The Express.
London, England, 1860-12-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
(TH.113 DAY.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Sittings at Nw Prins 4 Westminster.—(Before Lorl
Chief Baron Pollack and a Special Jury.)
IRWIN V. UNIV.—THE GALWAY PACLET COMPAN T.

MU farther Imuth4 d QM mm wu mmmed this

Mr. impair, Mr. Lantos, aad Mr. Mathew were counsel
for the plaintiff ; Mr. Elerjeant ghee, Mr. Berjeant Hallam-
tine, and Mr. Thompson Chitty were counsel for tho
defendant
The final witness called for the defence was

Mr. Lever. He deposed—l am member of parliament fur
Galway, and carry on Wainer in London and Manchester.
Witness denied the engagement with the plain.
tiff, and said be pressed hi• service• upon him
(the defendant). The defendant proceeded to say—
My main object was to get • contract to carry the mail..
I went to Dr. Berwick with the plaintiff. He described Lim
as a rich East Indian mesehant. I have no recollection of
the conversation there. I did not know of the plaintin
going to Southampton the first time. On the second is..
cation I had a trial trip and • luncheon. I gave him
151. He represented he could get some noblemen
down to see the vessel, and that it would
facilitate their getting the contract ; but he very
much disappointed mo. The only person who came
down was Sir Joseph Paxton, who was on his way to visit
souse public wain. I let him have two 501., on his represen.
tenon that the Home Secretary was about to return to him
100,0001. worth of property, and he wanted the money for
Amps. I thought the statement feasible, but I declined
to give him money. and I accepted two bills, which my
broker discounted.

Crow-examined—ln 18581 had three vessels of shout 409
tone. They were combing vessels between Liverpool and
Galway. Yr. Patter wee a clerk of mine. From that he
want to the Baltic, and afterwards returned and discharged
himself. On the 29th December, 1857, he was in Man-
chador. having•just mrived from the Baltic.
21r. fierjeast Ballantine objected to this line of examina-
tion. These was an action pending with reference to the
Baltic.

By Mr. Seymour—h is • matter of credit. On the 29th of
Deeember I proposed that Parker should accept a bill for
me for 984/. 15e., and that I would meet it at the time
mentioned provided he did not owe me the money on the set-
tlement of his account.

Mr. kierjesnt Ballantine said this matter was now the
subject of arbitration.

lidendant-1 don't know if the plaintiff has anything to
do with the arbitration ; he had been seeking Mr. Parker.
The Lord Chief Baron said he thought this transaction
had nothing to do with the ease.

Mr. Seymour said his crosmexamination was to the de.
fondant's credibility.
Defendant—Parker now owes me 1,4001. on the sale of •
ship in the Baltic. I undertook in writing absolutely and
unconditionally to MOS the bill at maturity. The hill was
paid away to Mr. Moss, of Manchester. • Parker
afterwards started an opposition line of Irish
packeta. Just before be was about to leave for In-
t/mac Moss bad him arrested on the
bill. I telegraphed to Moen where Parker was to be found.
He was about to leave the country at the time. 1 new
had a ship previous to March last called the American.
Empire. I can explain that. I bought • vessel uiled the
Prince Albert, and advertised her as the American Empire,
but we chained our mind and retained her name.
We had three Belgian ships, called the Prince Albert,
Prince Leopold, and ospria in treaty of per.
chase, and we intended to all them the British
Empire, the Indian Empire, and the American Empire. We
purchased the Prince Albert. I gave about 36,7001. for her,
and expended between 6,0001. and 8,0001, on her fittinp.
I said her to the company for 440001., sad I was paid for
her in paper—the shares of the company. The Prince Albert
and the British Empire, the Antelope, the Propeller, the
Indian Empire, and the Pacific were my shim.
The one I intended to call the American Empire
now bean the name of Congress, and is now
lying is the docks. All them ship were aimed in my pro.
imam The American Empire was not then purchased.
At Mae time of the publication of the prospectus I had not
• ship called the British Empire. lam not aware that
Shen was • ship el that name of 3,000 tons in existence.
A committee of the House of Commons examined
into the Galway contract, which was afterwards
sanctioned by the House of Commons. I do not
now hold shares in the company amounting to
one-fourth of the whole stock. 1 have 70,0001. worth
of ahem* and I put in 300001. morn of borrowed money.
The amount ot the capital is 500,000/. The company only
took from me such vessels as they thought fit for the trade.
250 free shares were prorated to me for my personal am-
vim in getting up the company, and the losses sustained
In work* she line. I sal • loser. The shares are
weir* 101. pa shire. I lost 170001. the first trip arose
the Atlantic of the British Empire. I lost 4 the other
ships ; the British Empire is now in the Victoria Docks. I
received 27.7001. for the oonceesioe interests, and establish-
It:c= I had nothing to do with drawing out the
t of the company otherwise than as a
director. I was not the seesatrrg director. I tram.
feted everything, including kisses. It is false
that I ever made • in the line. I have
lost 40,0001., and received ,7001. I got no insurance for
the damage to the British Empire. There is an item in the
balance sheet of 13,9011. Ife. 5d for preliminary expenses.
I did not make a claim of • shilling for preliminary expen-
ses. All I received for it was shares. They were given to
me to make up my hues. 1 gut the ZO free shares
in addition to the 27,7001. Previous to May,
1868, 1 had not mar= en business in London,
having an office hare. My name in conuaxion with the
Galway line tint became known in May or June, 1858. I
did not then know Mr. Ennis personally. The Indian
Empire was not under charter for India ; she was tendered.
I could have had 40,0001. to send her to India, but I re.
fruited 45,0001. I kept her back, believing the Galway
line wouM prove more valuable. I received 2,000 L
from the Midland Great Western Railway Compaq on as.
count of the Prime Albert. About six months after I obtained
the privilege of half fares. I obtained it throegh Mr. Stu.
ling. Mr. Basis might or might not have panted the con-
osmium I can't exactly remember. The final arrangement
with the railway company for giving me 2,0001. if the dim
tams was done within a certain time was made in June or
July a minute of the board; the only money I
was the valuation of the ships. I was at the meet.
ing of shareholders at the London Tavern in March last.
I don't know that the chairman of the company said that I
had been allowed out of the funds of the company for my
losses, ire. I don't remember that he said the charge of
18,0001. included • portion of my interest in the line. Mr.
Ennis did not promise me on the 30th May to continue the
11100011116011 of half fares for seven years.ll The letter produced
is signed by me; I did not write it, or read it.
(The letter woe put in. It was addressed by the defend.
ant to Mr. Ennis, referring to Mr. Penis's promise of the
conceasion, but as it required a stamp it could not be read,
and the Lord Chief Baron objected to any examination of
the defendaat on the subject.)
Defendant—The letter is not in my handwriting, and I
did not recollect it I have no knowledge of the person
who signed the memorial ;it was of no use. The pinata
same to me at my hotel at Charing-cross, and told
me that lord Clanoarty wanted to see me. 1 went, but Lord
Clancarty either could not or would not nee us, or was not
at home. I went with him to Lord Gough's. but nothing
came el it. I don't know if any of these great people—
urbter)—viiiited the ship. Plaintiff had his letters ad-
Burlinton Hotel, which obtained for huo answers,
17MMiterwar& found he did not live there. I don't think
the plaintiff ever had the honour of taking the roe-
ehair on any of the occasions. I had luncheons (not ban-
quets) on board the ship. I can't remember that I ever
had any conversation with the plaintiff about the articles
of ansociation, or that he ever showed me a draft of them.
(Defeedant was further examined and gave a general denial
to the plaintiff's statement.) I Waal twice at Lord Kings-
ton's. He borrowed some money of me, and I never saw
him afterwards. (Laughter.) Plaintiff once took um to see
Mr. Edwin James, but he failed.
By a J uror—i let the plaintiff have two 501, bills, and
about 50/. besides. I have not bad a shilling back. I found
We ykintiff was living in a 31. Bd. lodging in the Hay-
market, and bad made arnurgementa with the Loots at the
Burlington Hotel to receive his letters, and I thought it was
better to lose the money at once thau attempt to sue him
tort bisk.
letters and documents in connexion with the ass
were pat in and read. Their conteuts had reference prim
oipally to the prospect of obtaining a subsidy, the attain-
ment of which formed the bases of the two agreements elo
tend into by the defendant with the plaintiff and Mr.
Holmes.
Copies of the agreements were also put in and read.
Thin eke= the defendant's cue.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine summed up the defend
ant's evidence, and Mt. Dien Seymour replied
on the whole case. while the learned counsel
was proceeding with hi address, one of the jury
made an observation which led Mr. Seymour to soy that be
believed there was such a feeling on the part of some of the
le 7 dead his client that he would elect to be nomuitod.
The plaintiff was nonsuited accordingly.

OOURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Wore Mr. Oaraniinioner HaWO.)
At 111 ►RANCIS AND HOOPER.

The baekrupte were leather factors, of Bermondsey. This
was the examination meeting, but no accouota had been
filed. The petition of the London mid Westminster Bank
(noticed on a former occasion) praying to be declared entitled
to the promeds of certain goods, against bills which they had
discounted for Messrs. Mackintosh, loather-mon:bents, d
Bermondsey, was fret heard.
Ni. /toy appeared is support of the petition ; Mr. ik,'lef