1-21-08 THE REVISED REPO BEING A REPUBLICATION OF SUCH CAS IN THE ENGLISH COURTS OF COMMON LAW AND I FROM THE YEAR 1785, AS ARE STILL OF PRACTICAL UTILITY. EDITED BY SIR FREDERICK POLLOCK, BART., D.C.L., OF LINCOLN'S INN, ASSISTED BY 0. A. SAUNDERS, J. G. PEASE, AND ARTHUR B (EQUITY CASES). ERRATUM. Vol. 91, Preface, p. vii, line 9 from bottom, for 736 read 786. NOTE. The first and last pages of the original report, according to the paging by which the original reports are usually cited, are noted at the head of each case, and references to the same paging are continued in the margin of the text. The Revised Reports. VOL. XCIII. IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH. IN RE ETIENNE BARRONET AND EDMOND ALLAIN. 1852 Νου. 3. COBBETT v. HUDSON. (1 El. & Bl. 11-15; S. C. 22 L. J. Q. B. 11; 17 Jur. 488.) A party to a suit, conducting his own cause at the trial, has a right to address the jury as an advocate, without waiving his right to give evidence as a witness in his own behalf. ACTION on the case; in which issues in fact were joined. On the trial, before Lord Campbell, Ch. J., at the London sittings after Easter Term, the plaintiff, who sued in formâ pauperis, conducted his cause in person. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE told him that, if he addressed the jury as an advocate, he could not be permitted to give evidence as a witness. The plaintiff elected to act as advocate, and not as witness. Verdict for defendant. In Trinity Term, the plaintiff in person obtained a rule nisi for a new trial, on the ground of the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE's ruling above stated. Watson and Unthank now showed cause (1); and the plaintiff in person was heard in support of the rule. The nature of the arguments appears from the judgment. Cur. adv. vult. (1) Before Lord Campbell, Ch. J., Coleridge, Wightman and Erle, JJ. 1852. Nov. 3, 20. [11] R.R.-VOL. XCIII. 1 |