Summer Assizes.
h ,iii aurtiCXoaiSg", anni ine (tetence? was, that there hadl ec i no consideration. It appeared in evidenice, thatsome time ago the defendant was in difficulties, and offered hisereditors a composition of 7s. in the pound. Amongst those creditors was a person named Vim. Sheliiierdire, the brother of the plaintiff in this action; he agreed to receive thie composition * and the delendant gal e him an acceptance for 191., the amBount of the composition oti his debt. This acceptance wais paid over by Win. Shelmerdine to his brotler (the plaintiff) who paai l it to third pdeies. Wben ilue, it was dishonoured, and returne( to the plaintiff. *who gave notice lo his brother, and he went to the defendant, anl pressed him to lake the bill. The lefendant declared his inability to tlo so; but offered to give another acceptatice; and he gave to Win. Shelinerdine ali ac. ceptance for 191. 12s. to cover the bill and the expenses. Win. Slhel- nierdine, howevcr, did not give u, the first bill, anti two monlits after the second bill had been paid, thie plaintiff brought this action o0 the first.-To prove the case for the defendant, 'Var. Shelmer- dine was called, who was of course a very unwilling witness. lie ad(mitted that lie applied the second bill to his own use, and said hie didI so because thce defendanit had agreed to pay his debt in full, though he had previously agreecl to accept the eomposition. He was then asked if his brother, tile plaintilf had any kinowledge of his conduct to the defendant. He replied no, he had not spoken to his brother for eight years. Alr. Justice BAYLEY obscrvetd that what the witness had been saving was no evidence in the cauis; the jury must dismiss it en. tirely fronm their minds, and consider the case asresting solely on the evidence for the plaintiff, who was entitled to their verdict. * TheJury deliberated for some time; but did not seem inclined to comce to a concl:sion, w hen .Mr. Justice BAYLEY again told them, that the evilence of Wil- liam Shelmerdine weas altogether irrelerant. There might be some ground for surmising a colluision between the plaintiff and his bro- thcir; but there was no evidence to that effert, and they must not try cases on surFmise and conjecture. The jury again deliberated for some imne. MIr. Justice BAYLEY algainl told the jury, that the plaintiff was eatitled to th:ir verdict: if they found a verdict for the defendant, thev wouldl cut up the paper credit of the countrv by the roots. The Jurv again deliberated. One of them intimated to his Lord- ship that thiere was a difference of opinion amongst them. Alr. Justice BAYt.EY.-Gentlemen, if yoat cannot agree upon a vertlict for the plaintiff, I will dischaige you from giving any verdict at all. iulr. COLT5t.MN, for the defendant, objected to the discharge of thle jury Mir. Justice BAYT.EY.-Ther, gentlemen, I tell you it is your duty to find for the plaintiffi Mr. COLTMiAN.-lfyour Lordship says so, ofroursel mustcon. seint to itle jury being discharged. The jury were theretbre discharged. FRIDAY, SEI'T. 10. Before Mlfr. Baront HULLOCK. 5tA3ti'sow v. RIDGEWAY AND ANOTEER. Air. BRiUGEsAne opened the pleadings. This was an action brought by the plaitnitF for an assault committed upon him bv the two defendants, Alr. Thomas Ridgeway and Air. Ediward Conrad Rycroft. The defen 1ants .ilenoed *not guilty,'and thereupon issue was joined. Mr. SCARLETT stated the case to the jury. They hlad heard from his learned friend the nature of thit action. It was. brought for an assault, and for an assault committed under very novel cir- cumstances. Indeed, in the whole course of his experience, he was not aware ofever hving Inet tbith a similar case, and he trusted that he should niever liave the misfortune ofimeetitig with another like it. He should liave to prove the assault by circumrstantial evidence, which he hoped won di be so strong as to produce the same result upon their minds as direct evidence. And here, lie mn-ust say, that he did not owe any obligation to the defendants for the circalm-. stances which he wis enabled to prove that clay against them ; for they had chosen a time and place for wreaking their vengeance on the plaintiff, whlich was peculiarly well qualified to get rid of the notice of any witnesses. If there was any characteiistic by which the people of England were more distiniguished than another, it was the open and mranly way in which tbey displayed their rcsentment. Our country was more free from the crlrhne of assassination tian any other in the svorid, and it was almost an umiieard-of event for one man to way.lay aisotiter in the dark for the purpose of gratifying his malice against him. It was the part of an Englishman, ant parti. cularly of an Ei3glishi soldier, to meet his enemy in the face ot day, and not to seek-for him in dark rooms and in private corners; and he trusted that the Yerilicd given in this cause, in wlich he was serry to say that an English mcrchant and a3i Emiglish soldier were the de. fendants, would serve as an example to our countrymen to deter them from the commission of ainiilar acts of violence and unmanlv resentment. They would have heard that there were counnteies in the world, in which, when a man felt reAentinent for. any real or supposed injury, he eithier went himself, or hiired .some mercenary hard to wvreak it; amid that when no witness was by to see the blow, he struck down hi victtlin, and called the murder by the polluted namex of justice and vengea.nce. He wai sorry to have occasion to make these remarks, but lie felt that they were justified by the case he was going to Open to them-rta case which would convisice theth be- fore long, that these defendants had ateed with a spirit which was le"s suitedl to England than to Portugal 'or Italy. The plaiotiFf in this case, Alir. If ampson, was an attorney. Hle wias about 24 years of age, and was already marriel. He was a gemntleman bybirth, as his father was a clergyman, and had been during his life a iiagis- trate of thie county, Hisoffices were in Bolton, but his place of re. si4ence was halt a mile from that towR. On the day when this assault wasconimitted, he svas at dinner with his family. A mes- iage was lelivered to hlim from his office, stating that he was vianted on tie Instant by a client. Ile httrried in consequence to his offie, and no sooner had he entere4 it, than two other individuals entured af'ter himi locked the door, rind began to gasstilt hlis person. Thiese individuals were the two defendants on the record, -one of -whom antwas sald to be~ an officer in Hist Miajesty's service. HIe' trusted that thswsnt icecase; fbr an officer who considcred his.own honour an h ottur cof the iservice, even if lhIiad the justest cause of Yesentmecnt agzainst an indiiviaual, wvoaia prefer Indulging it in the face of,, (lay to gratifying it in secret and without wit.. elaj, wodid vay to his adversary, " I bring mny friend trC c~cl a onftvery between us-where, Sir isyours Nat so thcA6_ltfendants, of whom one was an officer of the nanen of Rycroft, about 30 years otf age, andl -tuie othier a Ma- =,nucurier, of influenice and opulence, in thte nieighbooarhioos of D3olton, stutinhi per.-on, and well.gifted with the knowledge how to turn thiat stoutn ess to the best adv~antage. IWhat t1teir provocatioll wits hie would not state, as ho could not be allwowed to prove it. He woula only state to them the facts whirls hie was in a condlition to establish before thlem. L Here the learned coainsel detailed thie circumstances of the case ais he afterwar&l proved themi in evidtence. His learned frienid would untdoubtedly tell them that there must have been -tome provocation to occasion so violent an outrage, and tilo doutbt there hiad. Butlet the jury distinguish. Ifaia tna,on his passions ibeingr suddenly excited, proceeded on theinstant to gratify it, some allcow- ance oughit unquestionably to bemade for him. The law of England said, that wlitere dleath arose from suddeni quarrel, it was not miur- der, but only inanslaughter; but it -Wvas not sjo where a tasa had tim alowe iim,in hic t col hs esentment. Neither tttelaw of nglnd or helw o Go alowe resun togodown upion a taco's wrath andif a indiidua, whn hehatd timie for conisideration, attaked nothr, ad deth esuedfro that attack, he was guilty, not o matslauhter butof mrder "And itere," saidi theleartt- ed cunsl, letme ellthee to dfenantsi, whose valour is, Ildup-. pose, to be a thm of glory to their latest posterity,- that if~ thie pltintiff hadcee killed by their violence, tbey' must htave been placed at the bar, an tood their trial upon an indictmemt for mnur- der. It is fertunc or them. that they thiought that they had given the plaintiff enough fr one occasion;, for ifebe had dlied uander their hands, I cannot see upon what grounds they coulti have expected a vertlict of acquittal." Tite learned cottnsel said, that he cared not whiat provocation the defendantsa had received ; thr no provocation cal ltldj ctif tlte base attack whichl they hadl mnade upon the plainv. tif,wic ooked, lite was s6rry to siy it, very.like assassination. le woul d not saty a word about the personal stiff'erifng which the plaintiff had endutred, as he considered this to bena case of gross in- sult, aind an abandlonment of' all genitlemanly feeling. lie trusted, that when rlitev' hadl heard the evidence he shaould lay before them, they would bit of the same opinion ; and if they were, thxat titey would teacll the defendants, by their verdict, thlat they must not gratify thleir anger in thieunmanly and un-Eniglish manner wliiclitlitey litui recently adoptedl. Tfite learned counsel thent c"lled thle following witnesses t-. Jatnes Fitton, exainined by Air. BtoROUGtAsc.-1 am clerk to Mr. [lamp son. He irs ani attorney, at Boltou. Ili-% office is; in thae town, buthis housie is about half a mile from. it. I kniow the de- fendants, Mr. T. Ridgewany anid lr. Rycroft. The first is a bleacher, at Horwicit; the latter, an officer in ithe arms'. I recollect Mir. T. RidgeWay COtnliny to tite Office On the 23.1 of July last. I saw litiit thiere. Hfe inquired for Air. Hampton. Mr, Hlampton was not ta: lie had gonie home to dinner. I told Mei. Ridlgeway so. Hc fiaid, " wisit yoku would go and fetchi him itnnmeditstelv. Tell Ihitni that Air. T. Ridigevway want.s to see hitin." I s'ent Alr. Hampson's hostler to his house with tltis inessage. Mfr. Ridge.. w'sy then sail -he wottild call again, in a quarter of an litnur or 20 minutes. Ilie went awVay when I se-at thte hostler for AI r. Hampson. Alr. Ridgeway cailled again before Air. Hfampton caine, lie waited at the cornier of our office. I had occasion to go into the yard about tiatactime, and I saw him in tite entry withi Con- rad Ri'croft. Tihey saw me. Air. Ridgeway then turnjed his head the other wvay. He was then leaning ott his sitick. I returned to t[it office. Air. Hamipson came in a few minutes tifterwards. He saul a wvord or two to tne, and thien went up to his own office. Mir. Ridgeway thien returnedt to our office, and asked for Mlr. Hampson. I said he was in htis office. Mir. Ridgeway went Out. He returned samai withi Mlr. Rycrof't. Titey hiad bothi sticks in their hantis. Mlr. flasipson hiati 'no ittick. I was in my rootui aLttlat time. Mly roomn is below MIr. Hampson's, and the stair.s go out of nty roomi Into Isis, so that I cani see a person going up stairs into lilt office ; and if the door is open, I cart see inito it. On Mlr. Ridgeway's re- turning withi LIl r. IRycroft, they stopped a little at the bottom of ithe stairs, and hiesitiatid which of thenis should go up first. Alir. Ridge.. way theni said, "1 You go first," poslited Rycroft up by the arm, And followedi himi close into Mr. 11amyp on's office. I could see the door after they Wen tup. I saw the dloor shut; it was shut imnmediately, after they both got in. I then heardi a great bustle andl a noise, as if some otte lhad fallen on the floor. I also beard blows. On htarittgthem, I ran upstairs I triedI to open tcite door, hut I found it fast. I put my shoulder against it, but could not force it open. Fromn the resistance made, I fancied that thie doer was fastened by a bolt which is in the Inside. Mlr. Hamapton called oar to me by name to fetch assistance. I wvent for it. There was nobody in the atreet but Ailr. H-am pson's hostleer. I-le went halfway up statrs with me, but no farther. He was afraid, he said,.of going farther. I then he-ard blows, and ran to the door again ; it wit still fast. I heard Air. Hlamrpson say hie would have the dloor opetietl. I stopped at the dloor tilt Af r. IRidgeway and Air. Rycroftearnte out. As they wantt down stairs, AMr. Ridgeway mat- tered somietlhing to Alr. Ryeroft, but I couldi iot hear whiat lite said. Mr. y&ot sai to r. ampton, wlito was coming out of his roomi, W1ie hiave given you enough for once." On getting down stairs, thley stopped a few minuites, and then went thieir way. Whren Air. Hatapsun came to tite office., I saw no marks of violence oni itis faice. When he came ont of his room, I Observed that hie lhad received a stevere bruise on his left tetnple. TIhe skiiut wats bruisedl. Alr. H-arapson took hiis coat ofl' in aty pree settee. I observed a severs trace of violence ott his left rnra. Air. Hamp3on was perfectly wvel) in health befowre chat timec. I ditd net observe a strengthening plasiter on hiim. Hie was canfined to his house till the Monday following. This outrage was committed on a Fridlay. He had his artai in a sling for four or, five days more. Cro;ss-examlnctd by Mlr. Sergeant CROSS.-I lhave lenown Air. T. Ridgeway fur somne titne. He is lanie ini one foot, but lte does not ualjly211 walk witih a stick. Somietimes he does, sotmetitnes hie doeR not.I do tinot knowz that an action wasi biougler ugarhnst Mr. Rycroft alone luist. I do not know tlint the writ was tauit to Mr. Tropitatm, of Chorlev. I never lheard my master say ao. Raeixaniiaed by Mr. BROUoUAAI.-LMr. T. Ridgeway Ist a very sto,it-bodied mian, and has the full use of alt his limbsi. I-is lame- ness would not, and does not, interfere withi his ightting in genieral. Williami Wellman, exatitined by Air. STARteE..-.I washostierin July last to Mir. Hatapson. I was, ow the 23d of that mnonth, de- sired by cite clerk to go for m-y master. I did so. I told my ma8- tar that Mr. Ridgeway wanited himi in the office. Mir. Hampton was at dinner when I got to hisliouse. I returned then to the office. I know Air.,T. Ilidgeway. Oni my -return, I saw him staniding at the corner of thie yard in whiceh our difice is. I know Mr. C. Rycroft. I-le'stoodi in the entry, leaninig a5ainst the ihoor. He hadi a stack witli Itim, and was tWueizzlig It about. I wenit hitto an adijoiniing stable anid saddled a horse. It fronts the olhlce. window where Mr. 1Hampton sits. The window was open. I heard tomle blows. They appeared to be given in Alir. Hlampxoii's of- fice. I hieard several blows, atid one mnuch more loudly titan the rest. T'tecy seemied to be given with a stick. They followed each other pretty quickly, and appeared to be pretty heavy. tI want into the yard. I then heardl a riot fIt Air. Heampson's office. His clerk called me into ithe office to assist. I saw the clerk go up stairs, and I went half.way tip miyself. He tried to force open the door, but it was fast. I didi not hear any noise then. I did not, liewever, go up stairs, at; I wats rathier dowi..bearted. (A laughi.) Whlen I saw Alir. H-amtnpon at his own housie, there was nothing thje matter wvith hltfn. When, lie caine out of his oficee, he hadl a cot on his left temple. By Alr. WsLLrA3ES.-I Canisot pretetid to say hovw many steps I was fromi lisa door. The door slid not move at aill wheit the clerk pu4hicd it. John Cunley, examinieI by AIr. SCA5tLLrTT.-I was at Ai-r. hlanipton's officeabout two o'clock on the 23d of Jiulv last. Whets I weust t''re, Isaw Mlr. Ridgeway and AiIr. Ilycroft loiteriing about the ~ prems. 5ir. Ridgeway hiad a stick in hist land, and so, I thinak, had MJr. Rycroft. I saw Air. Hampton as ha came to hisi ofIce. I was going out as ha came in, and. he held the door for Me. I we~nt out, and as I went I saw Air. T. Ridgeway miake at tnotion with hit hiand, and Air. Itycroft Immediately went u to hiim, atild they bothi entered Alr. Hampton's office. IMsa tan eftrs, Air. Rycroft first. They went ma, and I walked away. By Air. I'AsucE..-Alr. Ridgeway is lame. He sometimes~ walks with a stick, and sometitmea not. By Air. ScAftLETT.-Alr. T. Ridgeway lives four mniles from Boltcoit. Alir. Rycroft lives at Chiorly. I believe it is 10 miles fromn Bolton. I do not recollect Mr. Hobrew. l amnot old enough to do so; - but I have hieard of him. Ai)r. SCARLETT.-..4ant sorrytorsay that Iam old etiough to re- collect him. Hie was an attorney, withi a wvooden leg, and with that woodet lag lite couild beat the whole town of Bolton. (A laugh.) Winm. Johnson-, examined by MUr. BROUGHtAMs.-I was sent to attend Aler. Hampton on Friday, July 23. I found him com- plaining oi 'great pain. H4e had a bruise on his left temple, two inces ig,andonebrod. t-apeaedto have been given by a stic, ad i mut hve ben vey sver blew which inflicted it. On pllig of hi cen, Iobseveda wund acrosis the tendlon of his lef ar. Tat pperedto esut fonta violent blow. I ordered leehestobe ppledto he amle ad, also etu evaporating IotIOn, to revnt nfammtio. viite Ar. Hampton again in the evening. Air. Sergeant CRtoss.-I do not mnind how often you visited him the questioni is, was your visit necessary? The wvitness contin'ued..-.I thought it necessary. I saw him the next day. HIe compilained of the great soreness about his body. saw him again on Sutiday niornitig. Ha was chats better. He tent for ma in the erening, when I foundI him worse, and with great in- flammation in lilt arni. Air. Hampson went out en Mlondaly. 1 did not chink it safe for-him to go out before. Tihe integumnents of the eye ware discoloured. I applied a lotion to the eye. Cross-exatnined by Mlr. Sergeant Cstoss.-The plainitiff -had l~iti aria in a sling for three or four days afterwardls. I considered it prudent, but not neacessary. had eeninsruced o ly bfor tlem.The plaintiff, te ol mic, wshe thta o elive hathe idnot know. which o h e fentdants had received a wrong at his hands, and had irtstructed hi, counsel to tell them thathehad beer assailed by both defendants-a fact which was contrary to the tyuth, and was not supported by a little of evidence. There was, however, one made of proceeding which would have enabled them to know all the circumstances of this transaction, but that had not been adopted b the laintih'f for reasons which it 'wns not slseult to conjecture. Theeyhad been told that the plaintiff did not instirutt this action to obtain reparation for the iniury done o 8 person, but for the injury ddne to his honourrthat he looked upon the damages as totally unworthy of his regard and that he only wanted rise condemnation of the conduct oft?e defeudants. Allusion had been made to proceedings which tnight have been in- stitutel in another court had the assault been fataL. The deferndanti, is learned friend had said, might have been put upion their trial in the criminal court fbr murder; and if they had, they might have called upon the plaintiff as a witness. Air. ScARLT.T .-What I docs the learned Sergeant mean that they are to kill antanfirst, andmake zi wititess of hiin afterwards? (Greatlaughter.) Mr. Sergeant CRoss admitted that he had nade a blunder; what he meast to say was, that if the plaintiff hadl died of the beating given to him beforerthe assizes, his deposition might have been taken before a magistrate as to the prpvocation he liha given, and that tie- position, with all the infornretion it contained, might have been laid before the jury at the triaul. It-iswa dot,,however, Incises of mdrder only that a cmniifal ptocceding could be instituted-it could be in- stititttedalso In casts of assault; and if the plaindtif sdid not wish to ob?tain a pecuniary compensation, why had he rnot preferreal n in- dictment for an assault ? or no other reason than this-that urtder such aproceediog be miglsreva becn-rnsde nawnemls, and bean sub- jected to a.ll the rigour of a cross-examinaton. Then lie would not have dared to say that he did not know w- ich of the two defendants ha had lnjured. Then he might have been asked, " Did you not go about Dolton vipouring that y-'n hiad kiclked the faiTer of Mr. R%v- croft, andI 1had vapoured,. too, in language whii:h no getlernan could repent P" I-le mlight ha~ve been asked, "- Did yex flat know th:,t i Ryeroift was a Lieutenant ini the 8th Dragoons in India, I nd had afterwards been a LAeutenant in thie 21st Dragoons- n e imn which, thiey knew, levs reduced at the peace ? tlist qtuestion to hiim, " Sir, I hear that you declai'e that You have ofTeredt my father one of the greave-st Insults Which one mari can offer another-is that so, oir not ?" Uponi that he mighit ha-ve been axiked, "1Did not Air. Rycroft dlemand of yolu eithier an apology Ar satisf'ac- tion ?" Then he mnight have been asked, "1 Did you not, in answer to this, demaiid of cxpianation,offerto young Mei. Pycroft a Personal- insult. statting that vonu wouild give no explanation, atnd wonldmake no apology ?" To, a1l these questions he would have been bound( to give anR answer, and also to this adlditional quesition which mietht hiave been asked him-" Did any body give you a blow except Mlr. Rycroft. whio avows that hie canmed yoat for the insult offered to his fatber?" AU there points, however, were now left in the tiark, and thec plaintiff pretendedi that he liad no meanis of throwing light upon them by evidence. They would find in the courne of this trial, that thisg action had originallv been broutght against Rycroft alone: but thlat the plaintlif, recollecting that Ridgewny would be goodl evidenc-e for yCroft, determined to excludie himn by bringing the action against him also. But thouigh the evidlence of fr. Ritdgewaiv was thus taken out of tile cause, he would produice evidence to sho'w them, that it was a gross and false pretence on the part of the plain. tif tosaytha li ws inornt f te arty to wvhomn he had given the povoction, lie ould roveto themn, that the plair-tiff' had oased ublcly n ioltn, hatlie had kicked oldI lUr. Ry. crof ou of~ pbli rom. e lft t to) themn to conisider how a sodie wa likly o fel wen e hardof Auch an iaisult havinz beenoffeed o hi fater.His eared frriendI hud a gallant son in the same service with the defendlant, and lie wvell knew liow that gallant youth would avenge a look or a word that threatened hi,; learned father withi insult. Indeed, human ingenuity wo-ald look in vain for an insult more calculated to excite every spark of' feeling irn a man's bosom. He would show to thiem, theli ith r. Rvcroft, having heard that Mir. Hampson hadi said thiat lie hand kicked the old gen- tlemnan, went to Boltom, and, as4 he went, called sin hiis frieind, Mr. Ridgeway, telling him that fie was going to seek for an extilanation or satisfaction fromi Mr. Hamlpson. Instead of meefting with eithier an explanation or an apology,~ he mect with a personatl insult, and uiidier those circumstances' Mr. Rycroft dlid not hesitate to avow thatJie u-imed the plaintiifl Batt a,: to M1r. Ridgewny's joirning in the assault, all who lenew that geritlemnan'si character aind reputation wouldI declare that the story was too monstrous to be believedl. The gallant officer, and the gallant officer alone, catied the plaintiff, andi that, too, toe a boast which was as false as it was impudent. Plaintiff- hiad never lhatl the courage to attempt tlhe perforinance of whatt he boasted that he had executedI; and they would, thieTefore. fincl that thu muchAninjred plainiitff was a -, he wouldI not deerade himnself by repeating the word,. Ile knew that the p'ainitiff' had- broughit -tn action instead off preferrinig an indictment, because lie calcu- lated upon obtaminng large damnages. fie hiad thecrefore em. Playedi ati atlyocate, who was otie of thec ablest at the Britis,h bar, and who was notorious tor htis success in obtaining excess've tlainagesi. No one knew better than Iiis learned friend hiow to un- seat the juidgment ot a Jury by eloqluence-to make Passion usurp in their mninds the power of reason, and obtain fromn themn by inflmmaorystatements, vindictive and intemperate damages. Thei" lezarnedergeatit trusted, however, to their good. .ense upon thlis occasion; anid was certain that they wouldl not give the plainitiffirmore ttitan forty silillhungs slarniages, if they, gave him so mnitil, althotugh liis learnied friestd should represenit the defendants again and again as men whto exec-uted vengeance in ani assassin-like manner. The learnedl sergeant, after ridiculing the wqsertioti of Mfr. Scarlett, that the defendant liedl used every kind of contrivaince to exclude evi- dence likely to throw lighit upon the plaintiff's cause, and, stating tha6t it was thle plaintiff who hati utsed, every kind of contrivance to excltude evidence like] v to throw light on the defetid(ant's, concludedi by saying that he sho uld call witnesses to prove to thecm the facts which he had statedI in his speechi. Johin W~oodhouse,ex:ctmined by Air. AVtr.r.tAr,';.-I am an attor- ner at Bolton. I kiiow thie diefend(ant, Air. Rycrof't. I only knew hiiii by tsigahtttill July last. I believe he is an 'officer at' dragoons. I recollc meing hint on the 2'3d of July.. in ti;e streets of Bo!ton. It was about two o'cloeck iii the afternonis. He putsa question to me. fIt was aboutt somiethiing that lie supposed mne to have said to a Air. Merry. He asked roe if I hacl itsee certain expressions to) that gen- tleman. I dteclinedI giving ani ansiwer at first. Thec expreessions re- lated to Mfr. Rvcrofi's father. -le stated to mne that lie lied returned from ILiverpool the week before in the c-oach witli .11 r. Mlerry ; and that Air. MVerry had told hiim that I liad %add to hini, that Mr.Hamlp- soni had told me that he hadt kicked his- father out ot'a public rtoom. Mlr. SCARtETT...-I Will jUSt ask your Lordlship if this is evi- dence. I think it is not ; but I hiave no, objectionr to receiving it thus far. Mri. Baron HULLOCue.-l think, it is clearly, not evidJence. I ad- mnittedi it, beeause I thought yon had no objection. ilr. SCAR LETT.-~Nor do'l, my Lord, object to this evidlence. There is one pare, lhowever, of mny learnedI friend'.s statemnent, to which I shall object If he attempts, to prove it. Witness continued.-Mr. Rv'eroft asked tue if that was correct. refusedi at first to answer biun, 'but on hiis pressingz iie, I admitted that Al r. Ilampson lied toldl,me that lie hiad kicked the- of old Air. Rvcroft. By Me. SCARLETT.-I judged from thze mianner of Mre. Rycrof~t thiai lie intended to institute some proceediings uipon my answer, and therefore I declined to give hiim any at first. I liaed cold the circumstance to Mlr. Mferry ip confidence. I was. not authorized by Me1. Hampton to tell it to Me. Rycroft, nor to Mre. Mlerrv. I do nut know that I had niamed it to any body else. I think . I have men- tioneAl every thing tiiat passed bet-weein me andl Mr. RycToft. I hecardl the weeds ailluded to fron Mlr. Hailppoon in hlis own office. I hiad not lheard of Chic boiastat that timie frontia'nybod y cise. I have lheard it often meuitioneel sitice thie timne of this aissault. I hiave nut heard Air. illerty say thatt he hal Ymentioned this circumstance to Captain RY- ecoft on receivingz a promnise tipo hits honiour from that gentleman that he would take no notice of t Thie learne4 sergeant was thlen going to -ut IAle. Rycroft, stenior, into thle box,' whien Mr. Sc-arlet' saia that etltsi wimess was evidently intededto rov tht pil f llt eared friend's casie to which lie felta sron obecton.lIemus threfre oppose the receptioni of Mr. ergent aosssaid tht ashisleartied friendI objected, he woud nr pessthi evdene uon hecourt. Therecril ofth Cort f CmiionPleas, Lancaster, were then putin.Theprohontaf red fonitlciii two enstriem: fromn the firs ofilini i apeard tht te painiff hiad issiued out a cnpi-us ad respodeeduu aginst id. onradRvcrft alone, an. the 24th ofJlul yv and miolie agins Ed Corai Ryroft an lita Ridgrewy Air. causaT obsrved hat tis le be-en done in conisequence of a misitaketliat. hatl been made by the plaintiff's agent. TIhis ices the ease for the defence. MrScnt.ar'r,in reply, saidl tlstt lie mutt oncemore ailvise lila leartiedl friend to cotidne htfs observations miore to thle mierits of' his case ttitan to thie qualifications, of' tile advocate who was opposed to himn. lfisalearnied friend had, ironficaLlly no doubt, taked of. his being able byllisaeloquence to unsteatttitejudgmnentsof fjurirs,and to imake passion usurp in thieir minds the place of reason. For his own part, he knew no advocate whio pos,sessed such powers, and no Juries who wouldi asUov such power to be exercised over thiem.f lie was htimself, apilalii man, and wanted thiose pow'era of voice, that grace of action, anti that modesty of' demneanour whiceh were'so peculiar to hisi earn- ed friendI; and he Etherefore trusted that out of cotiapagsioti to himis, hiis learned friend would iii future cease to rnake those contrasts betwecn thiem, whichi when made always tended so nuchi to his(AMr. Scarlett's) diszdvantfage, it would save the timie if the Court, arid would not injure the initerests of his client, if his learned frientI observed less ttpon thie advyocate, atid( muoce upon teeeaginst whiich he was pitted. Ilis learnied friend( had asked, wy adnot AIr. Hampson p referred an indictment, instead of bignanaction, against the defendants; 'and had mientioned va- rioust point of evidence whiceh could then have been establishied in thieir fieIVOUrott of Mr. Hampizon's mnouth,. Ile knew his learned friendt so well asi to be quite sure, that if Air. Hanmpson lied pee- ferred an iiidictnienit agaiiiat themi, lie would hiave turned raund upon 6imi acud asked whiy he had not brouiglt an action. His learnetlh f'riend wveuld thten hiave told thiem, " If' Air. Hamipson hash brought an action, I couldi have asked tliisquestion, and I coultd have asked 1 that." [He% Air. Scarlett enumerated a long string of ineerroga- tories, which lie recited to the jury in the s.amre tone-of voice, and withi tke samne forinal gestures,whicli thie learned sergeant uses when addressing themn. The imitation uvas so complete as9 to excite cans-i- Lierable latghiter In Court.] He trustecl, however, thlat the jury woulad not be led awev fromi the real facts of the eafse by such a mode of argumentation, wFaUh he could assure them was taught as one of the very first rudiiments of thecprofession. Hse woisld be at willing as ainy mali to excuse thie feelings of a son whio had over-stepped the strict limits Of prdne ir, defenc-e of Ehe lionour and cha- racter of his fzther. He -stroiud have excused Air. Ricroft, If, on stepping out of thie coach in whichi lie heard the aspersion on hila fathier, he hadi flung Ihimself into anothier, posted to Bolton), and( there cotnuienced an investigation on the subject. Not only would he have excused, but lie would even have applaudedl him, if! an arivig thre le ha sen a fiendto1r. Haimpson to state what he hd hard an to sk im heter t was true that he lied used thelanuag atribtedto int Hewould even go further than thathe wuld ay, hat e wold ave appilauded Mlr. Rycroft if; n te pesene o oters ersns,ho had stated to Meir Hiamp- too hathe ad ear tht li ha tad rgaringhis father-if lie hiad told hin-u his opinion regardin iacnutin making suchi atn idle report-and if' he liad resente tha onic on thie spot. But Mr. Rycroft had not actedc a part at all like this ; Ccand as, my learne-4 friend," continued Ailr. Scariett, "1 has thoulght fit to alltude to a connexion of mine, I will say, that if he had slept a week over a wrotig done to mpe, as Mlr. Rycroft is proved to have slept over a wroaig done to his fade,and hiad thems proceeded to avenge it as lie. Pgyeroft has done, I should be mnere sorry for my son than I shiould be for myself, because, as I feetl irideamiid vanityr in the spirit of mnyson, I should laraent to see it exercisedI iii so pitful and itilas quarel. Hewas.howeer,of opinion that t1hi3 as- sasmt, hic cold e jutifed y n la orprincipile of honour, did not rignat frm ay thng ikespiit;and lie miain-ained, that itn comitig i, M. Rcrot hd nt atedeither a getierous orea manly par. Aprosoctioi o a eekoldcoud nee utify so wantomi an attak a tht wichhad eencomittd b the two de- fetndanta He said the two defendans beas e thouglit that AIr. T. Ridgewav was more active ehati Mr. Rycroftia perpetret- intc this outrage, although Ihis learned friend liad ststed that Mlr. T. Ridgeway had nothing to do with it, and was even emititled to a ver- dict ot' acquittal. Wbatever justification Alr. Rycroft might have, Mr. T. Ridgeway had none; he had, no insult to revenge-he had no injury for which lie wanted an atonemlent-lie had no provocation to allege in mitigation of his gross uLisconduct. Hoe -was an older manl than the other defendants and ought rather to have endeavoured to moderate than to excite the anger of his young companion. His learned friend had, in the courFe of his address, introduced into his sspeech many statementslt vwhich he had not attenipted to substantiate by evidence. lie had said tiet Mtr.Hampson bad brought this action to put the costs of it into his ewn pocket. Mr. Hampsosi had done no such thing: lie was a man In affluent circomnstances, and did not so much want a cotnpensation in money as he aid a vindication of his ow7n honour. He had therefore Rot broug;ht this action himself, but had placed it in the handis of another attorney, and would there- f6re denve no benefit from it in the manner insinuated by his learrned friend. His learned frienid had said that r. Hampton had insulted llr. Rycroft, but had not offered the slightest evtdence to prove it. But that, was not the only topic on which his learned friend had indulged in assertion without proof, to excite a pre. judice in the minds of the jury. He would therefore tell them, once for all, that if hi learned friend said that Air. Ry- croft dematended an explanation of Alr. Hamspson, he (Mr. Scasr. lett) denied it; that if his learned friend said that all satisfac. tioon was.refused by that gentleman, lie dlenied it; or that if his searned friend said that Air. Ridgewety had not struck a blow, he de. nied that also. The learned counsel, after various oth'er observa. tions, ucIlel on the jtry to nahow their bhorrence of the unrical con,duct of the tr deFendants, by giving such a vethuict nm n would deter tlhenm ftom the conumission of similar outrages in futur(m Rid as would vinsl;..ate tLlh hk-.1onor of Elie county of sBncos,ter froni the ble:nli.i,h wht ictl ese gelitienen haid thrown upon it. Tae learned Judlge surnmed up the evidence; and the Jury, afitr n short telbetation;, returned a verdict for thoplaintifFi..,amage., 51- COOPEiR V. JACKSOX. This was an action brought by the plaintiff', as an endorser of a bill of exchange for 2001., against James Jackson, theacceptor of it. There were two defences set up to it; of which the first was, that the bill had been obtained from the detfendant by menaces that if he did not give it, his son-in-law should be prosecuted for forgerv; atnd the second was, that no consideration had been given for.the bilL Fromn the piaintiff's statement, it appeared that there had beent sonie bill trarsactions between a paper.manrtfacturer at Manchester named Oliver, and a small innkeeper tbere namned Twigg. In the course of it Oliver had received twe bills for 1491. from Tceigg, drawn by himself upon his father-in-law, ;ayid purporting to be accepted by .' im. Oliver paid these bills over to Cooper, the plaintiff, whot, upon examination, found reason to uo.- pect that the names of the drawer and acceptor were both written' bv the same person. In co.seouerce of tbis sus- picion, Cooper and a friend of ihis, named Barnes, called an the de- fendant Ja keon, to know whether the acceptatice to the two billb was in his hand-writing. Jackson replied that it was not; but on being asked whether it was a forgery, replied that it vwts ant, as lie had giv-n his son-in-law, Twiag, autthority to pledge his credit for 180l. Cooper and Barnes told him, that if that were so, he had better gi ve them a freshi bill of his own, for 2001., as the appearance of tie two l.ills was so suspicious as to prevent their being negoti- able in the market. The detendant hesitated at this proposal ,ondsaid. that he would take a dav or two to consider it. After a consideration for a day or two, the defendant met Barnes. who acted on behalf of Cooper, at his sin-in-law's, and then gzve him for the two bills of 1001., the 2001. bill Ot, which the present action was brouglit. Tbc date of the bill was June 24, 1822. As the consideration was dis- puted, the plaintiff called evidence to prove that the two 1001. billis w4hich haid been given up for the 20?1. bill, were given by v wicg to Oliver, to reimburse him fuir 2001. whichl he had ad .anced Twigg to get rid ofa coinmissiot ot' i.aukruptcy that had been issued against. hiinby a person of the name ot Dotid. It was distinctly sworn by, the pl;intiff'm. witnesses, that no threats had been used to the de. fe'ndant to induce hitm to give the bill, and that he had never been told that if he did not signeit Twigg's neck would bein danger. On the partof the defendant, T wigg, hisson-in-lav, was called, who stated that he knew iiotliing of bilLs till he becanme acquainted with Oliver, who lodgedi at the inti vhich he kept. On the 12th J.ia-e, 122. Oliver told him that a good bargain had just been of- fered to hiTm in buffalo hides, and that it he (Twigg) could get him, 110h. for thiree months, he should receive 251. for the cLqommodation. In consequence of that proposition, lie applied to his father-in-law, the defendanit in the present action, for that sum. The detendant refusetd to give him that sum, or his name for it an a bill of ex- cha..ge, but authorized hirm to pledge his credit for that amounit. Twikg swore that Oliver. sn learning th-at fact, said, that as the defeadant had giveti Twigz authority to pledge h*is crelit, the-e conhl he no harrm in TWigg's signing the naume o7 the defendant to a bill lor that amnount. Oliver then wrote out the form of tbe hilL whicih he wished ta have tlrawn, and a maa. of tie name of LAwton, a servant of one Ridgway, a brewer, in Manchester, copied it; andl when the hill was thus formed, it was put into circulation. Twigeg proceeded to state, that tin the 20th of June, Oliver applied to him to get hIin two biL's for lliO. each. At tirst.he refused, but in consequence of Oliver's solicitations, and his repeated pronises that the hills should not be put in circulation, that they should be tieposited at a banker's, and that he shouild be providled with money to take thenm up, two bills were drawn, (by whom it did not appear), whsch purported to be accepted by the defendant Jackson. On the 21st of Jiunte lie again saw vliver, who desired himn to go to the Pa- lace Inn, _lanctiester. Twigir did so, and there Cooper was intro- duced to him by Oliver as his partner. hilhtst there Oliver paOA awaV the two bills for 1001. to Cooper. On the evening of that thay, buteleen 10 atid 11 o'clock, his father-in-law came to his house in a state of great agitation and told himu that (ooper had bee_n with hiin. about certain bilLs,that he (Twigg) had fbrged. They then ,went toirether to the N,ptune inn, where they saw Oliver first, and Cooper afterwards. 'I'g-i,g said that he told Oliver that he was terrib}y lfrihtencid by what he had just heartl, on which Oliver re- pliid, ' O):i, its a11 nonsernse, don'f mind it. I'll settle all about thiat." Cooper. the plaintiff, then caine in, and a fter sonme conversa- tion, asked the deiendant to give a freshi bill for the two biDs of 1001. each. 'iThe defendant refused to do so, upon which tte plair.- tiff told him that he had better cornply with the proposition, but withoutspeci,fying any particular reason: Evidence was giventocor- rob-orate this stateinent bv one or two other witnesses,bu. of too genc- ral a nature to add to it nmuch confirmation. On the part of the plain- tiff. admissions were extracted from Twigg, which went a lot1 way- to discredit hiis testihnonvt as, tor instance, that he had been four tiRies a bankrupt in the last -ear and a half, and that ie had advised his fathier-in-law to tiansfer al hiis propertv to a friend bya warrant of a: torney, in order to defeat the claim ef sthe plaintif. .Mr. Baron Hur.aoca, is summing up the evidence, told the jutry that there were two points for their consi(leration. The first wa.s, had the plaintiff's right to recover on this bill of exchange been destroyed by the manner in which the acceptance to it had been ob- tainefd? Now, if they sitoultl be of opinion that it had been obtain- ed by a menace of this description,-that his son-inalaw had commnit- ted a forgery, and thiat he should be prosecuted if it were not given,_ then the bill was given for an ilie2al consideration, and their verdict must be for the dlfendarnt. If, howevier, they should be of opinion that it hail not been obtainied bv any menace, then the other point would await their decision_na&:1y, had any and what consideration been given for the bill ? The learned Judge, after reading over the evidence, and comnienting upon it as lie went along, leftthe jury to consider their verdict. The jurv retired for a quartea of an hour, ard then returned a verdiet tfr the plaintiff-Damages 2101. SUMMER AISIvZES. LANCASTER. NVEDaNRSfAV. !RurT n SHELMERDINE V. BUDSWELL.