Star.
London, England, 1818-08-04 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

DOECIIESTER AssIZES.
DonGE FAGO AND ANOTHER.
'this was an action against the Propieetors of the
Auxiliary Mail Coach fiom London to Exeter, for
the loss of a box containing .goods sent fro= Mes L—s.
Todd and Co. to the plaintiff, of the alleged value
of 1'167 14s. 10d.
Mr. CASBERD opened the pleadings.
Mr. Serjcant PELL stated to the Court. that the
.:ase was not likely to occupy much of their time, as
there were two points only upon which it rested-Ist,
Whether the plaintiff knew of defendants notice,
that they would no: be answerable for the loss of
semis above Cu value, unless paid for accordingly?
Ind secondly, whether, even if the plaintiff knew)
)1 such notice, the defendants had not been guilty
of gross negligence. in which case their notice would
tot help them. lie stated that the defendants were
the proprietors of an auxiliary mail coach, and that
it was their duty, as such, to have a guard, not only
for the protection of the Mail, but of the property
of the passengers. There was no . guard. If there
had been one, the loss would not have happened. -
Mr. Justice Pette--" The point of no guard will
not much help you."
George Fisher proved. that in April, 1817, he took
box to the Bell and Crown coach-office, from
Toddand Co.'s directed to Mr. Dodge, Sherbornes
to go by the Auxiliary Mail Coach, and that he paid
2d. for booking it. He said he had never read the
board with the notice, but that these was such a
board before his eyes in. the office ; that he had seen
it often and often, and that its effect was that thee
Proprietors would not be answerable for parcels lost
drove E.,5 value, unless they were entered and paid
For accordingly.
Mr. Justice PARK—" That point is gone." •
Henry Maskell was then called, and proved that
he was the coachman when the box was lost ; that he
heel driven the coach about a week ; that there was
no guard when the box was lost ; that there was a
guard for three or four months in the winter time,
and that there has been one ever since.
Mr. Justice PARK—" We frequently shut the sta-
ble door when the horse is lose"-
The plaintiff was non-suited.
DURHAM, JULY 31.
SIDE.--DEFANIATIO'S•
ASTON P. GEORGE.
Miss Aston, the plaintiff, keeps a boarding.school
for puns ladies, in Durham ; she brought the pre-
sent action` against another Lady, Mrs. George, for
defamatory words used by her. The subject excited
the Utmost interest and curiosity in Durham for more
than trirelve months. The many reports and surmises
which it created were every where the topic of con-
versauen. It was supposed to have been di posed
of last year by a niexeuce, but it revived with in-•
ceased vigour. Eatly in this week Friday was fixed
.for the important trial. The town was for several
clays excessively crowded with the multitudes burn-,
big with curiosity to witness the discussion. Nine
o'clock wire the hour of meetiar in the Court. About
half-past seven
,the street leading to the Court was
covered with Ladies and Gentlemen pressing forward
to the scene of trial. It rained the whole tierre till
nine, yet it repressed not the ardour of curiosity.—
Vrivate carriages and post chaises drove up inces-
santly to the Court door. The door is never opened
till the clock strikes nine; the impatience of the very
ereepecz,able crowd was therefore very great. In the
service and for the accommodation of the fair, Gen-
tlemen are inventive and courageous. About half-
past eight, a few adventurers scaled the front wail
up to the window, or rather climbed so far, for they
Lad neither ladder nor rope. A window was opened
for the Lalies below, through .which they contrived
to make an ea:rance. Thus the Court became crowd-
ed to esces: before the door was opened.
Mr. Justice llevi.xe was ebliged repeatedly to
threaten- fines before the Counsel got admitted. A
trifline case of debt occupied the Court for a few
minutes, and occasioned much impatience among
the spectators, none of whom had easy seats, and'
few any tolerable standing room. Aston and George
were at le:lgth anuounce.i. Of the Special Jiffy, at
the head of whom was Mr. LAdiOTON, M. P. only
three appeared, of whom Jolt e WA Rug, of. Hilton.
Castle, Esq. was foreman. The rest were supplied
by a Wks.
Mr. LITTLEDALE stated, this was an action brought
by Mary Aston, the plaintiff, against Sarah George,
the defendant, for clef trnatory words uttered Sy her.l
The defendant pleaded in the first place that she was
not guilty, and secondly a justification.
Mr. SeAttLerr said, that he was now to address
them for an nufortuaate and most deserving young
Lady, who, up to the commencement of this ques-
tion, was most highly and most deservedly respected
by all who knew -her. She was obliged to come into
that Court to vindicate her character. The repara-
tion of the wrong done to her character, and not
damages, was the object of the action. She had been
injured in that part of her character which no da-
mages could compensate, and which, once injured
and unredressed, irreparably ruins the female cha-
racter. He lamented very much that he was obliged
to address them on this subject. He had trusted that
the defendant was sensible that she had acted under
some illusion, and would willingly acknowledge her
error. Whatever might be the result of this action,
the ruin of one at least, if not of both of the Ladies,
must be the consequence. By coming into that
Court, he saw from the audience which surrounded
him, that they were about to make themselves the
sport of idle, and, perhaps, malicious curiosity. To
the last moment, therefore, that it could be available,
most heartily should he hail any prospect of a pri-
vate arrangement.--(Mr. TOPPING, who, with Ser-
jeant HuLLcec, was for the Defendant, rose and
whispered s.nnething to Mr. Senn LET T, who then
proceeded.)—Ile had stated to them, that vindica-
tion, and not damages, was the plaintiff's object ; he
therefore willingly acceded to the proposal of his
Learned Friend, to take a verdict for the Plaintiff,
and nominal damages, £lOO.
Mr. Justice BAytev.--1 am very well pleased at
the manner in which you have disposed of the case.
We understand that the damages had been laid at
£2OOO. The circumstances which are reported re-
specting the origin of the action, we feel ourselves
bound in justice to the parties to withhold, both be-
cause we can have no security as to their.correctness,