Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-29 00:00:00

and directed the jury upon law relating to libel. The
jury returned aye -diet for doeplaintiff,aatnagea 40s.
This being the last
jury was discharged, a Ate his Lodship had to try, the
"NI the court rose shortly after half-
past six o'clock.
ERRATIM—In '.de terse of Waring v. Everth, tried before
Mr. Baron W,..tsou, on Thursday, the verdict was by
mistake state'', to be for the plaintiff. It should have
been for the, defendant.

NISI PRIITS COURT.

T.sZFORE MR BARON CiIA.NNILL AND A srzctit JURY.

BARKWO'ITH AND ANOTHER V. MASON.—This was an
action to recover damages for breach of contract. Mr.
Hid, Q C.. with Mr. Mellish, appeared for the plaintiffs,
and Mr. Wilda, Q.C., with AI-. Keysman, for the defendant.
The plaintiff's, Messrs. J. B. Barkeeorth and Henry Bark-
worth, are timber merchants at Hull, and the defendant,
Mr. John Mason, c Lilies on the same business in M ,mel,
in Prussia. In August, 1855, he contracted with the
plaintiffs to supply them with a certain quantity of
" crown" and " fi-st brack" staves, but when the cargoes
came to hand it was found that the " crown " staves were
not of the merchantable quality contracted for. " Crown"
staves are generally six feet. 1.-ng, six inches wide, and
three inches thick, and are straight and free from knots.
They are used for making casks, bat "first brack" staves,
-which are of inferior quality, are used only in repairing
The crown" staves in question could not be sold as
such, but 'were disposed of as " first bracks." After the
case had proceeded some time, it was agreed to take a
verdict for the plaintiffs, the amount of damages to be
certified by one of the jury and a gentleman in court, both
of them being acquainted with the trade.
liltasnar v THE ST. HELMS'S CANAL AND RAILWAY
COMPANY.—This was an action brought by the plaintiffas
administratrix of her husband to recover comoensation in
damages for his loss through the negligence of the defen-
dants. Mr. James, Q C., will Mr. Mtllward. appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Monck, Q.C., with Mr Cross and
Me. Carr, for the defendants. it appeared that at the
time of his death the deceased carried on the business of
draper, at St. Helen's, while his wife carried on the
business of a milliner and dressmaker. He was in com-
fortable circumstances, and was improving in business.
On the 22nd of last October he le't home in the morning
to collect some accounts He called on several parties,
and was re' urning home about seven o'clock at night. He
crossed the canal bridge at Blackbrook, but turned bark,
as it is supposed, for the purpose of calling for a friend who
was to have waitelfor him at a tavern in the neighbour-
hood. Meanwhile, the bridge had been drawn to allow a
flat to pass, and the deceased not noticing the circum-
stance fell into the canal and was drowne. The night
was very dark, a .d the bridge was only lit by one lamp at
the Blackbrook side. Since then the defendants have
erected a lamp on the St. Helen's side. The jury re
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, £5OO for the
widow, and .t. 150 for the son, (a young child.) Several
legal points have been reserved, arising out of the acts
under which the canal was constructed.
'VELD V. THE LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY
COMPANY.—This was as action brought by. the plaintiff to
recover compensation in damages for injuries sustained
through the negligence of the defendant's servants, while
travelling on their railway. Mr. Atherton, Q 0 , with
Mr. Unthank, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Monck,
QC . with Mr. Simon, for the def ndante. The plaintiff,
Mr. William Walter Yeld, is a clerk in the service of the
post-office, and at the time of his accident had charge of
the district between Carlisle and Crewe. He
used to travel in the post-office van attached to
the mail train between those pinto, and per-
form the duties of his office while the train was
in motion. Hie fixed salary was a little more than £l5O
a-year, bat this was generally swelled up to £350 by the
performance of extra duties. On the night of the 24th of
last November the plaintiff, in company with three other
post-office clerks and three guards, left Carlisle at a qu irter
to eight o'clock by the mail train, and all went well until
they came to Winnoce, within a few miles of Warrington,
at a point where there is a great number of curves, and
where the incline was very steep. The t, ain was
travelling very fast, and the engine ran off the rails. It
dragged the tender with it ; and, after running some
yards, both it and the tender fell over the embankment.
The other carriages were drawn violently along the
sleepers, and the van in which the plaintiff was seated was
overturned. The shock was very great, and some of the
clerks being thrown against the plaintiff, his left hip was
severely crushed against the edge of one of the desks with
which the mail vans are provided. He did not at the
moment experience the fall effects of his injuies, bat a few
days after sards he exhibited all the symptoms which
injury to the spine develops, and he still suffers from the
effects of the accident. He is 56 years of age, and has a
family of twelve children, nine of whom a-e minors ant
dependent on him. He has been sixteen years and a half
in the Post-office service, but before entering it he engaged
in cuwaiercial pursuits on his own account. The jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damsgea £450.
Ths concluded the business of the assizes.