The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-05-14 00:00:00

THE, STOURBRIDGE OMERITER.

,nd c. and !he j,tBil waa u very nor.
roe one. Thu question to decide was whethin
there was the quantity carried. Now the exact
way the timber measured sheuld be obtainen
by string. and not by tape, and that the railwa
company had a right to charae only what the
earried ; and contended that their mode of
measuring was not the correct one. He should
show that the timber was measured before it left
the station and after it arrived, by string, and
that the company only carried 1605 cubic feet.
He should prove that by two wit , and only
one had proved that there were 1866 cubic feet.
It was an important question to the trade, it was
not a question of the defendant not being able
to pay.
The Judge said after hearing the evidence of
the plaintiffs, he could not hold out any hope foe
him.

Mr. Stokes said under the circumstances, ar.l
after that remark, he should not call them, 23
he had stated what they would prove.
Verdict for plaintiff, with costs.

Collis v. Bruuks.--JURY CASE.—This wee an
action brought to recover the sum 01 £25 as
compensation for injuries sustained by the
plaintiff, through the alleged negligence of the
defendant.

Mr. Motterain (instructed by Mr. C. Collie),
appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Stokes for the
defendant.

Mr. Motteram, in opening the case, said the
plaintiff in the action is George Richmond Collis,
of Stourton Castle, and the defendant Thomas
Brooks, and the action was fort compensation
for the loss of eleven sheep through defendant's
alleged negligence. In the month of Septem-
ber last Mr. Collie bought 46 Welch sheep, and
five South Downs, making 50. They were get-
ting on very well, and in January they were fit
for the botcher. It appears there was some
conversation with a person named Nash, and
some statement was made about the sheep, and
Mr. Collis said he might let him know what was
said about the sheep. Defendant came to look
at the sheep. He did not see Mr. Collis, but
commenced to dress them for the "scab." Hav-
ing dressed them for the scab, defendant com-
menced to cut off the tails of 45 sheep. They
lost a good deal of blood, and the consequence
was that a number of sheep died. Defendant
did this without any authority whatever from
the owner of the sheep. His way appears to
be to dress them for the scab by cutting off
their tails. iiit he (Mr. Motteram) should
prove beyond doubt that there was no pretence
for treating them for the scab. He should prove
by a butcher who dressed two of the skins that
the sheep were not diseased, and why defendant
had treated them so, he was at a loss to under-
stand, unless it was that he should get three or
four pounds for what he had done. He should
prove what he had stated ; and asked the jury to I
give the plaintiff a verdict.

Georg* Richmond Collis deposed: I am the
plaintiff in this action. I engaged Mr. Padilla°
to purchase some sheep for me. He bought 451
and afterwards five South Down sheep. They I
were taken to my house, and progressed satis•
factorily up to January last. I had a converse.
Bon with a person named Nash. It was about I
the 10th. Did not give Nash orders to dress my
sheep, or any one else. Some time after I went
into the field and examined the sheep, and found
them looking very bad, and from what toy man
said they had been dressed with something, and
their tails cut off. Twelve sheep have died,
including one South Down. The first died at
the end of February. I had two skinned to see
what was the matter with them by Mr. Brooks,
a butcher, and from what he said I went to a
veterinary surgeon. They had no disorder
about them. I gave £5O for the 45, and they
would be worth from 8s to 10s more each. I
gave £3 10s for the ewe. The four lambs would
be worth seven or eight shillings each. There
are :37 left. They are very bad, and have de-
preciated from .215 to £2O. Did not authorise
any one to cut their tails off.
Cross-examined : I did have the conversation
with Nash on the 10th of January. Nash is not
my bailiff, but a man named Southall. I had a
person in my employ named Hinton. The
sheep were within 150 yards from the Castle.
The sheep were in good condition when I bought
them. The field is very dry. Did not know
the defendant until a few days since. I did
hear from Southall that the sheep had been
dressed for the scab. I looked after them, and
found they were very bad, crawling about. I
afterwards saw Nash, and asked him where the
mau lived. It was seven or eight days after
they had been dressed that I found it out. I
did send to the defendant several times. He
did not come. After my solicitor had sent to
him he came. Nash did not tell use the sheep
had got the scab. It was reported they had.
' Do not know that Mr. Cox's shepherd examined
the sheep and found they had the scab.

Re•examined: I did not authorise any one to
dress the sheep, or to cut their tale off.
Thomas Padmore deposed : I am a cattle
dealer. In the month of September I bought
45 sheep for plaintiff. They were what I call
straightforward sheep. Have examined the
sheep alive. They are not suffering from scab.
Had they been so the wool would have come
off.

Edward Southall deposed: I had the ears of
the plaintiff's sheep. Some time in the month
of January I had a conversation with the de-
fendant and Mr. Nash. Defendant told me he
was coming to dress the sheep on the following
Tuesday, and that I was to pen them up. I did
put them up, and defendant came as he pro-
mised, and dressed all the sheep with blue oint-
ment, and cut their tails off, and sent them
I away. The tails bled freely. The ewes were
in lamb. I had fed the sheep with hay and
swedes, and they were much improved from the
month of September to January. They did not
have the scab, or any disease. Never saw them
rub themselves. They were very healthy. My
master was not at home when defendant dressed

the sheep. I told hiss of it when he returned.
My master was very violent about it. The sheep
sickened and died. Some of the sheep are now
very bad, and I expect two or three to die.
Cross-examined: I will swear the sheep did
not have the scab. They did not bite at my
legs. Mr. Brooks knows best what was the mat-
ter with them. I did not ask him. lama shep-
herd. Hinton was not there. Did not order
their tails to be cut off ; I had no orders. Mr.
Collis complained that the sheep did not look so
well. I then told him they had been dressed,
and their tails cut off. When defendant came
the first time, I said they had better be under
cover. Brooks said it would not matter, as they
had plenty of wool on their backs. The field is
good laud, dry, and healthy.
. . - .

- James Clak, in the employ of Mr. Brooks,
butcher, said he was requested to go to Mr.
Collies, and dress two sheepskins. He did so
carefully, and found no scab, or any disease
whatever. When sheep are diseased they are
difficult to skin, and the knife has to be used;
when healthy, the skin pulls off.
John Green said: I reside at Kinver, and am
a wheelwright and farmer. Went to catch the
sheep for Mr. Blakeway, the veterinary surgeon,
at Stourton Castle, in March, and held it whilst
he examined it. I know something about sheep.
My own sheep were not in the same field before.
I did not see any scab. Mr. Blakeway told me
he was making the examination for the purpose
of finding scab. They were very weak, and
some of them could not stand.
Francis Blakeway said: I am a member of the
Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, shd have
been in practice for 20 years, and am Inspector
of Diseases in Cattle. Made a port-martem ex-
amination of two sheep last March. Two were
sent to me. I skinned them and examined them,
and came to the conclusion that they had died
from scurf, which had ben administered to the
skin. I found the rest of the sheep in a very
weak and emaciated state. Did not detect any
appearance of scab. The sheep that were left
were very weak. Their breath was bad, and
, some of their teeth were loose. The sheep I
made the post-ne.rtem examination of were the
same. There were no cases of rot. Have ex.
amined them since, but have not found any ap-
pearance of scab. Do not think the others will
die. They are in a weak state, but will recover.
If they were suffering from scab it would not
be proper to cut off their tails. It would render
them weaker.

Cross-examined: I cut off the lambs' tails.
Know the place where the sheep were kept.
The bottom part of the field is low and damp,
and a ould be injurious to sheep. It would be
a bad place for sheep in the winter. I thins it
was wrong to turn sheep out all night in the
field. I think it would bring on inflammation
I saw them on the 4th of March, and examined
the whole flock on the fith of March. Sheep
have the yellows. It would not loosen the teeth.
It would affect the breath. When it was dressed
and oared it weal not be notieed.

Re-examined by Mr. Motteram : The wool did
,mt come off. If they had had the scab the
wool would have come off.

This being the case for plaintiff,

Mr. Stokes rose to address the jury for the
defence. Ile said Mr. Motteram had opened
the case as though there was no such thing as
an answer to it. He had very little doubt as to
whom they would think was right. Mr. Brooks
was a d well known to a great many pre.
sent. He was sent for, and said the sheep had
the scab, and Mr. Motteram would hive them
believe he said they had the scab jut for the
purpose of getting £3 or .£4 from Mr. Collis.
Defendant was a man well known in the district,
and such a charge as this would be very injuri-
ous to his prospects. Mr. Collis found some of
his sheep bad. He went to his friend and advi-
ser Mt. Nash. Then Brooke was sent for. He
did noi go on his own account, but when he was
sent for he went. Mr. Nash afterwards sent for
.. doctor, Mr. Collis not liking to take the res.
ponsibility on himself. Mr. Collis would not
Gull Mr. Nash into the witness box, for fear he
might speak against him; but he (the speaker)
should call him in, and then they should hear
what he had to say. He should also call Mr.
Collie's gardener. Defendant examined the
sheep, and found they had the scab. He has
examined some thousands, having been in the
business 22 years, and he has never been known
Ito make a mistake. He should ask the jury to
give a verdict for the defendant, so that he may
leave the Court without a stain upon his charac-
ter. Who is the plaintiff? Why he is a gentle-
man, rich, and living at Stourton Castle. It is
not a question of money with him, but it is a
question of money with his poor client, who has
to get his living by his business; and he would
tell them that if they found a verdict against
him it might ruin his character, and so prevent
him from getting a living. It was a most im-
portant matter for the defendant, and he thought
that after he had called his witnesses for the
defence they would give him a verdict.
Thomas Brooks deposed: I am a dresser of
sheep, and have dressed thousands and millions
for the scab, and from what Mr. Minchin said
to me from Mr. Nash,! went to examine some
sheep of plaintiffs in the presence of several
others, and they had the scab. On the first of
February, from what was said to me, I cut the
tails of the sheep off for the purpose of keeping
them in the field. Cutting their tails off would
not injure them. The laud the sheep were on is
very wet and boggy, and not fit for sheep to be
on. Some of the swedes were rotten, and there
was hay thrown about tho field, which would
make it very bad for sheep. De not know what
the sneep died of.

Cross•ekamined : I did dress the sheep. There
Wati mercury in the ointment.
Edward Nash, landlord of the Foley Arms
Hotel, Stewponey, and farmer, said he went to
look at the sheep with one of plaintiff's servants.
He exaniined them, and found that nine or ten
of them had the scab. He told plaintiff so.
Cross•examined : I sent for plaintiff to look at
the sheep, and told Mr. Collis they had the scab.
They did have the scab, and I told defendant to
dress them.

James Hudson, shepherd to Mr. Cox, said the
she sheep had got the scab very bad. He exam.
Med two of them.

This being the case for the defendant,
Mr. Motteram replied. In doing so he said
he had listened to his friend Mr. Stokes, and
during his address to the jury he had no less
than twelve times called the defendant his poor
client, no doubt to gain the sympathy of the
jury; but he was happy to say that he was ad-
dressing live intelligent men, and be was quite
sure that Mr. Stokes's words would not lead
them away from doing their duty. It was not a
question of money with his client, but it was a
queaion of justice. Plaintiff felt that he had
been injured by defendant's unskilful treatment
of his sheep, and he now seeks for that remedy
to which, by law, he is entitled Mr. Stokes had
said a great deal about not calling Mr. Nash, as
the case rested upon his evidence. Mr. Nash
has been called, and stated that the sheep had
got the scab. The defendant has attended them,
and charged some three or four pounds for in.
a quantity of sheep. A thing of this
kind could not be tolerated. A clearer case for
the plaintiff had never been brought hits a court
of justice. If the sheep had been treated by a
skilful person they would have eolue on well, but
they had no scab, and yet defendant had been
applying mercurial ointment, which he had ad-
mitted ; and concluded by asking the jury to
give such damages as would compensate the
plaintiff.
At this stage of the proceedings it was near
six o'clock, and the jury were ordered to attend
at twelve the following day; but it was after
one when the Judge came.
. . . . _

- -
After stating that the train was late, he pro-
ceeded to sum up, and said: The plaintiff is
George Richmond Collie, and the defendant
Thomas Brooks. The action is for .2•25 dama-
ges, through the alleged unskilful treatment of
some sheep by tho defendant ; as you have heard
the plaintiff say he gave no authority himself,
neither did he depute auy other person to give
authority to defendant to do what ho had done
to the sheep. The defence was that he had au-
thority, and that he was assisted by some of the
plaintiff's servants; that the sheep had some
rotten swedes, and some bad hay, and that they
were not properly housed ; which was anything
but true. The first question for the jury is the
agency of Nr. Nash. There was no doubt he
I had said something to the defendant about the
I sheep ; but there is great contradiction its to the
I agency. If you think Mr. Nash was agent, then
you must consider the treatment of the sheep;
and if he set himself on with the intention of
getting a job, then there would be a very strong
ease of trespass. The word " fraud had been
made use of by Mr. Stokes, but be thought that
very strong. As to the case of agency, Mr.
Collis denies that he gave Nash or any one else
authority to do the sheep, but admitted that he
had some conversation with Nash, but not with
the defendant, or that he had any knowledge of
what he had done. There appears to have been
some talk between Nash and the defendant, and
Nash suggests that a practical man should see
the sheep, annd defendant goes. Time goes on
and information gets to the plaintiff by Southall,
and he feels so strongly in the matter that he
gets legal advice. You can hardly think that
plaintiff authorised Nash to do what he did do.
He had some conversation with Nash, who might
have construed it into an order. Nash might
have thought plaintiff said something he really
did not say, and so the misunderstanding might
have arisen. Padmore was called, and said he
bought the sheep, and they were very healthy.
He had examined them, and they never had the
scab. Plaintiff says he finds the sheep very
bad, with their tails cut off, and twelve die. Two
skins were sent to the butcher and examined,
and he stated that there were no appearances of
scab, and further explains that the sheep might
have been injured from mercurial ointment.
Plaintiff speaks of the field in which the sheep
were as being very dry. A witness (Mr. Blake.
way) said some of the lower parts of tho field
were damp; but the more serious statement
is that they were not housed as they ought to
have been. Now the information came from
Southall to the plaintiff. He told his master
what had been done, and that he had assisted.
Southall does net appear to be • man of great
experience, but Blakeway is a veterinary sur-
geon, of London, and he examined two of the
sheep in March, and believes that the sheep
died from something applied to the akin. More ,
importance mast be attached to Mr. Bakeway's
evidence than to the defendant's. Mr. Blake- !
way would be likely to give • very good opinion. '
He examined the sheep, and found no scab.
Defendant says that on the 19th of January
some man calls upon him. No doubt that man
was from Nash. He went to the sheep and
found they had got the scab, and put ointment
upon them, and cut off their tails. On being
cross-examined, Brooks said he was sure the
sheep had got the scab. Then Mr. Nash says
he had some conversation with plaintiff, and told
' him he had better get a practical man.
Mr. C. Collis called the attention of the Judge
to the fact that Mr. Nash did not give the de-
fendant any orders to cut their tails off.
Mr. Stokes: I think it will be better for both
of us to keep our mouths shut. If Mr. Collis
opens his I shall have to open mine.
The Judge There are two questions for the
jury. First, the question of agency. If you
find Mr. Nash had authority to set defendant
on. The second is whether the sheep died from
injuries sustained through tint defendant's want
of skill and judgment, and the way they were
treated. If you find there was a want of skill
you will give damages, and it will be for you to
say to what amount. Blakeway's evidence is
very strong, and he is a man of experience.
The root of the matter is the treatment.

The Jury retired for a few minutes. On re-
turning, they found a verdict for defendant, with
costs.

Gittings v. Crannags.—This was an action to
to recover the sum of £l5 9a 94, for money paid
to the defendant, for plaintiff. Mr. Clulow ap-
peared for plaintiff, and the Judge gave an
order for plaintiff for immediate payment and
costs.

Worthington and Co. v. Aitttrood. This Was
an action to recover the sum of £7, being a
balance of account for geode sold and delivered.
Mr. Collis appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Perry
for defendant. From the ovidence of a person
named Proctor, agent for the above firm. Re
sold some ale to John Attwood, at the Lye.
James Attwood, the son, was present at the
time. The father is now dead, and some of the
goods were sold to the defendant, at the time of
his father being alive. On cross-examination,
witness admitted that he did not know the de.
fendant's name was James, at the time, and that
the name of John Attwood was over the door.
Defendant was put in the box, and said that his
father before his death gave a bill of sale, and
that he lived in the same house, but before he
took to it an inventory of the goods was taken,
and he had to purchase what he wanted. His
Honour gave a non-suit, with costs.

IMPORTANT TO COLLIERY PROPRIITTORB.— JOU &M.
worth v. Perrelte and Ilarritton.—This was an action
brought by the plaintiff, a miner, living at Wordaley,
against the defendants, who are fireclay brick manufac-
turers at the Lye and Brettell Lane, to recover fil Ifis
for sick field pay due to him. It appears from the evi-
dence that the miners employed by defendant have been
in the habit of subscribing 6,1 per week out of their
wages towards forming a sick fund. The plaintiff was
oue of the men employed by defendants, and whilst in
their employ he received a very serious injury to one of
his arms, and was rendered totally unable to work. Be
was attended by the field surgeon (Mr. Freer), and sick
notes were given to him for the purpose of enabling him
to get his sick pay. The defendants paid him for thir-
teen weeks, and then refused to pay him any more, and
denied their liability. The ease was, op the 23rd March
last, referred by order of the Judge to Mr. Stokes, of
Dudiey, for arbitration, and on Wednesday last the arbi-
trator made his award in favour of the plaintiff for the
full amount claimed, and coats.

Mr. Addison appeaxed for the plaintiff, and Mr. Perry
for the defendants.

Prescott v. Weleh.—This was an action brought by the
plaintiff against the defendant the Rev. J. J. Welch, to
recover the sum of .tt paid by him to the defendant, for
what id called a capitation fee, for two boys. Mr. Perry
defeuded. This case has been several times before the
Court, sad on the last OCeligioll was referred to Mr.
Harward, but was again called before the Judge.
Mr. Prescott complained that the defendant was rot
present. He had subpened him several times, and it
*as treating the Court with contempt ; and inked his
Honour to commit him for contempt.
Mr. Perry said the defendant had appeared on former
occasions. The case bad been called on several times
before, and he would now ask Mr. Prescott to prove his
Cane.

Mr. Prescott then opened his cue, giving • history of
its origin, and the salary of the master. and contended
that it was for the education of the boys attending that
school, and not only to teach them Greek and Latin;
and that in the year liii3 afresh rule wee made to sharge
10. for each boy as • capitation fee. This, he contended,
was wrong, and the Governors had no right to make
such • rule.
Mr. Perry said Mr. Prescott wanted to try the validity
of • rule mad eby the trustees of the charity. It is not
in the province of this Court to try that, but must be
tried in the Court of Chancery and contended that this
Court had no jurisdiction to try the question whether
the rules are valid or not.

'rhe Judge said the role. had been made some seven.
teen years, and he could not set it aside. Mr. Perry's
.i, fence no. very precise and good. Ile agreed with him
that he had no jurisdiction.

NARNOW Est Are.—On Wednesday morning, about
half-past nine o'clock, intelligence was brought to the
police.station that • house was on fire in the Round
Court. Superintendent Freeman and all the men at the
station at once proceeded to the place, taking with them
One of the extincteurr always kept in readiness for any
emergency. The fire was found to be in the cellar of
the house, and from the density of the smoke there was
come difficulty in getting into a position from which the
',Wacker could be used with effect. This, however,
Mr. Freeman matoig,ol to accomplish, and in a very brief
period the tire was totally subdued It appeared that a
number of children had been left in the house by the
mother, who was out. One of the children set fire to
some shavings in the cellar, and the fiames speedily
seized on the woodwork uf the house. Someone ob•
served what had taken place, and immediately sent word
to the police station. But for the timely arrival of Supt.
Freeman, the fire might have been of • very severe char-
acter.

SUDDEN Drsln.—On Thursday morning last a man
named '1 honias Beach, aged 30, residing at Wollaston,
was found dead in his bed. It appears that the deceased
we. an uuderhaud puddler, and worked for Mr. W. 0.
Foster. lie went home from work at tire o'clock am.,
amid then appeared quite well. At nine o'clock he got
up, and had his breakfast about ten o'clock. Ile west to
bid again about ten, and as be lived alone locked up the
house. Between three and four some neighbours called
to lam, bat received no answer. A ladder was then ob-
tained and placed against the window. Some one went
in. and found that Beach was quite dead and cold. It
isploared that deceased had beeu vomiting. Dr. Camp.
bell war called in, and direi•ted thst what lie had vomited
should be placed in a jar. An inquest will probably he
held this dal iii the body.

Mythical. Orreacis.— At the Petty Sessions, yester•
day, before H. 0. Eirmstone and W. C. rirmstone,
Esti rt.., Char!,. Res, huckster, was summoned by Edward
niuttli, the lessee of the in•rket toll., for that he did,
not being n licensed hawker, sell on Beauty Bank stone
butter, contrary to the Stourbridge Improvement Act.
Mr. Prescott appeared to eupport the information.
Denicl Smith proved that the defendant went into the
house .if Mr. Peareall, on Beauty Bank. He can. oat
gain, took smite butter into the house, and received the
money for it. 'the toll due wan dd. Defendant had not
paid it. The di fence was flint Mrs r Ilgmve him Mt
order for some butter, and he delivered it. Mire. Peer.
nail was celled, •itti maul elle ordered some butter and
eggt of defetolant ; but did not say the quantity. Mr.
Prescott ennt.wit.,l that tlin fAct of tieirtpiHnt'n yea
standing in front of the house wile an advertisement, and
contrary to the Act. Liar complainant had taken the tolla
of the Contruiralionere.llll4l had to collect the money ;
and that defendant had, by selling the butter. infringed
upon Ins right.. The case was adjourned for fourteen
day.. . .

C•sx.—llenry Bird was charged with feloni-
ously stealing or the 6th just, two knives and two forks,
the property of George Taylor. Maria Hall, • domestic
servant, said on the above ,late the prisoner came into
her roaster's house, the Waterloo Inn. There were
quantity of knives and forks in the kitchen. After the
prisoner had gone, she missed two knives and two forks.
George Taylor proved thatfrom information received be
followed the prisoner on Friday last, and overtook him at
Holly Cross, and charged hint with stealing the knives
and forks, and gave him into custody. They are worth
one shilling. Sergeant Jones proved receiving the pg.
loner from the last witness, and charged him with steal-
ing the knives and forks. Prisoner said he did not steal
them, but brought them from his home at Darlaston.
Several letters were put in as to character, and one from
a medical gentleman, to the effect that defendant was
not of sound mind. The case not being pressed, the '
prisoner was discharged with the understanding from
lii, friends that they would take care of him.
SELECT op Wiiita.—Philip Drewry was charged by
John Vaughan with neglecting to fulfil his contract.
Complainant said he engaged the defendant to work for
him as a spade plater. Defendant left his work on
Tuesday last. He hail not been at work since. The
consequence was that he had eustained a loss of Os. De-
fendant agreed to give or take 14 days notice. The de.
fence was that complainant gave him 14 days' notice to
leave, and the time was up on the ith of May. Com•
plainant said that defendant owed 21 64, and he gave
him notice because he refused to pay it. Defendant then
agreed to pay it by instalments of 6d per week, and he
was to go on with his work. The Bench said there was
some little difficulty for them to settle, as eomplainaut
was under the impression that by paying the 6d a fresh
contract had been entered into ; and would recommend
the parties to settle the case between them. Defendant
expressed his willingness to return to his work, and give
14 days' Doges.
AINAT'LT CAI!. Issac Whitehouse and William
Whitehouse wets charged by Richard North with assault-
ing him, on the Bth instant. Complainant said he was
going home about twelve o'clock, when he saw two boys
throwing stones at a house, and remonstrated with them,
when the defendant Isaac Caine up to him, challenged
him to fight, end i‘track him him al times. Waning
then struck in self-defence, and they fought for some
time; after which be went home, when the defendant
William eame to his house, and struck him, knocked him
down, and kicked him. The defence of Isaac was that
eomplainant was in the road, and challenged any one to
light; that no one would fight hire, when the complain-
ant struck him on the eye, kicked him on the eye and
about the body until he beams senseless, and that he
had to be taken home. William said he was in bed when
loins persons came to biro, and said how his brother
had been beaten. He went down to the complainant,
and asked him about it, and he had five shillings of his
wife to fight him, and pulled his skirt of. Several wit:
were milled on both sides, and the Bench die.
nursed the case.

CHARMS Or FIIACOVLINTLY RIMoVINO GOODS.
Charles Perrins, of the Lye, wee charged by Edward
Foley with removing • quantity of gooda from his house
with intent to defraud him of his rent. Witnesses wale
called to prove the case, but as the defendant had re.
moved them in the day time the Bench did not consider
there was any fraudulent intent, and dismissed the
ease.

EXTEAORDIVARY CURE OP A COUGH DT POWELL'S
BALSAM or I/NISESD.—" Her Majesty's Gun Boat ' Net.
ley,' Wiek, North Nast Coast of Scotland, 7th September
1868.—Dear Sir,—Having had • most distressing and
severe cough, which caused me many sleepless nights and
restless days. I was recommended by His Lordship, the
Earl of Caithness, to try your most invaluable Balsam of
Aniseed, and I can assure you, with the first dose I
found immediate relief, even without having to suspend
my various duties; and the first small bottle conipletely
cured me; therefore I have the greatest °enhance in fully
recommending it to the million. Moat respectfully yours,
W. LINZELL, • Netley;—To Mr. Powell."—
Pow Etife BALSAM or ANISEED CAD be had of all Chem.
lota. In Bottles at Is ljd end in 'dd. Warehouse, 16,
Blacktriars-road, London. Ask for " Powit•L's IicAAAN
ktrummt."