The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-24 00:00:00

HARTNOLL V. COALING.

This action was disposed of late on Wednesday night.
The plaintiff is the proprietor of a newspaper, pub-
li,hed at Greenock, and he sought to recover from the
defendant, who was the solicitor to and projector of
several lines of railway in Kent, the sum of 691. for ad-
vertising parliamentary notices connected with those
schemes.
Mr. Sergeant Channell and Mr. Lush were for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Chambers for
the defendant.
The fact of the insertion of the advertisements was
proved, but on behalf of the defendant it was argued that
as solicitor to a company he was not liable. In the case
of one of the " Companies" there did not appear to be
any other person mentioned but the defendant, as so•
licitor ; but in the others provisional committees were
appointed, and their names appeared in the prospectuses.
Mr. Baron PARKE, in summing up, said that in the
cases where no provisional committee had been ap-
pointed, and the defendant had taken upon himself to
order the insertion of the advertisements, he was clearly
liable ; but in the other case, it was for the jury to say,
upon the facts, whether they considered the defendant
had made himself personally responsible, or whether he
was merely acting as the agent of the committee.
The jury found for the plaintiff, damages 331., striking
out all that portion of the aceount incurred by the defen-
dant as solicitor where a provisional committee had
been appointed.

CROWN SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
Thomas Constant, 14, George Gower, 12, Edward
Cansdell, 11, and Felix Finn, 11, were indicted for un-
la‘yfally placing divers pieces of wood and iron upon the
rails of the Canterbury and Whitstable Railway, and
thereby endangering the safety of the passengers travel-
ling upon the said railway.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Baldwin prosecuted, and Mr.
Mellor appeared for the defendants.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel, and the
evidence that was adduced, it appeared that, on the
evening of the 13th July, a train started from Canter-
bury to Whitstable at seven o'clock in the evening, and
when it had proceeded a short distance, the guard dis •
covered that an iron chair had been placed upon one of the i
rails, the engine passing over t before it could be stopped,
but fortunately no injury was effected. The guard then
proceeded along the rail, and discovered an iron bar
stuck in the ground between the rails, and a number of
other chairs were also found at intervals placed upon
the rails for a distance of nearly a mile; and, but for the
timely discovery of the obstructions by the guard, very
serious consequences might have resulted. Evidence
was now given to show that all the defendants were seen
upon the railway about the time in question, and two of

them were proved to have placed the chairs and the
ot,'-r articles upon the
Therails. jt:7
returned a verdict f Guilty against Constant
and Finn, an,- q
Juriginent was .vesP
i .
acuitted the others.
Willieun Allpress, a ted
-Pod 30, was indicted for the man-
slaughter of Anne Allpress, his wife.
Mr. Mellor defended the
Mr. Horne prosecuted, and -
prisoner.
It appeared that the parties resided a:!' Gillingham, and
the defendant was very much addicted :0 drink. On
the night of the occurrence in question, she was at a
public-house intoxicated, and the prisoner had an alter-
cation with her; and, according to the testimony of one
of the witnesses, he struck her a violent blow on the eye
and also kicked her. His statement was, however, con-
tradicted by other witnesses, and it appeared that the
deceased had fallen down some stairs, and the actual
cause of death was by no means clearly made out.
The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.