The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-16 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Jan. 15.

RICHARDSON V. CARMICHAEL.
Mr. MARTIN, on the part of the defendant, moved to
set the verdict aside which upon the trial at the last
sittings after term at Guildhall, before the Lord Chief
Baron, passed for the plaintiff for a sum of 231.
The plaintiff was a bookseller and stationer, and
brought his action to recover the amount due for certain
articles of stationery to the use of the Doier,. Boulogne,
and St. Omer Railway, of which the defendant was one
of the members of the managing committee.
It was now contended that the verdict was ,against
evidence, inasmuch as no proof was given that the goods
in question wore supplied to the use of the company; on
the contrary, it was proved that some of the goods were
sent to the private residence of the secretary.
Rule granted.

MINNONDE V. KUNTZ AND SOONER.
In this cause, which was also tried at Guildhall during
,he last sittings, the verdict passed for the defendant,
with liberty for the plaintiff to move to eater the verdict
for the sums respectively of 300!. and 1001.
The plaintiff was a traffic taker employed by the
managing committee, of which the defendants were
members, of the Manchester, Southampton, and Oxford
Railway, to take the traffic upon the line of the pro-
jected railway, which was stated to be about sixty miles
in length, at the rate of 151. per mile, to be paid in
three separate instalments, the first on the commence-
merit of the work, the second on its completion, and the
third was to be contingent upon the passing of the Bill.
The first instalment was paid, and it was to recover the
amount due upon the second and third instalments that
the action was brought. There was also a special count,
under which the plaintiff sought to recover a sum of
money for extra mileage, the line being sixty-five miles
in length instead of sixty ; and also a further sum for
extra work in various alterations and additions to the
traffic tables, and also obtaining evidence in support of
the same.
Mr. HUMFREY now moved to set the verdict aside,
and enter it for the plaintiff for the sum of 3001., being
the amount of the third instalment, the second having
been paid into court.
Mr. Baron PARKE—The third instalment was condi-
tional, but the conditions had never been complied with,
and therefore that sum could not be recovered.
Mr. llumEttEv now contended that the plaintiff was
entitled to the same for extra mileage, it having been
proved that the line was 65 miles in length.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON--YOU can only recover the
amount of the second instalment upon that item; the
record admits the payment of the first instalment, and
the third you cannot recover. Upon this ground you
can take a rule to enter the verdict for 251. only.
Upon the remaining grounds of the application, via.,
for remodelling the traffic tables, in consequence of the
abandonment of a portion of the line, and obtaining evi-
dence, the Court also granted the rule.
LAMB V. LAMBERT.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff; the pro-
prie,or of the Sunday Times newspaper, to recover from
the defendant the sum of 271. for advertisements inserted
in the Sunday Times, appertaining to the Jamaica
Northern, Southern, and Eastern Connecting Railway, of
which the defendant was one of the managing committee.
The verdict passed for the plaintiff for the sum claimed.
Mr. ti FREY now moved to set the verdict aside, on
t,hl7.eghround that there was no evidence that the order
ofthe
Coar4gainvyet,i ,b,aysAglirv.eon relnanbdehoaof
Aguilar,
the
tchoemspeac eyt a. r y
The COURT thoughttha
an _ tthere was evidence to the jury upon the fact, go to
refused to grant the rule.
In this cause, Which
%%mad
tried at 3
LEE U. C."..31R0UX
[(.luildhall during the
,of
verdict3ssl
withw as
last sittings before the Lord Chief
returned for the plaintiff for the 'on
sum'r
,liberty for the defendant to move to enter a
nens.u, it or
turn it into a special verdict by consent of the
parties,
should the Court be of opinion that the
contract was valid.
From the evidence given_ upon the trial, it appeared

that the plaintiff in the action was the administratrix of
Mr. Lee, who, during his lifetime, had purchased two
annuities, one immediate, and the other deferred, in the
National Loan Fund and Life Assurance Society, of
, which society the defendant was the secretary.
The object of the present action was to recover from
the society the; sum of 3551. paid by the deceased, on
the ground that at the period of his entering into the
oontract he was not of sound mind. It appeared
that shortly after the purchase of the annuities in
question, the deceased was confined in several
lunatic asylums, and that he died in an unsound
state of mind. The question left for the jury to decide
by the Lord Chief Baron was, whether the plaintiff was,
at the time of making the contract, of a sound mind,
and bad the defendant any notice of the same ; or was
the contract such an one as would reasonably be entered
into by a sane person, without fraud on the part of the
company. The jury found that he was of unsound mind
at the time of the contract, that the contract was per-
fectly fair, and that there was not slightest ground for
attributing fraud to the company.
Mr. GURNEY naw moved, pursuant to leave given at
the trial, to enter a nonsuit, on the ground that there
was no evidence to show that the deceased was of un-
sound mind at the time of his entering upon the contract.
Mr. Baron PARKE—A departure has recently been
made from the old rule, which prevented any person
pleading lunacy as the grounds of non-liability ; but it
must be set out in the declaration that the plaintiff was
known to be of unsound mind.
The LORD CHIEF BARON—There is no doubt but that
the contract was perfectly fair and honourable, and, for
a person in the situation of the purchaser, was highly
desirable and advantageous.
It was finally arranged that the verdict should be
made special in the case by consent of the parties.