The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-15 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER-(THIS DAY.)

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 Dover, 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 were 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.

SIMMONDS V. MUNTZ AND SPOONER.
In this cause, which was also tried at Guildhall during
the last sittings, the verdict passed for the defendant,
with liberty for the plaintiff to move to enter the verdict
for the sums respectively of 3001. 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-
ment 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. HUMFREY now contended that the plaintiff wa a
entitled to the same for extra mileage, it having beef
proved that the line was 65 miles in length.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—You can only recover th.p
amount of the second instalment upon that item; th
record admits the payment of the first instalment, anti
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,
for remodelling the traffic tables, in consequence of t he
abandonment of a portion of the line, and obtaining e vi-
deuce, the Court also granted the rule.
LAME V. LAMBERT.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, the f To-
pricier of the Sunday Times newspaper, to recover f tom
the defendant the sine of 27/. for advertisements inserted
in the Sunday Times, appertaining to the Jam aica
Nor thern,Southern, and Eastern Connecting Rail v, of
which the defendant was one of the managing commit tee.
The verdict passed for the plaintiff for the sum claim ed.
Mr. HUMFREY now moved to set the verdict aside,. on
the ground that there was no evidence that the or dc,r
which was given by Mr. Orlando Aguilar, the secrets try
of the company, was given on behalf of the company.
The COURT thought that there was evidence to E. 7) io
the jury upon the fact, and refused to grant the rule..
LEE V. CAMROUX.
In this cause, which was tried at Guildhall during the
last sittings before the Lord Chief Baron, a verdict was
returned for the plaintiff for the stun of 355/., with