satisfied there woo
not any ground to doubt of the propriety of the conclusion whici
the Jury had drawn in favour of the defendant in this case, thin,
fore no new trial ought to be granted, and the. potsetr.ust be de.
livered to the defendant.
The ATTOR N er-GENZR A L said, be was to have shewn cum
against a rule obtaiued by Mr.. Clifford, for a Ill.mbaisu to be &
rented to the Justizes of Staffordshire, commindmg them to btu
and determine on certain claims made by certain Roman Crtio
lies who sought the beneit of a certain Friendly Society, of
they were members; but as Mr. CLfford was out of took
should let the rule be enlarged until the. next term.
LortlELLidasottouau observed, that if any person moved 3
enlarge, or to revive the rule, the Court would order it of count,
if not opposed, tut otherwise it must fall and napirpof vuile;
fbr the Court would only act when judicially put in. mown':
Tll2. ATTOIN EY.43EN LEAL said, lie happened to kiwi, Pe
*wally, that Mr. Clifford intended to seprort the rule, and the"
fore sonic Counsel should, on his behalf, sign a irxina for co'
lasing it, and that should. be given in to the Office l.(); OA rt.
pose.

NEWMAN v. ItURFoRD.
The Plaintiff is a printer in Fritio,street and suceeesird toll"
business of the Defendant when he retired.' was entelei.
printing a work on Mineralogy for a gentleman sof the or.
Atkins. At the request of the Defendant, the Pkiintifl can
the work, and when finished, he, by order of the 11, o
livered it to Mr. Atkins ; he, the Defendant, umiertalkiell to 711
the Plaintiff's demand, amounting to £43. Ss. 91.
The defence was, that the' time of credit (twelve mantbs)vo.,
not expired at the time the action was brought, the Mt.,
having entered •on his part of the work in l'ehruary 160,99
4101141Denced his action iu September last. It appeared in eng
biftwerer, front Mr. Atkins, that his original ag:eeinent with
alisiord was for twelve months credit from the cornrottlr,
of the printing of the week, which was in April, I Sus, aaa t
he bad, in fact, paid Mr. Burford for the printing of the*.
work.—Verdict fur the Plaintiff, damages .€43 Ss. 91.

DlED.—Wednesday evening the key. Josrph Bober, c
tilicry-Court, s 4.— ,aged Waiksgarena, Nativelarnsbires
Frances, and Lydia, ganglions( sir T. W. White, UArt.

'LONDON : PruttrAl publi,blri by LEN.EII. • °,1,(
tethurrillage Lambith at tithe STAK-Orr ice, 14°.
Mitts Publikal also at the. STaa.Orflcr., !.einll: """-

4 X. 45.

.".,t