The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1863-07-28 00:00:00

NISI_PRIUS COURT, SATURDAY.

(Before Mr. Justice Wiles)
There were five causes set down for hearing, two
of which were to be tried by special juries.
Brea r. IitAVAX. —This was an action brought by
the plaiutiff, as executor of the late John Bash, EN.,
against the defendant, clerk to the commissioners
for carrying out thf• act for the improvement
of the town of Bradford, to recover the rum
of £l4O for services rendered by the late Mr.
Bush, as clerk, nominated and appointed under the
Act, for work and labour, as attorney and solicitor,
for fees due, and for money paid. —The defendant
pleaded that be was never indebted, and the statute
of limitation.— Mr. M. Smith, Q.C., and Mr. Lopes
were counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Collier, Q.C.
and Mr. Buller were fur the defendmit —Front the
opening statement of Mr. Montague Smith it
appeared that the action was brought by Mr.
Bush, Mr. Saunders, and Mrs. Bush, executors
of the late Mr. Bush, solicitor at Bradford ;
and Mr. &mewl was ouly nominally the defeedant
being the clerk to the commissioners of the town of
Bradford. An Act of Parliament was passed in 1839,
or paving. lighting, and watching the town of Brad-
ford. Commissioners were appointed to carry this
act into execution, and it was necessary that some
clerk should be elected. Mr. Bush was at first ap-
pointed as "law clerk," but in 1850, or 18.51, he was
elected clerk at a fixed salary of £35 a-year. The
Seat demand of Mr. Bush was duly paid; but the
whole of the sum claimed was due from July,
1853, to the time of his death, in November,
1858. That would be £l4O for four years, with-
out the fraction for the year, which was the
claim made by the plaintiff. As to the plea
that it WAS barred by the statute of limitations, that,
Mr. Smith contended, could have no offset, DA Pay'
meats amounting to £1.5 hod been made on amount
of the bill. The Board of Conimionioness had passed
a resolution in December, 1856, that the clerk's
salary should be paid by instalmeita of £25. Three
sums had been paid, but Mr. Smith admitted that he
did not think more than £7O were recoverable.—At
the suggestion of the learned judge the oouneel on
each aide consulted, and ultimately it was arranged
that a verdict should be entered for the plaintiff fir
£7O, subject to certain point, of law.
HOLLOWAY 0. —The plaintiff, a solicitor
of Pommy, claimed of the defendant, a builder, £7O,
for money paid by him for the use of the defendant.
The defendant pleaded that he was never indebted,
and that, he had satisfied and discharged the plaintiff's
claim before the action was brought. —Mr. T. W.
Saunders was counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr.
Smith, Q.O and Mr. Buller for the defendant.—
The defendant has recently been speculating in
building, and he purchased a small estate for the
purpose at Milton. The property appeared to have
been purchased by the defendant, but in the name of
Mr. Stephen Day ; and according to the plaintiff's
version be was to have a share of the profits if any
were realised. That property was re-sold with the
exception of a farm-house, six acres of land, and a
small piece of land about 30 poles. The defendant
wished to erect some cottages on the latter piece of
ground, and he applied to the plaintiff to furnish
him with the bricks; Mr. Cooke, the manufacturer,
declining to supply him unless he had the authority
of some responsible person. Mr. Holloway at once
gave his authority, and when bricks were required,
the plaintiff WU called upon to give the order.
Several mortgages were entered into by the de-
fendant—The business being conducted by Mr.
Holloway as solicitor. The accounts were very com-
plicated, but when Mr. Cook purchased the cottages
he paid off the mortgage to Mr. Holloway, and
deducted the £7O for the supply of the bricks to the
defendant. —For the defence it was contended that
an arrangement was come to that the plaintiff should
pay for the bricks, and pay oft another mortgage on
receiving the homestead. The last mortgage signed
by Day, Edwards denied altogether, as the former
had no power to act in the matter—Witnesses were
called on both sides, and it was arranged that a juror
should be withdrawn, all acconnta between the
plaintiff and the defendant to be settled, and no
further claim to be made on either side.

STR•TTON v. WALKIR. —This 111,1111 an action of
ejectment. —Mr. M. Smith, Q.C., and Mr. Everett
were counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Kiogdon for
the defendant —The plaintiff became possessed of
the property in 1822 by • will; and, as the defendant ,
is a relation, he allowed him to live in one of hts
houses free of charge. The agreement was that he
should pay £2 2.. a-year for the cottage and garden,
but this was never preened. la 1848 the plaintiff
feeliqg anxious to retain to. title to the property, de-
manded of the defendant some rent, and the latter
gave him 3s. on aconnit Latterly the defendant had
endeavoured to sell the property, and theretire in
October, 1861, the plaintiff served him with a notice
to quit. He declined to leave, and • second notice
was served upon him. Mr. Kingdou objected to the
notice, but that wan over-ruled, and the jury returned
a verdict for the plaintiff.
On Sunday morning the learned Judges, the High
Sheriff, and the Mayor and Corporation of Salisbury
attended Divine service at the Cathedral. At the
entrance they were met by the Very Rev. the Dean,
the Hon. and Rev. ()anon Oordoni and other offici-
ating clergymen. As the procession moved up the
nave the chnir sang the anthem, "I will give
thanks." The clergyman that took part in the ser-
vice were the Very Rev. the DOM.. Sub-Dean Eyre,
Rev. 8. 11. Lakin. and the Rev. H. T. Pullen. The
SherifFs Chaplain (the Rev. Mr. Selwyn) preached
an excellent sermon from the Brit vette of the first
Epistle general of St. John, "My little children,
these things I write unto you that ye sin not. If any
man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus
Christ, the righteous, and he is the propitiation for
our sins."