Publisher's Synopsis
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1843 edition. Excerpt: ... and from the short note I took of that witness's evidence, I felt some doubt in my own mind whether he bad not stated some fact which had escaped me at the time, which, on further investigation, might supply that defect in some minute degree; and, I must own, it was more with that impression that I left the case to the jury, than on any conviction of my own mind that the plaintiff had made out a case; and then I wrote the note which I have read, that if I was wrong in leaving it to the jury, the defendants' counsel should have the benefit of it, on moving for a nonsuit. Now, that being the case, I cannot but feel that the defendants are placed in the situation, by my having so acted, of being compelled to make this motion. If I had nonsuited the plaintiff, he then must have applied to the Court, and suggested any misunderstanding that had arisen at the trial, for the purpose of obtaining a new trial; or he might have stated that he himself was surprised by the objection, and could have answered it by evidence if he had been fully aware of it; that is, that had the plaintiffs counsel been aware that the defendants meant to make this sort of objection--that bituminous schistus, such as is found in England, could not be used with advantage in this process, he would have had abundant evidence to rebut it. If I remember rightly, that was suggested at the close of my summing up. Now the question is, on what terms we ought to allow this inquiry; and it appears to me, that as the defendants were entitled to a nonsuit, and would be entitled to a nonsuit if it were not for that suggestion, they ought not to pay the costs of a new trial. Now, a question has arisen, whether, if there was any real misunderstanding, the plaintiff ought to pay the...
