The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-08-08 00:00:00

COURT OF PASSAGE-YESTERDAY.

(Befoie Eli*ARI) SANIESt ts 4., t.C., Aisessor.)

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION.—BLARE v. DOWNY.—III
this case Mr. Brett appeared foiethe plaintiff, and Mr.
Deighton for the defendant. The claim was for £35,
the commission on the sale of a public-house. The
plaintiff, Augustus George Blake, is the proprietor of
the Great Maghull Hotel, at Illighull, and also a broker
selling upon Commission, and tho defendant is a publi-
can, living at the corner of Rilricorn-street,
In the eadrith or garah last, the plaintiff received
instructions to look out for a public-bouse for the
defndant, and subseqUently a conversation took place
relative to Mrs. Thothas's house, is James-street, which,
if obtained, the plaintiff alleged, he was to receive his
full commission. No agree Merit, hoWever„ was come to,
hut soon after the Plaintiff was tiVernibd dt the liotise in
which the adorn-lint at present resides, being for sale,
and informed him of the fact, .observing that it would
just suit him, if he had sufficient money to purchase it,
saying it was £3,503. The defendant -became anxious
to secure the property, and asked where it was situated,
when the plaintiff stated that his reply was,
." Before I
tell you that, I must have 'some tinderstandihg about
the coirtniisAidtt ;" td the deferlaarit replied, ".I
promised you £2O for Mrs. Thomik's house, and I will
give you your full commission on this heUse, if I like it,
and make a purchase. The plaintiff then described the
property where -it was situated, and to whom it
belonged, with all particulars connected therewith. Some
few days after this the defendant informed the plaintiff
that he had taken a friend with him, and, had purchased
the house for £3,306, which he had paid in full ; and,
subsequently, the plaintiff' ha.d told the defendant that,
although he had lie.en very sl' iu pdrchasitig the pro-
perty, liekhOttld, if Ms legal. rietiiser thought ilt,.deinand
even- hilillertily of the commission on the purchase
honey, and hence the present action. For the defence
it was argued, by Mr. Deighton, that the plaintiff was
not entitled to any commission, nor was there ever any
proMise to that effect. In support of this view of the
case, Mr. DOWny was called, and he stated that he had
never looked upon the plaintiff as A. commission agent,
and that th 6 gale of' the premises he then occupied was
through a negotiation with Mr. Orrell, the owner of the
house,'and Mr. Seger, the brewer, and not in the least
degree through the instrumentality of the plaintiff: Mr.
Orrell also spoke to never having employed the plaintiff,
and it was proved that the custom df tile hide Was not
to charge both iencior add purchaser With the commission,
*hick had been attempted in this instance. The assessor
having stated that the point the jury would have to
consider was simply which party had giyen a faithful
version of the transaction, as it was quite certain that
One of the two must be untrue, the jury, after a brief
consideration, returned a verdict for the defendant.
BRowNE V. COODE AND ANOTHER.—The circum-
stances in this case Were precisely the sarlie es those
disclosed in the case heard on the previous day, full de-
tails of which were published in the Tunes of yesterday.
Before the case was concluded an arrangement was made
and the same verdict recorded, as in the other case, for
the plaintiff. Damages, £l2 10s.
THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. WALKER.—Mr. Aspinall
was for the plaintiff and Mr. Brett and Mr. Marshall
were for the defendant. This case, although heard be-
fore a special jury, and had occupied a very large por-
tion of the day, was totally devoid of iliterest; eleept to
the real disputants. The plaintiffs, who carried on
btisineis hi this town, purchased in London thirteen
casks of cotton oil, of Messrs. Bedart, oil merchants, who
made arrangements to have them forwarded by a steamer
called the Rokeby, belonging to defendants. For the
plaintiffs it was alleged that when the casks were shipped
they were in good condition, so far as no leakage
could take place; and for the defence the contrary was

aged to be the case. The aMount involved was the
sum of £24. A vast quantity of documentary and oral
elide/ice was adduced, and after lengthy speeches from
the two legal gentlemen engaged, the Assessor said the
main question that the jury would have to consider was
were the casks sufficiently strong when shipped for a
voyage from London to Liverpool ; or, was the damage
from the leakage occasioned by the improper stowage of
the casks on board the Rekeby. The jury gave a verdict
foY the plaintiff, believing that the casks were improperly
stowed on board the vessel while on their transit.
B°uRKE v. HEVEY.—In this action, the plaintiff, a
dock labourer, sought to recover form the defendant, a
stevedore, compensation for the injuries he had sustained
by the fact that, as he alleged, he had broken his ankle,
through the negligence and carelessness of the defendant.
Mr. Deighton was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for
the defendant. The facts of this case are simply as
ibllOws :—On the 27th of January last, the plaintiff was
engaged in loading a vessel called the Sea Wave, which
was berthed in the Prince's-dock, outside of two others,
one of which was the Seraphiue. There was a stage
erected, and in consequence of the incline being very
great, and the negligence of the defendant's men, who
Were loading the Seraphine, the plaintiff's ankle was
broken. The men of the latter were rolling a large bale
of cotton, and from the fact that there was not a man in
the front of the hale, it came in contact with the plain-
tiff's leg and broke his ankle. Mr. C. Pemberton, sur-
geon described the nature of the injuries the plaintiff
had received, and, as the facts were not disputed, Mr.
Aspinall merely addressed the jury on the Mitigation of
damages. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £l5.
Tnosras v. HARRISON.—Mr. Deighton Was for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for the defendant. This was
also an action brought to recover damages for personal
injury sustained through the negligence of the defen-
dant. The plaintiff is a boot and shoemaker, and the
defendant was the owner of some cottage property in
Everton, and both carried on business in this town. In
the month of April last, a sewer was being constructed
in Havelock-street, vertori, on some property belong-
idg to the defendant, and one evening, as he was going
home, he fell into an excavation which was not enclosed
and dislocated his shoulder, for which he sought com-
pensation. For the defence it was argued that the
defendant was not liable, as he was the owner of the
house, and that if any blame -existed it was on the part
of the contractor who was making the sewer. Evidence
having been adduced to show that a Mr. Hughes was
the contractor, by the direction of the Assessor, the jury
returned a verdict for the defendant.
WALKER v. BATES.--This MIS an action brought by
the plaintiff, a car owner, to recover from the defendant,
also a car owner, compensation for having, by the direc-
tion of the latter, been falsely imprisoned. Mr. Aspinall
was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brett for the defendant.
In this case Walker had been given into custody on a
charge of having stolen a portion of some harness.
When the case 'was heard before the magistrates, the
plaintiff was dismissed, upon promising to give up the
harness, which was done, and hence this action. The
jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £5.
The court then adjourned until this morning, when
the business will be resumed.

MONEY ORDERS.—(To be supplied gratuitously at all
Money-order offices.)--On the 15th inst., and thence-
forward, remitters of money-orders will be furnished
gratuitously at all Money-order Offices in' the 'United
Kingdom with printed forms of application for.money-
orders. The public are recommended, when applying
for money-orders, to make use of these forms, since, be-
sides saving time, they will afford greater security than
verbal directions against mistakes,—(l3y command of the
Postmaster General,) Rowland Hill, Secretary.—Gene-
ral Post Office, August 3.

HORRIBLE DEATH OF AN ARTI,,T.— On Monday
afternoon Mr. Wm. Payne, the coroner fer the city of
London, received information of the death of Mr. Thos.
Cooper, jun., aged 23 years, artist, wko resided in King
William-street, London-bridge, under the following
melancholy circumstances :----It appeared that the de-
ceased got out on the leads of the house to smoke his
pipe, when ho slipped and fell a depth of upwards of
100 feet. He was picked up in a state of insensibility,
and conveyed to St. Thomas's Hospital, where Mr.
Drake, house surgeon, rendered every assistance that
medical skill could suggest, hut he expired shortly after-
wards from an extensive fracture of the base of the
skull.

SONS or TUE HIGHLANDER, SHOULDER 'l'o SHOULDER.
—We understand that the volunteers of Liverpool are
about to have an addition to their number in the shape
of another Highland regiment, the members of which
are to wear the garb of Old Gaul. The uniform of this
corps will be less costly, we believe, than that of the
present Scotch corps—a circumstance which will, no
doubt, be an inducement to many loyal young Scotch-
, men to join it, to whom the expense, of equipment is_ a
matter of consideration. We are informed that the
command will be offered to a gentleman of wealth and
position in this town.

THE DAILY TIMES, Viti)XESDAY, AUGUST 8, 1860.