Pearce And Another v. Brooks. This was an action, tried in London before Baron Bramwell, to recover from the defendant (a woman of the town) an in- stalment for the hire of a broughamn, and the defendant's third plea said that she was a prostitute and that the brougham sold to her by the plaintifs was to be used by her as such prostitute, and to assist her in carrying on her im- moral vocation, and that the plaintiffs made the agreement sued upon with the knowledge and in the expectation that the defendant would pay them out of the re- ceipts of such prostitution. The Jury found that the car- riage had been used by her as part of her diSpla'r to attract men and that the plaintiffs knew it was supplied to be used for tiat purpose. The defendant rented a house near Bel. grave-square, and ordered a brougham of the plaintiffs, who are coachmakers in Long-acre. The agreement was that the defendant should pay 50t down so much for hir and instalmenta of 15L 15s. each until all was paid; on her failing to pay an instalment, the present action was brought. Mr. ontague Chambers, Q ., r moved for and ob- tained a rule in pursuance of leave reserved at the trial, on the ground that the defendant did not prove such aUega- tions in the third plea as were essentiallv necessary to be proved to constitute a good defence to the iction. Mr. DIGDy SEymotTi, QCO and Mr BERESFORD noW showed cause against the ruje; and Mr. 31. CRaUtEW QQ, and Mr. J. 0. GnrFSSU apported it. The COURT thought the evidence given sunportedthe verdict, declined to interfere, and discharged the rule. PEARCE AND ANOTER, V. BROOKS.