The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-10 00:00:00

, 4__Z-___,,,,—Z,/ 4 A'-‘-e- -L.---Z --6-)rt ..__.--",___---,---1•
47
be
and
ea
dhi
slept
defendantl deapla
Gr.-t-1-7-7--
---
t tahnedßheiasire
ooni,ta. tour up e Wye,
1 nightaWn de t thatWetherell
ewr with
1 hhl
.. • a.:,-../,,...ia,,
A"#,,,% 0- z •
, ~; -A. , ' ‘,,„
-!1_ • _ * --4 H -, _
r ''. `,4, I daughter, who the
ecuspaimede
I separate rooms. He saw nothing in their conduct which
I was in the least improper.
I g ztg
, - --7,-- ,_ At., .-t.--../ r, --rfc, /4.,
,
/ - -\,
L eAdibru. riv) '‘:‘
proveda.i'ens tthh ae t lAalnr.d al %ord.' Moifs s t 111%e'' e thecar
.etliiierssta3H,eodtca,lt,
• '
1 his house as Mr. and Miss Mills, and that be called her
i his daughter, and she called him her papa.
I Mrs. Bradshaw, the dressmaker for Miss Wetherell,
was then called to contradict the evidence of the witness
Russell, relative to her having received directions to alter
some of Miss Wetherell's dresses about the period when
the miscarriage was supposed to have taken place.
This closed the case for the defendant.
The Learned JUDGE summed up, and at nine o'clock
the jury retired. Shortly before eleven they expressed
a desire to see his Lordship, and they were accordingly
escorted to his lodgings. The jury then said there was
not the least chance of their agreeing to a verdict, and
begged that they might be discharged.
Mr. CHAXBERS objected to this course on the ground
of the immense expense it would be to the parties. The
jury eventually retired to a private room, where they
deliberated fur nearly an hour, when they again desired
to see his Lordship, and then repeated the statement
1 that there was no chance of their agreeing; and it was
eventually arranged, after some conversation, and with
the consent of both parties, that they should separate for
he night.
SATURDAY, AUGUST B.—The jury came into Court
this morning at nine o'clock, and by direction of the
Judge they retired to consider their verdict.
At half-past eleven o'clock a messenger stated to the
judge that the jury had not yet been able to come to any
decision, and they hoped that they might be discharged,
His Lordship said he must request them to try still
'longer to agree in their verdict, for the expense of a new
trial w.ould be so very heavy upon the parties.
At a subsequent period of the day it was stated to the
Judge that persons in the street were throwing up
pieces of paper through the windows of the room in
which the jury were confined. His Lordship said that
must not be allowed, and a man must be stationed in
the street under the window to prevent this conduct.
Four o'clock, Sunday Morning.
At nine o'clock the jury having informed the Court
that there was no chance of agreeing to a verdict, they
were discharged.

PRICE SD.

Saturday, Aug. 8.
V. FULTON GRIFFITHS.-RAILWAY LIABILITIES.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is an
engineer, against the defendant, who was one of the
provisional committee of a scheme called the S)xford and
Cambridge, High Wyrombe, 'and 'Uxbridge Junction
Railway, for a sum of money due to him in respect of
his services as engineer of the intended railway. It
appeared that the line was originally projected by a
person named Robert Morton Caley, who associated
himself with Orlando Aguila. Subsequently, a person
named Lane joined the undertaking, and induced his
uncle, the defendant, Captain Griffiths, who was mayor
of Southampton, to become a provisional committeeman.
A surveyor, named Andrew Trimen, was then engaged,
who assisted in framing advertisements and preparing
plans for Parliament. The plaintiff afterwards undertook
the duties of engineer to the company. The evidence on
behalf of the plaintiff went to prove that the defendant
had regularly undertaken the duties of a provisional
committeeman, that his name had been set down origin-
ally by his nephew Lane, with his authority; that he
had on several occasions attended the meetings of the
committee, and that it was only on the faith of his name
appearing to the prospectus that the plaintiff had been in-
duced to undertake the works. His claim now amounted
to 6461. 165., being 100 guineas as a retaining fee, and
the rest for his labour at 12 guineas per day. It was
proved that the name of the defendant appeared in some
of the advertisements in the newspapers as a provisional
committeeman, and the contract was 'blade with the
plaintiff at one of the meetings of the committee, on the
24th of October. Subsequently to this a managing com-
mittee was formed, who took upon themselves the trans-
action of all the business of the Company.
Mr. Shee and Mr. Peacock appeared for the plaintiff.
Mr. MONTAGU CHAMBERS and Mr. BovILL, for the
defendant, endeavoured to show, in cross•examining
the witnesses, that the defendant (Captain Griffiths) had
never given his sanction to his name being inserted as
one of the provisional committee; and that if it could be
proved that he had done so, still that he had not acted -as
one of the managing committee, and was not liable for
the acts done by them.
Before the opening of the case was concluded,
The Learned JUDGE put to the counsel for the plain-
tiff whether he would proceed further with the case. It
was clear that the defendant could not be liable for the
expenses incurred in surveying the line, inasmuch as
that was no part of the contract entered into in terms of
the prospectus of the Company. All that he rendered
himself liable for in the first instance was the legitimate
expenses, such as advertising, &c., for getting a suffi-
cient number of subscribers to constitute the Company ;
and the managing committee was not justified in incur-
ring the expenses of a survey, or any other expenses,
until the required number of subscribers had been ob-
tained. He would, therefore, suggest to the Learned
Counsel for the plaintiff to withdraw the record, and
endeavour to come to an honourable understanding with
the counsel for the defendant.

The counsel for the plaintiff, after a few moments'
consultation with the counsel on the other side, said the
latter would come to no terms.

The trial then proceeded for some time, when the
Learned Judge again interposed. He thought it right
to put it to the jury whether they had any doubts as to
the defendant having consented to act as a provisional
committeeman heft re giving his written consent on the
15th November.

The jury, after a brief consultation, said they were
not satisfied that the defendant had agreed to act as a
provisional committeeman before the 15th November.
His Lordship said there was then an end to the case,
and the jury, without hesitation, returned a verdict for
the defendant.

MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Warmick, Aug. 8.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON and a
Special Jury.)

GEACII AND OTHERS, ASSIGNEES OF-JOHN SCOTT, A BANK-
RUPT, DECEASED, r. INGALL, ACTUARY OF THE IMPERIAL

INSURANCE OFFICE.

This extraordinary canse, which lasted from nine o'clock
till seven yesterday, and from nine o'clock till past two to-
day, was an action upon promises brought in the name of the
assignees of a bankrupt of the name of John Scott, deceased,
by the purchaser at auction (a Mr. Field, as we caught the
name) of a policy of insurance upon the life of the said
John Scott, upon the 13th of May, 1840, effected in the
Imperial Insurance Office for the sum of 2,0001., against the
defendant as the actuary or public officer of the said Im-
perial Insurance Company ; and was a third trial, a new
trial having been twice granted, after vervict against the office
on each occasion, for misdirection of the Learned Judges—
on the first occasion the Lord Chief Justice of England
(Denman), and on the second the late Lord Chief Justice of
j the Common Pleas. The real issue was, as to what was
" spitting of blood."
Mr. M. D. Mr. Whitehurst, Q.C., and Mr. Mellor,
conducted the case of the plaintiffs. Mr. Hutnfrey, Q.C., and
Mr. Waddington were the counsel on behalf of the office.
This case having on the two former occasions appeared in
the columns of Thz Sun, we must now restrict ORT
report to little more than an outline, though it is one of
very considerable importance. On both the former trials,
as Bove stated, the company were defeated in their re-
sistance, as it will be seen below they were also on the
present.

The policy was effected on the 13th of May, 1840, the
examination questions put by the office, of which one was
as to the having or ever having had " spitting of blood,"
having been answered satisfactorily to the office in favour
of the life, both by the assured and by his medical atten-
dant, and the assured having been examined by Mr. Wic-
kendon, the medical gentleman employed on the part of the
office, as also by the medical examiner on the part of
another office, by both of whom the life was approved of,
and the recommendation in favour of it made to their re-
spective employers. The assured became a bankrupt ;
' Messrs. Geach and others were appointed assignees under the
fiat, and put up the policy for sale by public auction, when
the gentleman who now sued in the name of the assignees
became the purchaser for the sum of 118/. The questions
put to the assured and his medical attendant were, as will be
seen, very strict indeed, and, as usual, the truth
answers thereto was declared to be the sof the _
basis of
contract,th
.
and this declaration the assured had signed. The
ofdeath.oc-
-843, a
member
of a very consumptive family. On the part of the plaintiffs
consumption,
beyond
curred
question. The
thThofe deceased was l
evidently
were called a vast number of witnesses, certainly more than
a scorn, whose evidence went most strongly to negative the
fact of the deceased having been the victim of consumption
in May, 1840, and also the fact of his having, or ever had,
spitting of blood. The witnesses for the office, with the ex-
ception of medical gentlemen, a Mr. George Richmond Col-
lis, and Mr. Wickeudon, the examiner for the office, were all
(or very nearly, if not quite so) near relatives of the deceased
whose interest under the policy was of course practically lost
by the assignment for the benefit of creditors under the fiat
in bankruptcy ; and it was advanced for the plaintiffs,
that they had either an interest in giving testimony in
favour of the office, or an ill-feeling towards the other
parties.
Mr. Justice PArrEsox commenced his summing up by ob-
serving upon the great misgivings and apprehensions that he
felt in directing the jury, after two such eminent Judges as
Lord Denman and the late Lord Chief Justice Tindal had
been held to have misdirected.

The jury, without leaving the box, in a very few minutes
returned a verdict for the plaintiffs, for the amount of the
policy, 2,0001.
The plaintiffs (in form; the purchaser of the policy, in
substance and effect) have thus had three successive verdicts
for them, a thing unprecedented, at all events for a very
long space of time, if not altogether so. The costs, the
whole of which, between party and party, fall upon the
office, will probably far exceed the 2,0001., the amount of the
policy itself.

CHARLES BARKER v. CHARLES FRANCIS WOODY, ESQ.

This was an undefended action by an advertisement agent,
&c., in London. to recover 273/. for advertisements inserted
in he Times, Chronicle, and numerous other papers, against
the defendent, as one of the provisional, and also of the
managing committee of a project entitled " The Cambrian
and Grand Junction Railway., '
Mr. Humfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Hayes appeared as counsel
for the plaintiff. The defendant did not appear at all.
The defendant was clearly proved to have been one of the
provisional and also of the managing committee. The order
by the agent of the committee was also proved, and that
advertisements to the amount claimed had been inserted by
the plaintiff. The defendant had written, in answer to an
application by the agent of the company to pay up, "I will
pay you my money like a brick, poor as I am, for I like the
line very much," ice. lie had also written a letter, acknow-
ledging that he had made himself liable as a committeeman.
The evidence, however, was that the plaintiff, as an adver-
tising agent, claimed 15 per cent. from the company, and
obtained also a sum varying from 5 to 10 per cent. from the
newspapers, and charged his 15 per cent. upon the whole
snm for the advertisements, and not for that sum minus the
5 to 10 per cent.—The Learned Judge said that this ap-
peared to his mind dishonest, and strongly recommended to
the jury a corresponding deduction. They, however, re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount sought
to be recovered.

BARKER V. VERNON.
This was another action of a like nature. A verdict Was
taken for the plaintiff, truitlect to a refurew3'.