Star.
London, England, 1829-07-29 00:00:00

MIDDLETON AND ANOTHER V. PROST.

This was an action for the recovery of 9001. the balance
of a sum of money collected by a person of the name of
Squire, deceased, who was the collector of taxes for the
Bishop's Liberty, in the parish of Lambeth. The de-
fendant Frost had become security for Squire, and the
action was therefore brought against him for the sum
mentioned, the balance left of the deceased's collection,
amounting to 3,226/. and due at the time of his death.
After several witnesses had been examined, at the sug-
gestion of Lord Tenterden, a verdict was taken for the
plaintiff for such amount as might be proved to have been
received. The witnesses, thirty-five in number, were
then ordered to go into one of the rooms attached to the
Court, for the purpose of proving, before one of the
members of the bar, the sums they had respectively paid
to Squire.

THOMAS V. HARMAN.
The plaintiff, who entered into a contract to serve the
defendant as superintending clerk in the wine and spirit
trade, brought this action to recover 76.5/. being the
amount of money belonging to the plaintiff, in the hands
of Mr. Harman, and three quarters' salary, at the rate of
4001. a year.
The defendant paid into Court 4291.
It appeared that the plaintiff was taken into the service
of the defendant upon a large salary. He was to superin-
tend the entries in order that there might be no mistake
with the excise. In consequence of some error with re-
spect to the quantities of spirits in the defendant's cellars,
the defendant thought proper to dismiss him.
The jury, under all the circumstances, found a verdict
for the plaintiff—Damages 362/.
SHERIFF. COURT, Rae Lax mum's, Jun 28.
CRIM CON.-DOYLEY V. BEVELL.

Mr. Cockburn (with whom was Mr. Sergeant Spankie)
opened the pleading. This was an action in which Mr.
J. H. Doyley was plaintiff, and Lieut. Bevell, of the sth
dragoons, defendant. The action was for criminal con-
versation with the plaintiff's wife. The defendant allowed
judgment to go by default, thereby admitting the truth
of the charges the plaintiff preferred against him. The
damages were laid at 5,0001.
Mr. Sergeant Spankie rose to address the jury.—The
plaintiff was the younger son of Sir John H. Doyley. At
Sir John's death, the title and property fell to the elder
son, Sir Charles Doyley, who was without any children,
and consequently the plaintiff was heir-presumptive to his
brother's title. About ten or twelve years ago, the
plaintiff, who was then about twenty-four years of age,
married his present wife, who was then eighteen years
of age. The marriage, which was solemnized at Calcutta,
was contracted with the perfect approbation of their mu-
tual friends. While they remained at Calcutta, they visited,
and were visited, by the must respectable persons there.
They were also frequent visiters at Sir Charles Doyley's,
who was married to a relation of the Marquis of Has-
tings. It became necessary for Mr. Doyley to remove
from Calcutta up the country. The jury were no doubt
aware, that in the detached stations in India, there were
yery few Europeans ; a wife, therefore, was a most ne-
cestiaiy companion, and Mr. Doyley here found the great
advantage of the marriage state; for although obliged to
live in a state of comparative' eclusion, he felt not the ef-
fect of his situation, such was the happiness that he en-
joyed in his wife's society. In progress of time the
plaintiff became the father of three children, two boys and
a girl. In 1825 Mrs. Doyley's health was affected, and
one of the .children was very ill. It was usual for Euro-
peans to remove their children to England, not only for
the advantage of receiving a good education, but also for
'the binefit of their health. It became expedient that
Mrs. Doyley and her clkildien should proceed to England,
and accordingly, in 1825, they set out for this country.
How Mr. Doyley felt at that separation can be better felt
than described. An allowance of one thousand pounds
a-year. was settled on Mrs. Doyley during her absence
in fagland, and she took with her a letter of introduction
to' a . Reverend Gentleman, named Snow, who was
married to a sister of Mr. Doyley. Mrs. Doyley, who
was most respectably connected, upon her. arrival in Eng-
had went to her half-brother, a gentleman named Vansit-
• tan, ramding in Yorkshire, where she stopped 'some time;
she subsequently lived with Mr. Snow some time, and. in
fliSTsha came to London. Here she became acquainted
, .
k 4 isiei )4rs.: Bedell—or rather with Mrs. Brown, for she
mama& a second. time—and then .with the defendant,
' : leko, be befiged, was related by marriage to the Doyley
, ... . . funny. -' NA: Doyley took a house- m Bentmck-street,
...
•
. . and berti .ilss gen shy the defendant-- and here if was
' tke'ctieeteeiso*Cptigiisted which give rise to this tic-
' timi; Jhrshafwicieof,dtpril, 1828, Mrs. Doyley gave
NA 404childe of "Mau the defendant was the father.
.. ' - . site OitAttfiletiepthellibiet' it was previously agreed that
,r-:;'''.4.,:ri. _ Mn lteey Wee to tp lislia at the • close of the
••••. . ',.". ' . ri41377,52114.-wilea•lbe time ectived.when she .was to
'..- • , ' :-.:''
~ OLEaghied;ithe filiiirilkOW relied tit go. In fact,
'6'' . ;•,- ': * kid thew becoeso*Pitivirfroltithen quitted
',.. ~• : •
• • ~, , , . -
_ ' •
b. .
_ . .