The Statesman.
London, England, 1813-01-29 00:00:00

generally ; and the Court, considering that it did
1. s ietttlt answer, as to the price of the horse
ct• ,sti. wing par: of the consideration of the note,
reduced the vestiict to 1071. 12s. 6d.
1111(NCS V. MORTIitER.
. ('Ruce was SleoWn against a rule for a new trial.
5t eas an action of hover, for a quantity of coals,
raised by D-fendant under the freehold of Plaintiff.
Defet.re wax, that Defendant was lessee' of Mr.
Ratille. Lord of the Manor of Shef, in the county
of j ark, and that the Lord of, the Manor was en
ti i.,t to all the mines under certain lands, •called the
New Lands, of which description Plaintiff's MRS
Stjed to he. To prove that the Lord was entitled
to the mines in such lands, a number of• witnesses'
proved) that the lord and his lessees had, foe
series of years, been in the habit of driving for coals,
where they pleased, in the New Lands, and that'
such right had never been disputed, but was well
known to all the occupiers of such lands.' To prove
tba, Plaintiff's land was part of those New Leeds,
the (nay evidence was, that it was entirely surround-
ed by those !adds. To rebut this, Plaintir pro.
duced deed. as far back as 165,. peeving that Ri I
vas
freehold; and to prove thot„,it did not constitute
part of the New Lauds, -84) paid by the name of;
titl,!-monevWas relied on. 3.12 e Judge left it to the
Jury r,;) both the points, directing them, that they
might presume that the New Lands were formerly a ;
• waste, vs Inc:a the Lord had granted out, reserving!
the wins, which grant might have perished by
time. The Jury, hovrever, foand • for Plaintiff otrl
both points, contrary, as the Judge stated, to what !
he conceived to be,the weight of the evidence. It was.;
now contended, that there Ought,to be.some deed te
disprove that Plaintiff had a freehold, and the tithe-
money ees relied on, as proving an •immemorial :
modus, wnich would prove, that it was a freehold I
iu the time of Richard the First • it was also stated-1j
that it was the province of the Jury to decide on the
fact; a tul.they had done so.
Lord ELLENBOROCGD said, that liswas very corn '1
moo, particularly its• the Northern counties, for one
person to have a freehold n the surface, and another '
to have a right to the mines: that the expression
tithe-money, was mach too loose to forin any con:
elusion ; that although it was the province of the
Jury to decide on the fact, yet it was the duty of
that Court, when a verdict appeared to them to be
contrary to evidence, to send the cause to be reconsi-
dered by a mere discreet and considerate Jell) and)
as in this case all theevideuce was for the Defendant,
as well in the uncontested exercise of the right of the
Lords of the Manor in driving where they pleased for
coals in the New Lands, as in Plaintiff's ground
being entirely surrounded by the New Lands, there
must be a new trial : and the rest of the Court eon-
cnrring, the Rule was made absolute.
His Lordship then sat at Nisi Prius.
DENT V. DUTCHMAN.
The SOLICITOR-GEN•EHAL stated, that this was an
action to recover back from Defendant a sum of 1001.,
deposited with hint by the Plaintiff, who was a pas-
senger in his ship.
James flosborrow was stalled, who provqd, that
he saw Plaintiff give Defendant 35 doubloons, which,
at 41., were worth 1401.: that Plaintiff agreed for
the passage of herself and servant boy for 401., and
that 'Defendant promised to give, her the remainder
on her arriva! in England ; the voyage was from the
island of St. Thomas to England; he swore that he
was not a relative of Plaintiff, although she might
somelimes have called him cousin : he said his pas-
sage was not paid for, and that Plaintiff did not pro-
mise to pay for him.
Lion, steward of the ship, sloe, that the doub-
loon was only worth 31. 125.; that Plaintiff agreed
to pay 401. for her own passage, and was besides to
pay_for that of her servant; and that she also pro.
mixed to pay for Ilosborrew's passage ; that the Cap-
tain had paid her several sums of money; and that
on her arrival in England she acknowledged that
the Captain had settled with her, and that she had
not any demand upon him.
Merton, a West-India Captain, proved, that the
usual charge for a cabin passenger was from 401. to
601.
The SOLICITO:teGENERAL then put in a letter from
Defendant to Plaintiff, promisit g that he would live
with her, and .would furnish her a house, and give
her an equipage, when they arrived in England.
Lord ELLENi.OROUGH,.in his charge to the Jury,
stated, that it was entirely a question to which wit-
ness they would give credit ; and that the letter was
of no importance, as it was merely an invitation to
prostitution ; and that, in no case, could it be a good
consideration for cancelling a previous agreement.
• The Jury found for Plaintiff—Damages 421. Bs.
ARCHES COURT, DOCTORS COMMONS, Jas.2B.

COLE O. CORDER..
This was aieit of defamation originally promoted
in the C9niniissary Court of Serrey, by John Cole
against John Corder, for, as alleged, applying
gross and defamatory- words ,to Tarr. Cole;•-itiewifei
It appeared by the proceedings in the pose, the
Court below pronounced that Mr. Cole had failed in
proof of the libel exhibited, and di:Wined Mr.l
Corder with costs. From this scene. an a
was prosecuted to this Court on behalf Mr. rei.
It appeared by'the evidence of two witoewes, that
in 4pternber, 1810, a Mr. Stock became a baekrupt,
and gr. Corder was one of his assignees, that at:a
private meeting of creditors, when Mr. Stock exhi-
bited his accounts, it appeared- that the sum of 1.1, or
15001. had had been paid by him Si Mr. John Cole
and Mrs. Jane Cole, his wife, with whom it also
appeared, that Mr. Stock boarded awl lodged:
whereupon Mr. Corder said, this is the way the
money has been expended-on a common wh..-e and
a strumpet, and he made use of many other oppro-
brious terms, not only those, but whin: words were
repeated on other occasions.
The Court (Sir JOHN Nictrom.), in delivering its
sentence, observ-3d, the only question for its consi-
- whether there was legal proof of the
charged. The law did require proof of
'in such cases, and it was clearly of
the evidence supported the charge,
the words made use of by Mr. Corder,
be applied to Mrs. Jane Cole,
.and
frinsed the sentence of the Court be.
onalleaanecl Mr. Corder in the costs of

•

• deration.was, a
defamation
two
witnesses chi
opinion, that 1
namely, I:int th
were meant to I
accordingly rav
1, low, and cowl
k. both Courts.
•
_
•• : i