The Sun.
London, England, 1847-11-06 00:00:00

IN BE JOHN BENTON.

This insolvent, a " gentleman," was remanded for
three months from the date of the vesting order for
incurring a debt by means of false representations.

BLOOMSBURY COUNTY COURT, Nov. 5.
(Before Mr. H. B. HEATH.)
roLLINGUIDGE V. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN
RAILwA:r COMPANT.
This was a case in wilich ec.,,p,”,..ti0n was claimed
fur an alleged breach of contract to carry cei-Cain
goods from Northampton to Euston-square.
Mr. Lewis, attorney, appeared for the plaintiff;
and Mr. J. A. Russell for the railway company.
Mr. LEWIS stated that the plaintiff, Dionysius Col-
lingridge, who was a journeyman currier, had taken
his passage by the train which left Northampton for
London at twenty minutes pas seven o'clock P.M.,
on the 6th of October last. He had three
packages, a box nearly empty, a carpet bag, and
a writing-desk. The two latter he had in the car-
riage with him; on his arrival at Euston-square
scatip he requested the porter in attendance to
take care of them while he went in search of
the box, which had been put into the luggage
van. Ob his return the carpet bag and writing-desk
ware gone. The action was brought against the
company for compensation in their capacity as com-
mon carriers, whose duty it was to carry goods
safely, unless loss occurred through the act of Pro-
vidence or the king's enemies. The Act 1 William
iv:, chap. 68, commonly called the Carriers' Act,
limited their responsibility in respect of gold and
silver coin, jewellery, &c., when the value of the
packet exceeded 101., unless at the time of the de-
livery the value and nature of the article were de-
clared, and a higher charge was paid for convey-
ance; but otherwise the Act dial not affect the
liability, any public notice professing to limit such
notwithstanding. The contract to carry the
luggage safe was as clear as the contract to carry the
passenger. The goods were lost on the platform, to
which the company would not admit any porters
except their own. If the liability at common law
were found to have ceased at the time the goods
were lost, the company's liability for the negligence
of their servant still remained. The amount claimed
was 191. 103., and in consequence of the loss of his
luggage the plaintiff had been detained from proceed-
ing on his usual journeys since the 6th of October.
Mr. Collingridge was then examined—He paid
ss. 34. third class fare from Northampton. On reach-
ing Euston-square he sent the porter to look for his
box. The porter could not find it, and. wanted him
to see whether he could not recognise it among some
ParCels. Witness said he could not leave the carpet
hag arid desk for fear they should be stolen. The
sorter told him that they were perfectly safe under
his protection, and that the company were responsible
ft•r them. When he had found the box, he returned,
Lilt the carpet-bag and desk were gone. and the porter
was gone too. tie saw the porter afterwards, and
next morning went with a friend to the office of Mr.
Jones, who asked the porter why he did not take care'
of the luggage ?
The porter said,
but wdietnnieesds had
given the luggage into his charge,
day that he had taken charge of
the things. 1;e
xt
carpet bag contained one dozen shirts, twhoesdueistus,of
clothes, eight silk' handkerchiefs, &c. The
phin wooden one, contained half- a-dozen booksa,
04• 0 al. worth of postage stamps, six pocket-knives,
watch, shirt studs, three shirt pins, &c.
On cross-examination by Mr. RUSSELL, the witness
stated that the bag and desk were in the carriage
with him; he had put them in iiiLoself ; he took them
out himself and put them on the platfora: he found
the box after he had lost his luggage. The c1i724.4t
hag and desk might weigh 501bs. together ; the box
51b-4. or 61bs.
The watch cost 71. 10s.; the guard
a as. ; the three gold pins 7s. 6d. each. The gold
shirt studs were worth thirteen shillings. There were
six silver pencil-cases worth thirty shillings, and eight
silk handkerchiefs worth t ree shilhleinvgaslau'epdietchee. These
were what the articles had cost;
at 31. 10a.
Henry Horace Elsdon was next examinedl—la
accompaniedM iffd
plaintiff to r. Jones's office.
identified the porter. Mr. Jones asked, "How
the luggage to be lost ?" The porter said he had
turned his back to go to look for Mr. Co mgridge's
box, though only for a moment, when the bag and desk
disappeared- Mr. Jones asked him what he did ? The
porter said he ran to the gate directly, and an oni•
:.nibus man or porter said he had seen the luggage