The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1870-11-22 00:00:00

BLANDFORD COUNTY COURT, MONDAY.

There were between 50 and 60 original plaints entered,
of which the following came before bin Honour, T. B.
P. Lefroy,
s‘rettsel Fowler Uriderhay, v. Marks Maidmenf.
Claimi:6,for medical advice sad attendance. Plaintiff ii a
doctor,defe nd an t • labourer. —Mr. Moore of Wimborne,for
the plaintiff, and Mr. Atkinson for the defendant. The
C.LIC was adjourned from the last court, for the predica-
tion of the deed of assignment, whereby the plaintiff
purchased certain debta from his creditors, at his bank-
ruptcy. His Honour remarked on the original summona
being taken out 4th July, and the 000 which they sued
on the Bth October.—Mr. Atkinson stated for the
defence that Maidment's wife had • cancer, and was
for soma time an inmate of Salisbury Infirmary, from
cinch she was discharged as incurable. On her return
home Mr. Uoderhay was called in, but told by his client
that as he was a poor men, ho could not afford much
for medicines, and that the poor woman only required
a little to soothe her pain. Instead of coming occa-
sionally. however, Kr. Underhay called nearly every
day. The defendant saw him, and again urged that he
could not pay, and told him not to call ; but notwith-
standing he visited her 30 times, and charged 2a. 64.
itch visit. They were prepared to pay £2 for the
visits previous to the time kfaidment told hint not to
call. Mr. Moore denied that this was a true version
of the case, and plaintiff stated that he was regularly
engaged to attend the woman, and the defendant's son
had gives him money to pay for medical advice. This
defendant denied, and eventually his Honour gave
verdict for £2, at Sc. per month.
Warekam, •. Ernest Hairy Rowdess.—This
was a claim for E 22 41. paid as deposit money on certain
property formerly belonging to Mr. Mellish, of Shilling.
stone. Mr. Johns appeared for the plaintiff and Mr.
A thine In for the defendant. Mr. Johns stated that in
1869 tlw owner of the property came before the court
on a petition of bankruptcy, assignees were appointed,
and Mr. Atkinson was the petitioner's attorney. A
sale by i.ucti in was advertised, and on his behalf, Mr.
Tod attended and paid as deposit on the property
the cum of 522 4s. to Mr. Bowden, the auctioneer. He
Mr. Jint, had since been informed that Mr. itowden
piid the money over to Mr. Atkinson. The sale 031110
to nothing—an assignment was prepared by Mr.Atkineon
of the property to Wareham, but before that could be
completed, he (Mr. Johns) was instructed to oppose the
I mkzupts passing his elimination and certain aceounts
which were ordered to be filed never were filed, and the
petition in binkruptcy was ordered by the court to be
dismissed: Mr. Wareham then asked the defendant to
return the deposit money which Tod bad paid for him,
but wax told that it had been paid over to Mr. Atkinson.
They held that the auctioneer had no right to dispose
of the deposit.—Mr. Atkinson said that in this ease
the: hid nothing to do with Wareham. Tod was the
nun who said it. His Honour: By what keear-eccer
preceding is this marl to be kept out of his money' Mr
Atkinson : The property was sold to Mr. Tod, knocked
(I,,wn to him, and he paid the deposit. Mr. Mellish.
the Ittoiltrupt,owed me some money and of course I had
a right to keep it. Ilia honour: It is perfectly clear
that this is an entirely undefended action. The
auctioneer had no right whatever to give up the money
ilepnsiteil with him.—Mr. Atkinson said that his client,
Mr. Bowden, was also an agent having been engaged by
Mr. Park to sell the property. His Honour: This
shelling, LI Loll one man to another will not do Is
the platot if to lose his deposit money because another
loan is engaged by him to treat? Verdict for plaintiff
with costs.

It . if. a. Georye Hid-J.—Claim El ls. for
pr-fe,sional ailvioe.—Plaintiff stated that in the year
1867, defendant came and asked him his adrioe as to
some fencing which had boon placed in his garden.
He wont and saw the plue, advised him, and after-
wards held a long consultation with a man named
Churchill, and for his advice preferred this claim.
Hick. never disputed it till lately. Defendant
admitted that he engaged plaintiff, but told him he was
a poor wan.—(His Honour : Than my advice to you is,
if you are a poor man, keep away from the law—loud
laughter.) A few days after, when ho saw Mr. Atkin-
son he :liked him what he owed bim. He replied ho
not charge him anything ; but make his land.
lord (Churchil) ply. Ile (defendant) would have had
Churchill ss witness, but he was unfortunately bound
over to appear at the Dorchester Quarter Session, and
Mr. .ttkiii.on was his bon4.—Theee statementa Mr.
Atkinson positively denied.—His Honour said it was
quite clear defendant had retained Mr. Alt inson's
Derrias, Ind he did not consider the charges inuno-
derote.—Mr. Atkinson agreed to take off one item,and
jud4cuent for Mi. Bd, forthwith was given.
The Some a. Jestie Easter.— Claim £3 7s. 10d.—
Plaintiff stated that he was engaged by the defend-
ant's wife to appur in a case before the magistrates
where her two sons, one of whom wu represented as
16 and the other 18 years of age, were brutally treated
by a policeman who shortly after was obliged to leave
the tow,. The defendant afterwards saw him and he
told him his charge, when he aid to pay ss. per
week, at the same time paying one Si.J Defendant said
that that he only engaged to pay 10s, 61., of which he
had paid ss. but he never engaged Mr. Atkinson's
services at all. Ifis sons who lived entirely Mutt from
him, engagcd him.—llis Honour avid that it wss
out of all reason that when a professional man's services
were engaged he should not be paid, and gave • verdict
for the plaintiff, submitting the aceonnt for the
Registrar's supervision.

The Sane ;. William Shepherd, sawyer, Sta.—Claim
£2 74--This was • similar case to the last. The par-
ticulars were these. Defendant was served with a writ
from a 13ristol firm. He obtained plaintiff's advice and
assistance, and letters were written. He also engaged
his terries in • case before the Starminster magic-
trates.—His Honour said that according to defendant's
way of showing the business of an attorney would not
be • very profitable one. Verdist for plaintiff.
The Same v. J. Maw:l,l.°rd, alias Joseph Hens.—
Claim El la—This was a somewhat peculiar wee.—
According to plaintiff's evidence it appeared that in
January last the defendant was summoned on • charge
of stealing the top of • fir tree from a plantation be-
longing to the Hee- D'Oyly Snow.—The charge was
withdrawn on defendant agreeing to pay 10a. to the
poor of Hilton. Bet the police, hearing of the
affair, summoned the defendant, and Mr. Atkinson
appeared. The charge, however, was vrithdrawn. De-
fendant's version of the transactlon was very different.
He said that he and a man named Inkpen went into
tho Bleak Bar. Mr. Atkinson was there, and they
commenced talking about Mr. Snow's letter. Mr.
Atkinson asked to look at it, and said "Give me the
piper. I will put it in nay diary"—(laughter). He (Hunt)
said I it cost anything he could not pay, to which Mr.
repli, .1 it should cast him nothing. John
Inkpen oatfirmed defendant's statement. His Honour:
It is very cud. nt you engaged Mr. Atkinson's nor-
ekes bcforl th., magistrates, and if you get into
trouble, awl engage solicitors to got you out of it, you
must pay for H.—Verdict for tho amount claimed in •
month.

r. Chalk rv. Cor,e L.—Th. claim El 61. 10d
sr,. not disputed, the only question with the defendant
bedig hi who he wes to pay the money.—lt appeared
that Chalker was travelling Agent for Mr. Coble of
Dorchester, and formerly carried on business on his
own necount. Cable purchased &portion of the hairiness
of him, and by special agreement, whilst Chalker
trxvn!'t.i for Cable, Cable could an. in Chalker's name.
!former after ?onsideration told defendant he
would be quite safe in paying Cable, and an order for
the amount in four instalments was made.
T.., trustees of the Court" Golden Arrow," A noient
Order of Foresters, Henry William Hatheriey.
Claim 17.. W., contributions, fines, lie. Mr. Johns
Ap0..0l fir the trustees of the lodge, who were repre-
sent .1 by H. !Sere, and Mr. Atkinson for the defen-
dant. On the case beicg called on Mr. Atkisson took
as a priliininary objection that, according to the rules
of the Court, and in conformity with the general laws
of the Order, the cue ought to have come before an
arbitration committee before being brought Into Court.
He cited cases in support of this—namely, at the Bow
(aunty court and the Hythe court. Mr. Johns, on the
other abb., cited a cane tried at the Leieeater court, to
chew that the society could bring the ease at one, into
court, eilti,out any such preliminary examination
before • committee of arbitration. His Honour said be
sic of opinion that he had no jurisdiction, but be would
adj..rurn the case till the next court to smolder the
queiti?n.

Cabie v. Zd ward Warr. --Chain£6 ih, 10d.—kr.
Johns, who appeared for the defendant, mild that this
ease was adjourued from the last court for the plaintiff
to furnish particulars. This had been dope, and by
them be found that the greater part of the goods were
supplied to defendant's wife, who had left her husband,
and lived separately from him. Since they parted he
had been overwhelmsd with claims of debts contracted
by his wife. He found that within one week a altar's
was made for two pairs of stays. and also two dresses,
and he contended the plaintiff must show first that
thew goods were purchased with the knowledge and
consent of the husband, and that they were necessaries.
—A witness named &afoot was then called by plaintiff,
who stated that he had travelled for Yr. Cable seven
or eight years. He supplied the goods to Yrs. WWl',
her hosband being present sometimes. He had also
received money from the wife when Warr was present.
Had given Wart a hall, about three =oaths ago for •
portion of the goods,but not for the whole till about 14
days ago. He then said he would not pay it.—Hie
Honour having examised plaintiff's book end the bills,
told that the goods were entered in the Ilene or Mrs.
W. C. Wan.—Mr. Johns; Sheamethd on lie Wines
et • istadram—Mr. Cable sot um se a

business. She was laundress at the Down House, and
bir husband was gardener them—His Bonen? t) I:ar-
foot paid ye , 'AI from time to time—l) r.
ant's wife.—ilis Honour. addressing plaintiff: You
must have same stronger evidenes to show that the
husband recognized there transactions of his wife.
The bills are made out in her ortme.-11r. Cable : The
cord troweers mast have been for him ; his wife would
not want them for herself —(latighter). —Mr.
.Johns
pointed out that the cord trowsers were charged in the
grit previous bill, amounting to £2 7e.—Mr. Cable
cionsidered it a hard case that after supplying a man and
his wife for years,and always getting his money regularly,
he sh ould be dons onto( it through their haring quarrelled.
The Judge: It is entirely owing to your own and your
agent's carelessness—l may say recklessness, of supply-
ing goods to married women without seeing their
husbands. I are, not at all satiated with the evidence
to-clay ; hut I will non-snit you, so that you may have
an opportuity of subpcuoing the wife to prove agency
re her husband's behalf.
In Re If. Marshall, stone MIMI and builder, Bland-
ford.—ln this ease both Mr. Atkinson and Mr.
ladlyse appeared in support of application' for im-
mediete execution, the former on • judgment obtained
at the last caul in • case in which Mr. Thwdinz was
tille plaintiff, and the latter in • Nation brought by Mr.
Jona, ironmonger of Blandford. It appeared that the
goods were to be offered for sale by auction the follow-
ing day, and both applications were granted.
Alfred &Una v. Clutrla Bird.—Plaintiff resides at
Ibberton, and claimed £.l 10a. for a spring cart, and
SY 10a. damage for the non-supply of iron aooording to
agreement. —Mr. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiff,
and gave up the second item of the claitn.—Yerilict
for I:5 10s. being allowed for certain iron used in the
manufacture of the cart.

--
SUDDEN DEATH AT BLANDFORD ST. MANY.
On Wednesday last, W. H. Atkinson, Esq., coroner,
hold an inquest on the body of Mr. Frank Smith,
watchmaker, who for many years had been clerk to the
parish club. On Monday morning Mr. Smith hail been
pulling carrots in his garden, and ho complained to Mr.
Philip Etheridge, with whom be afterwards diued, that
the stooping caused the blood to rush to his head, and
made him feel very giddy. Sot he ate his dinner better
than usual. About half-past two Mr. Smith went home
to have "• nap," as usual alter dinner. He
more seen alive. Laura Jane Hayman, a dressmaker,
001uPlitla part of Smith's house, Ending he did nut
°owe to tea about a quarter to live, soniched fur him,
and looking through his bedroom window, saw him
lying on the bed on his face. Mr. Henry Muuktots,
innkeeper, was called, and he formal open Chu door. On
going in he put his hand on Smith's back, and said,
"Oh, my de.ir fellow, what's the matter He got
no answer, and on lifting him up, found ho was dead:
The ju7 returned a verdict of "Death train ustural