Star.
London, England, 1817-08-25 00:00:00

CUMBERLAND ASSIZES.

The Assizes At Carlisle have continued three days.
Monday was occupied in disposing of the most trifling
causes in the paper. On Tuesday the whole day was
consumed in hearing the following cause of

HARTLRY V. HARRIMAN.

It was an action brought by the plaintiff, a respec
table Gentleman in the neighbourhood of Whitehaven,
againsthis neighbour, a person of property residip*
itAtiltlkte called 'Tivoli. The action was broughtC4.
ttoveF* compensation in consequence of tbedelenn
iiant'y' Wogs having worried seven of the plaintiff's,i
isikeep. " The defendant was represented as having
'paiied much of his time abroad, without having ac-
quired that degree of courtesy which is usually the
consequence of a knowledge of the world; for when
theplaintiff sent to caution him against the danger
'ais sheep ran from the ferocious character of his dogs,
' .ie replied that his dogs were as valuable to him as
the sheep were to the plaintiff, and if he pleased he
could keep fifty dogs. • The damage to the plaintiff's
flock was clearly proved to have been committed by
he defendant's dogs, who were traced frotn the scene

'of slaughter to their own tehnel. The Jury gare
the plaintiff a verdict. Dam.tges £24. 10s.

BRINTOL.

CLARKS V. Itnt.FlL ALIAs TUC PATIINT AOAINST MS

SUHOICAL OPERATOR.
The plaintiff in this act, n, whir is a cooper. sought
to recover horn the delendaiit, who is a sur.teon in
this city, compensation in d images for injuries sus-
tained in consequence of unskilfulness maw eve.' by
the delendant in an operation performed upon the
plaintiff's wrist, and for the loss of time which the
protraction of the curs had subjected him to.
Mr. SMITH stated Vie declaration; and Mr. Giza-
Lag opened the case to the Jury, and stated, that the
action was one of v-ry considetable nip:irtance,
as it affected the plaintiff and aloydie oetem.failt• At
the same time he should be sooty to state any thing
upon the present occasion that would be calculated
to prejudice the minds of the Jury. In the non h
of September. ISI-1, the plaiiitlf was in an employ-
ment ass wine-cooper, in which situation he was able
to earn from two to thre- guineas per week; but,
11.►vi,ag the misfortune to cut his writ with a bottie
in the course of his business, he was in consequence
compelled to apply to tl,e defendant for his proles
sional assistance; and lie (the Learned Counsel) wds
told there was but one course to be pursued in such a
case—namely, the taking up of the artery. It would
appear, however, that another mode was adopted by '
vie delendant, by sewing the integuments together,
and afterwards applying a sudden compression to
that put of the wooed. Alter this was performed.
he told the plaintiff be might walk fifty miles. The
poor man, however, had not more than three minutes
walk to his home; and en has arrival there, it was
found necessary to send for the defendant, who at-
tended him tour or five days afterwards, and the
wound then wearing a very serious appearance, it !
WAS considered necessary to call in Dr. Porter, a
physician in the city, and a Gentleman of great el-,
patience. From the situation Dr. Porter found the
plaintiff in, he sent to another professional gentle.
at in of the name of Mortimer; when they had met !
Mr. Rude was sent to, and acquainted of Dr. Por-
ter and Mr. Mortimer being present, and he accord.
iugly attended. They desired the wound might he
opened, hut Mr. Rolle said, 14 0 no, it must not be
touched." The arm was then in'a state of niortifi
Cation, and in twentyfour hours longer it might have
cost the plaintiff his life. Under these circuinstan.
cos, it would be for the Jury to say what daimages
they would give against a man, who, it appestyedi
had exercised the profession of a surgeon without
having the skill necessary for persons embarking its
so liberal a calling.
Margaret Clark examined by Mr. Smith.—She stat-
ed, that she is the mother of the plaintiff. He was a
wine-cooper, and lived on Stoney-hill. In the year
1814., he could earn two guineas per week, and
-sometimes three In the month of September, 151.5,
witness's son (the plaintiff) cut his wrist with a glass
bottle; application was made to Mr. Rolfes, the sur.
geon, and he attended. Witness was present when he
came; he said the main artery was cut, and he sewed
up the flesh of the wrist ; he bound it up tight, and
whoa he had done so, he said he would engage tee
plaintiff should walk 50 miles, and it would nit bleed;
and in consequence of that, witness's son left the
house to go to his own home. Witness saw him on
'the Wednesday morning following, and she attended
, him eight days, and was never out of the room five
minutes at a time. She saw Mr. Rolfe on the Wed-
nesday morning. He came in consequence of having
been sent for. Her son's arm was then much in-
flamed. Mr. Rolle did not do any thing to it, but
ordered witness to apply wet pads to it. She asked
him, it he thought there was any danger ? and he
replied. 6, Oh, no, it will do very well ; there is no-
thing wanting but time, patience, and water-gruel."
(4 laugh.) Witness consulted with a friend, and
sent for Dr. Porter in the afternoon of Saturday, ..nd
she sent three times to Dr. Rolfe. The first tame he
said he was " busy ;" the second time, he said he
was "going to tea ;" but lie and his nephew, Mr.
Allen, came after she had sent three times for him.
They examined the arm, and witness beard Mr.
Allen sat to Dr. Rolle—" You should have usei*,The
tourniquet, but now the young man cannot beir.ite":
They were about to leave the room, when witness
tad them, she had sent for farther assistance, md
named Drallorter. Mr. Rolfe said, he was a nein
he never use( ; that he had a parcel of bop set up in
business, and it was them he wanted to put forward
in hie, and that he (Rolle) had not lived till this
tome of day to meet a parcel of boys.
Cross-exatnined by Mr. Serjeant •Pat.x—The plain-
tiff Was quite well now, and able to work. Mr.
Rolle had attended her family for two or three years.
Mr. Rulte had never been paid his bill, and he had
orought her son into Court tor it about twelve months
afterwards, and her son brought the present action
just alter he was put into Court.
Dr. William Ogleby Porter said he was a physi-
cian, and had been in the habit of practising as a
surgeon. On the night of the 17th of September,
1614, he and Mr. Mortimer went to the plaintiff's
house, and found him lying in bed with a roller.
commonly called a bandage, tied tight round the
waist of his right arm; his hand was much swollen
said livid, it was gangrened; he was in great pain,
and before they parted witness sent for Mr. Rolfe,
and he came, attended by his nephew, Mr. Allen.
They met in the plaintiff's room, but went into ano-
ther room to consider the case. The result of the
consultation was, that they thought it necessary to
loosen the bandage, or rather to take it off. It was
accordingly opened by witness and Mr. Mortimer.
The hand was in a state of gangrene. If it had re-
mained another day, the probability was, that the
plaintiff would have lost his hand. Mr. Rolfe said
Ise had wished to remove the bandage before, and had
cut it for Allat purpose, but the people would not_ let,
him do tbky saw it had been cut. Mr. Mortimer
4 said the iitery must be tied up ; and witness obseried,
that Witte bandage was not taken off, the man 'must
lose his 4eand.: Much more conversation took place,
but witness could not recollect it. They afterwards
went into the patient's room, and Mr. Mortimer be•
pa to undo part of the bandage. Mr. Rolfe said
he bad not a tourniquet, and witness said it was of
no consequence, as be would stop the circulation of
blood.

Mr. Gasataa..64 It is of no use to go into parti-
culars, Dr. Porter ; I believe it was taken off."
Dr. Porter..—." We must ,go step by step in our
operations. The bandage was taken off, witness's

thumb val on the artery, and Mr: Mortinier had
tied it up."
Mr. GASELEP-.—." Had it then in the fist instance
been done as it ought to :!ve heen dime. Dr Porter?"
Dr. P.,rter--,, Am I t ansxer generally or speci-
&ally I

Mr. GASELCE —" Specifically."
Dr. Porter.—As it appeared, certainly not; it
aught to have compressed the artery alone, but it
culiptessed every vessel in the aim, and that is the
:vast) the nand woul.l have 'Atonic gangrene, rind
mortification havVtollowe.t. The ctm ress'in on
the artery Anne was done, and seccess.—
The more aptrustitinttide was o take lip the artery
itiniedia•ely inch a tnicusum. Sometim-s Ihe end
Of the &rico y clini9lint be obtained. auil thin it is
done with a cro .ked needle. •It w usaal to put a
bolster on the attery. that the cnipression may tail
particularly on ihai part, and that the blend may cir-
culate in other p.m!, and thr,ugh other vessels.
Mr. M.,rtitner was nest called, and ezainlited by
Mr. SMITH. tio if a stir. etni she and Dr. P sites
met Mi. Ittlie t tt:: oAl:tiff's on the ques-
tion. Wicisss opened the wound. an ,t the end
fund it extremely tuinified abd livid: •,.•re was c•ina
sidetahle appeara•.ce of inottifieatior. wound
was vet y ci ~ely at wed together. the At .ci 1 hied. and
tLI •Aitiless -.ecn:e.l it with tht Asstit.ritce al Dr. For.
ttf ; ly the Aritry AI! tied it. at.
leaded Irian the 17th.0l fie piemts.r to November,
hut he could not say to•the precise day in that month.
It the artery had not been oaten up, and the bandage
had not been removed, witness thought the plaintiff
would have barn in danger of losing his hand.
Mr. Sutru.—ln 'Jur opinion, was it skilfully
treated or not ?

Mr. Mortimer.—As it is a matter of opinioo, am I
bound to answer that question ?
Mr. Baton GRAHAM —I am afraid you must, as a
great deal depends in such CAWS upon the evidence of
professional gentlemen.
Mr. Mortimer—lt was not treated in the manner
should have treated it. Witness's charge lair atten-
dance was eight guineas.—Cross.examined—He had
not been paid his demand. Mr. Rolfe continued to
I attend witness in consultation, and he understood Mr.
Rolle supplied him with medicines, and he appeared
to attend him as a professional gentleman of teputa.
;ion would, fitstst,,,,m. _ _

This clnael the case for the plaintiff.
Mt. Strieant Pew. now rose to address the Jury.
and übservid that Of all the causes that came before
Courts of Judi* (hone were 01 so del.cate a nature
as causes of this description ; and we all, us our
anxiety after the fate of our tenon- creatures, were
very apt to pity and commiserate those who were so
unfortunate as In be placed in situ +dans which ex-
posed them to tie necessity of ailing in, in any
shape, medical assistance. It alts not a pleasant thing
to lose a verdict in a Court of Jus' ice, but to the de-
fendant it was dill a thing of greater imply-
tamer, because he would have not only the expenses
of the action to lose, but his reputation as a
professional 1111.111 might be tainted, and his future
prosperity would be at stake. There was one
thing which he would wish to impress strongly upcn
the recollection of the Jury, viz. that Clarke had
never been a sufferer, and so far be had but little
claim upon the consideration of humanity; for the
Gentlemen of the Jury roust have observed horn the
muss-examination, that be was quite well within a
; even Dr. Porter had, with great firmness
and impartiality, stated, that a month afterwards he
called upon him to return him thanks for his assist-
ance, and then he was quite well. That the action
was brought vindictively was pretty evident; for the
circumstances took place in the year Ibl4, and the
action wAs•not brought until the year ISl6; whys
then, he would ask, (though he scarcely need insult
the understanding of the Jury by such a question)
were two years suieted to elapse before the action
was instituted ? Why, it avoid naturally iliduce
every rational man to believe that some bad passion
had tnuad its way into 'lir transaction. and that some
spleen had existed in the plaintiff's mind. Tile ac-
tion was not dimwit of until Mr. Rude put the plait.-
till into Cositt, labirt:Citi been called, by rue witness.
It was, no alien that the plaintiff thought any
tliing 'Moth bringitn+, die action. Woul.l these cir.
4dmitances; itten';'lorm no part in operating upon
the Jury in mitigation of damages, even it they
should think that any damages were necessary ? It
was a very singular thing, that upon Mr. Rolfe's
persisting in the payment of his bill, the plain.
tiff thought he could pay him off by casting
reflections upon the reputation of his character._
He (the Learned Seijeant) had established, that Mr.
Nolte, iu his attendance, had acted like a most hu-
mane man ; and the Jury had it from the moisth of
Mr. MurtiMer, that the plaintiff had never paid him
for his attendance, which was eight guineas. So then
it stood—Mr. Mortimer had not been paid a farthing,
the defendant had not been pwd ; and he would ven-
ture to say they never would be paid, unless it should
be out of the verdict the Jury might give on this oe.
easion. Having submitted these tacis to the consi.
deration of the Jury, he would now take the liberty of
stating what he apprehended was the law upon the
subject : of this he was certain, that no man could be
liable to an action for a mistake; and in order to
justify a verdict against the defendant, the Jury must
be convinced that there was on his part a most un-
pardonable negligence. or a gross ignorance.
Mr. Baron .GItIIHANr, in summing up the evidence,
observed to the Jury, that the result of their delibe.
rations might be of the most serious consequences to
the defendant ; this, however, was not to deter them
from performing their duty. There was no doubt
'but carelessness would be a ground at action under
any circumstances; but with regard to skiltulness, it
was not required by the law of the land that a person
practising as tisitt.ggp should possess mrallitile
The law, however, required that hr should have a
cnntpeient cWgtee'lf skill to perform all that is irci.
dental to his prokitsiorif At the sante time, the Jiry
were not to ruicutilailin their assessment of damages,
supposing that the detend.int had been guilty of any
of the charges specified in the declAiatiein ; and the
circumstance of the plaintiff being stimulated to the
action, because the defendant was pressing for the
payment of his bill, was one which ought not to
escape their consideration.. The Learned Judge then
recapitulated the whole of the evielence with much
perspicuity and clearness; and the Jilt y, after a few
minutes' consultation, flund a verdict fur the - •
tiff—Dam:4Bes, Fiftc.-n

-
A plain