The Express.
London, England, 1848-08-25 00:00:00

Latu Intelligente.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. lbramiesioaer Pane.
A BAD CA6ll.—Samuel Hickman, innkeeper, of West
Railsham, came up for his last examination; the meeting
was also an adj.nuned one for the choice of assignees. The
amount of debts was about 4001. ; aunts, n+/.—The COM-
missioner said this was one of the wont eases that had ever
come before him. After maicg away with about 3001.
worth ot property—inof
faet all that he possessed, the bank.
P ro
rupt had come to claim the protection of this court, not
haring a shilling of was to give up to his creditors. Renee
there had been no trade assignee chosen at the usual stage of
the proceedings, there btine no debts or other property to
realise. He Mundd adjourn the examinations no die, the
bankrupt not beiog alowed to coma up again before the lst
of July next; protection in the meantime to be withheld.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Livxaroot, Are. 24.
Nisi Prues.—Befere Mr. Justice Erle.
RIGHT OF LIEN NY COMMISSION AGENTS.—CASSY
AND ANOTHER V. BLAIK AND ANOTHER.—SPECIAL
JURY.—The declaration stated that the plaintiffs were
possessed of 250 pieces of calico cloth, which the defendants
had converted to their use ; to which the defendants pleaded
—first, tnat they were not guilty, and next, that the goods
were not the goods of the plaintiffs.
Mr. Martin stated the cue. The plaintiffs, Messrs. James
and George Casey, roe m
at Manchester, and the
defendants, Messrs Blair and Sumner, are bleachers in the
neighbourhood of that town, find the action had been
brought to recover the value of 250 rime of colic, cloth
detained by the defendants from the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs
were in the habit of buying Manchester goods to a very con-
siderable extent through commissien agents. In connexion with
the case RSA the firm of Messrs. Birts, Watson, and Co.,
commission agent', carrying on business in the neighbour-
hood of Manchester to a considerable extent. The practice
at Manchester was to buy goods in the grey; these goods
were then sent to the per-on gating as agent or as principal
in the transaction; a bleacher was then employed, whose
cart conveyed the goods to the place where they were to
be bleached, and in a few days afterwards the bleacher
called at the place where the goods were taken from and
gave directions as to what was to be done. In this case the
goods forming the ground of 'nation were part of a quantity
of goods bought from Meters. W. and W. Sterling, the
manufacturers, in the month of September of last year.
The goods were sent, in the ordinary way, to Messrs. Bina,
Watson, and Co., and thence to the bleach works of the de-
fendants, who received directions from the plaintiffs
as to the bleaching. Upon the 21st of September
Messrs. Birts, Watson, and Co., stopped payment,
at which time they were indebted to Messrs. Blair and Sum-
ner in the amount of 1,9001. Mr. Casey made a claim for
the goods, and offered to pay for the expense incurred in
bleaching,but the defendants refused to give them up. alleging
that they would bold them for the debt due from Birts, Wat-
son, and Co., and the question to be decided now, was who.
ther or not the defendants acre legally justified in detaining
the goods under these circumstances, or whether they were
baud to give them up upon the expense of bleaching being
. The question (Mr. Martin observed) was one at
egmellierable importance, inasmuch as it affected a large nuns-
heed Weathers at Manchester and the neighbourhood, there
=loft ammegat them an ameiciation, or combination, to try
this mention, by which, and that very properly, these parties
might be looked upon as the real defendants in the
case. It would be said, on the other side, h
atta the
bleachers were in the habit of giving at the heads t
bills notices, which, in effect, were similar to the notices
given by the common carriers previously to the passing of the
act of parliament affecting their business, and which notions
set forth the terms upon which- they would do business,
which terms, in the, present cue, were, that the bleacher,
were to have a general lien upon all goods sent to them for
the purpose of -being bleached ; but he (Mr. Martin) appro.
banded that these notices could only be made available by
both parties consenting to be bound by the terms set forth ;
and tee jury ought to be satisfied with evidence to draw the
inference that these terms were acceded to, otherwise, as in
the present ti &suction, it would be a pledging of A. B.'s
goods to pay C. D.'s debts, which it was perfectly clear they
had no right to do.
Several witnesses were called to establish the case as
opened by Mr. Martin.
Mr. Baines addressed the jury, at considerable length, for
the defendants. The question at issue, he , was, as had
been stated by Mr. Martin, whether the defendants were
eutitled to detain rat
goods for a general balance as against
Sifts, Watson, and Co. There was no doubt a contract
might be so moulded es to give a general lien or Anemia* ;
but the question was what really was the contract upon which
these goods were received, and known by the plaintiffs to
have been received. lie would undertake to satisfy the jury
that the plaintiffs well knew the terms upon which the de-
fendants dealt —the only terms upon which they dealt, or
would deal—and with a full knowledge of these terms they
permitted the goods to go into their hands. In whatever way
the question might go, es regarded that court, it would after-
wards be discussed in the court above, as it was one of the
meet important commercial points ever brought before
a jury. The facts were, Birts and Co. acted largely as
commission agents, but there were times when they acted as
principals, end all the goods went in the names of Birts and
Co. and Blair, Sumner, and Co. There were no other names
used, and this was the usual mode of doing business between
the two houses. That being so, and Birts, Watson, and Co.
having failed, the defendant) claimed to retain those goods
which came in their name by virtue of a reamed lien. The
learned counsel referred to several cases where it had been
held that a lien had been maintained under similar circum-
stances, and stated that in all clues where goods were re-
ceived the defendants issued a note, stating that the goods
so received were liable to detention ler the general
balance of accounts. The terms of such notices were '
understood by the trade and acted upon. The defendants
had dealt with the plaintiffs in the ordinary course of busi-
ness, and the plaintiffs had no right to object to the course
which had been pursued in reference to them.
Several witnesses were then called for the defence, whose
evEence went principally to show the course of dealing with
bleachers,—that the name of the principal was
closed to the bleacher, and that notices, similar to those re-
ferred to by the learned counsel foe the defendants, as to
the lien, were commonly used in the trade. In croes-ex-
amination, however, it was elicited that in only one or two
instances had the stipulations, as to the lien, been acted

upon.
Mr. Martin replied, and observed that the idea of the de-
fendants being allowed to pledge the goods of the plaintiffs
for the debt of a third party was so monstrously absurd
that it could not for a moment be entertained.
His Lordship said the principle in law was, that one man
could not hold the goods of another for the purpose of satis-
fying the debt of a third person; and he could see no ground
upon which it could be contended, unless the jury should be
of opinion that the plaintiff, gave authority to that effect,
that the defendants had a right to hold the goods for a debt
due from Birts and Co. The question nad be n
e stated to be
one of the greatest importance to the bleachers in Manches-
ter and neighbourhood, and he had for this reason left it to
the jury to decide; but if the question had to be left to him
individually to decide, be bad a clear opinion upon the
matter, end would direct the jury to find for the plaintiff',
with leave to the learned counsel on the other side, if need
might be, to move in the natter.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for 1141.115. Bd.,
the invoice value of the goods.
Mr. Knowles said there were two other cues on the paper
which would most likely be regulated by the decision given
in the present one, and in which his friend, Mr. Martin,
appeared on the opposite side to the one for which he (Mr.
Martin) bad been arguing in the case decided. (Laughter.)
The Judge : I don't ever remember the question of custom
having been 'et up, and to have failed so signally.
Cease Cot:v.—Before Mr. Justice CreSeirell.
ALLEOED PIEECY ALND REVOLT.—Five mariners, J.
Farrell, 'l. Coates, J. Rigby, J. Bain, and R. GoodcAild,
were indicted for baring, on the high eels, piratically and
feloniously revolted on board the barque Cora, of
Liverpool, the property of Mesas. Harrison and Rogerson.
Farrell was chief mate of the venial in question, which