The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-02 00:00:00

L 4& W---THIS DAY.

Railways

Pad

Caosiag
nice.
64 66
104 105

Business done

(Atlantic & St Lawrenc(
!Bom.,Barodadr.Cent Ind
Gu. 5 per cent...
Do. New .

COMMON PLEAS.
(Before Chief Justice Erie and a Special Jury.)
MARTIN V. PUTTICK.

104 i I I k

Buffalo and Laxe Huron
Do. Preteronce

61 51
8 Si
76 80
74 78
71 74
104 106
1061 1074
1054 1061
108 11,9
1 lip
21 22
C 8 70
69 61
33 35
13 45
32 34
32 34
106 107 i
liP
11)

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Mr. Martin,
of the Choral Uiion, against the defendant, one of the com-
mittee of the Sicred Harmonic Society.
Mr, Huddleiton appeared for the_ plaintiff, and Mr.
Hawkins, Q,C., for the defendant.
Tho plaintiff :t appeared was in the Crystal Palace on the
occasion of the Handel _Festival, and during the day he
went into one the apartments of the Palace over which
the words "Third-class Refreshment Room" was placed,
and when there the defendant came in, and in a very indig-
nant manner demanded to know by what right Mr. Martin
was there, as he must have known that the room had been
specially appro?riated on that occasion to the use of the
gentlemen firming the orchestra. Defendant re-
quested plainta to show him his ticket of admission;
but Mr. Martin, feeling annoyed at the manner of Mr.
Puttick, refused to produce the card, saying he had it in
his possession, snd that he had alraady shown it at the door
when he entered. A quarrel ensued between the parties,
when Mr. Putt ck called for the aid of the police, and on
one of the constibles arriving he (defendant) said to hitr.—
pointing to Mr. Martin---" Remove that man." This led
to further confusion, when the constable told Mr. Martin
that he must leeve the place or he should Le compelled to
use force. Mr, Martin complained that Mr. Puttick had
no right to place such an indignity upon him, and there-
fore he sought by this action to recover compensation for
the affront.

Buffalo,BrantAGodriel,
6 p. et. bds. Aug. 1, IS7
Do. do. July 1, 1673
Do. do. Juue 1, 16;1
Cleutta.&S.Eastn.(Lio
Cape Town & Dock Scril
Eastn. Bengal go. 6 p. c
'East Indian, gu. 5 p. c.
Do. do. G Ext.....
Do. do. H do. ..
,Grand Trunk of Cana&
Do. 6 per cent. Pref..
Do. 2d Pref. 6 per et..

Do. 6 per ct. Debentr.
Do. 7 per cent. 1862 ..
Do. do. 1867..

Do. do. 1872..
Gt.lndiaPenin.gua.sp.c
Do. New gua. 5

Do. January, 18.62
Gt. South.of India (Lim
guaranteed 5 per cent.
Gt. W. of Canada Share,

1035 1045
125 13
7i 71
1,7 99
90 92

Do. New . .. .. . .
Do. 6 p.c. '73 with' t opt.
1, Do. 5i p. c. do. '77-8....

(Indian Branch Limited
Madras guar., 5 p. c.
Do. 41p. c. Extensior
Dc. 11 do.. • • • •
Melb.Corn. R p. 0. Bnds
Melb. & Hobson's Bay.
Do. 7 p. c. filortg. Bds.
Newßrunswick,tCndi.

i } dis
1034 104 i
98 100
94 96

51 53

Class A. Capital Share
(Do. do. B Capital do.
N.Rl.C'da6 pc Ist pi bds
I.Seinde
4.:
Do. Delhi
iDo. do ' e
Do. Punjaub ci
Do. Do.
Do. Indus. St. Flo.)

3 .6
3 5
83 65
105,1 106.
1031 10.4
P
101 105
100 102

The cross-examination of Mr. Martin by Mr. Hawkins
having concluded,
The learned Judge said that an arrangement might be
possible between the parties, as the constable had by no
means gone beyond the bounds of his duty in carrying out
the directions of Mr. Puttick, who had at that time an one-
rous duty to perform. lie did not for a moment suppose that
Mr. Puttick intended to personally insult Mr. Martin.
A consultation took place between the parties, when
Mr. Hawkins said, on tho part of Mr. Puttick, he cer-
tainly did not mean to put any indignity on Mr. Martin.
The jury then returned a verdict for the plaintiff, with
nominal damages.

vo Kr:10-N

COURT OF EXCHEQUEB.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin and a Common Jury.)
MORRIS V. PA.R.RITT.

This was an action brought by the parents of the plaintiff
for damages for a violent assault committed on him by the
defendant.

The plaintiff and three other boys, it appeared, were re-
turning home on the day in question, when one of the lads
threw a pear up, which lodged on the wall of the garden of
Mr. Parritt. The boy Morris, in attempting to recover the
pear, climbed up the wall, when the defendant rushed out
and beat the boy about the head and back, in a very severe
manner. From the injuries the boy received he was con-
fined to his bed for some time, and medical aid was rendered
necessary.

The other lads who were with the boy described the
manner in which the defendant struck the lad Morris, and
a working man, who happened to be passing at the time,
also said he saw the boy struck by the defendant in a very
violent way.
The defence was that no more correction was administered
than was deserved.

The jury, after a short consultation, gave a verdict for
the plaintiff, damages

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)
THE ELECTRIO AND INTERNATIONAL TELEGRAPH COM-

PANY V. POPE. ---
This was an action to recover 6s. extra " porterage,"
under circumstances of considerable importance to tele-
graph companies and the public.

Mr. Winckworth, of Gresham House, for the company,
said that although the amount in this case appeared small,
the company felt itself bound to obtain his Honour's opinion
upon the issue between the parties.

Mr. Pownall, in the company's service, said—Some time
since I received a message from defendant, who was an
attorney, and it was directed to Miss Cunningham, Wrad-
more House, Nottingham. Defendant said that it was
about one or two miles distant from the company's station
at Nottingham, and I charged 2s. 6d. for the message, and
Is. porterage. When the message reached Nottingham it
was discovered that Wradmore House was seven miles dis-
tant, and we had to employ a mounted express at a cost of
7s. or ls. per mile.

Mr. Wilson, assistant secretary to the company, produced
the published tariff, which, in reference to the question of
porterage, when the distance exceeded three miles, called
strict attention to rules 64 and 65; and those rules autho-
rised the company to charge Is. per mile for the special
express.

His Honour found by the receipt given to defendant that
the message was delivered "in accordance with the terms
of the company's published tariff."

Defendant said he rested his case upon one recently
decided, Behrens v. the Great Northern Railway Company.
There defendants pleaded non-liability, because plaintiff
had not paid an mara rata, but the court held that as plain-
tiff's attention had not been called to the extra rate he could
not be held bound by it. Here defendant's attention was
not called to the extra porterage, or he would not have sent
the message.
His Honour ruled that defendant's attention was called
to the published tariff by the very wording of the receipt,
and it was defendant's duty to have made himself acquain-
ted with the nature of rules 64 and 65. The case quoted
did not apply, and it would bo very unreasonable to expect
a Telegraph Company to carry a message seven miles for
is. A reasonable construction must be put upon the words
in the receipt, and plaintiffs would have a verdict.
Mr. Wincliworth—Not one farthing of this money goes
into the company's hands.
His Honour—Just so.
settled.
Verdict for plaintiffs, who recovered extra costs.
It is purely a question to be

TIIE SUN, LONDON, TUTSDAY EVENINGI, DECEMBER 2, 1862.

SPORTING-THIS DAY.

CROYDON RACES.—Tars DAY,
BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.
INNKEEPERS' PLATE.
Sinking Fund .. 1
Cheater
Nine ran.