The Express.
London, England, 1855-06-08 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 8, 1855.

EA we wit justified is so dealing with the cargo
rbinl wood Mild have been repaired, of eight
to have rimilittptti it in other vessels for the plaintiffs'
benefit. The plaintiff also complained that alter the
coffee wee so improperly unaltippedl the aptain
had neglected it, or it would have brought a highecr pries
than eves it had done. At the trial the jury gave a verdict
for the plaintiffs for 4,768 i , and • rule was subsequently oit.
tamed, on the gemmed' of misdirsetion of the learned Chief
Bosom who tried the mess, and (nether that the damages had
been misealculeted by the lure.
The Court, in delivering their judgment, said they were
unanimously of opinion that the direction of the I d
judge was unexceptionable. The sale of the coffee at Val-
parallel wee clearly a breach of contract, as the act of the
captain of the vessel must be taken to be the ac of the de-
fendants. It was left to the jury to say whether the sale of
the coffee was effected.with the privity of the owners. The
jury bad found that the defendants were privy to the sot of
their captain, and the court fully concurred In that view.
The next question was, was the coffee necessarily gold for
the purpose of repairing the ship? They thought not; it
was the duty of the captain to have communicated with the
Parties before he took upon himself to dispose of the cargo.
He ought, when be found his vessel in a leaky condition and
not seaworthy, to have unshipped the coffee and ware-
bonged it at Valparaiso until he could have communicated
with the owners, bat if be took upon himself to deal with the
cargo, as he did, the jury were warranted in finding
as they had done, that the defendants were guilty of negli-
ence, and had improperly conducted themselves. The
defendants throughout were acting entirely with a view to
their own interests, and without any regard to the interest
of the plaintiffs, and by so doing they had rendered them-
selves liable, and were bound to pay a large amount of
damages. With regard to the damages being erroneously
calculated by the jury, they were of opinion, taking into
consideration the time which bad elapsed between the injury
which the plaiatiffs bad sustained and the period of redress,
that the jury bad arrived at a proper conclusion, end that
the damages were in no respects beyond what they ought to
have been. Under these circumstances, they were clearly
of opinion that the verdict of the jury ought not to be dis•
turbid, and that the rule ought to be discharged.
Rule discharged accordingly.

The govern eat interfered,' eat *Sr men eompellei 19'
depart. Beth of them told me that they bad beta =de'
beekrupts. They said they left Neefehatel on account of '
their bens I. disorder, and they said they would return
soon, as they reputed their frit nde in England would ar-
range the matter. They said they eipmeted to be arrested
for sot surreaderieg to the Court of Bankruptcy. Its a
MOTS inalletOf to the p 44444 Sad II UMW. sad Med
to give the rebesen lemmas. I received • letter from Da-
vidson after he kit. This is the letter; I suppose it is
Davidson's handwriting.
Mr. Walker, formerly clerk to the prisoners, proved that
the letter was in the haodwnting of Davidson.
The letter, of which the following is a copy, was then
road:
" Deer Sir,—This morning we received your letter of the
26th inst. It laid in the Post-oMur two days. First, let us
renew our thanks to you for the past, and for the interest you
take in as. Any letters that may have arrived for us please
forward to the same address as toe last, but any that may
arrive afterwards return them to Ergland. Newspapers,
of coons, you will keep. The luggage will remain at
Neufchatel. 83 far, you see, we are safe, having arrived
here after • favourable passage across the Alps. One of our
filet steps was to take legal advice, and we have a very
strong opinion that the Sardinian government will not give
us up. So far Providence has favoured us, and we trust to
you to keep secret where we are. Take • note of any ex-
penses you may incur, and ask Mr. Pbilllpaon how much
we amts his debt.—Believe me to remain, dear sir, yours
most sincerely, D."
Mr. Henry Hoffman said—l am a merchant, carrying on
basica@ at 7, Old Broad-street, City. I had dealings with
the prisoners before their bankruptcy. The lest advance I
made toners was on the Ist of May, 1854. They deposited
with me five cases of plaids and 48 rolls of sheet lead. On
the 11th of April, 1354, 1 made as advance to them of
1,8501. on 14 cases of bobinettes. The advance was made
on the account of our correspondent, but I gave them the
cheque for the money, and these goods went away to Cal-
cutta. I made another advance on the same day. On the
15th of April I advanced 1,2001. on 37 cues of 'Turkey red
goods. They did not give me invoices at the same time. I
have had an invoice, and I believe by the mark that the
goods referred to in it are the same I have spoken of. Oa
the 11th of April we advanced 8601. upon 60 cuts of
lags that were sent to Calcutta. I also advanced 5621. upon
48 rolls of sheet lead ; and on the 28th of March, 2601. for
some prints. On the 16th of July, 1863, I lett town; my
clerk had • general authotity to advance money to the pri-
soners, but I gave him no particular instructions to do so in
my absence. I produce some warrants that I received from
my clerk when I came bask to town, and I spoke to the pri-
soners about them. I said it was sot my business to advance
money upon warrant+, and Gordon said he would take them
up shortly. They have not been taken up, and they turn
out to be fictitious warrants.
Mr. John Frederick Fiegin said—l am clerk to the last
witness. I recollect on the 17th July, 1863, Gordon came
to me and said Mr. Hoffman had told hiss that if he wanted
money on that day be might come to me with warrants, and
that I was to gin it to him. I said if that was the came I
was prepared to do so, on the condition that he would
return it in eight days. It was not the custom of our house
to advance upon warrants. I advanced upon these 2,4001.
I should not have advanced the money of my own accord;
and did soupon the representation of Gordon that my
muter desired it. The warrants produced by Mr. Hoffman
are the same that were deposited with me. I did not make
inquiries upon these personally. Our custom-house agent
made the inquiries.
Mr. Potter Stewart, of the firm of Ogelby, Galander, and
Co., said, lam • merchant, of Liverpool. Early in Jose,
1854, I saw Gordon in London. Re made application to
me for advances, and I made them to him to the ~teat el
1.5(01. The date of that advisee was the 19th of June,
.664. I saw the invoices of the goods upon which I made
ne advances. I believe those produced are the came I saw.
I believe so from the marks and the amounts. 1 sent the
copies of the invoices to Calcutta. I beiieve that the goods
referred to are the same as those upon which I advance.

the money.
The *Tint nee of .c,ei al merchants of whom the Waltrip te
had ;obtained goods to various amounts, wee next taken,
and the prisoners were remanded.

IRELAND.