The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1885-09-29 00:00:00

COUNTY PETTY 18E88I0N8.

FRlDAT.—Before Captain Pretor, Captain Phe
and Mr. Eliot:
RICIAZ OVVINCIL

Robert !fishier was cined for keeping &
carriace without a license. Ih-fendant live. at Wake-
ham, l'ortland. —Mr. W. 11. Man, I,XCiK) officer, pro.
secuted.—Mr. F. 11. I Mihiriiige, of the rxcise,
that on June 17th he saw the defendant's servant
dris jug' a four-wheeled carriage, for which he Itad no
licosise.—lk•fendant's statement wa.i to the effect that
ha w&a in doubt as to whether he ought to take out
a UN. Or 40s. license, awl that-Is-fore he had come to
0111.6410 n the offence WWI COMlllittel.

- ........
There was a second ch:wge agantit the 4 demi:int
of a similar nature on dune 2:141.--The Bunch ordered
I to pay A fine of 104. And coats in each
£2 19.'. 19s . in all.

CAMIL9OV_I_,KUNK

James Throne and Frank Parker were charged
with being drunk and disorderly at Preston on Sept.
19th. They were seen fighting by a policeman.—
Parker now alleged that Phone., who did not appear,
bit I ' and that he only struck bun back again.—
Ordered to pay Ss. Ikl. each, including costa
Abraham Mere, labourer, was charged with being
ilrunk and disorderly at Broadway on September 9th.
lie was near the Railway Tavern in a drunks,
excited condition. When told by a policeman to go
lime he saul he should not be ordered home by any
polieeman a. long as hehat wary to ply for a glass
of ikrir, and used bad language. —Defendant, who
denied hying drunk, said he had four children to
maintain.—lie was discharged with a caution.

ALLKUZII C.AMIt OVrIMCS.
Noah Mardi was summoned for unlawfully killing
awl taking game on !•,eptember 114th at Wyke
—NE., Howard defewled.---Defeielant war men in II
field eecupird by Mt llodier, of Portland, by P.C.
Custard walking about inc wipt the furze in a sue.
Ocher. manner. 11., afterwarde went bi another of
Mr. 11..Mee* fi-lds,anitcrept along the hedge; also to
r. Ward's li-1.1. Witness stopisid and search him.
f..mr.l nothing 'nit a gun and ammuni•
tin in his porressi.m.-- Replying to questions by Mr.
Howard, Curtaril said the defendant * father war in
the employ .4 Mr. Hodder a* the manager of a small
farm. its did not know that the very gun the
dere:Omit had was Mr. Hodder'N. Witness went
with the defendant to Mr. Ward, who, however, said
he hal not given a permit to the defendant. Vr.
Ward bail not since taken any proceedings in the
Inciter. —Mr I IoW.IIII having addressed the magic.
triter in +dew": . the etre war dismissed.
.....

tiToWAw ‘Yt4oitAtti:F.l) wiTil Vm:RANcY.
J.. 1m Carr, age 23; John Michell, 21, both of
Leath ; William Baker. 27, of Wigan ; IMMO
%laagowan, age 15, of Hull, and Henry pfactnanua, of
Hull, were brontht before the court in a charge of
vagrancy,.
chag.,y dlr.,' that betworn four awl Ave
o'clock that morning, in consequence of having
receive., it complaint front Mr. Hideout, of Itadip.h.,
he visited hi 4 farm premise. lie found the tive
defendants asleep in an outhouse there. He searched,
butt found nothing beyond a hot of matches and pipes
on them. li, reply to his questions they stated that
they came fr.. 111 Hull; that they had tickets for the
limo a; Weynninth. hut that upon going there they
were t .1,1 they would have to pick it certain quantity
..f oakum the following morning before their
departure, and that the governor had power to detain
them until eleven o'clock en Saturday miming.
Pins hearing thin they gave up their ticket., and
retuned the lodging. They further stated they had
;wen ',towed away in • tem.! from Hull. but that
they wen. found out, and Jandorl on Friday at Port.
land. The MOO wan hound for New York.
Pri.onern now ntat.nl it wan after half.p.vit wren on
Friday night when they were landed at Portland, and
that they thought they would do better on the other
nub of the water than this. Eight were stowed away,
but the •,ther three were kept on board. They left
Hull en IVedneeday morning, and were not "fund
oat" until Friday morning.
P.C. Chaffey further deposed that 74facmanus told
him he left home unknown to his parents.
The Bench dismissed the MAP.

with what she had. She had not told Annie Jeans
she intended to leave, but she was present when she
told her mother she was afraid she bh,, Uhl be coin
' pelled to do so. Witness stated that at the police
station Major Storldart suggested she should return to
his service until she heard from her father, and she
told him she was afraid to do So. She had never
said she was afraid of j,.r tis,stlArt tens going her.
Shit had hail several situations offered tier since, lett
she emit not take them. She could not stay in
England, a. this was not her country. Oa the 7th of
July when oh. was ordered tau of the bow, Rli" ht‘d
not said to any one should we'll.' leave. She I lid ir.t
refuse to carry the baby on that day She was
exhausted and watitsl to put the baby down, when
Master le. WV.. +aid " Talc up the batty unmeliately.“
She said "May I take rest, if you plo.cos." mid h..
told her to take it lip mil WWI h-r not to eir an
inch. He t his brother, Mawr Iltigh, to kick
her if she dared to 111.0Ve. Mrs. Stodilart then
beckoned her to come, and ordered her to walk up awl
down in front of the housewith the baby for a quarter
a an hour. She walked up and down for some time,
but as she did not walk fast enough Mina May boxed
her ears. She did not Mien say she would not stand
sittodanday a
rta house she lust "sly Sc,' shillings ui lt.);
precession, The 1111111.1 evening she went to Mr.
MeMahon'o house, and remained there until the lot
of September. Mr McMahon charged her 106. a
week. Since then she had been away with two
ladies at Sarelown, who, having heard of her case,
had offeresl her a home.
The mat witness examined was Mrs. Stoddart,
iff
.w,hkoedsahi dere
fl
sow
u arriving
a Calcutta
ti t tf
with whichhu,a dillies
her children. Her husband gave plaintiff the money
in her presence. Plaintiff wish.sl to have four hour.?
c
leave the following day in order that she 'night go
and purchase the things: also to say good-bye to her
child. On the Vlly_fle plaintiff behaved very well for
about six days. Witness then found the ateward was
giving her beer without her consent, it being an
extra. When she had it teemed plaintiff said, " I
shall not do • bit of work unless you ffiVe Inc my
beer, and I will makeytet giveittoine." She refusel to
keep the cabin tiny, and witness had to do so herself.
She also would wit deep on deck,
allegin that it
was the doctor's orders, hut the doctor said it was
not true. Plaintiff further refine Ito bathe the little
g
girl, when witness was getting the baby off to skip,
inserting_ her agreement was to look after the baby
only. Witness said it would be very hard if she hail
to look after hoth children, and her huslAnd was at
the time ill with brain fever. She spoke to the
captain about the plaintiff refining ti °ley her
orders. He told her is was a servant's duty to iney
her mistress, and onlered her down ~n the lower deck.
In the evening plaintiff went on her knees, and
asked witness to forgive her, saying ale. would never
again behave as she had done. The captain it the
,hip said to witness in the presence of the plaintiff
"Sfsmer than have ouch perpetual fault finding do le
much as you can aaeirself." Plaintiff worked very
much setter towards the end if the voyage. Three
days after their arrival in England. plaintiff catne to
her and said " Madam, will you write to my modwr
and say you are pleased with me?" Witness told
her she was working beautifully' and subsequently
wrote a letter to her mother, and placed it in • work
Inc. The following day the letter had disappeared.
Plaintiff had read the letter. Only she and- witness
knew that it had been written. She gave no orders
to the plaintiff to poet the letter, but it appeared
that it WAS I ..t.41. After the disappeseania. of tha
letter plaintiff again behaved badly. On July 7th she
said—" Yin do not trust me ; you do not believe me.
I am tired if this, and I am going." Wittiest told
her chic had said that dozens of times, and her husband
also asked plaintiff why she did not go. When alto
was behaving so badly witness told her she would have
to turn her off, but reminded her that she had advancod
rk rupees' and that she would have to return the
balance. She replied—" I will give it you back ; do
not he afraid—Upon being cross-examined respecting
the rupees, witness said she did not know whether
they were in note, ic paper.
Mr. Welsford : /low d.d you know there were 50
ruiees ?
Witness: Because my husband said so, and I saw
the money on the table.
The Judge : My experience is that women never
can discriminate between that which is hearsay and
that which is direct evidence. The plaintiff ask.sl for
50 mitres. The witness's husband stated there were
50 rupees, and the plaintiff went away satisfied, there-
fore tilec melusi.tn the witneso Callle t./ was irresistible
—that 50 rupees were on the table,
lii further crees-examination, Mrs. StAdart said
the plaintiff mpeatedly coniplaintsl of the treatment
of her daughter, eight re:11,1 Ohl. She' however,
believed ler child before the servant. She asked
witness to request the child to behave better, but
witness replied she would H, it bother herself about it.
It now being six o'clock, the Court wad ailjournel
until 10 on Saturday morning. The folltneing evidenet
was then taken :
When the Court re assembled on Saturday morn-
ing, tlet.ludge said: I have candidly considered the
matter. and am of opiniett that the two sents claimed,
tal Its. 10.1. and £l.l, making together ell lb. 10.1.,
were included in the general term for re 1111 l titration
for services renderel, soil claimable tinder 'me con-
tract ; therefore they fi. 1111 l A one claim only, which
cannot lie split, and one in reflect to which the Court
has no jurisdiction, inannuch IVA the phkilltili has Wit ,
abandoned any part .tf bid claim, and the Court h 11,111.1
power to 3111.41,1 witheut the consent ..f the I blend.
hit, and the two cases form but Wheat the eitllll
first presed.A itself to in'-, I threw out a Suggestion
there was a difficulty in regard to the splitting of the
claim. The claims are virtually one. awl coin,. under
the term of remuneration for services rendetid, and
they were the conoideration ftr the contract. No
contract is valid in law without consideration, and
that is the consideration.
Mr. Welsfonl • Although we ere acting under one
contract, them are several clauses if action. In this
Mae there are two actions, the first 0111. having been
enterel by me on August 15th. That action was
brought before the Court, and judgment pronounced
mem it. I oubmit that any 11lle0ti.111 as t.1111P•W trial
cannot in any ahape or way affect my right to a
claim tender the first action. It was taken, and Ping-
mete given, and I applied to the judge for his direct
tiono as to this second action, and this second action
allowoil ti hi,' brought by in', under special circum-
stances, 1 should not under ordinary 1111 l stance,
hare had • right to bring Ow action, but Major Stud-
dart had filed MI 1116.13, it before the jtelge, and hitt
solicitor contintesl the fact that he is *bee to 1e.111,1
for India, therefore I claimml the right, and the judge
granted it me to bring thia ...cowl action. there not
bt.ing, under the onliatary ruleo of the Court, sullieient
time ti SerVe the 1111 l Themfore the CAM' 4:111,1.
thus. I brought an action and recovertsl jiidgmentl,
and tei far as my learned friend is come:mob when
he applied for a new trial, 11,3 di.l not attempt to
..n.. Is .rtion ef the Pidniettit, our did Major
Stoddart, in the affidavit made to stiptstrt the trial, in
any Amite or way nter to the claim for the smut if
Li 100. Ti..' judge clearly tutu, and stated that the
judgment for the el to.. was, itn H tjor Stiollart's own
whitest oh ree.veraltle. her tbe circitinotances,
The .111.1. e. The judge said to ine he Wail diasatie
fiel with the verdict, and that he had granted a new
trial. Ile wanted another mitei to be brought Whew
on the matter. The jtelicature .tct has introduced
that principle into the law generally, but it doet wit
apply to th.,14. Courts, although in the high Colima
Justin i . it s the nght principle to follow. He was
very c trefttl I oletithl not Ist at all prejudiced by what
he said ; therefore I agreed to take the matter, know
ing nothing about the other side, amid I am as unbiaased
as I very well can be.
Mr. Weloford : We brought an action for the
recovery of es. 24. as wages in India, one for el
15.1. std. asservices in England, and El 10s. for wages
in lieu of a stiontli'a notice.
The Judge : You have to address yourself to the
question id having come into the tout fnr
Qumet yoti abandon any part of the claim !
Mr. Welsford : I recovered judgment.
The Judge : That is what you have not done. The
new trial him set amide the judgment.
Mr. Weloford : Money has leen paid into Court,
and the hearing fees of the Coen have been paid over
to the plaintiff, by the express order 'if the duclge,
and had there been no pelt:tent it would have been
ine fu ,r the Judge to have made that order. I
r end claim the right to take that money out, unless
there WaS an express order from the Ckmrt that it
should not be.
The Judge : Has the plaintiff got it?
Mn. Welaford : She has got the Court expectant and
th.• el 10e.
The Judge : If the money were reduced actually to
£5l, den there might be a qeestion an to whether I
had a right to record the claim as revised to that
amount.
_ .