>From Jackson's Oxford Journal, Saturday, July 14, 1860; Issue 5594. OXFORDSHIRE SUMMER ASSIZES. NISI PRIUS COURT. QUARTERMAN v WHITE. - This was an action for damages and tort, brought by the plaintiff, Philip QUARTERMAN , of Temple Cowley, against John WHITE , also of Cowley, the brother-in-law of the plaintiff. Mr. Huddleston , Q.C., and Mr. Scotland, for the plaintiff; and Mr. Serjeant Pigott and Mr. Cripps for the defendant. The evidence of the witnesses for the plaintiff went to show that the defendant had taken certain things on the premises of the plaintiff under a distress for rent, which did not appear to be included in the inventory made at the time of the distress. The pleadings and evidence of the defendant's witnesses were to the effect that the things in dispute were given up under an agreement, but as to the agreement, the witness, Mr. Chas. T. HAWKINS , who made the distress, and drew up the agreement, failed on the point as to the things intended to be carried by that instrument, and thus gave a point in favor of the plaintiff as to damages in respect of the mangolds and carrots not included in the inventory. The evidence of the plaintiff was to the effect that the carrots and mangolds were of the value of 10 pounds, of thereabouts. The defendant's evidence of the value of these things was to the effect that they were of not more value than about 3 pounds. Counsel addressed the Jury on both sides. His Lordship summed up, stating that there were two questions to go to the Jury; the first as to whether the 14 shillings paid into the Court was sufficient to cover the plaintiff's damage; and the second as to the value of the carrots and mangolds, the plaintiff estimating the value at 12 pounds, and the defendant and his witnesses at 3 pounds 1 shilling and 3 pence; and, after a short consultation, the Jury retired to consider their verdict. Verdict for plaintiff on the first question for 1 pound 2 shillings beyond the amount paid into Court. On the second question for plaintiff for 7 pounds 10 shillings; the result being, according to the pleadings, verdict for the plaintiff on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th issues, and the defendant on the 5th issue.