The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1874-07-21 00:00:00

BRIDPoRT coUNTY COURT.

FRIPIS. —Before Mr. T E. l' Lefroy.
Then: were 107 original plaints, 10 Judt.enent suntmonses, and
fire adjourned Judgment sunenonsm, but neuiy all of them
were settled by the Itt-gistrar (Mr. W. If. Manley). Ills Honour
took Ids seat shortly after Ilooloek.

li:aboth &fovea UGH, innkeeper, AlBurton, r (Nadu
Ilnrt, baker, South-street, Bridport —Mr. Day appeared for
plaintiff, and Mr. F. W. Gundry for defendant—This was •
claim for 1221 Co 2.1.; and had been taken for hearing to the
Court of Queen's Bench, who had sent it before H a Honour.—
Mr. Bunchy mid he believed an arrangement had been come to
between the parties. - His Honour, on being Informed they
were brother and sister, said surely that mould be the meet
sensible course to pursue.- -Mr. Ounalry said he believed the
terms were £.5 to be paid down, and Cl a month—Defendant
sail the money now claimed hail been paid for him by his sister
without his anietion.—Mr. Day wed plaintiff was willing to
neeept the terms prmese.l, on condition that if the Instalments
were not kept up, execution would follow.—Mr thuidry
thought that would he rather hard on the defendant, as he had
lately eimpromised with his creditors. —llls Honour said the
onler of the Court would be for 25 at once, and monthly in-
stalments of Cl, if not paid, of course execution would follow
—Mr J. D. hymen applied for his expenses ; he employed 20
hands, and could not afford to come up there and lose his time.
—There were fire witnesses, who were ollovrel expenses for
half-a-day.

Mr..m. adorns , grocers, Itridport and Portland, v. J. 11.
Revlon. -Mr. oundry for plaintiff. —ln opening the case Mr.
Dumb,' said he had only just been instructed, but he believed
the fact. were as follows. Defendant was now living at
Bournemouth, aril RSA the proprietor of a large number of
vans that were travelling shout the country, known by the
!lone of" Chian lecke"- Mil Honour said he believed •
similar ease hal recently c one before him --Mr Oundry
continued Mr °sham had supplied • in.,, named Tucker,
from time to thee with goode, during the stay of one or them
vans in Itridpott, Tucker having the charge of the van. Mr.
Oilionie had ale; given Tucker cheques no as to enable him to
remit money to Tucker, for the defendant He believed the
defence hi h.: set up woull be that the defendant had no deeding"
at all with Tucker, but that Hort°n let him the IWO
at a week, and therefore that he should not have been
trusted in his 'come. -Defendant now said the man Tucker
sas not in his employ, nor had he ever been sanctioned to
contra.' dobte in his name.- ,Mr. Oundry said he allowed HIM
to travel with his name on the vane, and it was painted in large
letters ini them, "4)11. of Burton's branch establishmenta "
Mr. E. thbonidand the pneent claim was for loaf sugar, moist
ou,or, currants. die., which Tucker had bought of him for the
he said of "giving the people of Beaminster a
treat" The goofs were sold by Tucker at a lower price than
be "-as o for them ; for instance, what Tucker gave Id. for he
would sell for lid , so that no pretit was attached to the salo—
n was done to attract customers. His Honour mid it wsa a
most disgraceful way of doing business-if they hail the goods,
and never pakl for them, of course they got a large lomat out
of then. Plaintiff continued that he had made Ina cheques in
Tuckers name which hal been forwarded to Burton, three of
which he now produced --Defendant maid Tucker had never
been ill his employ. He let him the van at 1 Os. a week, and
sold him goods, which he paid for, by sending chequea—le
'newer to iii. Honour, defendant said If the hirers of the van
did not sell their goods they had to keep them. Ile had not
brought hid hooka to show how he traded.- Mr. Cundry mid
if ilidemlatit hal nothing to do with the neon, he had no right
I'. allow than to travel- with vans bearing" Burton's Branch
E.tablitihment." Mr. °dont said previous to Tucker coining
arm the town plaannls had been issued annoureing that
" Burton is
could reem 1111 l end Cal that Tucker be aumnioned as • VI itlll3llll,
eed then they Elkin get at the right' of the GOO It Was quite
certain going 00 like Doh was a kery disgraceful way of dieng
biroluses. If Ilurton had no connection with Tucker why had
he not topped hint from travelling with the van, after the
eeion l Way issued, which was on the eith June—ye
ounilry and there were many men travelling about the county
with vans hearing Burton's name, and this was how tradee-
men were imposed lA. lii, Honour wild he hoped the
reporters pnaient would make the cane public, that It might
act al a caution. Ile should allow., the ease till
nest court day, for the attendance of Tucker. - Defen-
dant : Shall I hake to attend - His Honour : You can
please youneell whether you tome or nul—Ddentlant : I shall
Is' in Pranue at the time. --Ills honour: If you are not here,
you must take the eoleleqUelletal. -Defendant : I have a name
and a character I ass stmunimol here for £4 odd: I am
determined to char my name—lli, honour: By your oern
thinking you are employing a man who has obtained goods in
your name, and now you loth deny your responsibility. —The
case WY .1.14,11111LN1 till the October court, on the application of
Mr. Oundry, as it wool I ins mere convenient for all partics.—De-
fondant, If I acme then, I shall apply (manta—His Honour :
And you won't g& thou.

DIRrrTED COS-TRACT.

Mt Joan Turner, woodsman, Bridport, V. &trill Sanwa ;is,
Eyre. Claim gl lie 9., for barley meal, MUS, ex.—Defendant
NMI he had never had the thing.. The last he mer loci was
In May, 1,72. In fart, defendant maid. Mr. Turner had owned
to him that there were no many of the hates of liamways hs
did not know who to charge things to. —Mr. Turner and one of
his emu lroved supplying the articles In question.—llls
honour asid there was not the least doubt in his mind that
defendont owed the motley. The question was, how iambi he
pay?—Plaintiff nalt. he had no desire to be hard with the defen-
dant : he believed he was earning about about lea per week.
Ili. Ifonour mole an order for ls. In a fortnight, and It a
mouth afterward..

Till DRINK MAIN.
ittoPeri Bugler r. Ir ilboot Grersitoom —Mann AA 12w ed.
for beer, tobacco, ke.- -PlainUff said he wee. wheelwright and
mitts by trade ; his wife kept a little shop, and looked aee
the beer-house. Ile did not know much about the Mbar, Mit
believed most a the beer was had for men who defendant
employed on the road. Defendant told him some little time
ago, that if lie would make It right with the " mimes" he
would pay him.-- Defendant "You ismer knew Me take
drink on the road. I never didn't. I defy it." -Mrs. Bugler
said defendant I .wed the money kw hoer and tobacco; some of
the beer was drunk in the house, but nos unieh of It ;
'Mould think about fas. worth - Defendant 'And that was of
a numlay morning, I supper.; all right, I know. Ain't ye
got the beer down your husband hrought me in a rush basket
when I mes 1i,4 house clone Ly Au to lissocy, I never used.
bit In my Iktgler mid the dclembodluel been In ber
hoeo when he was drunk; he had had drink in the town
bef.in., lie Cat. there. -His Honour said the law was, and It
was a very good law—that beer consumed on the premises
could not he recovered for. Plaintiff had not shown that It was
not consumed oil the premises; and would, therefore, be

JI'DOMINT 51UMO%ont.
Albert Corti., v. George Bocklaml.- -Plaintiff said this case
was adjourned from last court, when defendant's mother
appeared, and promised to pm Is the following day, but she
had not done so. —Defendant did not now appear—Hl.
Honour mid the man had already paid 76. of the debt, and
when • man seemed willing to pay, he did not like to be Itanl
upon him. However, if In. was not pail in a fortnight, be
would have to go to gaol for I 4 days.
rke saw v. William Wakely.—Plaintlf laid the money
Ye. 3,1 hal been owing for yearn; defendant had been meat tO
gaol for • *fanner debt, but had not pad it —The order wee
suspended for a fortnight; If not ecompfind with, defendant
would be sent to prison for 40 days
G•orle Guppy, miller, ljeovii, s. Jam. Legg. labourer,
Ikatuliater —lletuidant said he could not pay anything now;
ke casual 106. • week ; he hail three children ; hi. wife had
lately been confined, and he had had Wanes in the house.
He was laying Is. a month at the priaent time for other debts.
--lie wee ordered to pay 2.. a nioldith.
The 50..., v. cs,j, Lrg.r, Beaminster. —The wife of
defendant appeared, and mid her husband was labourer, she
was paying other orders; but was tilling to lay Is. tkl. a
month till the other accounts were paid, and then she would
pay Is. • month. —His Honour consented to the arrangement,
on tandition that she kept up her payments—Mr. Guppy said
he had to umlc from land, thieli was very expensive, and
now had to pay the orate, Is. - His Honour told him he lad
allot-of poor people to get into debt, sod must g kle, ly the
COIIV.IIIIIIIICCII.