The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-07-10 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT.

Wednegday last was a special clot, appointed
for 0.13(401141ot gdionruod county Court Oases,
NU l the following were disposed of

ifion v, Hiaker toidd t'llorards. At the
County Court. on Wednesday lust, before Mr,
Young, Deputy-Judge, this was an notion
brought to recover the Muhl of ..f2 las, the value
of eoul.—Plaintitt sold that li. we an engineer,
and on the 10th December, 1S(17. he agreed with
the defendant to work two engines, to be paid
45 per day. overtimo to be paid for, and to have
one ton of coal per month. On the 14th Decem-
ber. 1807, be commenced to work at the Mea-
-Ime Colliery, end the first coal received was on
the 16th Jamey, 18C8. He did not receive any
more till March 10th. Daring the time he was
engaged with the defendant he had received 7
tons of coal. There were still eight tons due
to him, the volute of which would be £2 16s.—
The 114enen was that it WilF4 not customary to
allow the engineer coal, and th at he never agreed
to give the plaintiff coal, although he had given
hint coal. Two witnesses were called for the
ilefenee, whose evidence went to chow that it
was not customary to allow engineers to:have
coal, hat that they were allowed to pick coal out
of the slack.—Hie Honour, in summing up, said
it was quite clear there was an agreement for
plaintiff to have coal, and it was admitted by the
defendant that plaintiff had had coal by picking
it out of slack, lind that defendant had, accord-
ing to his own evidence, sent plaintiff coal, and
according to the document put in by the de-
fendant it ia quite clear plaintiff had been al-
lowed coal regularly until August Itsn7. He
then gave s verdict for plaintiff fur £1 10s.

Gregory V. SA, ',ling.—This was an action to
recover the sum of a is, for an assault npon
him by the defendant. Mr. Perry appeared for
the defendant, and said he might just state the
facts, which would shorten the case. The de-
fendant was summoned by plaintiff a short time
ago before the Magistrates for an assault, and
was tined 10s and Costs; and contended that as
the defendant was fitted, end had paid the line
and costs, according to Act of Parliament he
was released front all civil or criminal prosecu•
thins. Defendant then proved that he was sum-
moned by the plaintiff, and was fined lOs and
costs, amounting to 30s lid, and had paid the
fine and cost.—His Honour said the objection
was a good one, and he must give a non-suit.
Mettle v. .Imiell.—This was an action to reco.
vet the sum of ISs frotu the defendant for the
maintenance of defendant's wife. Mr. Maltby
appeared for plaintiff, who said that he he had
kept the defendant's wife for three weeks. De-
fendant did not appear, and his Honour made au
order for the full amount claimed, and coats.
Wood Bruthers v. ('safest —This was an ac-
tion to recover the emu of £8 9,s 3d. for goods
sold.— Mr. Maltby appeared for plaintiffs, and
Mr. Prescott for defendant, who made an objec-
tion that the plaint note was wrong, it having '
been made out in the name of Thomas and Henry
Wood, whereas it should have been Thomas
Wood, Henry Wood, and the Executors of
I George Wood; also that defendant had Leen
paying a composition, which had been tendered
to plaintiffs who had refused it. He had the
deeds with hint to prove that a composition had
I been paid. Mr. Maltby said his olients had not
received notice of defendant paying a composi.
lion till after the proceedings had been taken,
I and It was then too late, He elso contended
that Mr. Prescott had not proved the deeds. Mr.
Prescott said they proved for themselves.
I Thomas A. Craig said lie was clerk to Messrs.
Wood Brothers, and the amount claimed was £8
24 lid. He had seen the defendant during the
last week, who offered hint the composition he
sac paying, amounting to Qs in the pound.
Cross-examined: George Wood was a partner,
but died nine months ago. The plaint was en-
tered by a man named Hodgkiss, who is a chain
maker, and has often collected small debts. De-
fendant came to their oilice at Cradley, and said
he was a bankrupt, and offered the composition,
which amounted to 19s 4,1. It was refused.—
Ills Honour gave a verdict for the full amount
and costs to be paid in 14 days. Mr. Prescott
said the verdict was worth nothing, as the de-
fendant could not pay. The Judge said that
was the plaintiff's look-out. He thought the
High Bailiff should have an indemnification be-
fore proceedings.

SERIOUS CHARGE OF SMASHING. - At the
Public Office, on Monday, before J. Holcroft,
Esq., Sarah Palmer and Harriet Wilson, two
respectable-looking women were charged with
uttering a base half-crown at the shop of Henry
Taylor, confectioner, High-street. on the 30th
ult. Mr. Perry, solicitor, defended Wilson.—
Mrs. Coakley said she kept a shop in High-street.
On the above date the two prisoners came to her
shop about two o'clock. Palmer asked for a pair
of socks, and tendered half-a-crown in payment.
Did not think it sounded well, and asked her if
she had not got any smaller change. She said
she had, and gave 3id in coppers, the price of
the socks. Gross-examined: Palmer asked Wil-
son to lend her a half penny—John Daggett said
he was an eating-house keeper, and lived in
High-street. On the day in question Wilson
came into the shop, followed by Palmer.
Wil-
son called for some pork. She put down half-
a-crown. Put it on the counter, and told them
it was a bad one. Palmer took up the half-
crown, put it into her pocket, and both left the
shop together. The pork Wilson ordered came
to 4d.—Henry Taylor said on the same date the
prisoners came into his shop, and Palmer asked
for two buns and two mince cakes, which am-
ounted to 3d; and Wilson asked for a mince
cake, and gave him one penny. Palmer tendered
him half-a-crown piece in payment. He sounded
it on the oil cloth, and thought it did not ring
very well; but as it was on the oil cloth he did
not think anything about it, and put it into the
till. Gave Palmer 2.8 3d change. There was no
other money in the till, but the half-crown.--
Acting-sergeant Jones said from information he
received he apprehended both the prisoners in
High-street on the 30th ultimo. Charjed Wil-
son with passing a bad half-crown. She said
she did not know it was bad; the other woman
gave it to her and asked her to get a quarter of
pork in Iligh-street. The man said it was bad.
The other woman picked up the half-crown, and
they left the shop. He (Jones) then charged
Palmer with passine bad monies. She said "I
did not know it was bad. The woman in High.
street did not say it was bad, and I could not
afford to lose it." The officer said he received
the half-crown produced of Mr. Taylor.—Mary
Wigley said she was the wife of Sergeant Wig-
ley. Searched the prisoner Palmer and found
I 12s 214, and on Wilson 81(1 in coppers. The
money on Palmer was four half-crowns, and a
two-shilling piece, and 2id in coppers.—lNilliam
Maier said he was a silversmith, and resided in