Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-08-26 00:00:00

RADCLIFFE D. MARRION

This was an action to recover the value of two accept-
ances for £3OO, and another acceptance for £2OO. The
plaintiff was Mr. James Radcliffe, of this town,
formerly a tailor and draper, but now retired, and the
defendant was Mr. Thomas Marrion, brewer, of Sheffield.
Mr. James, Q.C., and Mr. Quain were for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Overend, Q.C., and Mr. Millward for the
defendant.

In January, 1858, the plaintiff gave the defendant
three acceptances, two for £3OO and one fol £2OO, in
consideration of his entering into an agreement to
employ the plaintiff's son, Mr. Joseph Radcliffe, as his
agent in Liverpool for the sale of his ales. Mr. Joseph
Radcliffe had already acted as the defendant's agent,
and, it was alleged, now owed him between £3,000 and
£4,000. He became bankrupt, and, under the terms
of the agreement between the plaintiff and the
defendant, the latter was to employ him as agent in
Liverpool, after passing through the bankruptcy court,
and his earnings in commissions were to be placed as a
set-off to the acceptances, which the defendant was to
take up. The commissions for the first three months
amounted to £2OO ; but defendant refused to allow the
commissions, and also failed to take up the bills which
plaintiff ultimately did; and afterwards the plaintiff's son
was dismissed from being the defendant's agent, contrary to
the terms of the agreement. The present action was for
the recovery of the value of the bills which the plaintiff
had only given in consideration of the agency and com-
missions guaranteed to plaintiff's son by the defendant.
The defence was that plamtiff's son mis-conducted him-
self, and that the defendant in consequence dismissed
him.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff for £BOO with
interest, less £2OO paid into court. The interest was
taken at £4O, and a verdict for £640 was therefore
returned.

BROOM V. HALL -AND ANOTHER.
This was an action on a contract for the delivery of a
quantity of saltpetre. The main question turned on a
point of law, and ultimately a verdict was entered for
the plaintiff, with leave to the defendants to move.
The court rose about half-past six o'clock.

A VALUABLE SET OF CHINA
other day, belonging A young couple, the
15t:ino.Bila.irgowrie, previous to
their marriage, went
us togethertr
y
spend some of the fruits of their Vthor they Pert Perth, e
rt
eo
a saving couple) in the purchase
requisite for the domicile. Amongsto othernecessaries
the bride elect bought a beautiful set of china, and dtillindgst
packed and sent home before her. When she reached
home and unpacked the china she found in the teapot to
her utter astonishment, a roll of bank notes to the amount
of £42. Being honest as well as industrious, the artless girl
wrote to the party from whom the china was purchased,
and narrated the circumstance. The answer received
was that the china-merchant had received the contents
of the teapot in payment of an account, but, expecting
a traveller to call for the money, he thought it needless
to bank it, and had deposited it in the teapot as a safer
receptacle than the cash-desk. On the traveller's arri-
val the china-merchant, on looking for his notes, found
that the teapot had been sold, and the traveller grum-
blingly had to leave without the money. It appeared
that three sets of china had been vended that day, so
that the case was deemed hopeless until the welcome
letter from Blairgowrie arrived. The honest bride was
rewarded with £2.