The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-02-15 00:00:00

biroir. r. DUNN.

This case, in which, at the Sittings after last
Michaelmas' TermVehe jury found a verdict against
the Defendant foe MM. as damages, on account of
Criminal Coorrersettim with the Plaintiff's wife, again
*tenth for OM at!the prevent Sittings after Term.
The. Airrotteritv&cttraAr., on the part of the
laintiff, did not-resist the Rile for a new: trial
'tic made absolute, the Defendant not having
Nen:heard, and the Plaintiff being desirous that he
ebt;ttld clot hare it in his power afterwards to say, or
irtintitte, that justice hod not been done 'him.—
The terms imposed on the Defendant were, that he
should pay the costs of the day of the former trial,
and should undertake to accept of short notice of
trial for the present Sittings.
cattrrai RS V. STEIN, 6141T113 AND CO. ! • ,
This important case, and all the ether eases,
which, on tnOtions Tor new trials, 'Ruler Nisi beo
been granted, stand oval. Tor argam'ent till nest lirm.

COURT OF COMMON PLE44, Fee. 14.
HUDSON V. SANT.

The Plaintiff, a farmer at Hampstead, sought to
recover a compensation in damages for the loss of a
servant's services, and an injury sustained by having
his cart overturned. It appeared that bit son, a
young man, who acted as his servant, was diving.
'the cart with his mother in April last. At some dis.
tante from Hampstead they met a coal- waggon he.
longing to the Defendant, which, by the un,kilful
management of the driver, came in contact with the
cart, and dashed it to pieces. The unfortunate wife
of the Plaiutiff was thrown out and killed on the
spot. The young man was also disabled, during
considerable time, from following his occupation._
Application was afterwards made to the Defendant
for a compensation, and as the offer did not agree
with the Plaintiff's sense of the injury, the present
action was brought. _ _

There was no defence, and the Jury Coned a rer.
dict for the Plaintiff—damages 501.

ARCHES COURT, DOCTOR'S COMMONS, F1:11 14.
GENRES AGAINST VICKERY, FALSELY CALLING nut.

SELF DENNES.

This was a cause of nullity of marriage, brought
by Henry Defines, the husband (acting by his
Guardian), against Catharine Vickery, his wife,
falsely called Denn's, by reasc-n of miuority.
It appeared that the marriage took place between
the parties by licence, on the 21st of July, 1810, is
the parish church of it. Martin, Ludgate, which mar-
riage ceremony was not performed by the Vicar or
Curate of the parish, but by a Clergyman resident in
the country. It further appeared, that Me. 'thorns,
Rennes, the father of the minor, died in the year
1803, appointing by his Will his widow and three
other persons executors and guardians of his ail.
dren, and that the parties resided at Blenheim, in the
county of Bedford.
_ _

The evidence produced in the cause west to prove
that the mother of the minor highly disapproved of
the marriage before the solemnization thereof, and
that it was had without her consent or the consent of
the rest of the guardians. The evidence also went to
prove the identity, minority, and all the necessary
facts in a cause of this description.
The Court (Sir JOHN NICHOLL), after recapitn.
flitting the same, was of opinion that the facts were
clearly proved, and therefore pronounced the mar.
riage to be null and void.