The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-10-31 00:00:00

..,.,

him q!,;1

had eight casks of colours consigned
London, carriage paid. The plaints
invoice in due course, his clerk made apPi"",
goods. It seemed that the goods were not
paid, and the defendant's clerk consequen
deliver them, unless the freight,a!,
which am°°',2
was paid ; this the plaintiff refused to do—tlw, v
not delivered, and hence the present actioa:7; his
having failed to prove the case, was non-sinvew ,
WELSH v. WILSON AND ANOTHER.--MI% oa,
structed by Mr. Roby, appeared for the plo
Brett, instructed by Messrs. Curry and Wit,
the defendant. The plaintiff is an accoun 4(1!
fendants are a lodging.-house keeper and hertie
peared that the phuntiff lodged in the house
the
o
and. having fallen into arrears in his reaq, 1.1,11
seized his clothes, those of his wife and 41. (
them. In consequence of this, plaintiff '!"a's, ,
111
his room for some days until a friend lent .'ll4
and thus enables him to go out and plat' —tos
The present. action was accordingly brought : 4 a
pensation for the loss the plaintiff has su!taulp
value of his goods. Verdict for the plainufri fl
BARRATT AND ANOTHER V. ALLAN AND
cluttalop: appeared esdo
some
that
wt theork defendants,
thev had
a
Aspinall and Mr. Brett, instructed by. Mr. ;
for the plainriffs ; and 'Mr. Blair and Mr. "„
structed by Messrs. J. and H. Gregory, forgc. I tct
he
Hughes, are millwrights and enneers, an?",,
of some cottage property;belonn.
Barrett, and Michael Trueman °
d insertedViili3lll!l J01;4: .

6,
objectionable manufacture in—the-biildillr
from the noise and offensive smells cawisble. %
houses of the plaintiffs had become untenan, 4 %
case had been opened,_ a consultation t.00.,', y

side, and it was'agree'd that the matt
Mr. Raffles, as arbitrator.

HARDY V. WIGNALL.-Mr. M'Aubrcy,
Black, appeared for the plaintiff, and gr. •
by Mr. Radcliffe, for the defendant

TbePnt

owner, and the: defendant, who

IP a 1
owner, but much more extensively engatcrecto
than the plaintiff. It appeared that on the 0 e ail
the plaintiff purchased a horse of the defencls. ttse
servant, for £l6 10s. The horse was warra!
when taken to the plaintiff's stables, it lc', Ur t
was labouring under a disease of the len,
under a cart, but would not draw, and 00.

the fourth day after the purchase he died'
,ty ii
accordingly brought the present action to ree° f(
which he had paid for the horse. Forth
contended that no warranty was given, and infj.
had no power to do so, and it was further the
horse, at the time of the sale, was in a perfect' tirl
dition. Verdict for the plaintiff, £l6 10. lk");
AsHCROFT BRADSHAW.—MT. Blair, in,
Owen, appeared for the plaintiff, and Nrior
strutted by Messrs. Fletcher and Hull, was .6g(
ant. In stating the case, Mr. Blair obserre`',(j '1)1
of the case were very simple, and that if Cr
to be as he was instructed, it was one of the fr'',
to impose on. a respectable lady that had ere,." ti
his notice. The 'plaintiff resided in a 110 r
George's-square, where her husband, who hP
officer in this town, had lived for several.' ral . ger
husband's decease, the plaintiff increase(' , th
which were rather limited, to a very
by letting lodgiiigs, but in the month A
eiea',;
she deemed it advisable to let the house and 41
t),
put a bill into the window for that purpose.
ico, ate`
defendant, who is a medical officer in the te'
,11]
,„
the house, and agreed to take it at £5O a 'tr
quarterly in advance. An agreement to tas tt
drawn up and signed by both parties, and thei 144
being paid at the stated period, Dr. Brads°i N
having apologised for the delay, gave a
he would pay the money on a certain FridaY,',
afterwards he called again, and asked to see ~
on its being shewn to him, snatched it from v4N
hand, crumpled it up,.put it into his pocket, an nbh
I have changed my mind, and let it to whoto4 epo
Gross and unjustifiable, however, as this cone OSJ
plaintiff was willing to put up with it, and she
accepted the offer of another medical gentleman' curt
son, to take the house at a rent of £55 a fear'. '4lit
circumstance came to the knowledge of the le 'fit
called on Dr. Thompson, told him that he ha 'oLev
house already, and that if Dr. Thompson eg' '1044
would do so at his peril. Dr. Thompson aeco fl
off his agreement, by which the plaintiff, havo, notl
her furniture and got rid of her lode e(
very serious loss. For this the present
brought, and damages were laid at £2OO. tie(
was then examined and deposed to the facts
Mr. Blair in his statement. She denied ha,,evi 'a]
conversation with Dr. Bradshaw as to her pc"i
house, and produced a copy of the aoTeemen; ' ~(11111
Dr. Thompson was about to enter withe'her. n fast
was then examined, and deposed to the fact %
entered into an agreement with the plaintiff the
house, and to his having refused to fulfil it in 0 re
in consequence of the caution of the defendant., A\,
Mr. Atkinson then addressed the jury for t 4
nhgerved. tllat the lieepsa ,the Council babo ,
more abused than it ha .been by Mr.
upon the conduct of the defendant. Tor',„.ca
certainly,
hthe!.(tcoDunnoilß)radshaw had tater, t o't
meat,
conceived that his tau
in so doing, inasmuch as he had been inf°rgl '``)el
let authority, that the plaintiff had no power t° "jilt i
and had Mrs. Ashcroft satisfied him on this rot r'll4l
fendant would have carried out his agrearile le
No witnesses were examined for the defenee;e
after a careful summing up, and analysis of °o, e
and complicated pleas on the record, found a
plaintiff, £lOO damages. Points have been rese'
court above. ~;,, -

The business of the court, which was more t,``tir
protracted, in consequence of the irrelevant
duced into several of the cases by the council—
which more than once called forth the censure "'
Lr
terminated at Six o'clock, when the jurors were
and received their certificates of attendance.

CHARGE OF DEFRAUDING THE COIll't)I 4
On Saturday, Joseph Rosson, and Williatn,ierl
former a contractor, and the latter the late Clef ,
Works at the New Borough Gaol, Walton,) `1,5(1., ..,:'
before Robert Benn, Esq., and Thos. Bootb9„,' -, •
Police Court, charged with defrauding the ll° .,4'r
Liverpool, of a sum of upwards of £1727, in oyno '''l
1
the supply of bricks for the erection of the Net/ •
Simon prosecuted on behalf of the CorporatiO
Snowball appeared for Rosson, and Mr. Bremner:,
Mr. SIMoN, in opening the case, said, he was 41
appear on behalf of the Corporation, to prefer ac" IN
two parties who had been summoned, Jose Pit,, 1,1
William Clarke, the particular nature of which c.,"
be determined hereafter, when the evidence had be Ti
throughout. It might be that they would have t°, I,'
with conspiracy, or false pretence, or both. It,sto '0
in 1849, the corporation of Liverpool commenced i.,1
of a new borough gaol, in a field near Walton« 1.) vl
other contracts made for the purposes of the bul '1(14 ° E
between the corporation of Liverpool, on the one r
defendant, Rosson, on the other, for the supply
cof
-gY
,
necessary for the erection of the building, Mr. Pd.
manufacture the bricks in a field in the neighbourilo
supply them to the extent required for the buildiohr (4011
to carry out the contract, workmen were emplaYeu 01, tll,
and over those workmen, a clerk, named Harper, 0; 1.'41
whose duty it was to superintend them, and to co ,r, '',„,kt.,
day, the bricks which they made, and to inspect thli i',lll.lie
and then to hand those returns to the Clerk of tb° 'rl
behalf of the corporation. The Clerk of the worn t1„111
by the corporation, was Win. Clarke, one of the de Ot
the present case, and it was his duty to act as 3 c,,,,1t
workman's returns, and on the returns of liar&
also his duty, in order to ensure correctness and acc"o
through the fields from time to time, and inspectf ,toil
and count the number made. The mode of matliott hm
this---the men were appointed to work at ser,, t., "
There were eight stools in the field, at which t", ~,i
I
were employed in the manufacture of bricks, so tlO,ll tv,
a facility afforded thereby to the person whose dAut2to Tit i,
count the bricks, to go through and perform that u" (4` k
the inspection and correction of the accounts in 0' „, v''
(Mr. Simon) had mentioned, it was Clarke's Jul,
return to the surveyor of the corporation, who ''
to the Finance Committee, who paid the am
from time to time, Rosson would be entitled.
have to show the magistrates that, in making th.,
there were falsifications of the most extreme eharac`"

ionnt~e~b

commencement. At the very outset of those opefAti
only were there false accounts, in themselves f
falsified to a considerable magnitude. They eves
extent, they charged for an additional st(
actually in use, so that all the bricks chat
head of this separate stool was a perfect irni
tion practised upon the corporation, and that by 6
servants, in collusion with the contiacto
of bricks alleged to have been made, o
corporation, was 6,167,230, for which r
to the amount of £5,124. 18s. 9d., whe
of bricks made, he should prove to have
thereby showing a fraud on the corporat.— , s
upwards of £700,--a fraud perpetrated by in"'
charge of the number of bricks alleged to have
mb bee of
Mr. Wightman, corporation surveyor, and ahoBo,
were examined, to show that a nuer of bried
~b,lO,
siderably less in number than the quantity eharse
on the ground, and at the conclusion of the
Simon applied for a remand. Mr. snowb3
il
Bremner resisted this, contending that there .vas i,
tra
to justify a remand. The magistrates grant" t
but intimated that bail would be taken for Clarke
The amount of bail was fixed at £5OO

)1. lew tt

era 7.,

tm.ets
DARING ROBBERY.—On Friday 11-gh
mises of an extensive baker in Brownlow-hi''
into, the safe was dislodged, and placed in a Lebv"o
and carried to an unoccupied house in the nw-cierAt• e 4
The safe was there blown open with gunr. rend
though a large booty was expected, the theivesoi. Cowd
a few pounds. The question arises how a sa
ooh
been carried in a wheelbarrow through such 3there.
without the knowledge of the officers on duty