The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-04-27 00:00:00

Xocat an gistrict °gals.

COUNTY COURT.

Lesser v. Pearson.—At the County Court, on
Wednesday, before Mr. Loxdale Warren, Deputy
Judge, this was an action brought by Selina
Lesser, of Birmingham (late of Brierley Hill),
against Allen Pearson, pork butcher, to recover
the sum of £3B, the value of a bill, £3 for
wrongful conversion of same, and £5 placed as
security in the hands of defendant; total, £46.
Mr. Homfray appeared for plaintiff, and Mr.
Elcock for the defendant.

Mr. Hoinfray briefly detailed the facts of the
case in his opening speech, the particulars of
which will be found below.

Plaintiff said she formerly lived at Brierley
Hill, with her brother Jacob, who was taken to
prison, and she was left in charge of the shop.
The bill of exchange in question she obtained
from Philip Hymn, of London, and gave £3B
for it. As soon as her brother was taken into
custody a large quantity of stock was placed in
the hands of defendant, and as she was desirous
of carrying on the business, purchased some
goods of defendant. She gave her sister £5 to
pay defendant for some boots bought, and the
defendant sent the receipt produced. Have had
no part of the proceeds of the bill of ex-
change.
Cross-examined: I got no per year as wages
from my brother, Jacob, and had money besides.
My brother owed me nothing when he was taken
prisoner. He had paid me £5 two or three
weeks previous. I have beard that my brother
Nathan was indebted to the defendant .ktiO. I
handed the bill to the defendant in March 1871,
It would not be at the end of January, or the
beginning of February. I got the bill from
Philip Hymn, of London, and gave him £3B for
it in cash.

At this stage. his Honour adjonrned the case
until Thursday morning, when witness was again
cross-examined by Mr. Elcock.
Witness: I paid the money three days after
my brother left home. The money was in silver
and gold.
Mr. Homfray here objected to the mode of
cross-examination, as it did not effect the case.
. . _

Mr. Elcock contended that he had a right to
put the questions to test the credibility of the
witness.

Cross-examination continued. I paid the
money to Hymn's son. My brother, Jacob, sent
the bill to Mr. Hyam, in London, ou Nathan
Lesser's account. Nathan drew the bill. Smart
accepted it. There were transactions between
Smart and Nathan Lesser. The bill was passed
to Jacob, who paid the money to Nathan. Jacob
having got the bill offered it to Ilyam for goods
he had of him, but Hyam refused to have it, and
I paid the money and handed it over to defend.
ant. Jacob was not a creditor at the time of
Nathan's bankruptcy. Hymn is a merchant in
London. Hymn s son was not engaged in our
shop, but I saw that Hymn did not want the bill,
and I paid the money. My brother being from
hod.e at the time I went to see him, and he gave
me authority to discharge all claims that may
arise, and, acting under that authority, paid the
bill on behalf of my brother. I was in the shop
selling goods after he was taken to prison. The ,
bill was paid with part of my own money, and
part taken in the shop. Will swear I paid a few
pounds out of my own pocket, and have since
been paid the money I advanced for my brother
Jacob. Mr. Pearson asked rue to give him the
bill, and he would bail my brother Jacob out. I
refused to give hint the bill, and he offered to pay
it into the bank for me. There were nearly two
hundred pounds' worth of bills. During the
trial I advanced my brother Jacob nearly £lOO,
as it was stated that Dr. Kenealy would require
£lOO to defend him. I went to the defendant
silent the bill, who said it was dishonoured, and
that there was as 6il expenses due on it. I after
went to Mr. Smart about the hill, and afterwards
instructed Mr. liinufray to bring this action.
Defendant did promise to become bail fur my
brother, but after he had got the bill and about
.1:110 worth of goods, he refused, matins' that
1118 father objected to his becommA bail'. Ile
also reinsed to give tip the bill and goods, stat-
ing that he should stick to them, as 1”y brother
Nathdu owed hint some toodey. The £1 I went
1.1.1 the. defendant abdut was for some goods
bought of Mr. Arthur Pearson. My sislyir went
to purchase the goods, and dolendmit refused to
send them. Toe £5 ass not paid to the defend-
ant, aa a consideration for exchanging a box of
common goods fur sortie of a superior quality.
Julia Lesser said : At time time of my brother
Jacob's arrest I was staying at his itioDd with
my sister. Was present when defendant told
my sister that he would place the bill in the bank
fur her. I went to Arthur Pearson's shop to
purchase some goods for my sister to open a
shop, arid paid for the goods. I also selected
other goods to the amount of .£5 as Bd. I told
Olin I would send the money down. He re-
marked that as it was a wet morning I need not
send the money, but could pay it to his brother
Allen. I afterwards paid the money to Allen
Pearson the same day, and he took off the odd
money, and gave me the receipt produced, and
wrapped it up. Did not open it at the time, but
after I took it borne my sister said " What is tht
meaning of the receipt on account ?" and took
it to him and asked if lily sister owed hint any-
thing. Defendant said no she did not ; neither
did Jacob, but that he should stick to the £5.
I afterwards went to to Arthur's to see why he
had not sent the goods. He said he should stick
to the goods, as ruy brother Nathan owed him
money. Defendant had £l5O worth of goods of
my brother, which have since been recovered.
Cross-examined: Defendant did say he should
stick to the bill, and I told my sister so, who
said she owed defendant no bill, and lie had no
right to keep it.

-Jacob Lesser, formerly of Brierlev Hill, said
that when he was taken into custody he left with
ins sister 4:200 worth of ,bills. Mr. Wilcox
(clerk to Mr. Ululow) and the defendant, brought
the bills to him at Dudley, and he endorsed
them. Defendant offered to become bail for him
when in custody, but afterwards refused. Was
in the habit of buying raw goods from Mr.
Smart and had bill transactions with his (wit-
ness's) brother, who handed the bills to witness,
and he paid Smart the money. One of the bilk
vas io witness's possession at the time of his
.rrest, and it was sent to Hyena's, in London, on
wcount of money witness owed him. At the
)resent time it was his sister's bill, as she found
the money for his defence, which was a very ex-
pensive thing. Defendant had a large quantity
proper ) innougiug to WitIICS4 la his posses-
sion. He refused to give it npn stating that the
AlullCAS'd brother Nathan owed him money. Wit-
ness had brought an action against the defendant
and his brother in London, and defendant was
ordered to pay £lOO.
. _ _

Cross-examined: I was out of prison in May,
and in about three days after went to defend-
ant's house, and asked Wm what right he hid to
go and take .£1.50 worth of goods out of my
house. Defendant said in consequence of Nathan
owing him money ha should stick to the goods.
Did not owe the defendant any money at the
time. I then told him he had a bill of my sister.
Defendant said he should stick to that. The
bill was originally my property, and I paid for
it. My sister did find money for my defence,
and I hare relinquished my claim 'yen the bill.
This being the case for the plaintiff,
, Mr. Eleock addressed the bench for the de-
fence. and contended that the bill was not in the
possession of defendant, but in the hands of his

ho kid a bec upon it of sowe six
pouuds for costs, and that they should never
have heard anything about the action if defend.