Court Of Common Pleas, Gu...
I Before Lord Ckigef Justice fBT and a Comrnoiz Juir. ' This was an action of trespasn alleged to bave.been comraftted by defendant in pulling down part of preninea4elonging to the plaintiff Pait of tbese premisea donsjgted of imeTetiasf the, ol Liondon wall; upwards of 159 feet long and 14 Mide, situathbetr,eem W1riiic.k.- lane and Newgate. The trespass coitplained d? was thetaking a'ay some of the bricks and making a stabl Iht the lower part of tho vwal. It was preved on the part of the plaintiff, that this wall had abutted apon, and was used as, a p3rtof the bIiilding, in the erec. tion of an inn, which has stood there, aan4been In the plaintiff's possession, for several years. It was also glven as proaf ofplintiff'l right, that he had made a sort of garden. and sowed neede on the top of the wall for a length of time. For the defence it was con- tended, that this prpperty had never been clained by plaintiff ; that he kad refused to pay tithes for it, as beng altogether useleea to him. The Loiua CHIrr JUSTICE.-Tithen for what? For the seeds I suppo5e. (A lough.) Air. Sergeant TADDg-14o, my Lord; they have misch better tithes in London than those on seeds. A Juror.-No doubt they have, but f wish ve had no titlses at all. The case then proceeded, and the jury, afEer hearing the defen- dant's evidence, and the reply, gave a verdict fortheplaltlff._da- mazes ls the defendant undertaking to put the plaitff 'a premises in the state he had found them. cOtitflp no COURFO PLEAS. Y,? 1>ALIt fl*' SRIEARMAV V. ELSThg.