The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1876-12-19 00:00:00

JUDGMENT SUMINNSILS.

George Bridle V. George Pope.—llle Honour relured the
ord.'s. from 114. to 44. a month.

Marko Stautascra V. nausea.; N .rman.—Defen.lattt had
pail lala into Court, leaving ii hal.anx) of only 4. 2.1. due,
anti the Judge adjourned the rase.

WINBORNE.

LORD Bmcohegigin departed from Lord A.l.i‘n.:ttiownr..'s
seat at Crichel, fer London, on Monday.
A FOOTMLL MATCH was played at Bailey Gate., f:owtunr.
tCsO rzUne:t:hlaYteCvaer
tnic
eanilZegi
foo
unlinisetey enan.S:t.trund tini thredgerit
~beitrwo
uee) ni
ithekuel y
London. There was good play on both side; but the
Londoners were victorious.
Au aVILATAINIXIMY of conjuring, tiVritualistn, ,
wasnigixvennLaAtcathigeooCoßrnvEAgcmhatitiottei;.N.
Monday, when there war • field of between four and five
hundred.
THE PRINCR AND PaINCIOSS CHRISTIAN ore expected to
Home, on Monday next.
PIT a visit to Sir Ivor:mil ply Genejjelkhret.
CoUNTY COURT, Tneaday.—Muf ore the judge (Mr. T. E.
I'. Lefroy).
Reseed ivogs.r, Wiinliornit Y. Thomas 1•011,14411, Long
Ilant.—A claim of £lO 194. OM. for tea, —lbifendant offered
to pay 104. at once and 103. monthly, and the Judge mole
that order.
Trustees of the Wimborr.e Ilosilitiog Society. v. Robert
Hood, Blandfer.l.—A claire of £l3 :h. Id. instalments doe
on the mortgage of two properties at Sturininster Newton,
Mr. 11. T. Trevanion for plaintiffs. —Judgment for tho
a ~,,,, int forthwith Ily defatilt.
Wilii4l4 Pruitt, surgeon, Witubornc, V. Rligubrtb Pit-
mon Monk, of Ilatitortvton.—A claim of IX 124. 6.1. for
professional services.—Mr. Tanner for plaintiff ; Mr.
TreVanion for defendant.- The was brought agaiit,t
defendant as executrix of lv r lato father under the idea
that deceased died twnrwase 1 of properly, hut it was
proved that the whole assets w.!re only a I that
defendant had paid considerably re than that out of
her own pocket, although she woe not liable for any debta
that the assets would not cover.--Ifis Honour gave rt
verdict for defendant.
Charles Munn, v. .tosepts PosnoL —A elabel of in.
lislance of a account—Ti. lio paid so three instalments.
Alms:Nth, Legg. Sturtninster Marshall, y !teary Grows,
Corfu Mullen. —A claim of 4,77 11.. id.—Mr. Trevanimt
appeared for defendant, who lovl paid AZ fn. rel. into
Court and pleaded • set oil of V ls. lii, and said the
rest was an over-charge. The only part of thu claim dbi-
puted was a charge of 12.1. a day for plaintiff's plough and
horses and men, the defendant satin,: ho had always pre-
viously paid plaintiff 104. a day, but plaintiff said defen-
dant agreed to pay him 123. a day on this occadon, in
which he was corroborated by aeorge Flippen, his carter.
Plaintiff disputed 113 of the set oil for repairs to a gate
damaged by his boy whilst ploughing in defendant's field,
on the ground that the boy was defendant's servant for
the time being.- The Judge said plaintiff was liable for
the damage WI the buy was his servant and not defendant's,
and allowed both the claim and setoff.
• iSUIDSTIMI OF •OF-NCY _

Chivies Mon, of Leigh Dairy, Wimbome, v. William
!lure!,le, cheese factor, of Weymouth and Dorchester.—
This was a .daimof £l5 3s, tkl. balance due on the sale of
Ini cwt. Vibe, of cheese, at £SI Is,, after deducting
£33 17s. 6,1. for groceries received on account.--Mr.
Trevanton. of Poole, for plaintiff; Mr. Weston, of Dor-
chester, for defendant -The point in dispute was as to
whether Mr. Hobert Drake, a dealer, of Poole, by whom
the cheese was bought, was acting as the agent of defen-
dant or not. —Plaintiff •aid he had done business with
defendant and Drake for eight or nine years it. and
whatever cheese was bought by Drake was always sent to
defendant and charged to him, and defendant remittal
payment direct to him and not through Drake. Defen-
dant bad been to his 110.1.43 and bought cheese and also
with Drake. lie should think Drake heal bought
cheese of him alone on three or four occasion.s,
and it was always charged to defendant, who plid hint
In money awl in ammis. Defendant told hint that if he
had a let of cheese at any time he could sell it to Drake,
awl he (defendant) would pay for; it. The cheese in
dispute warn bought by Drake for defendant, rand con-
signed to Mr. Short, Nine Elms station, by order of defen-
dant. The cheese bought of him by defendant was usually
consigned to London, awl in the present cats the &lamas
of the consignee was sent him through Drake by defendant.
Mr. Henry Hurdle, defendant's brother, canna to his house
and markesl the cheese with an "11" for litirdle.—Cross-
examined by Mr. Weston : When defendant callod at his
house with a emtleman from London at Christsuaa he slid
not tell Wien:lent he had already s 'hi his Meese to Drake
Sik.i 14101 Wm.: for sale. lie did say that he could not sell
the cheese at the price defendant offered, and Drake
; afterwards eAlne awl Weight the cheese for the defendaat
' When he was at the station sending off else etseest in
question be aaw Mr. Henry Hardie and mike,' him where
he was to Kohl the weight the ehenet Ile told him to ;
tend to either Drake or liurdle.—it thert Drake said he
had bought tons of Cheese tor defendant during the 1 sot
nine years. lie bad bought cheime for defendaut when he
was not with hins. Ile had bought cheese of plaintiff
before tile present time, and it was comMinel to various
places by defendant. Defendant told hint if lie suit any
charm worth ouying lie was to by it for bust and ha
would pay for it Sind :way him for iti4 trouble. lkfen-
dant adwars paid tiis partiea : he slid not pay for the
cheese. lu the preseat instance he bought a hot of cheese
of plaintiff a.fitt .44 defendant did not hilee it :LB he took
the reistaiibler I ; self, and rend phaintiff for it. Ile
should thihk altoge.iber he had bought font% live, or six
toes of theses of pht.,cfr when defetelaut was not present.
All lie dal via, to tete anything ter defendant that was
worth the mosey, awl defendant paid for it, lie delivered
the gr ,c; rise to plaintiff since the transaction. Ile wa, in
tile habit of delivering grocurie.s to different imrs..es tor
defendant, but never tusk the Moiler for therm—, 'coos-
examined by Mr. Weston : lio slid not ask Mr. lieury
Henna to go to plaintiffs awl mark suite cheetah Ile had
never bought cheese himself with sold it to defendant. ;
(Mr. Weston real n letter in whirls Drake offered to all ;
defendant some cheese he had bought.)—lieormunittasi by ;
Mr. Tree: ttt i.. 11: This Warn the first complaint he It el had
of adelni4lit not forwarding the cheque for anything lie
had bought for him. He always del so all right before,
and he was surprised that he .Ibl not now. —Mx. Weat...lh
whlressed his 1.1.42. nit for lefendent, awl produced • copy
of accounts batween dafendant awl Drake in which the
latter Wad credited with tit, 6.1. for the c:temat: in
question, which was a quarter cwt. lest weight titan
charged by plaintiff, according to the railway , ounatity's
books. Mr. Weston contended that his client Imaghtt the
cheese of Drake, who waa not defen.hutt's agma.—
Defewlant was called, and sill he had bad dealings
with Drake for *duo years. Ile went to plalittiit's
house last Chriatitiaa wait a gentleinan fr no Lmoloum Jur
the purpose of buying cheese, bat plaintiff told him
Bobby Drake bad bought it all, and he hadn't any to sell.
Ile never recognised Drake as his U4ellt., hut Drake had
bought a deal ef cheese front which he selected whateear
he liked and left the nett, lie was not obliged to take
all the chh-ese that Drake lought. Ile gave Drake 2,. a
cwt. sotimumtsissims for buying.--Cro.-examined i,y Mr.
Trevanion : lie diol not recollect telling plaintiff that
whenever be had a lot of cheese hoc ould sell it to Drake,
:and he hlefetelano would pay hint (plaintiff) for it. his
Mel supplied plaintiff with about gdi worth of granwries
sine, the diewle W 1.4 sent to Loudon, awl they. were sent
through, Drake, • who um paid for delivering goods.
. . . . .

Malaita 4111 OW.Yi for the tgrocerter. Ile wohl the elie..ne
in question bo Mr. Short himself. Ile woul.l not swear
that Drake luel not I,:fore thin bought awe*, of pltnitiff
for I.ini when he wan not there. —Mr. Mello. Iltirdle 'Aid
. .. . . .. . ..

he was in partnership Sk WI his brother, and kept the
books. On the toth of february he saw Drake at his
house On the West Shore, Poole, and FAN' some che
there. whieii lie toll liinf WAS moue of plaintiffs. Ity
1/rake's orders he went to plaintiff's hoopoe to mark some
cheese. Drake told lOin he had bought all there was
there. Ile found, he should think, over two tons of cheese
in the room, (ruts which he sefected 30 cheese, and
marked them. Ile did not attempt to make a bargain
ith plaintiff as to the price of the cheese. Ile gave
Drake instructions where to fiend the cheese. 311.1 on the
21st of !larch he saw plaintiff at the Wimborne railway
station. Plaintiff told him he had just loaded the cheese,
atudaskted.whethec he
.was to look for payment to hitu or
. . . . . . .

Drake. He told him Drake, as be hail bought the cheese
of hint. He had obtained the tieket that was on the
cheese from Mr. Short, and the weight was Inlcwt.
—Crogs-examined hjr Mr. Trevanion : Ile did not, when
he went to plaintiff-a house, ask plaintiff whether Drake
had not bought some cheese for bun. Plaintiff drove hint
round the neighbourhood to see other people's cheese the
saint day, and plaintiff ordered a quantity of groceries of
him, which were out on the 11th, if March. Ile had not
*milks' for payinent for the groceries.— Ile Judge th.iught
the case was not altogether free from doubt, lett be was
of opinion that the man who had benefit of the ChMs,,
should pay for it, and a verdict wa, entered for plaintilf
for the amount dainsed, lons the value of a quarter ewt.
of cheese.