The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-06-28 00:00:00

COURT OF RING'S BEXCH.—Jura 27.

r.GG V. LORD COLERAINE.
This action was brought by therplaintiff. a well known
genunitb, to recover of Lord Coleraine, better known
as Calonel Hanger, the atnonet of a bill for work done
to bia order, so long ago as the year 1777. His Lord-
ship in 1817 went through the bill and affixed his ini-
tials to the items, which he admitted to be correct, and
afterwards paid 35/. on account, reducing the debt to
131. 14s. exclusive of interest.
Mr. CAMPBELL, for the plaintiff, admitted that be
could rot insist on interest upon the ordinary items,
but claimed it upon a draft given on the 7th of
March, 1778, for 171. 61. 6d., the interest on which was
361. 7s. (A laugh.)
The Loan Cuter JUSTICE held that interest was not
payable on the order produced, and
The Jury, under his directions, found a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages 131. 14s.
BREAKING THE RULES Of THE KING'S BENCH PRISON.
. REST V. JONES, ESQ.
Mr. NARRTAT stated, that this was an action against
Wm. Jane*, Es q. Marshal of the King's Bench Prison,
for the escape of a person named Young, then a prison-
er in the rules. The Learned Gentleman said he should
call witnesses to prove that the Prisoner was seen at a
coffee-house, near the Surrey Theatre; at the Swan
Tavern, in Arnndel-street, Strand ; and at other plates.
This action, therefore, was to recover against the Marshal
the amount of judgment, debt, and costs.
Thomas Middleton produced office copy of judgment
in the Court of King's Bench, in a cause Reay e.
Young," on the 12th of May, 1841, being in an action
on a bill of exchange, total damages and costs amount-
ing to 419/.
Other witnesses were called to prove the alleged facts.
Mr. GURNEY, for tie defendant, said he should show
that the whole of this was a preconcerted plan to get
the Marshal into a trap, in order to make him pay the
costs.
The Linen CHIEF JUSTICE said be thought the Jury
would be satisfied the plaintiff's case was sufficiently made
out in evidence to entitle him to recover against the
Marshal.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 4191. and costs.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE 27.
DASHWOOD. CLERK, V. GARNHASI.
This was an actios for a malicious arrest. The plain-
tiff was a clergyman of Suffolk, and the defendant, a
tradesman of Eteocles' in the same county. It appeared
that the defendant had furnished some dresses and milli-
nery to the plaintiff's wife, after baying received notice
not to trust her. The plaintiff obtatued a fortune of
bOOOl. with his wife, but some disagreement having
arisen between them, and her property in Jamaica being
r tther deteriorated, he allowed her IDOL per annum for
the maintehance of herself and the education of her
danghter. This annuity had not been regularly paid
since April, 1819. The 5111 on which the plaiouff had
been arrested was for goods supplied from December in
that year to December, 1821, and amounted to 491.4 s
The plaintiff called witnesses to prove the notice and the
arrest, and the defendant produced evidence of the deli-
very of the goods. The Jury found a verdict fur the de-
fendant, on the ground that there was a probable cause
of t.
Mr. S.rgeant TADDIr appeared for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Sergeant Vattonax for the defendant.

CONSISTORY COURT, FAIDAT, Juan 27.
cauevry AND ADULTERY.—LEY ogairest LEY.
This was a question on the admission of a libel brought
In on behalf of Mrs. Harriet Matilda Richardson Ley,
the wife of John Lev, of the parish of St. George in the
East, county of Middlesex, and diocese of London, in a
suit of separation and divorce, by reason of cruelty and
adultery, promoted by her against her husband.
Dr. ADAMS and Dr. JESINSR, as counsel for Mrs. Rich-
ardson Ley, contended that the libel was admissible ; but
Dr. LUSIIINGTON, on behalf of the husband, opposed
its admission. The libel, which consisted of 28 articles,
v.as in substance this :—it pleaded the marriage of the
parties on the 18th of June, 1816, at Ringstead in Nor-
folk, and recited that they very shortly afterwards came
to reside in London; that a few days only after the mar-
riage, Lev treated his wife at times with much contempt
and indifference, and at others manifested so mach us-
Iri ndness to her, by quarrelling without provocation, and
addressing her in the most disgusting langnage, that she
w.,s frequently obliged to sleep apart from him. On
one occasion it was necessary for Ley, in the performance
of his duty, as an excise-officer (assistant inspector of the
river Thames), to reside some time at Gravesend; bin
wife accompanied him, and in the presence of the people
with whom they lodged, he very seriously ill-used and
l.urt her, by dragging her violenltly to her room, and
knocked her against the stair-railings in-doing so. It
was farther stated, that in consequence of these him, she for some time refused to cohabit with him, un-
til induced to consent to live with him again by the media-
tion of the wife of a brother officer of the same depart-
ment ; but no sooner was Wen-conciliation effected, than
lie renewed his old course of behaviour by addressing her
in the most obscene terms before strangers. On their
• return to town, Mrs. Ley, by her husband's permission.
went down into Norfolk to visit her relations; but daring
her absence he was frequently visited at their lodgings in
the New-road by one Harding, a female with whom hebad
cohabited previously to his marriage with the party propo-
nent, who had acknowledged herself to be pregnant by him.
and with whom, during Mrs. Ley's stay at Norfolk, he
frequently renewed at their lodgings his illicit inter-
course. On Mrs. hey's return to town, she was greeted
with the most gross and opprobrious epithets from Ley,
by which she was so terrified that her health became
much affected. The 10th article of the libel charged that
some time in the latter end of the Oar 1816, he without
any cause, flew into a violent passion with Mrs. hey ; and
offer insulting her with his accustomed 'obscenities, and
threatening her with personal violence, at length seised
bar with great force, and held her suspended by the legs,
with her head downwards, for several minutes, which
occasioned her blood to determine violently towards her
bead; by reason of which violence, she then suffered great
pain and anguish ; and her sight bad beep since inst.-
:tally affected—an additional consequence being, that
this ill treatment occasioned a palatal disease in her
throat, which has ever since continued, having hitherto
baffled the skill of her medical attendants. The II tb ar•
tick propounded certain acts of violence into which Ley
was betrayed towards his wife, on account of some differ-
ence of opiniou that be entertained touching the purchme
of e tea-kettle. The 12th was of a more serious charge-
ter; for it set forth, that in consequence of his indiscri-
minate amours, he communicated to Mrs. Ley a parlien-
-1 it disease, which he subsequently acknowledged to bsve
contracled, and for which he expressed so much contri-
tion, threatening moreover to•m 'lre away with himself if
she would not forgive Linn; that she cooseuted to return
home a ith him from !vs sister's, at whose house she first
discovered her unfortunate condition. In July. 1317.
however. having gone to Gravesend, together, with
one or two. young ladies who were ou a vist to them,
Mrs. Ley, it was stated, was once more persecuted by the
brutal fury of her husband; for, happening oneday to find
that a young woman, who had. formerly been their ser-
vast, but had quitted them. hal calla on Mr.. Ley, be
atinscd.bis wife to so shocking a manner, that the young
Wks quitted site house. They bad scarcely retnrnerl
e 3.ey .up into the room where they wets sitting
, and catching up the latter in his arms, lie
of the window in an indecent- posture, sued
• he 'retold throw her down into tit: ettee•

before J.eff rope
liiiiii6..
( with his pits. 0
held last est of
threstreed tbot