Star.
London, England, 1826-12-05 00:00:00

Thu usual proof of publication haring been glee*, tire libel wu
put in sad read.

Mr. BROUGHAM addressed the Jury for the defendant,'
and contended, that as no malicious motive, according
to the statement of the Learned Counsel for the prose-
cution, hAd influenced the defendant in publishing the
alleged libel ; and as he had, by the course of proceed-
ing adopted by the defendant, been precluded from
proving the truth of the publication, the Jury would
not be justified in pronouncing a verdict of guilty.
His Loansurr having summed up,
The Jury, after a few minutes' deliberation, pronounced a verdict
of Guilty.
We are happy to state, that the Loan Cam Junin' lam ap-
parently recoyeted from the effecu of his late accident.

WILLIAMS % PATSICS.
This action was brought 6y an infant, Arongh the
medium of his nearest relation, to recover damages for
pain and anguish he endured in consequence of a ladder
(ailing on him in Rosemary-lane. The defendant, who
is a bricklayer, had assisted in raising a ladder before
the house of a Mr. Newball, and common prudence re-
quired it should be fastened. It was, however, left in a
dangerous state ; the wind blew it down ; and falling
struck a child on the head. The infant was taken in a
state of insensibility to the house of a surgeon. and for
a time his life was despaired of. The defendant, whilst
the child's life was in danger, said he would make any
sort of redress, but after the recovery, he said he would
pay nothing.
The defence was, that the defendant was not the
person liable to make compensation. It was alleged
that he only assisted in raising the ladder to enable a
carpenter named. Squibb to do some work upon a cornice.
The Jury, under all the circumstances, found a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages, 401.

OLDHAM V. THZ EARL Or lITZATH3IBII.

This was an action to recover the amount of an ironmonger's bill
for articles supplied to the order of Lady Strathmore.
The order of the articles by Lady Strathmore, and the dater/
at her Ladyship's seat in Nottinghamshire, having been proved,
there was no defence, and the Jury found for the plaintiff.—
Damages, 281.

♦SSSAULT

am 16 MAYNE.

This was an indictment against the defendant, a landholder in
Hanworth Park, 'Middlesex, for assaulting Daniel Hopping on
the
.16th of April last.

Mr. HAW [IN* said, the prosecutor, Mr. Hopping,
was a respectable man ; the defendant occupied a farm-
house in Hanworth Park. On the day mentioned in
the indictment, the prosecutor was going through Han-
worth Park to Feltham ; be had not proceeded far
before he was met by the defendant, who asked where
he was going? The prosecutor said he was going to
Feltham. The defendant said if he did not go back he
would put him in the cage. The prosecutor stated,
hat he had often travelled the same road before, and re-
fused to go back. The defendant then alled three men,
who took Mr. Hopping by the hands and legs, and con-
veyed him to the cage. He remained all night in
custody, and next morning was taken before a Magis:
trate on a charge of trespass, but the Magistrate in-
stantly dismissed him. This was the nature of the as-
sault, which the Learned Counsel undertook to prove
by witnesses. _

'The prosecutor, when examined, proved the above statement.
The Loan Cale, JUSTICI then asked Mr. Adblphus whether he
had any answer to the case ?
Mr. ADOLPHUS said, the man was in a state of exces-
sive intoxication, and that he was so abusive at the time
the congregation were coming out of Church on Sunday,
that defendant was compelled to put him in the cage.
The LORDCHIET JUSTICS—I will take your evidence;
but if a drunken man is found in a park, and another
calls his men to take him to the cage, that is unlawful.
Thomas Bean. who saw the prosecutor go into Hanworth Park,
confirmed Hopping's statement.
Mr. ADOLPHUS, in his address to the Jury, said the
prosecutor had trespassed, and when ordered to quit
the park and go to the main road, be made a dis-
turbance just as the congregation left the Church. He
was so drunk and abusive that it was necessary to put
him in the cage.
Mr. Mayne's bailiff, avid two others, were called to pro♦e the de-
fendant's case.
The LORD CHIRP JUSTICE, in his charge to the Jury,
said, Mr. Mayne could not by law imprison a man for
trespassing on his ground. He might take him back to
the high road; and if the Jury should think he was
properly taken back to the road, and that it was there
necessary to confine him, in consequence of outrageous
behaviour, they ought to find the defendant not guilty.
If he was a trespasser, the defendant had a right to order
him to go back, and if he refused, he had a right to re-
move him.—The Jury found the defendant guilty.
SHERIFFS COURT. Mann", Doc. 4.
W1L12144 11. 42. KATUAIIINZ DOC& CORMAINT.

The claimants were carcase and retail butchers, re-
siding in St. Katharine', where they also carried on the
business of milkmen, keeping about forty much cows,
the amount ottheir receipts and payments for one year
was proved to be 90,0001. They claimed 50001. cons•
pensation, exclusive of the value of fixtures and the lease
which had been agreed upon,—Verdict, 18801.
aaasaix sp. st. XATHARINZ mix COMPANY'.

The claimant in this ease was a distiller and rectifier, who claimed
WOOL including the leasehold interest, and the plant and fixtures
by appraisement.—Verdict for goodwill, 20001.
The trial of these causes occupied the whole day.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dm. 4.
VITOASIT4IIOI[III.4I4 V. WOOD.

This was an information filed by the Attorney Gel
neral against George Wood, the printer, publisher, and
sole proprietor of the Kent Herald. The information i
charged him with having inserted in the Kent Herald,
during the month of December, 1825, and the months
of JAnuary, February, March, and April, 1826, certain
advertisements, upon which the stamp duty, which is
As. 6d. on each, had not been paid, whereby the Com-
missioners of Stamps were defrauded to the amount 'of
1821. 61. The defendant had pleaded Not Guilty.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL stated the case to the Jury.
The facts were all proved in the ordinary way. No
defence was made, and the Jury found a verdict for the
Crown to the amount claimed.
taxa a.
.111t0114111 36111411110111 G - - -

The information in. this case charged the defendant
with having run a stage coach from London to Ports•
mouth for a certain time without paying the duty,which
amounted to 741. 15f. This case, as well as the former,
being undefended, the Jury found for the Crown.
The Court then adjtiorned.
The Loao Cour Baum' who sat for the first time since Term,
Appeared to have recovered from his late slight indisposition.

One of the neatest points of BURKS'S wit was ad-
dressed to his present MAJWITY, when Prince of Wales. I
" A bumper toast, for' as toast-master I am absolute,
am I not ?" exclaimed (Ira Heir Appareht. Certainly," I
replied Bonze, "jure ,de vitro." That,' reji.ined the
future Sovereign; rs the only right to be so I could
with to have." It is by 'mixing with such -Men, and
knowrug life acauratelys that our gracious Sol/tamp
formed his excellence and achieved pis popularity