The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-21 00:00:00

LoNnoiNj NATIYRDAY EvENIN'G. AUGuBrt

storm of Tuesday night much of the corn had
sprouted, and it is feared that material damage has
been done to it. It is gratifying to learn that the
vast corn district called the Marshes, extending along
to Sutton Bridge, has not
materiallypfring
from mildew or blight; the heavy
suffered the coas t from S Spalding
fen lands have suffered most. No corn in the Holland
division is yet housed, and there appears to have been
a 'general scarcity of labourers throughout the dis-
trict. Prices for cutting, 12s. to 15s. per acre.
KETTEUIN4.—The crops of grain in the neighbour-
hood have arrived at maturity, and the harvest has
commenced in earnest. It has, however, been re-
tarded by the late heavy rains, which came down so
drenchingly that it was almost thought Lord Maid-
stone's prophecy of the Deluge was about to be literally
fulfilled.
there Tehree
streemopoemraptluarinethsaosfatlhe g
also been warm, conse-
quentlysome
mildewextent.
are spoken The wheat croops
s b
are
heavy,
w
anvyhsoun sproutingblighte toa
h
and t
extensive. The potatoes are much diseased, and the
stench from the decaying stems in a morning is al-
most intolerable.

GRANTHAM.—The harvest, which was proceeding
with great vigour in this neighbourhood, was consi-
derably delayed by the unfavourable weather of
Thursday and Friday in last week. Activity has
again been resumed this week. The crops generally
are ready for cutting, and are of fair quality and
yield, nothing likely to prove seriously detrimental
being observable.—Stamford Mercury.
YORKSHIRE.—The anxiety experienced in the
course of last week as to the critical state of the
weather, although partially relieved since that time,
has not been entirely removed. The days have been
generally fine, but much rain has fallen during
the nights, consequently the progress of cutting
has not been carried on with that rapidity
which
otherwise would have been the case. Hence also the
corn already cut has remained in the field, in sheaf,
longer than could be desired, arising from the fact
that it was not in a fit state to be led home and housed.
Yet many stacks have been secured in good con-
dition. But the unsettled state of the weather at
this critical period, with the wind continually shift-
ing its quarters, and the atmosphere frequently
disturbed, is far from promising. There is reason to
believe that the sample, under these grievous but un-
avoidable circumstances, will not generally
excellent quality which, at one time, had been confi-
dently expected.—Doncaster Gazette. be of that

THE LONDON GAZETTE, Aug. 20.
At the Court at Osborne House, Isle of Wight, the
18th day of August, 1852, present the Queen's Most
Excellent Majesty in Council. It is this day ordered
by her Majesty in Council, that the Right Honour-
able the Lord High Chancellor of that part of the
United Kingdom galled Great Britain, do issue writs for
proroguing the Parliament, which was appointed to
meet on Friday the twentieth day of August instant, to
Thursday the twenty-first day of October next; and also
for proroguing the convocations of the provinces of
Canterbury and York, from Saturday the twenty-first
day of August instant, to Friday the twenty-second day
of October next.

ADMIRALTY, AUG. 17.
Corps of Royal Marines—First Lieutenant and Quar-
termaster John Huskisson to be Captain, vice Captain
William Gordon, to retired full pay; Second Lieutenant
Henry Fallowfield Cooper to be First Lieutenant, vice
Huskisson, promoted.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Northampton-

shire.
Thomas Wilkins, Esq., to be Deputy-Lieuteuant;
William Harcourt Isham Mackworth Dolben, Esq., to
be Deputy-Lieutenant; Allen Allicock Young, Esq., to
be Deputy-Lieutenant, Aug. 12.

BANKRUPTS.
William Marshall, provision agent, Tooley-street,
Southwark, to surrender Aug. 28,
at twelve, and Oct. 1,
at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official
assignee, Basinghall-street; Ashurat and". Son, Old Jewry.
George Morton, coal merchant, Scotland-yard, Aug. 27,
at eleven, and Oct. 1, at one, at the Court of Bankputcy.
Cannan, official assignee, Aldermanbury; Selby and
Matheson, Lincoln's Ina.fields.
Thomas Secret, common brewer, Barnet, Sept. 3, at
half-pest eleven, and Oc°, 1, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. man, official assignee, Aldermanbnry ;
Green, South Molton-street, Oxford-street.
Thomas Franklin Nicholl, auctioneer, Poole, Sept. 2,
at half-past eleven, and Oct. 1, at eleven, at the Court
of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-
street; Barber, King-street, Cheapside.
John Bell. draper, Ludgate-hill, Sept. 1, at two, and
Oct. 5, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Edwards,
official assignee, Sambrook-court, Basinghall-street ;
Cobb, Gray's Inn-square.
Thomas Townsend, hat manufacturer, Bristol, Sept.
3, and Oc', 4, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court.
Miller, official assignee, Bristol; Linklaters, Sise-lane,
London; Abbot and Lucas, Bristol.
William Martin, grocer, Stamford, Aug. 27 and Sept.
17, at ten, at the Birmingham District Court. Bittle-
ston, official assignee, Nottingham; Hill and Matthews,
St. Mary Axe, London; Bray and Bridges, Birmingham.
William Jones Williams, hosier, Wolverhampton,
Aug. 26 and Sep- 25, at half-past eleven, at the Bir-
mingham District Court. Christie, official assignee, Bir-
mingham; Chambers, Sheffield.
C2olu,r,at hwalhf-iptatrsotreel,evoeffin,ciaalt the
nße Birmßirminghamingham Dis -;
William Mole, victualler, Birmingham, Sept. 7, and
a
Streicptt.
Wrights, Birmingham.

DIVIDENDS.
At the Court, Basioghall-stree",
H. Thompson, Portpool-lane, Gray's Inn-lane, com-
mon brewer, Sept. 13, at twelve.
In the Country.
W. B. Frankish, Kingston-upon-Hull, linendraper,
Sep" 8, at halt-past twelve, at the Town-hall, Kingston-
ty3n-Hull—W. IL Richardson, Darlaston, Staffordshire,
tube-manufacturer, Sept. 21, at half-past eleven, at the
Court, Birmingham.
NOTICE OF CERTIFICATES.
At the Court, Basinghall-street.
J. B. Drew, Willem's-buildings, Old-street-road, car-
penter, Sep', 13, at half-past eleven—F. Castelli, Bury-
court, S', Mary A se, merchant, Sept. 14, at half-past
eleven—F. F. Braggiotti, Bury-court, St, Mary Axe,
merchant, Sept. 14, at half-past eleven.
In the Country.
T. Barnes, Bristol, auctioneer, Sept. 15, at eleven, at
the Court, Bristol—G. Standerwick, Bristol, auctioneer,
Sept. 15, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—J. Harris,
Liverpool, jeweller, Sept, 14, at eleven, at the Court,
Liverpool—J. Timothy, Liverpool, flour-dealer, Sept. 13,
at eleven, at the Court, Liverpool
CERTIFICATES GRANTED.
J. Dellinger, Wickham Market, Suffolk, broker—T.
F. Millar, Bath, music-seller, certificate of the first class
—J. Jutsum,_ Greenwich, licensed victualler, certificate
of the second class—B. Wyon, Regent-street, engraver,
certificate of the third class—S. Haynes, London-street,
Paddington, wheelwright, certificate of the third class—
G. Lillywhite, Brixton-rise, farrier, certificate of the se-
cond class—l. Wakefield, Liverpool, tea-dealer, certifi-
cate of the third class.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

G. Batty and R. Feast, Leadenhall-street and Moor-
fields, Italian warehousemen—T. and M. Stainton,
South Shields, Durham, brass founders—R. Satterth-
wait3 and 11. Wright, Lancaster, builders—G. and J.
Wykes, Leicester, commission agents--J. and G. Rams-
bottom, Whalley, Lancashire, cotton spinners—Mar-
garet and W. Sanderson, Sutton and Rainhill, Lanca-
shire, butchers—W. R. Beaumont and B. Shaw, Mex-
broagh, Yorkshire, coal miners—H. and J. W. Weaver,
Manchester, tailors—Harriet Pitcher and H. Newman,
Pan..-,-aeon Bazaar, Oxford-street, dress makers—J.
Pechoy and C. Clarke, Walham-grean' Fulham, seeds-
men and florists—H. and J. Pickup, Rorae-odale, Lan-
cashire, cotton spinners—J. Jordan and W. Wilcox,
Liverpool, shin chandlers—J. and J. Goodchild, Har-
row-on-the-Hill, farmers—W. Wright, A. W. Young,
and G. Wright, Singston•upon-Hull, merchants (so far
as regards A, W. Young)—J. S. and H. J. L. Stubbs,
Manchester, merchants—A. Hughes and J. Hirst, Hud-
dersfield, Yorkshire dyers—l V. and J. C. Hodson,
Liverpool, Lancashire, chemists—G. M. Chadwick, J.
Chadwick, W. Chadwick, T. Chadwick, J, Chadwick,
and H. Chadwick, Rochdale, Manchester, Aldermanbury,
London, and Glasgow, flannel manufacturers (so far as
regards W. Chadwick)—T. Shaw and IL Gault, Man-
chester, woollen draDe:s.
SCOTCLi SEQUESTRATIONS.

Alexander M'Nair, Glasgow, wright, to meet within
the Waverley Hotel, Glasgow, Aug. 24 and Sept. 14, at
twelve.

SEABORNE MAILS.
DT signifies that the mails are sent from the general Pat-office
by the night—and M by the morning--dispatch.]

When made up in From what When
PLACES. ,General Post-office port dis-
due.
........ I London: ' patched.
America (by Brit. pkt.)Nl Aug. 20 i; .. Liverpool .. Aug. 26
America (by 'U.S. pkt.) N .. •• Liverpool .. Aug. 31
America (by U.S. pkt.) M, .. • • .. .. Southampt. Aug. 23
Australia (via South-
ampton) .. .. .. M .. .. .. Southampt.
Ditto (via Marseilles) NI ..
~ ,Dover ..
Ditto, viac. of G Hope '•.• • • • IPlymouth., Nov 30
Africa (West • NI
• • • • • . . •
coast).. Nl4th of the month IPlymouth ~ 26
tinenos Ay;:s ....
Belgium .•••• • • •• N 19th & 30th of mo. Dover .. Aug. 24
California(viaCh
3razii • •• •• NlDaily .. .. .. Dover .. Daily
Cape of Good 11:47r
•• Nl'9th of the month Southampt. Sept. 16
• • M 9th of the month 'Soathampt. Sept. 16
ee) M 2d & 17th of month Sonthampt. Sept. 1
Cape de ye a Pe N 14th of August .. Plymouth.. Aug. 26
•••
m,2aadon., Wed., &Fri.
' r i • • ..
iiN2d. of the month.. Plymouth.. Aug. 26
Constantinople. ....
Central America .. _ 7thl7th 27th of mo , Dover .. Aug. 30
Channel Isles ..
Ni7thl7thtlyth..
uanbargh .. .• Ni Tuesday
il 25,;1 & 17th of aeon. ISouthampt. Sept. 1
,Southampt. Tu. Th. Sat
B,_iofmolDov ..Aug. isi
vwSiccel7h of mnth ISouthampt. Sept. 1
Chili .. .. ..
France .. •• Mla
Grwee* • • ~
~ 1
8,
...kia.y.. DLoonv
de
or n ....
TTawiese.edsallyat
Dover Au•• 30
::iolland • • • • •• St Wednes.
kiondisras .. .. . Nll7th of the month' Southampt. Sept. 16
London .. Mon. Thur
.. .. Holyhead.. Twleedall
month Southanapt. Aug. 28 Y
a S.o.nth.n.ruLpi.B)4lllNl2TwiOtheeofathileY
rnd;a(viiofarseilles) N,Bth&24th ofmonth Dover .
Li Hope 1•1115 th of mon
India, via C. Of .
..
7..11,11C:di
jaall(vii
Yr 15th of th
Plymouth.. Aug. 25
mauritias
..
.. month Plymouth.. Aug. 26
wrr nean 0414
M'el --- a .. M 20th of the
Southampton) ,
month Sonthampt. Aug 28
,fediterrAnear (via
N Bthgc 24th ofmonth Dover
..
Marseilles) .. ~ ,
i dof the month.. .. m 2
MaT'ic° ** ••
.. Id 9th of the month So th Sept,* u ampt. Sept. 16
Madeira •• ••
r 17th,1: th,l9th,27tb 1
Malta* .. •••t &30th of month j Dover Aug. 28
.. N sth 15th25thofme Dover .. Aug. 22
Pap
Naplales4 • • ' '
..
,N sth 5.h r . ill of mo , Du-rer .. Aug. 22
States', ..
Peninsula • • ..
Mi7th 17th 27thef nu-, Southampt. Aug. 26
.. M 2d & 17th of mntb'Southampt. Sept. 1
Tuscany* .. .. •• Peru
••
•.
N sth 15th 25th of mo Dover •• !Aug. 22
West Indies • •
M 17th of the Moab Southampt. 'Sept. 1
• •
West Indies (except
of the month •. Sonthampt.
Havana & Nassau) Id `AI
m The mails to those Conntries thus to ark Od (*) are conveyed by
French packet via MarSeilleg.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTIII92I?N Cll?CUl7:—Liverpool, Auy. 20.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice
WIGIITMAN.)
WEB TER V. GARNETT.

This was an action of libel, brought by the plain-
tiff, who is lessee of the Haymarket Theatre, against
the defendant, who is the proprietor of the Manchester
Guardian newspaper. The defendant pleaded " Not
guilty."
Mr. Watson, Q.C., Mr. Sergeant Wilkins, and
Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr.
Hugh Hill, Q.C., and Mr. Aspland for the defendant.
Mr. WATsorr, in opening the case, said, the plain-
tiff was the lessee of the Haymarket Theatre, and had
long performed on the stage with preat success. The
defendant is the publisher of the Manchester Guar-
dian, and the plaintiff was compelled to come before
them in consequence of the publication of a paragraph
in that paper which was calculated to do him the greatest
possible professional injury. Anything affecting the
popularity of gentlemen in the plaintiff's profession
was calculated to be a serious injury to them. The
present libel arose out of proceedings which took
place in Manchester in June last, several gentlemen
in that town having resolved to get up a series of
drareatic performances, the proceeds of which were
to be applied to the charities of the town. The
paragraph in question bad cast an aspersion on the
character of Mr. Webster calculated to make him un-
popular at country towns, and to prevent his having
engagements at country theatres. A new drama had
just come out at the Haymarket, and Mr. Webster
was busily engage with it when he received, on the
17th of May, a letter from Mr. Worthington, the
secretary of the local Charities Committee at Man-
chester, asking him if he could afford assistance in
carrying out a proposal of Mr. Knowles, the manager
of the Manchester Theatre, to have a series of dra-
matic performances in aid of the charities of the
town. Mr. Webster replied that he should be happy
to afford such assistance as he was able, consistent
with the demands upon his time at his own theatre.
On the 27th of May he wrote that he was so much
engaged at his own theatre with the new drama of
Alind Your Own Business, which had had a great run,
that he could not come down, and could only spare
some of his corps. A telegraphic dispatch was sent
to him urging him to come down, but he replied to
this, offering to give up a day's performance to aid
them, but he could do no more. In the Manchester
Guardian of the 2d of June—a newspaper which
had a large circulation—appeared the following pa-
ragraph :

Festival Performance in aid of the Local Charities.
—(After a complimentary notice of the liberality of Mr.
Knowles, the dramatist, it went on)—On Saturday we
announced the programme for four ont of the six nights,
Wednesday and Thursday being left open because of the
extraordinary neglect of Mr. Webster, lessee of the Hay-
market Theatre, who, after a letter of large professions,
was written to thrice without deigning any answer, and
when a pressing telegraphic message at length exhorted
a reply, it was such as to determine the committee to
make their arrangements without asking any aid from
Mr. Webster."
At first sight this might appear not to be a strong ob •
nervation regarding the plaintiff, but Mr. 'Webster
felt that it would be destructive of his success should
he ever after wards be called upon to perform at Man-
chester, from the unpopularity it would raise against
him, and the same effect would be produced in the
smaller towns in which this paper circulated. Mr.
Worthington, in answer to a letter from the plaintiff
complaining of this paragraph, wrote to him that
the paragraph he complained of did not emanate
from the Charities Committee. Mr. Webster
then, by his attorney, called on the de-
fendant to retract the same, and make an
apology for the injury which this paragraph was cal-
culated to inflict upon him. The defendant wrote in
answer on June 12 :—" I beg to say, in reply, it is
not my practice to make apologies, or to do anything
else, under the pressure of threats." The letter went
on to say it was the duty of every man of right feel-
ing in this country who bad done an injury to
retract it, and be would do so if the threats of
proceedings were retracted. Mr. Webster, of course,
could take no such step, and commenced the present
action.

Mr. Benjamin Webster examined—He was the ma-
nager of the Haymarket and Adelphi Theatres. En-
gagements in the provinces during the recess were
highly important to him. He went as a " star" on
those occasions, as an actor. He had performed at
Manchester once, In May last he had brought out a
new play entitled Mird Your Own Business, by Mr.
Mark Lemon. It was important for the success of
the new play that it should have a series of perform.
ances. Witness and the main strength of the
Haymarket company were engaged in that co-
medy. On the 17th of May he received a
letter from Mr. Worthington, the secretary
of the Dramatic Festival Committee of Man-
chester, asking him to give his performance,
and also that of some of his company, for one of six
nights. He answered this on the 22d of May, offer-
ing his own and company's services as much as the
demands of his own theatre would enable him. (The
further correspondence opened by the Learned Coun-
sel was then put in and read, together with the libel.)
The new play of Mind Your Own Business and a
new farce of Keeley Worried by Buckstone at that
time had a considerable run, and himself and most of
his corps were engaged in performing in them, ren-
dering it impossible for him or them to go to Man-
chester. Notwithstanding his letter, he heard that
he was announced to play at Manchester, and, in eon-
sequence, he wrote to Mr. Worthington on the 3d of
June offering to forego one of his
performances in
London, and come down to Manchester, rather than
that the public should be disappointed. He first heard
of the libel some days afterwards. On the 7th of
June he rceeived a letter from the Charities Commit-
tee, thanking him for his kind offer. He subsequently
instructed to writs to the committee,
complaining
wis toofatthernpeayragra
ph,and received an answer
from Mr. Worthington that the paragraph did not
emanate from the committee. (These letters were
put in.) Observations concerning actors in the public
press had a very g ea effect on their success in their
profession. (The letters to and from the defendant
were then put in.)
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. HILL, for the defendant, sincerely regretted
that these steps had been taken. He was by no means
insensible to the value of character, and of the neces-
sity of preservingit from attacks ; but the paragraph
inquestiong
gave no ground whatever for proceedings
like this. He cast no aspersions whatever on Mr.
Webster. But that gentleman occupied a position
which brought him much before the public, and he
must submit to the comments and remarks' of the
so long es those comments
jwoeurrennalostof the day; and,
made
for the purposo of private slander and
abuse, Mr. Webster had no right to complain. Mr.
Webster complained that the article in question was
ajury would judge. They must
forget the defendant, a gentleman
fih
respectable with Mr. Webster, and bound by
not,
however,
Of tha
equally
his position to bring all matters of local interest before
the public in his newspaper. The defendant was right
in guarding the success of the public charities of the
town where his newspaper was published. Looking,
then, at the duties and position of both these gen-
tlemen, there was no pretence for saying that the
in question transgressed , the bounds of
The correspondence which had
paragraph in
.
been put in was in the first instance a very
liberal offer from Mr. Webster of his services—pre-
aragraph said.-." full of professions."
ent
NeisoeidYouwbhtallr the
. plVebster, at the time he wrote this
letter, intended to do what he professed, if able to do
it. That offer was treated by the committee as a
most liberal offer, and produced a corresponding in,_
pression of the
22d, them, as appeared by their letter
22d, offering him any of three nights toperform, and
requesting
an immediate answer, in order that their
until. the 29th of Ma
tivnesdand their advertisements to the news-
arrangements might be announced. No answer %ea,'
Y$ and they
hwoewreevoehrl,igreecde
Immediately
papers with Mr. Webstef.s. name announced for two
was receivesdtatincitetshurtp?rise.
hisW Webster,
attorney,o
nights' performances, wh_ieh appeared the very day
did statingex that he could not
this letter
An attorney
Was there
anything come.
libellous
himself to
afterthe 5 thist h
of
and
e ewasw sent stating
otnone
()Mt ro .
oofnecnrome7inegdy.
high
aracte r
into court. He
nwehvoe r ofhad course,but t 11 e hraedm ebdayt
the
ed
editoradopted
li
kt he i
as course
injured
ample apology would have been
gentlemaninstead
o f
when, no 'doubt, an
reats of the lain • '
made to him. Under the three the def P d attor-
ney, the course pursued
by
manen
an t Was that
which every highly
honourable would
pursue.
The attorney had asked (as attorneys
.always did) for a
retractation of the charge made
.again!t the plaintiff
in such a manner as rendered it impossible to be given
by the defendant, terming the paragraph "libellous
defendant to
an admituntrutb
that he had published a lib el r .id
.The
attorney took care so to requirerhe anal.ef_ apology
endant never thatfelt he
would not lose his action. '
any hostility towards the plaintiff, and was quite an-
lished any libel respe t"
conscious of having pub 1 cmg
him fairly. If the whole matter were loosed at he
was satisfied the jury would not be of opinion that
this was a libel. The defendant made no imputations
on the plaintiff, and had only refused to make an
apology because of the extravagant _ demands made by
the plaintiff's attcrney, which, as an honourable and
independent man, he could not accede to.
the case, leaving it to
His LORDSHIP summed up
the jury to say whether the paragraph was a fair
comment on a matter of public interest, or was die-
tlted by private soite and malice, and tended t 3 the
injury and discredit of the plaintiff. If they thought
the latter, they would say what damages should be
given to the plaintiff.
The jury retired to consider their verdict, and after
being absent about an hour, returned into court With
a verdict for the defendant*

WESTERN ClRGUlT.—Bristol, Aug. 19.
(Before Mr. Baron PLATT.)
LAVERTON V. THE BRISTOL WATERWORKS COMPANY.
Mr. Sergeant aiiuglake, Mr. Barstow, and Mr. M.
Smith were counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Butt,
M. Rowe, and Mr. Stone for the defendants.
The declaration in this case stated that, by an Act
of Parliament under which this company was consti-
tuted, it became the duty of the defendants to lay
down pipes, to affix water or fireplugs, and keep the
mains charged, but that they neglected to do so, and
did not keep the mains charged, in consequence
whereof the plaintiff's premises were burnt down, and
he sustained great loss. The defendants pleaded not
guilty, and they also pleaded several other pleas,
which, however, did not raise any particular question
to be tried.
It appeared that in 1846 an Act of Parliament was
passed (9th and lOch of Victoria, c. 222) for the pure
pose of supplying the inhabitants of the city of Bris-
tol with water. Several :sections gave the company
power to take lands, to take springs and other waters
from a considerable distance, and particularly from
the river Chew, on the Mendips ; to lay down pipes,
&c. There was a proviso that all these works,
Sze., should be completed within five years from the
passing of the Act. Other sections provided that the
company should lay down mains and affix fireplugs
for the supply of water for extinguishing fires, such
fireplugs not to be more than 100 yards from each
other; and it was enacted, that as soon as such fire-
plugs should have been completed, the company should
deposit keys and affix public notices, to denote the
situation of such fireplugs. By the 98th section it
was declared that the company should at all times
cause the mains to be fully charged, and that it should
be lawful for all persons at all times to take and use
the water of the company in extinguishing fires with-
out making compensation.
The facts were simple. The plaintiff was a cabinet
maker in large business in Redeross-street, in the
city of Bristol. On the 2el of September, about two
o'clock in the morning, his premises were discovered
to be on fire. The alarm was given, and several
engines instantly repaired to the spot ; but the
efforts of the firemen were unavailable, as, al-
though there were mains and fireplugs in the
street and neighbourhood, there was not any water
to be obtained, and it was nearly four o'clock
before the engines could be got to work, and
then the fire was extinguished in a comparatively
short time. The supply of water to the city was
upon the " pressure' system, so as to avoid the
necessity of persons having cisterns ; the company,
therefore, had the mains charged during the day, but
stopped the supply during the night, in order to hus-
band the water. The company had refused to deposit
keys, or to affix public notices, according to the pro-
visions of the Act. In consequence of there not being
water in the mains on the night in question, the pre-
mises and goods of the plaintiff were destroyed, and
he sustained damage to the amount of nearly 6001.
As the company had refused to give any compensa-
tion to the plaintiff, he brought the present action to
recover that which he alleged to be due to him in
consequence of the negligence of the defendants in
not having their mains charged with water in ac-
cordance with the provisions of their Act of Parlia-
meat.
Upwards of 20 witnesses were examined to prove
that there was a fire, that the mains were not charged,
and the value of the property destroyed.
The defence was that the defendants were not li-
able. By the Act of Parliament the company were
empowered to take the water of the river Chew, 18
miles from Bristol, but they would not take the water
of that river until they had formed three compensa-
tion reservoirs capable of holding a certain quantity
of water, and had obtained a certificate to that effect
from two magistrates. The company could not ob-
tain that certificate, and other circumstances delayed
the progress of the works and prevented that state of
things from existing at the time of the fire without
which no obligation of any kind could have existed.
The company had done all that was possible with a
view of supplying the inhabitants with water. The
public obligation only attached after the inhabitants
were supplied. The great object of the Act of Par-
liament was to give the company power to supply
the inhabitants with water for domestic purposes ;
and, although the company had laid down mains and
pipes, still they were not bound to find a supply of
water for the extinguishing of fires until the domestic
supply was complete ; and it was further contended
that, by the Act, there was an exception in times
of drought, &c., and it was said that at the time of the
fire there had been a great drought, so that, in fact, the
company had not sufficient water for the purpose of
extinguishing fires, or they could not on the follow-
ing day supply the inhabitants with the water they
were entitled to. The company had done all they
could under the incomplete state of their works. It
was also submitted that, under this Act, no action
was maintainable, but that the damage should be as•
sessed by a jury or determined by arbitration, because
the obligation being imposed by Act of Parliament,
the remedy pointed out by that Act of Parliament
must be resorted to.
The defendants proposed to show that at the time
of the fire they had not completed their reservoirs
under the Act, or obtained the magistrates' certificate
that they were complete, but had entered into a
' money contract for the supply of water, and that the
drought had prevented their finishing their reservoirs,
and that had they not shut off the water from their
mains on that night they would not have been able
to supply the inhnbitants with water the next day.
The Learned JUDGE decided that such evidence
could not be received, and a bill of exceptions to that
rule was tendered.
Evidence was then given that the great damage
was done before the arrival of the engines, but it was
admitted that there was not any water for nearly an
hour after their arrival, and it was then turned on by
one of the turncocks. Some of the policemen who
were called by the defendants stated that had there
been water some part of the premises might have been
saved. It was clearly proved that during that night
there was not any water at all in any main in the
city of Bristol.
air. Baron PLATT, in summing up the case, ob-
served that there was a stipulation in the Act of Par-
liament that the company should
give protection to
the public ; and, in case of fire, water was to be ready
to extinguish it. It was part of their bargain that
they should afford that benefit to the public as part of
the service for which they were paid, and for the
monopoly given them. It was the duty of the com-
pany to keep their mains full, and it was a serious
dereliction of their duty to have neglected it. It was
no answer to say that they could not have supplied
their private customers with water had their mains
been charged.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff--
Damages 5311. 183. 7d.
The case lasted nearly two days, and brought the
Western Circuit to a close.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

tenced to transportation for having in his possession
a quantity of silks, watches, &c , the produce of va-
rious burglaries and robberies. The prisoner hid
been employed by Jacobson, whose real name is
Woolf, as foreman, and after the conviction of his
employer he had gorse into business for himself. The
property in question, which consisted of watches,
rings, and other articles, was found in the prisoner's
shop in Agar-street, and identified by Mrs. Woolf as
being part of the stock in one of her husband's shops,
which, as she alleged, had been surreptitiously re-
moved.

The prisoner as7erted that the articles produced
were his property. Some he had purchased, but the
bulk had been given to him by way of payment for
wages due at the time he left Jacobson's service. _

&Ir. Austin, a solicitor, said he-was in a condition
to prove that only a clock had been given to the pri-
soner in part payment of his wages.
Mr. Cross said he could produce a bill of parcels
to show that the cases of some watches identified by
Mrs. Woolf as her husband's property had been made
for the prisoner. It must also be recollected that the
articles said to be stolen had been found exposed pub-
licly in the shop for sale.
Mr. llAanwicK said the case must go to a jury.
Mr. Cross applied for leave to bail the prisoner.
Mr. ILtRDWICK would take time to decide upon
the application.
The prisoner was then ordered to stand committed
on the charge of stealing certain articles identified by
Mrs. Woolf.