The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-12-20 00:00:00

LAW COURTS.-LONDON.

MITCHENSON AND ANOTHER V. OLIVER.-LIABILITY OP
SHIPOWNERS.

This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, who are
ship and anchor smiths at Limehouse, to recover from the'
defendant, a merchant at Liverpool, the value of certain
goods which had been supplied,-and of work which had been
done to a ship belonging to him, called the Progress, whilst
it was lyinc, in the East India docks. The defendant pleaded
a denial of liability.
• On the part of the plaintiffs, it was proved that the de-
fendant was the sole registered owner of the vessel, that
Captain Thompson was the master of the vessel, that in 1852
Captain Thompson had given the order for the goods and
the work in question, which had commenced on the 10th of
October, and ended on the 17th November, 1852, and that
the work and stores which had been furnished were neces-
sary to enable the ship to obtain the classification of A 1 at
Lloyd's. When the repairs had been completed, the ship
was engaged by the Admiralty for the transport of troops
for the sum of 68001.

The case for the defendant was, that in July, 1852, Mr.
Oliver had agreed to sell the Progress to a Mr. Gompertz,
to whom on the 9th of September he delivered her, and
that Mr. Gompertz had appointed Captain Thompson as
master, and had through his agency given orders for the
supply of the goods and the work in question. After the
work had been done, having reason to believe he should not
be able to obtain his money from Mr. Gompertz, he had
resumed possession of the ship and had appointed another
captain.
The defendant's case having concluded,
The jury said they had made up their minds without
hearing the reply.
Lord Campbell directed the jury in point of law that if
they thought the vessel remained in the possession of the
defendant, and that Thompson was appoiaed master with
the concurrence of the defendant, although by Gompertz,
and that the goods and work ordered by Thompson were fit
for the ship, Thompson might be considered as the agent of
the owner, who might be held liable.
Mr. Bramwell tendered a bill of exceptions to his lord-
ship's ruling.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount claimed.

NICHOL V. OLIVER.
Mr. Serjeant Shee and Mr. Boville appeared for the
plaintiff ; Mr. Bramwell and Mr. Barstow represented the
defendant. •
This was an action brought against the same defendant
as in the last case, by the plaintiff, who is a shipwright, to
recover 5311. for work done to the Progress, under the same
circumstances as those detailed in the previous action. The
only difference was, that the order had been given by the
shipbrokers, Messrs. Hutchinson, instead of by the captain.
Mr. Bramwell submitted, at the conclusion of the evidenile
adduced on behalf of the plaintiff, that there was no case,
as there was no connection whatever shown between the
plaintiff and the defendant.
Mr. Serjeant Shee contended that Captain Thompson,
having superintended the plaintiff's workmen, and ordered
work to be done beyond that which was ordered by
Messrs. Hutchinson, must be taken to have ratified their
Order.
Lord Campbell was of opinion that there was no evi-
dence in regard to that part of the work which was done
under the order of Messrs. Hutchinson, but that there was
evidence with regard to the. remainder of the plaintiff's
claim.

The case for the defendant being closed.
Mr. Serjeant Shee replied.
Lord Campbell summed up, directing the jury in the same
manner as in the last case with regard to the work done
under Capt. Thompson's order.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, for 2461.
RILL V. OLIVER.

This was also an action brought to recover 5421. for sails
chiefly supplied to the Progress by the orders of Captain
Thompson under circumstances similar to those in the two
last cases.

Verdict for the plaintiff, subject to a reference.
BRODIE V. OLIVER.

This was the fourth case against the same defendant
brought under similar circumstances to the others, and
resulted in the same manner.

The snip Athens, arrived at Now nriAans with immi-
grants from Havre, reports twenty-two deaths from cholera
on the passage.
The Richard Alsop made the trip from New York, die-
charged, loaded with 3000 bales of cotton and 5000 staves,
and sailed for Liverpool in twenty-four days. •
The legislature of Newfoundland is prorogued till the
3lst January next—" then to meet for the dispatch of 'busi-
ness."
MORE DEATHS AT SEA.—The packet ship Victoria, Capt.
Champion, from London and Portsmouth, Oct. 27, arrived
AC New York with 388 passengers. She had 50 deaths
among the passengers.
WRECK OF THE BRITISH BARQUE EuzA.—Baltimore,
Wednesday, Nov. 30.—The British barque Eliza, from
Callao, bound to Baltimore with guano, went 'ashore near
li Cape enry on Monday, and the vessel and cargo were a
total loss. The mate was drowned.
NEW Sum—Launched on Wednesday, from the building
yard of Messrs. James, Smith and Sons, a beautiful ship of
1337 tons new measurement, and 1649 tons 0.M., named
the Queen of the Seas. The Queen of the Seas is con-
structed with the view not only to beat the Marco. Polo,
built by them, but to beat or compete successfully with any
merchant ship now afloat, as she was constructed under
special survey by Lloyd's surveyor, Mr. Tucker, and will
class seven years at Lloyd's. We learn that Messrs. Smith
are building two clipper ships for a Valparaiso house, in-
tended to compete with the American Clippers in the Cali-
fornia trade, and from their experience and well known en-
terprise, we have no doubt that they will be entirely sue-
cessful.—New-Brunszoicker.
I ROBBERY By AN APPRENTICE.—On Saturday, at the
Manchester city police-court, a young man named. William
Armitt, an apprentice in the employment of Mr. Marshall,
tin-plate worker, was charged with absconding from his
master and taking with him ss. 6d. It appeared that he
was sent an errand by his mistress, who gave him 6s. 6d. to
accomplish it, and that he never returned. 'The master was
willing to take him again into his service upon condition
that he promised to behave better, for the future. This
proposition was kindly laid before him by the magistrate,
bilt the inexorable apprentice said he cared nothing at all
about it, and ho was then committed to take his trial at the
sessions: