DIGESTED REPORT OF LAW PROCEEDINGS. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
WILLIAMS V. PARKINSON.—The defendant is a poor woman,who havingrefused to sign an answer which had been drawn up on her part, was brought before the 'Court on Friday last, when e motion was made to commit her to the Fleet Prison for con- tempt. The woman on that occasion declared that she knew nothingof the answer ; .and the Vice-Chancellor directed that the case should stand over, that inquiries may be made into the facts. Mr. Cooper now stated, that the representation of the defendant's obstinacy, which he had made on Friday, turned out to he quite cor- rect ; and he therefore moved for a writ of habeas corpus cum causii, that the defendant may be brought before the Court, and if she should continue obstinate, that the decree may be taken against her pro confess°. The learned counsel observed, that nobody could be more sensible than he was of the absurdity of commitments to prison in such ca-es : but it was the only course which, under the present system, and in the present circumstances, could be followed. The -Vice-Chancellor granted the application ; and intimated, that in the next Session of Parliament a bill would be introduced to amend the law upon this subject, and to draw a distinction between parties who refused to answer from perverseness and obstinacy, and those whose ignorance or distress made them litter objects of commiseration than of punishment. (Dec. 14.)
Hoses v. Goonwts.—The parties to this suit had been in partnership as
brewers, but the partnership has been dissolved.. The bill was tiled for a specific performance. It contained one hundred and thirty-nine allegations of fraud, and extended over one thousand three hundred folios ! The answer to this bill covered three thousand nine hundred and fifty-one sheets of paper ; and the application now made was that the plaintiffs may be allowed seven months to prepare exceptions to the answer. The Vice-Chancellor refused to grant more than two months' time for the purpose, as no affidavit was produced to show -what progress had been already made in preparing the exceptions. (Dec. 14.) TEYNHAM V. TYLER.—This was an application in reference to the trial of an 'ejectment. Mr. Knight stated, that the question upon the trial would be the sanity of a gentleman who had executed a certain deed. The plaintiff; Lord Teynham, contended that this gentleman was at the time of executing the deed in a state of mental incapacity, although he sat and voted in tlw House of Lords for many years. If Lord Teynham could prove this, he would become entitled to a very large estate. Lord Teynham was on the bench during the discussion of the application. (Dec. 18.) COURT or KING'S BENCH.
BULL V. JOHNSON.—This was an action against the keeper of a ginshop in the Borough. The action was brought to recover damages for au assault, said to have been committed by the defendant upon Bull, of whom the Attorney-General said, that he was so great a gin-drinker that he was scarcely ever sober. The wit- nesses on both sides contradicted each other upon every part of the evidence ; and the Judge left it to the Jury to say which side of the swearing was the most probable. The Jury got rid of all the parties by finding for the defendant. The case was tried by Mr. Justice James Parke, in the absence of Lord Tenterden, Who was kept at home by illness. His Lordship came down about one o'clock, iiiitl-dispoed of the remaining business of the day. (Dec. 14.) HARRISON V. Honsoss—This was an action for assault and false imprisonment. The plaintiff (an attorney's clerk) had been employed to serve a writ upon the defendant. Having met him in the street, he tendered him a copy of the writ' enclosed in a letter. The defendant refused to receive it, and ran into a shop in
Catherine Street. The plaintiff followed, and again tendered the letter, which the defendant again refused. The plaintiff with both his hands took hold of the defendant's coat, and having unbuttoned it, thrust the letter into the breast. The defendant then gave the plaintiff' in charge for an assault, to an officer, who took him into custody and detained him for three hours. Lord Tenterden left it to the Jury to say whether the plaintiff had committed any personal violence in the service of the writ. Verdict for the plaintiff—damages 5/. (Dec. 14.)
ROCHARD V. AUGER.—The plaintiff, a miniature painter in Regent Street, was employed in March last to paint a likeness in miniature of the defendant, a French lady. The miniatine was painted and paid for; and so much approved of. that Madame Auger, at the request of some friends, sent it back to the painter, with a request that he would make two copies of it. After commencing the copies, he found it necessary that Madame Auger should honour him with another sitting; and for that purpose she appointed an hour, which had unfortunately been prcengaged by a woman of quality, who was punctual to her time, and was actually sitting to M. Rochard when Madame Auger came to the door. The painter ran down to the carriage, and made many apologies to the lady; but she was not to be appeased, and said that the lady of title had gotten precedence be- cause she (Madame Auger) was not a countess; and she went away in a pas- sion. The painter finished the copies, and sent them home in October, with a bill for 28/. Is. Madame Auger refused to pay the bill, or take the miniatures, alleging that they were as like the painter's face as they were to her own, and that in consequence of his impertinence she had had her likeness painted at Paris. This action was then brought to recover the amount of the bill. For the defence five witnesses were called, who looked at the copies, and said they were neither like Madame Auger nor like each other. The Jury nevertheless found for the painter to the whole extent of his demand. (Dec. 15.) BRETT V. BEALES.—This case, which involved the right of the Corporation of Cambridge to levy certain tolls in that town, occupied Lord Tenterden and a special Jury for three days in this week. The Jury to-day negatived the right of the Corporation, by finding for the defendant. In a former trial of the same ques- tion, with other defendants, the Corporation obtained a verdict; but a rule to set that verdict aside is now pending in this Court. (Dec. 18.)
COURT OF COMm ON PLEAS.
Massy V. Gsvhse.—The plaintiff in this case sought compensation for the injury which had been done to his house in Waterloo Bridge Road, by the pulling down and rebuilding of the New Jerusalem Chapel, of which the de`elide:es are trustees. The action was tried before, at Kingston Assizes, and a verdict re- turned for the plaintiff—damages 1801. The case during the present investiga- tion, was contested with remarkable eagerness on both sides; and the Jury after a great deal of deliberation, assessed the damages of the plaintiff at forty-shillings, being one-ninetieth of the sum awarded in the same case by the Kingston Jury. (Dec. 14.) FAWcETT a. HUBLE.—The plaintiff is an attorney, and brought this action to recover damages for the injury done to his character by the defendant, who, in the office of one of the Deputy Masters of the King's Bench, said in the presence of several persons, that " the plaintiff had committed so many perjuries, that he ought to have been hanged long ago ;" " that he kept a woman, and robbed tradespeople to supply her with goods; that he (the defendant) had seen the plaintif alter a deed after it had been executed ;" and other things of the same nature. The defendant is also an attorney. They Jury found for the plaintiff-- damages 5/. (Dec. 16.)
Dssismu v. Ievtx.—This was an action on a policy of insurance on the ship George, from London to Buenos Ayres. When the vessel sailed, it was understood that Buenos Ayres was in a state of blockade; and the Captain was therefore di- rected to touch at Monte Video. and ascertain the actual condition of Buenos Ayres before he should proceed to the latter place. A strong wind from the northward pre- vented him from making Monte Video ; and he held on towards Buenos Ayres, until he cause within sight of the blockading squadron ; and the vessel not tack- ing, she was captured, taken into Monte Video, and there condemned as a prize, for having broken the blockade. The defence to the action was, that the break- ing of the blockade made the policy void. It was also contended on that side, that the decision of the Court of Admiralty in Monte Video, which condemned the ship, was not conclusively binding upon the parties. The question was at present decided by a verdict, subject to a special case, in which the merits of the question will be brought before the Court in bunco. (Dec.17.) Pe INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
WILIJAm WALLIS, late a licensed victualler, was opposed by two spirit-mer- chants. The insolvent had borrowed of his relations 630/., with which he took a public-house: the business did not succeed, and the insolvent sold the concern for about as much as he gave for it. Out of the money which he now possessed, he paid his brewers part of their debt, and his relations the whole of theirs, and also paid several smaller debts; and out of what remained, he offered 5s. in the pound to the spirit.merchants by whom he was now opposed, and to whom he owed a considerable sum. The Chief Commissioner said, that the Court wished it to be publicly understood, that where a person without capital embarked in business upon the money of his relations or friends, he had no right, when the business turns out unproductive, to prefer the interests of such persons before the just claims of those upon whose goods he had been trading on credit. The pay- ments made in this case bythe insolvent to his relations, were made with au undue preference ; and the Court therefore sentenced the insolvent to be remanded for nine calendar months. (Dec. 6.) FANNY HUNTER, a fashionably dressed and prepossessing young lady, who titioned under the name of Fanny Stratton, was opposed by Edward McDowell, of Burlington Arcade. The opposing creditor said, that one fine evening in .lone 1828, the lady stopped at his window, in company with the wife of a respectable tradesman, and was admiring the articles exposed for sale; on his invitation. they entered the shop, and he sold to the insolvent articles to the amount of 4/. She offered a note of the Brecon Bank in payment ; but he told her to pay when she called again. She came again in a few days, and announced herself as Mrs. Stratton, having an income of 300/. a year, under a settlement by Mr. Stratton. She then got other matters to the amount of 37/. Mr. McDowell swore that he had given her credit solely on the representation of her having a settled annuity of 3004 a year. The witness, on cross-examination, said, with great gravity, that his shep was so extremely tempting, that no lady of taste could pass by without stepping in to buy something. He admitted that he had a very silvery and insinuating tone, and &tithe had made many a guinea by his tongue. The Court, on examin- ing the evidence, adjudged her to be entitled to her discharge: -(Dee. 17.)
Previous page
