The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1871-09-02 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT.

Matthews v. Lesser.—At the County Court
held on Wednesday, before Luxdale Warren,
Esq., Deputy... Judge, this wee a new trial. At
the former hearing judgment was given for the
plaintiff, and the defendant applied for a new
trial, whicu was heard before ti jury. The first
jury subpienaed were all challenged by Mr.
Parry, and another one was unpannelled. Mr.
Llcock appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Parry
for the detendant. The action was brought to
recover .ElB Os tid, for timber supplied to Jacob
Lesser, of Brierley Hill..
. . .

The , Rbeit Matthews, timber dealer,
Hart's Hill, said the defendant called 011 hitn in
August last, and asked if he could supply hial
with sonic cutting-boards. lie said he could,
and he subsequently supplied thew according to
dirueusions furnished. Nothing was said about
Nathan Lesser when the boards were ordered.
. .

Cross-examined: lie did not make application
for the account before Christmas, but whether
it was before Nathan Lesser's bankruptcy he did
not know. He had never received a notice from
the Dudley County Court informing him that
he was a creditor of Nathan Lesser's, whose pe-
tition had been tiled.

Sarah 31atthex s, plaintiti's daughter, said she
purchased some boots at defendant's shop in
Novetnher, and defendant said it did not 'natter
about the money, as he owed her father an ac-
count. she suid she would pay him, however,
and did so.

William Matthews, sou, of plaintiff, said lie
was present when the goods were ordered, and
the gouda were beaked to Jacob Lesser.
Cross-examined: lie did not know Jacob Les.
ser, nor that the place in Dudley belonged to
hint. He had never seen a notice of Nathan
Lisser's bankruptcy sent to his father, and rc•
questing him to attend a meeting of creditors.
'fhe defence was that the timber was supplied
on Nathan Lessors account, and that the pre-
sent plaintiff was in no way accountable for
them. Mr. Parry, for the defence, called
Jacob Lesser, who said he had been in busi•
ness for housed since 1867. Previously he was
a partner with his brother Nathan. About 12
months ago, plaintiff told hint he had Leard his
brother Nathan had taken to a factory at Dud-
ley, and he asked him to get him an order for
some cutting-boards. He believed the boards
were nem ered, but witness had never been ap-
plied to for payment until after his brother's
suspension. He never gave au order for hi;
brother Nathan.

James lireen said he called upon plaintiff for
his account, by the instructioos of the receiver
in Nathan Leasa'a bankruptcy, and plaintiff gave
it him at once. He asked the plaintiff particu-
hirly whether Nathan Lesser owed him any
money. . .

- Miss Julia Lesser said, by the request of her
brother Nathan she called upon plaintiff in
gust, 1870, about the boards, as this workpeople
were standing, and they were required at once.
His Honour, in billowing up, said that on one
side or the other there was gross perjury.
12 lie jury returned a verdict for defendant.
Mr. Parry applied for costs, which his Honour
granted.

CLAIM OF WAGES.—At the County Court, On
Wednesday, before Mr. Loxdale Warren, Deputy
Judge, an action was brought by William Bowd-
kr, engineer, in which he claimed the sum of
12 13s 4d for wages from his recent employers,
Messrs. Finustoue and McEwen. Mr. Collis
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr • Perry for the
defendants. The plaintiff was engaged to drive
an engine and look after steam hammers, in
which capacity he had been employed for four
or iive years. On the Ist of June last, Mr.
McEwen told him he would have to attend to
other engines without any extra remuneration.
The latter refused, and discontinued driving the
one he was employed to drive, and in conse-
quence Mr. McLweu discharged him without
notice. The engine plaintiff had been driving
was 15-horse power, and the two others he was
wanted to attend to were lietween 30 and 40, and
20- horse power. besides two boilers. Plaintiff
au he defendant Mr. Mel.: wen) were examined
aftvc which the Judge gave it judgment for the
full amount and costs.

jiones V Pllne IlefelidelltiS. —This was a suit for
ditmlissal. Plaintiff has been employed
by the defendants as engineer. In consequencl
of complaining of insufficient slack to get al
the steam for the pair of engines he was driving
he was dischargert without notice.— Judgment
for the full amount.---Mr. Collis appeared for
the plaintiff, and Mr. Perry for the defendants.

EqUITY SClT.—This Was R suit instituted by
Mr. Thomas, on behalf of the Stourbridge and
Kidderminster Banking Company, ea equity
mortgagees, against Messrs. Northwood, for de.