Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-04-09 00:00:00

COURT OF PASSAGE,

Yesterday, the Liverpool Court of Passage was opened, in
the Nisi Prius Court, St. George's Hall,
BEFORE EDWARD JAMES, ESQ., ASSESSOR.
Aarzom FOR DAMAGES.--WILTON v. TIPPING.—The
plaintiff, James Wilton, is a carrier connected with the
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company, and the de-
fendant, Mr. Richard Tipping, is an extensive cart owiter.
The action was brought to recover the amount of £7O, for
injury done to two of the plaintiffs horses, by an accident
arising from the alleged neglect of the defendant's servants.
Messrs. Brett and Heskith appeared for the plaintiff, and
Messrs. Aspinall and C. A. Russell appeared for the defend-
ant. It appeared that, on the 29th December last, four
of the plaintiffs waggons were proceeding along the rails
laid down along the docks, and in the neighbourhood of
Sonth Hill-street there is an incline of about 200 yards.
The waggons had 'proceeded about ten yards down the
incline, with the breaks on two waggons, when the
driver observed a large cart, wiih two horses attached,
on the line, about twenty yards a-head. He called to the
breaksman to put on all the breaks, which was immediately
done. The waggons having a " way" upon them could not
immediately be stopped, and the driver saw that his horses
would be crushed between his waggons and the cart if he
proceeded on the line. He drew his horses off the line,
and turned them down a space between some timber that was
lying contiguous. In doing this, the chain from the
waggon slackened and got under the wheel and pulled the
horse nearest the waggons down. The horse first fell back,
and was then dragged on his side. This horse, in falling,
pulled the next horse down on his side, and in the struggle,
the second horse got his hind leg between two logs of timber,
and was there held. The two first horses were still moving
and pulled this horse round, and broke his leg at the fetlock
joint. The horse was so injured, that the veternary
surgeon ordered him to be killed. The first horses were
also much injured. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff
for £35.

ACTION FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT.—GRIFFITIIS AND
WIFE V. JONES.—The declaration in this case was for
giving the female plaintiff into custody, and causing her to
be imprisoned at the police office. Mr. Aspinall appeared
for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Fenwick for the defendant.
It appeared that on the 28th January the defendant, on the
pretence or suspicion that the female plaintiff had stolen a
silk gown piece, gave her into custody. The plaintiff, Mr.
Griffiths, is a coach painter, and the defendant is a dock
gateman. The plaintiff occupied apartments in the
house of the defendant in Scotland-road The
female plaintiff was taken to Bridewell, kept in custody,
and brought before the magistrate, and upon the assertion
of the defendant, Mr. Mansfield was induced to remand her,
that other evidence might be brought. The prisoner, how-
ever, was discharged, the charge not being proved, hence
the present action was brought, in order that the plaintiff
might vindicate her character. A verdict was returned for
the plaintiff for £B.

ACTION FOR TRESSPASS.—HERTS v. BRERETON.---The
plaintiff in this case, D. Benjamin Herts, is a tobacconist
and cigar dealer, in Renshaw-street, and was also a traveller
for a large firm, and the defendant, Joseph Brereton, is also
a traveller. The declaration charged the defendant with
breaking and entering into the shop and premises, and
calling in a policeman and having the house searched by
policemen; to which it was pleaded that the defendant did
not call a policeman, and that what he did was done by the
knowledge and leave of the plaintiff. Mr. Brett appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Temple for the defendant. It
appeared, that on the evening of the 27th January, the
defendant was robbed of £lO, in a public house, by a
female. The defendant left the public house to go after
the female, and he believed she went into the house of
plaintiff, and that she was there concealed, and he conse-
quently got a policeman, and went into the shop. Mrs.
Hefts was in the shop, and the defendant told her a lady
had robbed him of £lO, and that the lddy who had robbed
him was concealed in her (Mrs. Herts) house. Mrs. Herts
told him he was mistaken, and upon that he beckoned to
the policeman, who was anding outside. Afterwards the
defendant and the policeman went out, and the defendant
shop, making gesticulations, and drew the
people passing along, the defendant alleging

attention of tl
that a lady wt

.o had robbed him was concealed in the sliop,
and used other offensive remarks. Subsequently other
constables were brought, and the defendant said he would
have the house searched, and did actually have the house
searched, but no lady was found. Mrs. Herts said the
plaintiff came into the shop and asked for a cigar, and she
named the price, upon which he said it was too dear, and
asked who was in there, smoking. She replied that her
husband was there. He said he did not want her
husband, but a lady, dressed in black, who was
concealed in the house. Mr. Temple said the
defence was, that leave was given to search the house, and
was not the defendant, but the the police who
~he house, and got liberty from Mrs. Herts. The
defendant, in his examination, stated that he had been at St.
Helen's, and in returning he entered a carriage containing
a lady and gentleman. He got into conversation with the
lady, and walked with her from the Railway-station to
opposite the Adelphi-hotel, and there she requested him to

searched t

called in and saw her cousin at the cigar shop.
She then went into the plaintiff's shop, came out again
in a few seconds, when he (the defendant) accompanied her

wait till

to a public-house, in Brownlow-hill, where she robbed him
of the money in question. She went away, and he saw her
go into the plaintiff's shop. He then called a policeman

whom

then went into the shop to buy a cigar, and on
being told the price he said it was too cheap to be good.
(Laughter.) Mrs. Herts then smiled. (Renewed laughter.)
In reply to the question whether there were any other ladies
- in the house, Mrs. Herts inquired if he was the gentleman
re ! who had been robbed ? He said, "What do you ask that

Tor ?" and she said, "nothing." He then went. out of the
shop to get a policeman, who returned with him. He stood
opposite the shop until police-inspector Smith went
in. That would be about an hour and-a-halt,
afterwards. Mr. Smith asked permission to search
the house, and Mrs. Herts replied, " With the
greatest leasure." Her husband was at the desk,
The inspector then left the shop with Mrs. Herts,
but he (the defendant) did not go with them. When they
returned, Mrs. Herts said, " I shall hold this gentleman
responsible." Ile said, then, " I have nothing whatever to
do with it, it is in the hands of the police" The inspector