The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-11-01 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT

Re John Bunn.—At the County Court, held on
Tuesday, before E. Kettle, Esq., Judge, this
bankrupt, who was supported by Mr. Addison,
passed his last examination. There was no opposi-
tion.

Drew v. Millward.—ln this case our readers will
recollect an action brought by plaintiff against
the defendant, for causing a quantity of lime to be
placed on the footpath, and the plaintiff fell into !
it and injured his eye; and at the last Court a
verdict was obtained by plaintiff. Mr. Clulow, '
who appeared for plaintiff, said that he believed
his friend, Mr. Stokes, who held £l5 in hand
would pay it into Court, and he had .£ tin addition.
He (Mr. Clulow) was quite satisfied at the verdict
of £25, and would suggest that £2O be paid into
Court, £5 in a month, and the costs .£1 per month.
Mr. Stokes said that it was wrong for Mr. Clulow
to make use of any conversation he had had n ith
him. The money was not paid into Court, but he
was prepared to do that. He thought that his
friend had been very hard upon his client, who
was very poor, but would agree to pay £2O down,
and the remaining £5 and costs, at the rate of £1
per month. This the judge remarked, was very
fair. The next question was, what was to be done
with the £2O on behalf of the boy. Mr. Clulow
said he would leave that with his Honour. The
Judge directed that £l5 be placed in the Post
Office Savings' Bank, until he attained the age
of 21 years; and that the defendant pay £1 per
month until the amount was paid.

Taylor v. Fox.—This was an action to recover
the sum of .25 6s for injury caused to plaintiff's
pony. Mr. Addison appeared for plaintiff, and
Mr. Perry for defendant. Plaintiff is a pump-
maker, and keeps a pony. Defendant is a farrier,
residing at Bretton Lane. The evidence went to
show that the plaintiff sent his pony to be shod,
that in so doing, the pony was injured in the felt,
and he was unable to use the pony for eight
weeks. Mr. Perry addressed his Honour for the
defence, and contended that the injury caused
was an entire accident in being shod. That it
was quite possible any one might have cut the
shoe a little too much. Defendant was put in
box, and said that his man shod the horse, which
was brought back. The shoe was out down to see
the cause of lameness, which is the usual thing
to do. Other wituesses were examined to show
that horses were sometimes lamed in being shod.
His Honour held that the defendant's man was
not sufficiently skilled, and gave a verdict for the
full amount claimed; and remarked that the man
who shod the horse ought to pay half the amount.
Cook v. Tillesley.—This was an action to recover
the sum of eti 16s, for cider sent to the plaintiff,
which was alleged to be had. Mr. Addison ap-
peared for plaintiff, and Mr. Perry for defendant.
Plaintiff said that he kept a public-house at the
Lye, and agreed to buy three and a half hogsheads
of cider of the defendant. One hogshead was
delivered on the 20th of May, and the remainder on
the 22nd May. He tastedthe cider on the 27th of
Mar, and found that it was quite sour. Sent word
to the defendant about it the following day, but
ho refu.ed to take it back. On the 20th of August
he returned it to the defendant's house, who re-
fused to have it, but he left it upon his premises.
The defence was, that the cider was good when he
sold it, and that it had not been kept in a proper
place; and that he could have sold it over and
over again if it had been returned in proper time.
His Honour gave a verdict for defendant, but
remarked that he thought the plaintiff was entitled
to some recompence.
Madden v. Hill.—This was an action to recover
the sum of £2, being the value of five loads of
timber. Mr. Perry defended. Plaintiff was not
prepared to establish his case, and the case was
adjourned at the request of plaintiff, who agreed
to pay defendant's costs.