The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-13 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME cmcurr.—CHELMSFORD, March 12.
CIVIL COURT.

'Before Mr. Justice Wightman and a Common
Jury.)
KEYS V MAIN.

This wee a " horse cause," which raised some
curious questions, puzring both to farmers and
lawyers. It was an action for the price of a horse
sold for /20, and, es this was just the sum which
would be within the County Court Aot's jurisdic
tion, a demand of 61. was added for interest, a
notice that interest would be demanded having been
given on the 1013 of November, and the action
being brought on the 191 h of November last. The
horse was bargained for at the price mentioned,
and the parties had lunch, after whicl the buyer
ob,erved something about the horse which led him
to doubt its soundness; but the seller, according to
the evidence for the buyer, said, "Oh, he's sound,"
and the buyer then took the horse home. On its
arrival it tell ill of the "gripes," and died withic
12 hours. _ _

Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Pearce were for the
plaintiff; Mr. Phiibrick was for the defendant.
The case was commenced yesterday and lasted a
great part of to day, 15 witnesses being examined.
The learned Judge, who observed Oat the case
had taken a long time, left it to the jury whether
the horse wes warranted, and, if so, whether it was
unsound at the time of the bqrgain.

The jury, composed chiefly of farmers, were much
perplex, d, and took some time to consider their ver-
dict. At last they said t hot the horse was warranted
sound, and that it was sound at the time of the bar-
gain. Thereupon
Mr. Pbilbrick, counsel for defendant, raised the
point that the bargain was not binding under the
Statute of Frauds (as it was not in writing, and the
price was above £10), until the acceptance, and that
as the warranty was not till then, the question was
whether the horse was unsound at the time.

The earned judge then asked the jury that ques-
tion, which seemed to perplex them still more, as
it was pretty plain the horse had the gripes then.
The jury at length asked if the gripes was un-
soundness P

Tbis point, which thus puzzled a jury of farmers
appeared also a little to perplex the Judge, who
rather, in fact, avoided answering it directly, telling
the jury that. it was for them. He suggested that
the question might be whether the horse then had
the gripes, and whether that was the disease of
which it died ; and if so, was that in their opinion
unsoundness, which might depend on whether, if
the buyer had used proper means, the horse might
have recovered.

The jury at last said that the horse did die of the
disease, and had it when sent home and accepted,
but that it m'ght have recovered if properly treated ;
and that it was not unsound at that time, as they
thought that the gripes was a disease, but not ne-
cessarily unsound.

The learned Iv dge said this came to a verdict for
the plaintiff for toe price bargained for. But then
the question would arise as to the 61. claimed
for interest. There could be no dnubt it was claimed
with a view to costs, under the County Court Act.
Did the jury think the 6d. was really due for costs ?
The jury ,aid "No."
The verdict therefore was entered only for the
£2O, and The efftct will bu that each party will pay
his own costs.

NORTHERN CIRCUI r.—yoßK, March 11.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Keating.)
Joseph Best, sen., aged 52, Joseph Best, j un., 17,
and Samuel Emsley were indicted for conspiring to-
gether to obtain 24 ends of woollen cloth, of the
value of £l3O, from William Baines, with intent to
defraud. They were further charged with con-
spirinv together to obtain 28 ends of woollen cloth
from William Pilkington, of Leeds, of the vaiue of
£2OO, with intent to defraud.
Mr. Manic and Mr. Hannay prosecuted, Mr.
Campbell Foster defended the two Bests, and Mr.
Middleton the prisoner Emsley.
It appeared that. the Bests were manufacturers of
cloth, and also commission agents, carrying on busi-
ness in a warehouse in Park-row, Leeds. The pri-
soner Emsley also carried on business at the same
warehouse. In November last the prisoner Emsley
went to the prosecutor Baines and said he had an
order for 24 ends of cloth, and wanted a sample.
He said he was buying for Messrs. Sykes and Son.
Mr. Baines, being satisfied with the name of that
firm, agreed to sell to sell 24 ends of cloth at 3s. a
yard, to be delivered at Best's warehouse. The cloths
were delivered as finiihed in the course of December
and January, and the carter's book was signed by
the elder Best. Subsequently the younger Best
sold a quantity of these cloths to Messrs. Bennett
and Swainson, of Leeds, at 2s. 3d. per yard, and
received pay for them.
On cross-examination it was proved that commis-
sion agents sold for one another sometimes, and the
price given, Mr. Bennett swore, was the fair value
of the cloths. Some time in January the prisoner
Emsley went to Syktis'a warehouse and inquired if
a man named Best had sold him any woollen cloths,
and was answered in the negative, " because," said
Emsley, " he has been selling some cloths for me,
and I cannot get paid for them ; Messrs. Sykes
never gave an order for these cloths, as stated by
Paisley.
On the opening of the ease by the learned counsel
for the prosecution,
His Lordship said he must elect on which charge
he would go, and he elected to proceed on the pre-
sent charge.
The only other piece of evidence was that on
taking the elder Best into custody there were found
upon hilt- three receipts for money, purporting to
be in the handwriting of Erusley, but not proved
to be so, and a conversation between Emsley and
Best as they were taken to gaol, in which, as proved
by the turnkey, Best said to --ElLfilloy, at the same
time winking with his right eye, " Thou knows we
are both innocent."
Mr. Foster was proceeding to address the jury,
when
His Lordship thought the evidence would not
support the charge of conspiracy ; so far as it went,
the prisoners appeared to have acted separately, and
the receipts put in were not proved te be in Ems-
ley's handwriting. He therefore directed the jury
to acquit the prisoners.
Emsley
was then separatelycharged with obtain-
ing the same goods by false pretences from Mr.
Baines, with intent to defraud.
Mr. Maule and Mr. Hannay prosecuted ; and
Mr. Middleton defended the prisoner.
He was found Guilty on this charge, and sen-
tenced to be imprisoned nine calendar months, with
hard labour.
John Simpson and Eizabeth Scott were indicted
for stealing a watch, chain, and Beale from the per-