<div1 type="SM_PSpage" id="LMSMPS50665PS506650007"> <xptr type="pageFacsimile" doc="LMSMPS506650007"></xptr>
<p n="86">The King and Frederick Deft. was Ind for obtaing. certain goods the property of <rs type="persName" id="LMSMPS50665_n86-1">John Harvey</rs>
<interp inst="LMSMPS50665_n86-1" type="given" value="John"></interp>
<interp inst="LMSMPS50665_n86-1" type="surname" value="Harvey"></interp>
<interp inst="LMSMPS50665_n86-1" type="gender" value="male"></interp>
under<lb></lb>
prefalse pretence of her being of the age of Twenty three years whereas in truth<lb></lb>
and in fact she was an inft. under thence<obscured></obscured>
and not of the age of Twenty three<lb></lb>
<del>The evidence</del>
On the part of the pros: was produced a record of the <rs type="placeName" id="LMSMPS50665_geo28">Marshalsea Court</rs>
<interp inst="LMSMPS50665_geo28" type="placeName" value="Marshalsea Court"></interp>
<interp inst="LMSMPS50665_geo28" type="type" value="undefined"></interp>
<lb></lb>
to prove that<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
an appin of debt<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
had been camed on in that Court for the reconvey of<lb></lb>
the value of the goods and<del>but</del>
that the deft. had obtained avudiet them by<lb></lb>
pleading her non age but no such thing appeared by the record where<obscured></obscured>
<lb></lb>
they<del>then all</del>
produced a witness to give evidence of what passed at that<lb></lb>
trial - but the witness being objected to on the part of the deft. upon<lb></lb>
head the pror. dvnd their can<lb></lb>
argrement the Court rected such evidence in admisseble. - Upon<lb></lb>
this on the part of the deft. it was urged that as the pros: had failed<lb></lb>
in his proof that the defr. was<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
under age defr. ought to be acquittd.<lb></lb>
and the Court inclining to this opinion the matter went to the Pry<lb></lb>
but an observn. being made on the part of the pros: that tho' there was<lb></lb>
no proof of the non age the Jury might from this judgemt. from the<lb></lb>
appearance of the defr. an altercation ensued and the defts. Counsel<lb></lb>
prayed after this suggestion to be allowed to go into his<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
defined and<lb></lb>
examinr. of witnesses<del>to the part of the deft:</del>
which the Ct. taking<lb></lb>
into Consedr.<del>the opinion</del>
It was reclid 5 to 4 that as the matter was left<lb></lb>
to the jury the defts.<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
would not now<gap reason="illegible"></gap>
be promd<lb></lb>
to lay any further evidence before them. Deft was acquitted</p>
</div1>

View as Text