1835—At Warwick Lent Assizes was tried DAVIES _v._ BADGER, an action brought by a journeyman whitesmith of Dudley, against Mr. Badger a magistrate of Dudley, for striking him with a stick at the Dudley booth, at the previous East Worcester election. Mr. Balguy, K.C., was for plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Goulburn for defendant. It was of course made a political affair, and excited great interest. Mr. Badger, through his counsel and his witnesses, denied ever striking the man at all. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff: damages £30, costs 40s. 1835—At the Midsummer Assizes was tried PARKER AND SON _v._ ROBINSON, M.P., a case which excited much attention at the time, and was particularly interesting to those of the legal profession who looked to reap rich harvests at elections. The plaintiffs sued Mr. Robinson for assistance said to have been given him in the way of canvass, &c., at the election of 1832, when the sitting members were threatened with an opposition by the Hon. Mr. Dundas. Mr. Robinson had paid £75, and paid £13 into court, but the amount of the bill was £186. Mr. Robinson pleaded that he had not given authority for such expenses to be incurred by plaintiffs, who, at this election, were only subsidiary agents, Mr. Cameron being his chief attorney. Various solicitors were examined pro and con to show that the charges were reasonable or otherwise; and the Jury, eventually, returned a verdict for plaintiffs, damages £38; thus Mr. Robinson paid £126 instead of £186. Mr. Sergeant Ludlow was for plaintiffs, and Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, M.P., for defendant; and both made amusing speeches about the affair. 1836—At the Lent Assizes, before Mr. Justice Williams, was tried BADGER _v._ COOKE, an action brought by Mr. Badger, the Dudley magistrate, against Mr. Samuel Cooke, the celebrated Radical mercer, for a libel. After Mr. Badger had been found guilty of the assault on Davis at the Stourbridge election, Cooke issued a placard triumphing in the result of that trial, and saying that “every honest man must ever afterwards look with most indignant contempt on his (Mr. Badger’s) actions, since he had already disgraced the dignified functions of his station,” &c. &c. The defendant addressed the jury in his own defence, quoting papers to show that Mr. Badger often made use of as strong expressions towards his political opponents, and declaring that it was nothing more than a question of Tory and Radical. He was found guilty, Mr. Justice Williams declaring that the paper had a palpable tendency to defame and degrade Mr. Badger in his character as a magistrate. He was only required to enter into a recognizance of £50 to appear when called upon.