Star.
London, England, 1819-01-11 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

The LORD CIIANC7.LLOR sLill labours under extreme
debility, the eXect of his late attack of the gout. His
Lordship, it ib now ascertained, will not attend either
of the Courts of Chancery for some time, hut will
confine hirnsif entirely to his dt.aies in the House of
Lords.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH. JAN. 9.
OAKES V. WIGGINS.

This was action to recover damages from the De-
fendant, a Surveyor, sent down by the Plaintiff to
value a farm of 562 acres, in Deeping Fens, Lincoln-
shire, on which the latter had laid out £15,000, as
security for an annuity, on the representation of the
defendant that the farm was wurthl2l72o a-year tent.,
Mr. J. Mossop, the present tenant, stated that he
took the farm alter Jones, the last tenant, left it.—
Witness never offered 20r. an acre for it ; he now
gave 17s. 6d. an acre. Witness's father offered 205..
an acre for him ; but on seeing the farm witness con-
sidered it to be too high a rent, and would not give
more than 17s. 6d. it would at times carry 300
sheep, but the drainage mill was not equal to drain
ing tie land. Witness did nut think any one would
have given more than 12s. an acre for it in 1811.
When witness took it the farm was in a ruinous state.
Mr. Willan Lad experience in valuing land in va-
rious parts of England for .53 years ; went in Fe-
bruary, 1816, to view the farm in question ; the
draining mill was much out of repair, and even if it
had been perfect it would not have heels equal to
draining the land. If the landlord had done the ne-
cessary repairs, witness was of opinion it would have
• been worth from It. to 11. Is. an acre. It Was a very
indiffnent soil, but would have been greatly im-
proved if it could have bean well drained. It could
not in 1814 have been worth any thing like 31. an
acre. • No person of competent judgment could have
valued the farm at a rent of £1 7.20 a-year.
Mr. Wm.2lshcon, and several other gentlemen, sur-
veyors and valuers ofiand, deposed to the same effect.
Mr. Morgan, the actuary, stated, that the annuity
wanted by Mr. Oakes was worth £22,853.
\qr. Serjeant PELL, for the ddendant, submitted
that the plaintiff's loss had not arisen from the negli-
gence of his client, but from the want of caution on
the part of the plaintiff himself, and his Solicitor,
who ought, before they advanced so larne a stint as
15,000/. on the security of 560 acres of feu land, al-
ready burthened with a mortgage to the amount of
7003/. to have made more minute enquLias than they
. had dote.
Mr. Milne stated, that he took the farm in ques-
tion in 1810, and continued to occupy it till May,
1813' when he was succeeded by Junes. Witness
paid Mrs. Bourne 13001. as rent; the farm when he
took it was not in a good state ; it was in better order I,
when he left it; there were lands in Deeping Fen let
at that time from 42g. to 465. an acre.
Cross-examined—Was tenant to Mrs. Bourne two
years ; was sine he had paid one year's rent ; knew
Jones; had fiennently been in his company, but was
not certain whether he recJinmentied the farm to
him ; witness lent Mrs. Bourne 100/. in drafts, before
his rent wag due; witness had paid his whole rent,
and Mrs. Bemire still owed him between 80/. and
1001. The 'eat of 13,..V. would not have been ton
much it it had been well drained.
Mr. de Brune stated, that in 1811 he was desired by
Mrs. Bourne, to look out fur a tenant fur her Denying
Fen estate. 1-b accordingly did so, and found a
who commissioned him to offer 23,000/.
which sum Mrs. Bourne refused to take. Mr. Yate-
man, on one occasion, when speaking ef Jones,
represented him as a very intelligent clever man. Ia
the latter end of and beginning of 1811., their
•- was a great fall in talc value of hind.
Crots-examlned—Mr. lleskissoa was the Gentle-
Iran who 017:r:A '2!i,0001. for the estate. When
plaintiCs main ney was with witness, witness said
lie.feaied they had got into bad hands. He might
have expre:i,cd his surprise at Wiggins's report, for
• ha was surpiised at it.
The ;.iolicitor who drew up Jones's lease stated,
that at the the:.: it was drawn it was ante-dated, but
he considered it to ba a genuine lease.
Mr. Topharn I.eld a fa: us of 250 acres within half
a mile of the farm in question; he paid, in 1811, up-
wards of ids. an acre. ''Witnesi,'s land was similar
to Jones's.

IL Jones took the farm in question in 1812, and
recollected Wiggins's coming down in Ail il, 1S14:
he arrived between ten and eleven in the mu
Witness haci never !.een or communicated with him
befeac ; he act...tiled till the next morning, and M it-
ness never saw him again till last July, or had any
communicatitin with him. Whilst at witness's Iniuse
he was employed in walking over the farm during
the day, :::ad in the evening he employed himself in
making (ALlN:it:as of the value of the property:
Cross-examined—Mrs. Bourne lent witnesslo,oool.
Of the money she got Item ME. Oakes. Witness knew
that Mrs. Bourne had since been discharged under the
Insolvent Act. After :asceiving the monLy witness en-
gaged in meicantile transactions ; when he left the
• tarm, he left a sum of 1901. part of 10,003/. to carry
on the farm with.
The CHIEF Jusauct, in summing up the case to
the Jury, concurred in the admission that had been
made of the defendant's innocence of ally corrupt or
fraudulent intention; but in point of law his Lord-
ship thought him liable for his negligence and inat-
tention, to such an amount as the circumstances of
these would warrant the Jury in finding.
The Jury found for the Plaintiff, damages 60001.
THE KING V. DR. STODDART, QUIN, AND MITCHELL.
Mr. HUNT addressed the Court, by stating that he
was the prosecutor in this cause, and attended for the
a motion upon the subject.
purpose of making
Lord C.J. ABBOTT—" Sir, this cause is not before
the Court,: the Jury are sworn, and if you have any
thing to say yon must take a proper opportunity to,
do it: —Upon which Mr. Hunt withdrew, and at-1
tended in the Court again about three o'clock, when
his Lordship was summing up in the above mention-
ed case. Upon the Jury returning the verdict, his
Lordship said that he would now hear the Gentle-
man who was in Court this morning as the prosecu-
tor in the King v. Stoddart.
Mr. IIuNT stated, that the defendants in this cause
had been indicted at the Old Bailey Sessions for a
libel. That they had moved the cause into the Court
of King's Bench by a writ of certiorari, add having
moved for a Special Jury, had given hint notice of

trial for theft present Sittings. That he had in con,'
quence come to town, but found that the caute was
entered very low upon the paper list ; yet that many
causes that stood still lower than this had been dis-
posed cf. •
Lord C. J. ABBOTT—" Who told you so?"
Mr. Hunt—" No one, my Lord ; but I see they
are Struck off the paper, and what I wish to avoid is
being taken by surprise."
Lord C. J. ABBOTT—" It is the rule of this Court,
and I have .•iven strict orders that all Special Jury
causes should be .itken in their turn, and there will
be no violation of this rule. The appointment of it
will appear in the Marshal's Office, to which you
can refer for information."
Mr. Hunt—" I am content, my Lord ; that is all
I wish for." Mr. Hunt immediately left the Court.

PALACE-COURT, GREAT SCOTLAND-YARD.
THE KING'S COACHMAN ARRESTED.
JAMES LEONARD V. GEORGE FOSTER.
On Friday Mr. COWLEY moved for a rule to shew
cause, why the writ issued in this case should not be
quashed, on the ground that the defendant was coach-
man in ordinary to his Majesty, and was also ap-
pointesl his Majesty's state coachman on the 21th of
May, 1801, by a warrant signed by the Right lion.
the E.:rl of Chesterfield, then Master of the Horse to
his Majesty, and directed to Rohert Manners, Esq.
Clerk Marshal to his Majesty. The Learned Coun-
sel moved rirr the rule upon an affidavit of the de-
fendant, which set forth a variety of statements; that
he was liable to be called on by his Majesty or
the Prince Regent at any time, suiting their will and
pleasure; and that in pursuance of the office to which
he had been regularly appointed, he was privileged
from arrest, having received fees and salary by vir-
tue of such appointment, and having apartments for
himself and family in the King's Mews. The affi-
davit also set forth, that one Hicks, an officer of this
ICourt, arrested him on the 4th of the present month,
notwithstandiog he (the defendant) told him he was
a privileged person, and that he was oblige,' to give
bail for his appearance.
Mr. REYNOLDS, who presided for 13. Mown, Esq.
observed to Mr. Cowley, that as the merits of the
case must be discussed hereafter, it might he prudent
to forbear entering at length at present. He should,
however, grant the rule to shew cause.