The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-19 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BEIVCII, Dec.

BARDON t'. BENTOM—SHARE DEALING.
Mr. Bovill was for the pleintiff, and Mr. iftunphrey
for the defendant.
This was an action to recover the value of a bill of
exchange f;ir 100/. 18z. 6d. and the value of sevtr.tl rail-
way ~hares, which the defendant had undertaken to sell
for the plaintlff. The plaintiff had carried on business
as coal agent at Wapping, and the defendant,
who was a railway share-broker, had had offices
in- Nicholas lane, hut, to use the graphic a ords of
Lord Denman, in summing up, " these panies had
come to no good at all," as it seemed they had left their
respective residences. The plaintiff, like most people in
the autumn of last year, had speculated !erg* in rail-
way shares, and the defendant had acted as his broker.
In this way a small number of shares in the Eastern
Counties ; the Exeter and Dorchester ; the Exeter,
Yeovil, and Dorchester; and the Warwick and Worcester,
were deposited with him for sale. The plain-
tiff gave the defendant the bill for the above sum
on the understanding, that if the shares were sold,
the defendant should take it up, but if the reverse
occurred, tat the plaintiff should do so. The shares
were net sold by the defendant in the strict sense of the
word, as the defendant had pawned some shares with a
person named Stanley for 121, and with a person named
Thompson for 81., but the plaintiff had not received
even those sums, and he had been compelled to take up the
bill, for which he had received no value. The defendant
after the "panic" became a bankrupt, and in his exami-
nation he stated that a person named Somers had stolen
the bill from him, and that he had not therefore re-
ceived any value from it.
The defence was, that the defendant did not undertake
to dispose of the shares ; that the vanic came on, and
that many of them would not have -brought more than
one quarter per share.
Lord DENMAN said the question which they had to
decide was, whether the shares were or were not depo-
sited with the defendant for the purpose of being sold
for the plaintiff. He was bound to pay to the plaintiff ,
whatever he received on account of the shares, with the
deduction of a reasonable sum for selling them. The
bill, it appeared, was given to the defendant for value,
but he had not given any.
. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for 1001.
18s. 6d.

A HORSE CASE.--SPINKS V. BARDELL.
Mr. Humphrey and Mr. E. James were for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins for the defendant.
This was an action to recover 27/. 6s. from the defen-
dant for " horse meat," supplied to a horse, which he
had bought from the plaintiff, under the following cir-
cumstances:—The plaintiff is a livery -stable keeper,
and the defendant is the well-known omnibus proprietor.
The horse was sent to Aldridge's Repository, and was
sold to the defendant for twenty-nine guineas. The
horse was sound, and in excellent condition. A few
days after it was brought to the plaintiffs stables by a
boy, but his appearance was so altered, he was such " a
poor limping, miserable wretch," that those employed in
the plaintiff's stables, who had known him before he was
sold, scarcely recognised him. The boy left the horse,
and said his master would call and speak to the plaintiff
about it. He came, and in a conversation which c issued
between them, the plaintiff said, if he allowed the animal
to remain, he should charge him 11. Is. a week for keep-
ing it, so that the defendant knew perfectly well that he
was rendering himself liable for his keep.
In support of this statement, a number of witnesses
were called, who were in the service of the plain-
tiff. They all agreed that the horse was perfectly
sound ; that he had not been " nursed," " '
or "rowelled ;" that he was not affected with " farcy,"
that he had no "jog," no swelling in the glarnb, no
" ulcers in the nostrils," no " mumps." It appeared,
however, that he had a " rowel in his chest" when he
came back ; and that he was now in high condition—so
high that it had been found necessary to put him in a
box by himself, as he had kicked down all the
partitions in the stables. The plaintiff's veteri-
nary surgeon said he had treated the horse for a
lameness in the hock. He was afflicted with farcy,
which, in an advanced stage, was almost incurable; and
no one would think of putting an animal so affected into
a stable with other horses, as this horse had been placed,
on account of the great danger of infection. Farcy was
a morbid poison, which affected the whole system. The
horse had hal a " seton." lie did not notice whether
he had been " rowelled."
For the defence the very reverse was shown, and that
the plaintiff well knew that the animal was afflicted with
all these diseases. The defendant, it appeared, had
kept the horse for a month, at the plaintiff's request, as
be induced him to believe that he would soon get well,
and that at the end of that time he sent him back as use-
less, and demanded the return of his money. A veteri-
nary surgeon saw the horse a week or two ago, and found
he had recovered, but the veins were still" corded." As
soon as the horse was brought from the repository, he
was found to be in the diseased state alluded to.

Mr. HUMPHREY replied.
(The jury had not given their verdict whet we wen
to press.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dec. 18.

GOLDICUTT V. BEAGIN.—BREACH OF PROMISE.
This cause was tried before the Lord Chief Baron. on
the 25th of February last, but a new trial had been since
ordered.
Mr. Watson and Mr. Lush appeared for the plaintiff ;
Mr. Cockburn and another Learned Gentleman appeared
for the defendant.
The counsel for the defendant, however, retired from
the cause, under the following circumstances :
Last evening that Learned Gentleman made an ap-
plication to have the trial postponed, on the ground of
some affidavits.
The L)RD CHIEF BARON said he had perused them,
and it was his opinion that if the defendant should at-
tempt to call witnesses on the part of his defence, it
would certainly be acting like an insane person.
Mr.
Comaitrax—My Lord, I must most respectfully,
but energetically, protest against any Learned Judge
Prejudging a case, and thereby prejudicing the minds of
mrspyy who are summoned to try the cause. It is
t likely that some of the jury are in court, as op
applicationhatodyroufr Lordship, about an hour since, your
Lordship
any other cause,eaunsded to say whether you would take
has
ath(7 present was the next upon the
list. After what
fear that it will be impossibler(ed from your Lordship, I
get a fair trial.
The conversation then dropped,to get
called on this morning,
Upon the case being
Mr. COCKBURN said that, after what had passed last
night, he should not wish the eto b cause
• tried during
this sitting.
The Lorin CHIEF BARON denied having said anything
which could at all operate upon the minds of the . -
41rEly peir .4i cession then ensued, which ended in
'eggs withdrawing from the cause.
.1,-NrANNT then opened the case of the plain.
• an action brought to reoo ver
eat was for ' breach of promise
?.; , attOrign damages a
". 1575* r•-•#Z
4:4"Y
kT