The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-19 00:00:00

emmmossi!

COURT OF PASSAGE.-YESTERDAY

(BEFORE EDWARD JAMES, ESQ., Q.C., ASSESSOR.)
The court sat at nine o'clock yesterday morning.
STOWER V. BELL.—This was an action brought by Jacob
Stower, pickles and sauce manufacturer, Liverpool, to
recover ss. from Thomas Bell of Stafford, for goods
sold and delivered. Mr. Brett appeared for the plaintiff.
There was no defence, and a verdict was accordingly
given for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

TURNER "V:JAmEs.-The plaintiff, Wm. Turner, cabinet-.
maker, Tilington, claimed .£5 15s. from William James,
being the value of a pier-glass, and the amount of certain
alterations made in it at plaintiff's order. Mr. Aspinall
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brett for the defend-
ant. The defence was that the work was not done to the
defendant's satisfaction. The jury found a verdict for the
defendant.

EDGAR V. ALISON.—This was an action brought by the
plaintiff to recover damages occasioned by the defendant
having caused him to be wrongfnlly taken into the custody
of a police-officer, and also for money belonging to plain-
tiff illegally retained by defendant. Both parties were
dealers in bags; and, on the 14th of June, the plaintiff
bought 2,250 bags from the defendant. On the same day
the plaintiff sold them again to a person named Robin-
son. The parties were in a public-house shortly after,
and the defendant asked the plaintiff for the price
of the bags. Some dispute arose about pay-
ment, and then it was alleged that the defendant
had immediately sent out for police-officers, who
came in and arrested the plaintiff, and carried him to
the police office. A 3 some witnesses of material testi-
mony were absent, there was no evidence to show that
the defendant had given any directions for the arrest, or
that he had got and retained ally money belonging t
plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict for the deft I:int
CHECv- This

to the

vas an action for goods
The plaint if? claimed £2l lOs from the

Ts V. F.S.-
old and delivered

defendant for a number of pigs sold to hi n in July, l 855•
Mr. Brett appeared for the plaintiff. Verdict tor the
plaintiff.

HOWARD AND WIFE V. DF.VINE —Mr. Tindal Atkinson
and Mr. Blair appeared for the plaintiff in this case,
which was an action for libel. The declaration alleged
that defendant published a libel upon the plaintiffs to the
effect that " the male plaintiff opened hampers left in his
charge belonging to one John Brenan, and took out the
contents and filled up the hampers with bricks and rub-
bish, and that his wife took the same goods down to
South Wales and sold rolls of silk and other goods, and
that he could prove it?' Mr. Brett appeared for the
defence. The Assessor did not think there was ground for
action in the declaration in its present shape. Mr.
Blair applied for leave to amend. The Assessor
directed the jury to be discharged in that case for the
present, to allow Mr. Blair to make application to the
court to amend the declaration.

DALBY v. WHEATLEY.—This was an action for trespasS•
Mr. Aspinall appeared for the plaintiff, who was a fish
curer in Toxteth Park. The defendant was a house
painter. The action was brought to recover damages
from the defendant, for painting two feet of the front of
plaintiff's house. It was stated that defendant was en'
gaged in painting a house next to the plaintiff's, and
applied to the plaintiff for the job of painting his house
also. Being refused the job, he wreaked his vengeance !)./,
adorning the plaintiff's house with a stripe, two feet
broad, of a brilliant hue, contrasting most ludicrousli
with the general colour of the building. The Assessor
remarked that he had heard many absurd actions, but
never heard of one to parallel that. Mr. Aspinall offered
to withdraw the action, provided the defendant would
paint the whole house the same colour. Mr. Brett, who
appeared for the defendant, declined to comply with the
suggestion, but offered that the offensive stripe should be
painted out. As the parties could not agree, the action
proceeded, and the plaintiff and his wife were examined
to prove the case. The plaintiff deposed that considerable
damages were done to his premises, as a business eon'
cern, by this unsolicited adornment, and evidence Will
given to show that it would cost 3 IN to restore the
house to its original condition. Mr. Brett, on the part of
the defence, contended that the whole affair arose out
of a mistake on the part of defendant's workmen,
with which the defendant personally had nothing,
to do. The defendant deposed that he did not hear of
any complaint made while the painting was going on, and
knew nothing about it, until he received a writ from the
plaintiff. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with
damages 20s.

GODFREY V. WALKER.—In this action, James Godfrey'
master carter, was the plaintiff, and George Walker,
master carter, defendant. The action was brought 0
recover .e 5 ss, claimed by plaintiff as commission agreed
upon, and due to him for having effected for defendant
the sale of a stallion at Christmas, 1'655. Mr. Brett
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for the
defendant. It was denied on the part of the defence that
any commission was agreed on, and it was contended that
the plaintiff had been paid all to which he was entitled,
The jury found a verdict for the defence.
ABRAHAM V. WASHINGTON.—This was an action aria'
ing out of the same circumstances, which produced 30
action for false imprisonment on the previous day. The
subject of dispute was a sword, alleged to have beo
the property of Prince Menschikoff, and the plaintiff 011
the present action, who was the defendant in the false
imprisonment case, claimed to receive the value of the
weapon which he alleged the present defendant 1017
carried off. The defence was that the defendant 111 d..
purchased it for 30s. The evidence was chiefly similal
to that given the previous day, but it further appearea,
that the plaintiff in this action had purchased the sword
from the party who gave it originally into his keeping for
10s, after the transactions in the shop and in the police
office with the defendant. The jury found a verdict fol‘
the defendant.

Ho, unToN v. ABRAHAM.—Mr. Brett appeared for fhe
plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for the defence. The plaintiP
was Anne Houghton, and the defendant Isaac Abrahal°'
furniture broker, Islington. On the part of the plaintifr
it was alleged that on the 17th of June last the plaintiff
purchased a goodwill, furniture, and stock-in-trade of
publichouse called the Ringo' Bells, in School-lane, frail
a person named George Abraham, for about £2OO. The
latter was at this time indebted to the defendant, who
accordingly, on the 19th of June, seized the goods in the
house, under a waerant of execution. The action wag
accordingly brought to recover the amount of the goon'
seized. No evidence was given for the defence, and 16
verdict was returned for the plaintiff.
BRERE YON V. DOVER.—This was an action brought t°
recover damages arising from injuries suffered by the
plaintiff, owing to alleged carelessness on the part of one
of defendant's servants. Mr. Brett appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Aspinall for the defence. The plaintiff
was a carter, and the defendant a warehouse owner. The
plaintiff had occasion to go with a cart to the defendant'
warehouse to receive a load, consisting of some chests 0
tea. One of the defendant's servants was engaged ti
lowering the chests by a jigger and rope, and 1,"
was alleged that by the careless management
of this party the rope was let go at an impropen`
time, and a chest fell upon the plaintiff, oh:
sustained such severe injuries as compelled him to be e".
invalid in the Northern Hospital for four weeks. The
plaintiff's case rested chiefly upon his own evidence. Mr'
Aspinall contended for the defence that the amid/
arose from the carelessness of the plaintiff, who shout
have been in his cart at the time, watching and receiving
the chests, but as he was on the pavement at the time, the
chest not being received below and lifted into the earl,
struck the plaintiff and caused the injury. Mr. Aspina'
stated, that if this accident should be shown to hal
arisen from the carelessness of his servant, Mr. Dove
would most willingly receive the verdict et' the jury, but
as he believed at present that the plaintiff was wholly to
blame, he felt himself bound to defend the action. -Ell;
deuce having been called for the defence, the jury folio'
for the plaintiff, damages .415.
REYNOLDS v. BARROW.—This was an action for gool
sold and delivered. The plaintiff was a baker, an
claimed £l3 9s 8d for bread supplied to the defendant,'
family. Mr. Brett appeared for the plaintiff, and Nit'
Scott for the defendant. The claim also included the
value of several quantities of oats, bran, meal, &c.
appeared that the whole of the articles were ordered DJ
the defendant's wife, from time to time. Mr. Scott con'
tended that there was no evidence to show any authority
from the plaintiff to his wife to order the oats, bran, °,`
meal. The defendant NYAS not, however, called as a vw-
,
ness. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the
full amount.
The court then adjourned.

THE CRIMEA.—The following is an extract from a lettef
dated Balaklava, June 28, 1856 :—" The Sardinians tin°,
sold their huts to a Russian merchant for 40,000 francs:
they cffered their hay for 5 francs the truss. Our Kadik°'
merchants are shipping everything, as there are no salt
to be effected with the Russians, except by almost making
them a present of the goods. Crockford is taking evert'
thing to Malta, where, I believe, he intends settling. MO
Nightingale leaves the day after to-morrow in the Otta"
but it is uncertain if she goes beyond Constantinople 0;
the present. General Windham and a lot of the star'
leave in the Emperor, directly she has embarked all bet
powder, &c.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS.—The report of the committen,
appointed by the House of Lords to take into considel
tion the present mode of carrying into effect capita
punishments, and to report thereon to the house, has bee
o
published :—On reviewing the whole of the evidence the
committee are of opinion—" 1. That executions should le
future be carried into effect within the precincts of
prison, or in some place securing similar comparative
privacy. 2. That a certain number of official witnesse:
be present at the execution, and sign a deposition t';
having witnessed it. 3. That such other spectators
the local authorities see fit to admit be also allowed to
mad(
present. 4. That the exact time of the execution be ma"
known to those without, as, for instance, by the tolling
a bell, which shall cease st the moment of the execution'
and the hoisting at the same time of a black flag.'
ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.—On Wednesday, at the VV;?ri
tester assizes, John Phipsen was indicted for the ,
murder of Elizabeth Milward, at Old Swinford, on t"A
27th of June last. The prisoner, it will be recolleete,"o
from the facts that have already appeared in
NORTHERN TIMES, was a nailer, and during a quarrel
be
threw a picc of hotiron at deceased, which entered be
side and killed her. The jury returned a verdict 0,
guilty of manslaugh er. The judge (Nlr. Baron Aldekt
;on), sentenced him to a fortnight's imprisonment. tr
Lewes, on the same day, John Murdoch, aged 20, wri;2;",f
was tried for the murder of James Wallerd, the keeP,e
of the gaol at Hastings, who attempted to prevent
prisoner escaping therefrom. The jury returned a verd'!",l
of guilty, but recommended him to mercy. The 1:%0
Chief Baron, in an impressive speech, then sentenced '
prisoner to death, on hearing which the prisoner turner
round and said to the people, " There's a lesson I

you•"