The Express.
London, England, 1857-06-29 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Sittings at Nisi Prim', at Guildhall—Before Lord Campbell
and Special Juries.)

TZATNER C. ItAITLAND.—DUTY OF CONSIONZES.
This was an action minimal the defendant fur neglect of duty
as consignee,
Mr. H. HUI and Mr. Pcteredurfl were for the plaintiff;
and Mr. BoviU and another learned gentleman conducted the
case for the defence.
The plaintiff was a wine-merchant, carrying on business
at Liverpool, who in 1811 had a quantity of light diary to
dispose of A friend of the plaintiff's, Mr. Douglas, a ship-
owner in London, mentioned the fact to the defendant, who
was a partner in a firm at Montreal, and produced I
a sample of the wine. The defendant tasted it,
raid it would Ming about 141. a pipe in Mon-
treal, and that his thin would bo prepared to
receive the consignment of it. This conversation woo com-
municated to the plaintiff in June, 1851, and he bad the wine
bottled and peeked in thirty-nine COMP, which ho chipped
for Montreal in July, 1852. They arrived there in Septem-
ber and on the Gth of Deeewbor the defendant wrote
a lesser, se)ing that the wino was unmarketable in that'
city. The plaintiff then roqueated him to return
ft, but he neglected to do so until June, 1856, when it had
completely lust its virtue, and Inv wholly worthless. The
plaintiff now claimed to bo re-imbureed for the damages
which hetied sustained by reason of the neglect of the de-
fendant.
The correspondence between the parties, which was very
voluminous, was adduced in evidence.
Mr. Feather, the plaintiff, mid the wine was perfectly
sound when be !hipped it for Montreal, and if it had been
returned to Liverpool, in 1852, be could have sold the
thirty-nine eases bur 174 f., but when it arrived in 18.56, it
was of no value whatever, and lee refused to receive it.
On cross-examination, be said ho purchased the wino in
1848, from the importer, at 10/. a butt. It was a light, low-
clam wine.
Mr. Boni], In the course of his ad Imes for the defendant,
wan interrupted by the jury, who intimated that they were
agreed in opinion.
Lord Campbell raid the creation was, whether the de-
fendant so msconducted himself as to render himself liable
to this action.
The Foreman—We think be is not liable.
Lord Campbell—Yon will have to say whether Mr. Mait-
land undertook that the wine was tit for the Canadian mar-
ket. It seems that the converted ion with hint took place In
Jane, 1861. The wines were not sent until a year afterwardr
The Foreman—We think there was merely • consignment,
and no undertaking on the part of the defendant that ho
could sell the wines.
Lead Campbell—The second question will be whether the
defendant is liable for not having returned the wine in a
proper time.
The Foreman—We all think that the defendant is entitled
to our verdict on both points.
His lordship then entered the verdict in his notes Sir the
defendant, but as the jury were about to leave the boo one
of them said they were not all agreed in opinion.
A juryman—Thcro are two my lord who differ from the
rest.
Lord Campbell—Yon must all be of one mind before I can
take your verdict.
/dr. Petersdorf, on the pert of the plaintiff, then asked
that the trial beproerudtrl with.
Lord Campbell—You arc certainly entitled to that. Let
the case go on.
Mr. Bovill was then about to renew his address.
The Foreman—We are all agreed, my lord, and give a
verdict for the defendant.
Verdict for the defendant accordingly.
ne.1.4. e. TILISINDALS AYn OTItERS.:7CAII ArCIDZIIT,

with basil
the Wel&

to L most
be boliood
never bevo

Tbc AI

to 9pllwil,

VIZ ROY AI

Mr.
to be a ley
the mating
ago moll/
Combo ail
Prilori, Co

John C
mid that
of tho II

gm a an
tivnetal.
and on S;
and, as to

attapecti4
seemed ra
into hi:. b
raining n
he lung)
him into

The I
that he

11;rii;,—Cd
quantity
Mr. C
brought
when he
fits or w
knows a
Mr. 0
he wns I
Mr CI
true, bu

infriog
Tbo

111111olt
BEAUI

aD

An
stated
any r
of lb

This action was brought by Mrs. Mary Ann Hull, a
widow, on behalf of herself and several children, to recover
compensation or damages fur the loss of her hueband, a tab
driver, who, it was isged, had been killed by the wrongful
act of a errant in the employ of the defendants, who carry
on business as carriers under the name of Messrs Bickford
and Company.
The defendants pleaded not guilty.
Mr. M. Chamber. and Mr. °verve& were for the plaintiff,
sad Mr. Bevil) and Me reteradorff for the defendants.
It appeared that the deceased was the owner and driver of
a Hansom cab, and bad a family of eight or nine children.
He was also represented a. a highly respectable man of very
temperate habits, and oleo aa very industrious, and •
good driver. On the let of November Mat two gentlemen
PATd him to drive them from the stand opposite the lag
House, to Mile End, and when begot into High
Whitechapel, a van belonging to the defendant:tin
drawn by two horses, came in collision with the
cab, at the corner of Coinmereinl-street, almost doubled it np
and by the force of the blow the driver was knocked off his
mat on to the pavement, and sustained melt severe injuries;
that he died in the London Hospital, two days afterwards.
Both the gentlemen slumped uninjured. On the part of the
plaintiff, evidence was adduced to show that that van was
going at groat speed, on the wrong side of the road, and that
it was drawn by two young and spirited horses, which the
driver could not effectually control.
As Is usual in such cases the evidence was confiding.
Mr. Hart, an isinglass manufacturer in the City, one of
the gentlemen in the nab, who was called by the defendants,
add his impression win that the accident was inevitable, and
that neither party was to blame.
In reply to Lord Campbell, the witness said when he saw
the von it wee turning out of Commercial-street, and taking
its wvang side of the road. He thought the man was going
to discharge his cargo en that side; if he 111114 he was right,
but otherwise he was wrong.
The driver of the van we. then recalled by the direction of
his lordship, and he stated that he was net going to discharge
on the side of tho road where he was. He also candidly ad-
mitted that as he turned into High.street, Whitechapel, be
took the wrong side of the road, but said he could not get to
the other side in consequence of genie omnibuses being in
the way.
It was stated in the course of the trial that the deceased
earned about 21, a week, and was 46 years of ago at the time
of his death.
The jury, after about an hour's thence from court,
returned • verdict for the defendant, deranges, 3751., half to
be given to the widow, and the remainder to be divided
among the ale children who are unable to maintain them-
selves.

ot~fEe~

icoß:

~Mr.

rign.
their