The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1859-09-27 00:00:00

Somersttobirt.

YEOVIL COVNTT Col:RT.—The usual monthly sittiug
of this court wax held before W. Saunders, Dui., derity
judge, on Saturday last.
Hurlstone r. Abbott.—This plaint was to recover the
sum of 10s. 64., for five weeks' rent. The plaintiff is
rent collector at Yeovil, and sued the defendant for the
above amount, and 4s. 3d. for the summons. It ap-
peared that a notice to appear at the lad court had
been served upon the defendant, which notice was
abandoned by the plaintiff, who failed to appear. His
Honour said that as he had first abandoned the sum•
mons and taken out another he could not grant him the
costs, but would give a verdict for the amount claimed
aa rent, which was to he paid in a mouth.
Brown r. Osinent.—Plaintiff is a tailor and draper, of
Sherborne, and defendant was described as • farmer.
This was a plaint to recover I:2 14s. 74. for goods de-
livered. Ordemil to he immediately paid.—Same r.
JIIIIIO% Hereford, for El 12s. goods delivered. To be
paid at 4s. a month.—Kaille r. Joseph Hamblin, for
1:.1.6.1. To he paid in • month.—Saine r. Hill, for
El his. sd. Order made for 2s, a mouth for:; months ;
6s. a month efterwards.—Same r. Greatwood,
balance of an account for tailoring. Order made for ria.
• inonth.—Same r. Poole. —To recover £4 ss. 41 for
drapery goods. Defendant acknowledged the debt, but
said she had no means of paying it at the time she
ordered the goods. His Honour: What ultimate
means did you expect to have to pay it? Defendant :
I wan in hopes of putting come one else in the court for
E3O. Mr. Fear (who appeared for plaintiff): Did you
not say you had some private means Defendant: I
have not a shilling. I obtained the wearing apparel to
go and see • widowed aunt, whom I expected would
give /220 to assist me, and then I could have paid Mr.
Brown. Mr. Fear said the debt was clearly contracted
by fraud.—His Honour (to defendant): You have con-
tracted this debt, as it is said, by fraud. It ic a very
doubtful affair altogether, especially if you had no
means of paying it at the time, nor any reasonable
expectations. Defendant : But I hod reasonable
expectations ; for I thought of receiving 1230. His
Honour: Well, you must pay 10s. a month. Defendant
again asserted that she had not a shilling in the world
to pay it witli.—Same r. Agnes Davey.—The defen-
dant is sister to the above defendant, and 126 3a. Id.
was sought to be obtained front her under similar cir-
cumstances. Ordered to pay lOs, a month.
George Edwards r. George Stokes.—Supported by Mr.
Fear.—Plaintiff is a draper of Yeovil; and defendant is
the rate and tax collector. The plaint was for £2 ha.
for drapery goods. The defendant (who was not present)
was represented to be in good circumstance., an order
was therefore made for immediate payment. At a sub-
sequent period of the sitting, Mr. Stokes appeared, and
said that he had paid El 2s. Id. for Mr. Dlwards in the
shape of taxes, lie called at the shop a few days ago,
and saw his brother, Mr. Edward &tweeds, with whom
he offered to settle: be, however, Wll4 just going to Mel'
bury, but said he would see it put right.—His Honour
said lie would suspend the judgment for two months,
which would give him an opportunity of coining to an
arrangement; or if there was any difficulty the defend-
ant could $ll4 at the next court. Mr. Stokes said that
the plaintiff had been ill, and, he believed, was unaware
of the taxes having been paid to him, but his brother,
ought to have infonned him of his calling.—Same r.
Chubb.—This was a plant to recover 124 10s. 7d. for
goods delivered at various times. El 10s. was paid into
court, and an order made for payment of the remainder
by monthly instalments of 10s.--Senie r. Clothier.—
To recover 60 lb. Isl. Mr. Itichanls, for the defendant
*aid that 122 had been paid 110%11, and lie hal offered to
pay the remainder in monthly instalments of ss. Order
for that amount granted.
Stewart r. Shiner.—Plaintiff is a grocer, Ice., of Slier'
borne, and sought to recover 10s. balance of an account.
Order made for 31. a_month.

Corry r. Watts.—Judginent sununone.—The plaintiff
is forenian to Mr. Ensor, glove manufacturer, 'borne,
Port, and the defendant is a glover, of Yeovil. It ap-
peared that an order had been made by the Court econo

time back, for payment of 2s. a month, in liquidation of
a claim for money lent. Defendant had not paid a single
instalment in pursuance of this order. He said he had
been very unfortunate and not able to comply with the
order of the Court. He now offered to pay tie, a month.
—Plaintiff: What security have I. your Honour, that lie
will pay the money ?—His Honour said he must pay tie.
by the end of the month, or stand committed in,
default, for ten days; he must also pay ss. a month
afterwards.

Sugar. Gale.—This was also a judgment anramons
for El S. Id., for goods delivered by the plaintiff, who is
a tailor. Defendant (who did not appear) was de-
scribed as • farmer's sou, and was ordered to pay 10s. a
month.

William Harding r. Pickford and f'o.— Mr. Richards
for the plaintiff, who is an auctioneer residing at l)or-
cliester ; and Mr. Sidney Watts for the defendants.
This was an action to recover £3104. for damages and loss
of a quantity of Parian, China, and Bohemian vases,
&c., through the mismanagement or carelessness of the
Company's men, whilst conveying the same from the
Choughs Hotel, Yeovil, to the Pen Mill railway sta-
tion. It appeared that there had been a two days' sale
of thin description of goods at the largo room of the
Choughs Hotel. Yeovil; and it was alleged on the part
of the plaintiff that the goods had been properly packed;
that when they arrived at Dorchester, one side of a Case
MILS burnt open as if by • fall, and that some of the
article* inside were broken.—Nathaniel Pike, servant
to the plaintiff, deposed that on the bul of July lie
packed a quantity of property consisting of China orna-
ments, pictures, &c., in a wooden case. They were
packed very carefully, and nothing was broken. The
case was in a sound condition, and adapted for packing
that description of goods in. He also packed some
articles in another case, and in two crates, but none of
these were damaged or broken. When the cares and
crates arrived at Dorchester, lie found one of tho sides
was broken, and he saw some of the articles were broken
inside. Cross•examined :I put in a sufficient quiuitity
of hay and straw to pack then with, and I rolled up the
articles in paper. Didn't break any of them in packing. '
Was sober when I packed them.—By his Honor : I put
the box on the pavement outside the Choughs yard, and
left instructions for the delivery company to take then
up. The wood of the cases was about of an inch
thick, and ths y were properly nailed and faatenel.

. . .... .—......
Th;nnas Stone, as,iistant waiter at the Chimp, de-
posed that he assisted Pike in packing ; and afterwards
in mewling the goods fmni the yard to the pavement
outside. Whilst removing them, he beard the goods
inside " shackel" a bit. He had read • letter from Mr.
Harding, and had sent a reply, stating that a vase was
broken in packing. Didn't f.ec any of the vases broken.
Pike appeared to have been drinking.
Edward Tilley, foreman porter at I'm Mill, deposed to
receiving two cases and two crates on the 4th or July,
to be consigned to Dorchester. Observed that the crates
and cases were badly packed, and made a memorandum
in his book to that effect. Told James Hatcher (the
carrier) that they were very bad crates, and not fit to
carry .meli goods in.—By the Judge : If the crate. or
en hail been broken at the sides I should not have
sent them by the railway. Thu crates were composed
of strips of wood, there being an interval of eight or
ten inches between each strip.
Mr. William Harding, the plaintiff, deposed that the
cases he received were solid wood, and not strips.
Mr. S. Watts said his clients did not dispute that the
goods 113,1 been damaged. He should call a witness to
prove that she saw a vase broken, and that she 3.111'
Pike put the broken piece into the crate. It was obvious
therefore, that he told his master the goods were pro-
perly packed to screen himself from the imputation of
having broken the articles. Ills nuister had, in conse-
quence, very innocently brought the present action
against Pickford and Co.
. .

Mr. Richards having consented to a non-suit, the
plaintiff was non-suited accordingly.
Davey r Squires.—This was to recover £2 13s. ro.d.
for labour performed fur the defendant, who is • railway
contractor. The Woe was adjourned till next court clay
on account of the absence of a material witness.
Harris v Culliford.—This was an action in which tho
plaintiff claimed the ownership of sonic goods that had
been skied under an execution by the defendant. Mr.
8!a•le appeared for the claimant, and Mr. Fear fot the
defendant. In opening the case Mr. Slade said this was
what was called at, interpleader case, and in order to
show the jury why it was brought before them, he
would state the circumstances connected with it. Mr.
Culliford, the defendant in this GLAC, had recently ob-
tained a verdict as execution creditor against Mr. Slum-
son, an insolvent, residing at Northover, llcliester, and
in accordance with that verdict he had issued execution,
fillti seized the goods which were the subject of this
inquiry. Although they were supposed at that time to
be Mr. Simpson's goods, they were in fact (as he should
presently show) only in Mr. Simpson's possession as
tenant ; for they belonged to Mr. llarris, of Yeovil. It
often happened that when a man got into pecuniary
difficulties, fraudulent means and devices were resorted
to to retajia possession of his gods. Hail this been one
of those canes he (Mr. Slade) would not have appeared
before them that day ; but lie should clearly
show them that this case was perfectly free from
any imputations of this character. Dr. Penkivil, of
Yeovil, advanced to Mr. Simpson, in 1653, the sum of
ram, which was secured bya mortgage of Mn. Shupson's
interest under the will of a Mrs. Shoreland. Dr. Yenki-
vil becoming dissatisfied with this security, a further
security was given, and Mr. Simpson executed a bill of
sale of the goods, which was dated December 12th, 1557.
That bill of iiale empowered him (Dr. P.) to sell the goods
of Mr. Simpson at any time upon giving him thnie days'
notice of his intention. He (Mr. Slade) would show them
that that document was immediately afterwards filed;
and that, in the early part of this year Dr. Penkivil
served Mr. Simpson with a notice of his intention to sell
. .

the goods ; that the goods were accordingly taken
semion of by Dr. Penkivill, and brought from Northover
to Mr. Harris, at Yeovil, with a view, at that time, of
selling them. The goods originally were of considerable
value—t2oo or upwards—but they had dwindled away
to n very inconsiderable amount: and in order to avoid
the trouble of an auction. Dr. Penkivil was induced to
sell then, in the bulk to Mr. Harris, who kept them
several months, thinking that Mrs. Simpson, by her ex-
pectations, would be able to re-I,uich,e than. He sub-
sequently let them to Mrs. 3inipson, at a low rent. He
(Mr. Slade) should produce the mortgage made by Mr.
and Mrs. Simpson to obtain the 1::.M0 from Dr.
; also the documents showing that the ;peels were
xtld aid afterwards let, and having tl.me this, he should
be ready to hear any defence Mott might be made u to
the claim.

For the claimant, Miss Matilda Simpson (insolvent's
daughter) was called, who proved her father's signature
to the mortgage and agreement for bill of sale. She
was cross-examined at considerable length as to the re-
moval of goods at various times from her father's house.
—Mr. John Phillips deposed to taking an inventory of
Um goods at the request of Dr. Penkivill.—Mr. Fear for
the defendant, *intended that a deed of this kind was a
fraud upon creditors, especially when it was given for
any deed which existed previously ; that no evidence
had been given of the L'Alo having been paid ; nor that
Hsrris had paid for the goods.—Mr. Harris (the Clain-
ant), who was in court, deposed to purchasing the goods,
for which he gave a note of hand, and also to letting the
articles contained in the agreement produced to Mr.
Simpson at 10s. a month.
His Honor said he thought the Jury would be satisfied
that this was a bowl jifk claim. If Mr. Harris was not
• ••1 to keep the goods it would be very dangerous
for people to buy any goods at all. The Jury immedi-
ately gave • verdict for the plaintiff.
Mr. Fear then applied that Mr. Culliford should have
the goods that were not included in the claim.—His
Honour though•that had nothing to do with the pre-
sent action; and that he could get them on application
to the Court bailiff.

Brown r. Slade for the plaintiff and
Mr. Fear for the defendant. This action arose from a
dispute as to the ownership of some apples and grapes
which grew on Mrs. Simpson's premises. The plaintiff
is the surviving trustee and executor of the will of the
late Mrs. Sherland, and the question to be determined
waii whether those growing crops were in fact the pro-
perty of Mr. Brown, in trust for Mrs. Simpum, for her
separate use, or whether they were liable to be seized as
the goods of Mr. Shupson.-31r. Fear contended that a
trustee was not • proper party to claim ; the proper
claimant was Mrs. Simpson, who was the party in the
actual possession.—His Honour thought that as the fruit
had not yet been severed, it remained invested with the
trustee, who was still the proper person to make the
claim.

Re Holt.—This insolvent came up for his last exami-
nation, and reoeived his final order of protection with-
out opposition.