Star.
London, England, 1827-02-26 00:00:00

log refused to say where he lived; and where he was,
going to, until he was lodged in the watchhouse.
Several witnesses were then called, who proved that
the plaintiff on being stopped, said that the drawers
were his own property, and he was as honest a man at
Mr. Dunbar, but would give no other explanation till
after he was taken to the waichheuse, when Callow iaid
to him, 14 Why did you not say who you were at first,
and save all this trouble.
The LORD Cuter JUSTICE, after recapitulating the
evidence to the Jury, said that with regard to Callow,
he was by his office bound to take any one iiirn custody
on a reasonable charge of felony ; therefore, if they
wei eof opinion that he had acted bona fide in thee-men-
tion of his office, they would acquit him; with regard
to the other defendant, he had pleaded a justification
which he had failed to make out, the plaintiff Was there-
fore entitled to their verdict. It did not appear that
he was actuated by any malicious motives, but them
could be no doubt he had acted hastily and impru-
dently; it was therefore for them to say, taking all the
eircumctances of the case into consideration, what com-
pensation the plaintiff was entitled to.
The Jury having found a verdict for the defendant
Callow, returned a verdict for the plaintiff against
D u nb a r.--Damag es 1001.
mason V. TOSS.
This was an action by the plaintiff, a dress-maker, to
recover from the defendant, a shopkeeper, residing in
Gilbert-street, Grosvenor-square, a compensation in
damages for an assault and false imprisonment.
It appeared from the evidence produced on behalf of
the plaintiff, that her brother was a teacher of music,
occupying apartments in defendant's house, in the year
1826. Sonie dispute had taken place between them,
and Parsons was to quit the lodgings at Chi istmas. He,
had been in the habit of occasionally having musical
parties in his rooms, and sometimes a little dance. On
the 25:h of November last, having removed part of his
furniture to bis new lodging, he thought it would be
a good opportunity for a dance; and accordingly in-
vited a few friends, and his sister formed one of the
party. Ia the midst of their festivities the defendant
entered the room, accompanied by several watchmen,
and having desired them to do their duty, gave the
whole party, except the plaintiffs brother, in charge,
and had them all conveyed,two and two, to the watch-
house in Mount-street, Grosvenor-square. When they
arrived there, the night constable inquired what they
were charged with ? wnen the defendant charged them
with creating a riot and disturbance in his house, know-
ing that he had a child ill at the time. This was denied
by the plaintiff, and the charge was finally dismissed.
For the defendant several witnesses were called to
prove that the plaintiff's brother had said he would an-
noy him ; that the dance was a most noisy one, and
that the plaintiff had not been given into custody at all,
but had gone voluntarily to the watchhouse, the de-
fendant having directed the watchmen to take all of the
party into custody, except the plaintiff and her brother.
The Loan Cater JUSTICE having summed up the
evidence, the Jury found a verdict for the plaiatiff..—
Damages 201.
This being the last day of the SittingsatWestminster,
we cannot help again noticing the great inconvenience
sustained by the officers of this Court and the public
,from the cold to which they are all exposed from the
construction of the Court. We have before mentioned
that the windows in the gallery, which during the
summer season promoted the heat, on the approach of
winter were removed, apparently with a view to admit
the air. The Lord.Cbiet Justice, by surrounding him-
self with cut tains, contrives to ward off the cold, but in
consequence of this precaution there is often great dif-
ficulty in hearing the observations addressed by him to
the Jury. We trust, therefore, that before next term,
an improvement will take place at the suggestion of
some one who understands what accommodations are
required for a Court of Justice.

ARCHES COURT, Frs. 24.
O► VIM SALL or rollll3loUtli V. TUE COCIIMMI or

Dr. Lusntworow, on the part of the Consilium, said
that the proceedings in this suit had been suspead-
'ed in consequence of the nonpayment of a bill of
costs amounting to 691. claimed by Lady Portsmouth's
Proctor. He was now instructed to inform the Court,
that the costs were paid, and prayed that the cause might
be set down for hearing by•the first day of next Term,
and that Commissioners might be named by the other
party to examine witnesses.
The Countess of Portsmouth's Proctor informed the
Court, that there were• two other bills of costs ready to
be taxed, amounting to 1501. and prayed that a sum of
money might be ordered to be paid on acconnt of
those bills.

The Courtr granted the former part of the prayer;
but as the other bills were not taxed, he would not make
any order on them.