The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE--This Day,

COURT OF PROBATE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

RIDGWAY V. ABINGDON AND °TILERS-WEDGWOOD

INTERVENING.

The hearing of evidence in this case (the opening of
which will be found in another part of The Sun) was re-
sumed this morning.

Mr. P. Smith was called to give evidence as to the capa-
city of deceased to make a will, and was of opinion that he
was quite capable of doing so when the instrument was
executed.

Mrs. Ledbet ter, the nurse who attended to the testator up
to the time of his death, said that Mr. Mayer always ap-
peared to be quite collected. He took food up to the hour
of his death. She gave him milk and water, with bread
crumbs in it. She had seen the servants give him a spoon-
ful of sherry in some water. The doctor who attended him
always mixed the wine betore he left him for the night.
The night before his death Mr. -k.,ingdon was with Mr.
Mayer, who was then suffering great pain, and young Mr.
Abingdon went to the druggist to get something. from him
to allay it. The pain was very uncertain in its attacks.
Mr. Mayer did not appear near his death on the day he died.
He was very ill, but death was not expected that day. About
two months before his death he was very much concerned
about a nest of throstles (thrushes) which he had in his
garden. He regretted the loss very much, and Mr. Wedg-
wood brought two old ones, which were put in a cage and
placed near the place the nest used to be. She did not
notice more particularly that the day before his death a
large number of letters were lying on his table unopened.
Ann Faire said she lived in Mr. Mayer's service for 11
years before his death. She recollected the last witness
coming to wait on him. She saw air. Mayer frequently
before his death, and he always appeared quite right in his
mind.

By Mr. Chambers—She gave him his food. He got
worse and worse, and died on a Thursday. He was very
bad a week before his death. She did not recollect seeing
old Mr. Abingdon there at that time. He never went into
Mr. Mayer's bedroom without he was invited up. Mr.
Abingdon called frequently, and appeared very
anxious about Mr. Mayer a week before his
death. Mr. A stle called once and saw Mr. Mayer.
On the Tuesday before his death, Mr. Mayer sent for Mr.
Abingdon, junior, and he slept in the house until he (Mr.
Mayer) died. She had never told any persons when they
called that Mr. Mayer was not in a state to do business.
He was able to do writing business. She had seen him
write before his death, but he was not propped up with pil-
lows. He was not able to attend to business a week before
his death. She did not know that during that time
he was attending to business, because she left the room,
By the Judge --Weakness of body prevented him doing
any business. He perfectly understood everything that
passed,
Win. Chester, gardener to the testator, said he always
went of a morning to his master's bedroom to receive orders,
Up to the day before his death Mr. Mayer gave him direc-
tions the same as usual, and always appeared to understand
everything he said.
The case is not expected to conclude today.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)

A CITY MERCHANT SUED BY A RAILWAY COMPANY FOS
25. BD.-SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY Y.

FLA TEAU.

This was an action to recover 2s. 10d. under circum-
stances of considerable importance to persons receiving re-
turned goods. It appeared that defendant sent a parcel of
boots to a customer in Maidstone named Marchmont, and
Marchmont, after examining them, refused to accept them
from the plaintiff, but returned them to defendant. The
goods were taken to defendant's warehouse, and he, after
the delivery, refused to pay more than ls. 6d., the carriage
from Maidstone.

Defendant pointed out to-day that the sum in dispute
was but ls, 4d., but he did not see why he should be called
upon to this, because it was not his debt. Mr. March-
mont had opened the package, or he could not have told
whether the goods were equal to the sample. If Mr,
Marchmont chose to open the package, it was clear he was
liable to pay the carriage. _ _ _

A person who appeared for the company said that the
consignee at M aidstone refused to receive the goods, and
directed the company to take them back to defendant. The
company's carrier told defendant that there was carriage to
pay, and defendant said he would pay it.
His Honour—The company have a lien upon the goods,
and they are entitled to hold them until they are satisfied.
You (defendant) have received the parcel with all its liabi-
lities, and if you have any claim for the Is. 4d. it is rather
against your customer at Maidstone than plaintiffs, who are
entitled to a verdict, with costs.
Verdict for plaintiffs.