The Express.
London, England, 1852-07-27 00:00:00

THB RECENT EMIGRATION ACT.

At the Liverpool Polioe-eourt, on Saturday,
Richard Boothroyd, an emigrant, claimed a payment of
IW. sad the retain of pump-money from Mr. J. S. de
Wolf, as charterer of the emigrant ship (Willie. bound for
Port Phillip, which revel had takes her departure on Sun-
day, the 18th July, instead of Monday, the 191 h, as he had
been hammed, taming him andother passengers to be left
behind.

Mr Blair, barrister, attended for the plaintiff, and Mr.
Harvey, solicitor, for the defendant.
Mr. Harvey stated, before the ame was called on, that he
had only just received his instructions and he applied for
aa adjournment to enable him to rebut the evident* which
Mr._ Blair had to offer.

Mr. Blair objected to an adjournment on the ground
that the delay would be injurious to the interests of his
client cad other pmwengen left behind, and be imposing a
farther hardship upon them. They had been left on shore
without money—their property, to the amount, he under-
stood, of about 1,0001., being on board.
Mr. Harvey, on behalf of the owners of the vessel, ex-
premed great regret t►at any of the passengers should have
been left behind, and g►ve • promise that all the property
should be taken care of and be delivered to the various
owners ea soon as they arrived out. He proposed that the
unfortunate passengers should be taken out by another
vessel on Monday, for which they should pay the usual
thine, subject to an abatement of U. each, under the
circumstances. It wu not until the previous day that he
was aware of Mr. Blair's intention to proceed under the
Emigr►tion Act ; and Mr. de Wolf wu actually not served
with the summons until that morning. They had no desire
to shrink from an inquiry ; but be applied for time to exa-
mine his witnesses.

Mr. Mansfield decided that the case mint be proceeded
with, and it was mutually arranged to take it at 1 o'clock.
Some time after the hour appointed the ease was called
on, when Mr. Blair proceeded to state the facts to the
court. Haviag drawn attention to the clause in the act
under which he was seeking for compensation, ho said he
should prove that the emigrant ship Willie was the property
of Mr. Claus, of Kirlulale ; that she had been chartered b
Mr. de Wolf for a voyage to Port Phillip; that the plaintiff
and other passengers were repeatedly told by the captain
and the first and second mates that the 'hip would not sail
until Monday, the 19th of July, sad that they might make
themselves comfortable on shore on Sunday night, as a
steam-tug would be in waiting at the Prince's Pier to take
them on board on Monday morning; that the same state-
' went was told to other parties; that the plaintiff and others
consequently came on shore on Sunday ; that she was sd-
vertised in On newspaper to sail on the 19th ; that, on Sun-
day night, on going down to the landing-stage, they found
she had sailed, taking with her their luggage and money ;
and that, on applying to Mr. Walthew, the passenger-agent,he told them that be could not help them being left behind,
and declined to use exertions in their behalf, as it was their
own fault. If he proved these facts he thought he should
be entitled to the claim of 101. and the return of the passage-
money. Having called evidence in support of the statements,
he gave way to
Mr. Harvey, who adduced witnesses to show that it was
always understood that the time for the Ottillia's sailing
would be Sunday ; that Lieutenant Prior, the second govern-
ment emigration officer, on Saturday, the 17th, had gone
on board, and cautioned the passengers not to leave the ship
on any account, as she would be sure to sail on Sunday ;
that notice, were stuck up is, prominent places in the vessel,
stating that the passengers should stay on board on Friday
night, that rations would be given to them on Saturday,
and that she would sail on Sunday; that the passengers
generally understood she would sail on Sur.day ; that every
exertion was used on Sunday to acquaint the passengers on
shore with her departure on Sunday night ; and that, on
Sunday afternoon, -Mr. de Wolf himself went en board and
announced that she would sail at seven o'clock. One point
particularly enforced by Mr. Blair, in cross-examining the
defendant's witnesses, was, that Mr. de Wolf had stated that
one rearm why the vessel was allowid to nail on Sunday
was because the bailiffs were on the look out fur one or
men of the passenger'. Before calling his witnesses Mr.
Harvey addressed the court, contending that the charterer,
Mr. de Wolf, was not responsible for any representation
made by the captain to the passengers or anybody else;
that the Passengers ought to have sought for information as
to the ship's sailing from the passenger agents, and not have
listened to every cock-aad-bull story that might he told
them ; and that, in reality, the plaintiff had misconceived
his remedy.
After the condition of the evidence on both aides, Mr.
Blair submitted that the ease had been entirely proved ;
and, havink touched upon the most prominent features, ho
left the matter in the hands of the court.
After a brief deliberation with his brother magistrate,
Mr. Smith, Mr. Mansfield, in delivering judgment, said
there was no doubt it was intended that the ship should sail
on the Monday morning, but that, for some reason or an-
other, which was irrelevant at that moment, the time had
been altered. It was proved by the witness Chalk, of the
steam-tug Zephyr, that he heard the master of the Ottillia
say, at seven o'ckek on the Saturday evening, that the tug
was to be in attendance, to take the passenger' from the
pier, at eight o'clock on Moaday morning, and the unex-
pseted visit which Mr. de Wolf paid to Mr. Claus, the
owner, on Sunday, seemed to prove clearly that the time of
the ship's sailing had been altered. There appeared not to
have bees sufficient notice given to the passengers of that
alteration. His brother magistrate and himself were of
opinion that the captain must be considered the agent of
the charterer, and that he gave ordersfor the tug to be in
readiness at the Prince's Pier at eight o'clock on Monday
morning. The decision of the bench was that the panage
money should be returned, and that the defendant 'honk'
pay 61. as oompensation.—Affiion.