The Express.
London, England, 1861-08-16 00:00:00

The jury returned a verdict for the pluintiff--damsgea
2501.

(Before Mr. Justice Williams and a Special Jury.)
reaCWAN V. THORNTON.

This was an action brought by the public officer or
manager of the London and County Bank, to recover from
the defendant the sum of 6,0001., upon a guarantee given by
him to the hack, to secure advances made to a person named
Edmund Smith. The defendant pleaded that he had been
induced to give the gu trantee by false representations that
were made to him by the plaintiff with regard to the po-
sition and solvency of Smith.
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., Mr. Lush, Q.C., and Mr. P►terum,
were counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. M. Chambers. Q.C.;
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Garth, were counsel for the
defendant.

Upon the forms of the pleadings it devolved upon the
defendant to go first to the jury upon the plea that the
guarantee in question bad Leen given by him under false
representations, and it appeared from the evidence that was
gone into with that view that the defendant was a person of
considerable property, who bad been engaged for many
years as a contractor, arid that Edmund Smith, the person
mentioned in the declaraLion, was also a contractor, and
that be was engaged on very extensive works for the govern-
ment at Portsmouth, Pembroke, Shoreham, and other places,
in 1856, and subsequently. The defendant and Smith, it
appeared, both kept an account at the London and County
Beak, and in the year 1856 there was a negotiation on
foot between them with a view to a partnership, and
about this time Smith was anxious to increase hie credit at
the blink, and the defendant went to Mr. M'Kewan to
have some conversation with him in reference to Smith,
and in consequence of what he said the defendant eventually
gave& guarantee on his behalf to the extent of 5,0001. Some
time after this Smith became bankrupt, the amount for
which he failed being 120,0001., and epee his death, which
occurred shortly after the bankruptcy, the amount of his
guarantee was claimed from the defendant to cover a por-
tion of the loss that had been sustained by the bank through
him, and the claim was resisted upon the ground that the de-
fendant was induced to give the guarantee by certain
false statements that were made to Lim by Mr.
Mirewaist the manager of the bank, upon the occasion of
the interview referred to. The defendant, who was the prin-
cipal, and, indeed, the only witness called to support the
charge of fraud, was eternised at very great length, and the
chief allegations that were relied upon appeared to be
that Mr. M'Kewan was represented to have stated that the
amount due by Smith to the bank was much less than it
really was, and that his account generally was in a more
favourable state than the facts warranted. Mr. Thornton
was cross-examined at very great length in reference to the
nature of the transactions that had taken place between
him and the bank and Smith, and also with regard
to the various contracts that bad been entered
into by the latter, but the details would, of
course, be entirely uninteresting to the public. This ma-
terial fact wee however elicited in reference to the question
at issue between the parties, that although in the course of
the proceedings various communications passed between the
beak authorities and the defendant in reference to Smith's
affairs, and the bank was pressing for money, not a
word was suggested as to the guarantee having been ob-
tained by false representation until after the discovery was
made as to the actual condition of Smith, and the defendant
did not seem to have repudiated the guarantee until pro-
ceedings were taken to enforce it, or at all events it was
evident that such proceedings were contemplated by
the bank.

Mr. Bovill, in the course of a most able address to the
jury es behalf of the plaintiff, called their attention to the
jury es
the charge that was made against him was a most
serious as. for a man in his position, and that he could not
have had the slightest motive fur making such a false re.
pusentation as the one alleged to have been made ; and he
WY instructed to state, and he should call plaintiff to depose
to the fact upon his oath, that be never did make to the de-
fendant any false statement with regard to the account of
Smith, for whom the guarantee was given. hut that he
told him the exact position in which he stood with the
bank, haring the authority of Smith for so doing. The
jury would undoubtedly have one positive oath against
another ; and, however unpleasant it might be for them to
decide in such a case, he reminded them that the defendant
had undertaken to establish his plea, and if he failed to do
so, or the ledance of testimony appeared to be in favour
of the opposite view of the question, they were bound to
say so by their venliet.
Mr. M'Kewan, the plaintiff, was examined, and he
positively contradicted the evidence that had been given by
the defendant as to what took place between them in refer-
ence to the guarantee, and asserted distinctly that he gave
the defendant an exact statement of the position of Smith
in regard to the bank. Other evidence was also adduced
that tended strongly to support this view of the case.
The jury retired to consider their verdict, and upon their
retain into court they found for the plaintiff. They, at
the lame time, expressed their opinion, in answer to ques-
tions that had been put to them by the learned judge, that
there had been uo misrepresentation on the pert of
the plaintiff, and that the guamotee was given uncon-
ditionally.

NORTHERN CIRCIIIT.—LivzopooL, Aro. 11

CHANGE AGAINST A PATE OF SHOOTING ♦ SEAMICf.
At the Liverpool arises yesterday, William Crneby, 25,
and Matthew Oihney, :12, were arraigned, the former for
'bootleg • coloured seaman named Henry Johnson, on
board the ship Panama, en the 16th May last, and the
latter for concealing and harbouring Crosby after he had
committed the offence. At the time mentioned the vessel
was lying in the Hersey prepared to sail for San Francisco.
The prisoner Crosby was the mate of the Panama, and the
prosecutor was one of • number of coloured seamen
who had shipped at Liverpool on board the
Panama. It appeared that some disputes had arisen
between the black men and the officers of the
ship, and the former having complained that the provisions
were unfit for food, they were ordered by the officers to
leave the ship. The men declared their willingness to do
so, but insisted on going below first to collect their clothes.
Some white seamen having in the meantime arrived along-
aide, the black men were peremptorily required to get into
the boats, the officers telling them that their clothes would
be sent after them. As the men resisted this enter an en-
counter took place ; and while the prosecutor was lowering
himself into one of the boats, and was suspended by one
hand which greened a rope, the prisoner shot him with a
pistol. Johnson loosed his hold immediately and fell into
the water, but was immediately rescued sod conveyed on
shore. The defence was that the complaints as to the pro.
visioning of the ship were groundless ; that the black
sailors outnumbered the whites ; that their conduct was
very violent, and that from their being armed with knives
the prisoner was led to extreme measures in self•defence.
The refusal to allow the men to take away their clothes
aroma it was contended, from the fact that the cologne(' amen
bed each reestved U. in advent* on going on hoard, and