CHRONICLE. 
At a trial in the court of Com- 
mon Pleas, Haydon versus Maden, 
anextraordinary circumstance hap- 
pened. This was an application 
to the justice of the jury, for a 
compensation in damages for a vio- 
dent assault committed by the de- 
fendant and his wife on the plain- 
tif. Mr. Maden, husband to the 
celebrated operatrix on the teeth, 
lives at Enfield, and possesses some 
fields in that neighbourhood. There 
was a common foot-path through 
one of those fields, which Mr. Ma- 
den thought proper to stop up. 
The plaintiff pulled down the 
bushes, &c. with which it was 
stopped. The defendant and his 
wife saw this, and came up to the 
plaintiff with great indignation. 
Mr. Maden gave him five or six 
terrible blows with a large stick, 
which he had in his hand, and 
which brought the plaintiff to the 
ground. When he was down, 
Mrs. Maden, not satisfied with 
what her husband had done, pulled 
this poor man by the hair, and tore 
his face. The evidence was very 
strong against the husband, but no- 
thing appeared against the wife. 
Mr. Serjeant Bond, as counsel for 
the defendant, said, every drunken 
fellow in the parish, who became 
independent as he. became drunk, 
went about pulling down people’s 
gates, filling up their ditches, &c. 
all under pretence of reforming 
the evils and mischiefs. that had 
crept into the parish. After thus 
levelling people’s fences, these re- 
formers proceeded next to rob their 
wuchards and gardens, Just as the 
foreman of the jury was proceeding 
to deliver in the verdict for da- 
mages against the defendant, which 
athe judge was clearly of opinion 
should be 301. with costs, one .of 
whe gentlemen of the jury fell into 
24 
a fit, which reduced the bar rather 
to adilemma. Mr. Serjeant Mar- 
shall, Jeading counsel for the 
plaintiff, said, his client was not 
to lose his right, because one of 
the gentlemen of the jury had 
fainted away. It would, be.ex- 
tremely inconvenient for the plain- 
tif, who was then attending, with 
all his witnesses, to be obliged te 
bring them again from Enfield; 
and therefore requested either that 
the court would stop a little te 
see if the gentleman recovered, or 
to swear in another juror whe 
had heard the cause tried, or dis- 
charge the jury ‘and call another. 
Mr. Serjeant Bond said, there was 
too much humanity in his breast 
to permit the unfortunate geatle- 
man to serve again that day. He 
thought as.a juror had been with- 
drawn, that this was the best ver- 
dict they could kave in this case. 
Lord Loughborough said, if the 
counsel for the parties could met 
agree about this case, he: did not 
know that he could do any thing 
but discharge the jury. There 
could not possibly be a verdict, as 
there had been no trial. The plain- 
tiff must move the court fer @ 
Venire de Novo. . His lordshipsaid, 
an accident once ‘happened before 
him on the circuit, and on that ee- 
casion he took it on him to act, 
in order that a man might not re- 
main in prison. On a trial :for 
felony, one of the jurymen, wher 
the trial was proceeding, fell imte 
a fit. He was carried out intovam 
adjacent room, and after some: time 
he came back again. It turned 
ovt that he was dead drunk with 
spirits, which he had taken in the 
morning; on which his Lordship 
fined him, and discharged the juny; 
and upon consideration, ,and. én 
hearing arguments upon it some 
