Star.
London, England, 1810-09-03 00:00:00

LAW ATELZMENCit.

PALACE COURT, AUGUST 31.
EGERTON V. RUBINO.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a re-
spectable looking woman, the wife of a Master Block-
maker at Deptford, against the defendint, also a fe-
male, and wife to a publican, also residing at Dept-
ford; and the assault, as proved in evidence, arose out
of the following circumstances. There is a Female
Benefit Club, held at the house of the defendant, of
which the plaintiff, it appeared, was a member, but
not one of those most approved by the defendant, as
she was what is termed a dry member, that is, one of
those who did not spend any thing at the time of
paying her subscription, as most of the other members
did; on the day on which the assault complained of
was committed, however, the plaintiff and a female
friend went to the defendant's house, who acted as
treasurer to the club, to draw some money which was
due to her, and as she then attended to receive money,
instead of paying it, she called for two quarterns of
fir//prosf, one for herself and the other for her friend,
I which they stood at the bar and sipped ; whether this
potent beverage obscured the apprehension of the plain-
tiff, or not, does not appear ; but, upon paying the
reckoning, and counting the moaey she had just
before received of the defendant, she conceived she
had received ninepence short of what she ought to have
had. The landlady, however, soon made it appear
that the nituisince, the subject of dispute, had been kept
back as the balance remaining due upon a note of hand
which she held of the plaintiff. The passions of these
fair adversaries, however, being roused were not soon
smoothed, a warm argument of words ensued, which
was followed by one of blows, on the part of the de.
fendant, who applied her fats with some effect, to the
face and breast of the plaintiff, who was finally driven
from the field, or rather from the house, without having
an opportunity of striking a single blow.
The defence setup was, that the plaintiff had ca•
lumniated the chastity of the defendant's daughter,
and said she was pregnant during the absence of her
husband, who was gone from England upwards of
dime years, by another man; and further, that when
she discovered her situation, she had taken deleterious
medicine to destroy the fruits of her incontinence
previous to its birth.
The Learned Judge told the Jury, that no words
could justify an assault ; in the present case, the slan-
der cast upon the defendant's child had been most
foul (if the assertions of the plaintiff were without
foundation), and the Jury in giving damages, would
consider how far the passions of a mother would be
irritated by hearing a daughter so calumniated.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
mages ls.
SEPTEMBER 1.-A case was heard in which one
Simpson, who lets lodgings to ladies of easy virtue,
.was plaintiff, and a Miss Ellis the defendant. It ap-
peared that the lady had been removed from the lie-
fendant's house, and taken into keeping by a Noble
Duke, and the present action was brought for the
recovery of 13 guineas for as many weeks lodging,
and £l 13s. for damage sustained by broken glass,&c.
The debt was denied by the defendant.—Under the
direction of the Judge, who observed that the claims
were not legal, both on account of the minority of the
defendant, and because the lodgings were only taken
by the week, the plaintiff was non-suited.