The Sun.
London, England, 1833-12-12 00:00:00

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

(Sittings at Guildhall, before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE
and a Common Jury.)
IYODONNEI,I. V. BARTLETT.

no SOLICITOR-GENERAL (with whom was Mr. Maule
and Mr. Richards) stated the case for the plaintiff. It
was an action brought by the plaintiff, who was the master
and owner of the Good Intent, a schooner, against the
owner of another vessel called the Elizabeth, to recover
the amount of damage incurred by the defendant's vessel,
by means of negligence, running foul of the plaintiff's.
Having stated the circumstances of the case, the Learned
Counsel called the following witnesses :
James Quin stated that he was a seaman on board the
Good Intent, and acted as helmsman on the occasion in
question. At four o'clock on the morning of Sunday, July
8, 1833, while on the voyage from London to St. Mi-
chael, and not far from the Lizard, they saw the defendant's
vessel the Elizabeth on the lee bow, about six miles dis-
tant, steering in a course that it appeared would bring
her within a mile and a half to leeward of the Good
Intent ; she, however, changed her course, and bore
towards the latter vessel with the signal for speaking
flying When about half a mile distant only she hailed
and asked the longitude ; the master of the Good Intent,
who had in the interim calculated the longitude, gave the
information. The Elizabeth kept bearing down fast
towards the Good Intent, and when about three ships'
length from them the master of the latter hailed the
Elizabeth to luff, but the notice was not attended to, or it
was too late to enable the Elizabeth to do it, and she ran
foul of the Good Intent, carried away her shrouds, broke
the foremast off close to the deck, and stove in the quarter.
After getting clear of the Rlizabeth the Good Intent bore
up for Falmouth under a jury mast.
Cross-examined by Sir J. SCARLETT—Nobody told
witness yesterday " mind you stick to it the brig ran into
you." Had not seen Captain Macdonnell (the plaintiff)
for eight weeks. He was at Milford. The witness was
examined at considerable length as to the technical parts
of navigation.
John Norris, mate of the Good Intent, stated that he
had been a mariner 30 years, and had commanded vessels
24 years. He described the course the vessel was taking
during the night previous to the accident, as a proper one.
While he was below in his berth he heard some one on
deck exclaim there was a sail ahead. The Captain called
out to him " Come on deck, for they will be aboard of
us." On going on deck he saw the Elizabeth about a
frigate's length from them on the starboard bow ; the
Good Intent was steering the same course as before ; the
Elizabeth had her jib and foresail set and her sheet aft.
The Elizabeth came foul of the Good Intent, as described
by the last witness. The Good Intent's head was carried
off a point and a half, which in some degree eased the
blow. The Elizabeth then had the wind, which be-
calmed the Good Intent's head sails. If the latter had
not cased off, they would have come foul bow by how.
The Elizabeth did not at all alter her course, which
she might have done easily, and so have gone astern.
Witness then described the extent of the damage.
The moment the vessel was aboard of the Good Intent
some person on board the Elizabeth asked the longitude.
After the vessel got clear and the Good Intent got a little
sail up she passed the Elizabeth. Had seen land ou the
Friday previously, and was about 140 miles from land.
Witness had hove the log and calculated the longitude.
Even after witness came on deck the Elizabeth might with
a little activity had eased off. About a minute before lie
came on deck his Captain called to the Elizabeth to luff.
According to the state of the wind it was the Elizabeth's
duty to have gone astern. The rest of the crew of the
Good Intent were either abroad or dead, and could not be
brought forward. The crew consisted of six hands in all.
Cross-examined—When witness afterwards passed the
Elizabeth, which was two or three hours after the acci-
dent, witness was putting a jury mast up ; he hailed the
Elizabeth, and had an offer of assistance from the latter.
Witness had not been much asleep that morning. Hove
the log at two o'clock that morning.

Re-examined—On arriving at ialmouttip a pro Pest was
entered.

Mr. Walter Hunt, a passenger, on board the Good
Intent stated, that he was in his berth on the weather
side of the vessel, when the Captain came down to take
out the log-book and reckon the longitude. He then
went on deck again, and witness heard him call out,
"Luff, luff !" Shortly afterwards he heard a tremendous
blow on the side of the ship, where his berth was. It
was blowing fresh, but the vessel had remained on the
same tack all night. Witness got on the deck in time to
see the mast go overboard. The Elizabeth was then
astern, having got clear of the Good Intent. He then
heard a strange voice cry out, " What is your longitude?"
but did not hear the answer.

Mr. Thomas Hill stated he was brought up to the sea,
and was master of a ship for many years. Had heard the
evidence of the mate and semen of the Good Intent,
and, in his judgment, the Elizabeth was very improperly
managed.
His LORDSHIP interposed, by saying this was a new
bead of evidence, and if allowed, in all cases of accidents
on the road coachmen would be called to prove whether a
coach or gig was properly driven or not.
After hearing Counsel on each side,
His LORDSHIP said he thought the plaintiff was entitled
to prove what were the known practical rules at sea.
Witness—lf a vessel to windward asked to speak another
vessel, she should alter her sails, hauling some up, and
then she might go as near as she pleased without danger.
That was the rule observed at sea, the foresail should be
hauled up and the jib down, so as to be inoperative, and
the ship would be more under the power of the helm.
The value of a vessel like the Good Intent being detained
a month would be about 801., the current expenses alone
being about 60/., anti the hire of the vessel 201.
Cross-examined--801. a month was but a moderate
charge; but to give a profit a vessel of her size should
bring 1001. per month.

Mr. William Broad was agent at Falmouth for the
Good intent, and was agent to Lloyd's ; be recollected
the Good Intent putting in there on 10th July, and while
under repair, he now and then went on board ; she had
a jurymast, and had great damages ; she appeared to have
been run foul of ; was present when she was surveyed ;
she was repaired at an expense of 1501. 7s. 61. ; those
repairs appeared necessary from the damage she had sus-
tained ; witness paid that sum on behalf of the plaintiff :
the charges were fair and reasonable ; the vessel was
detained at Falmouth about five or six weeks ; witness
had been master of a ship 18 or 20 years; according to
the relative positions of the two vessels, as described by
the two first witnesses, he said the .Elizabeth ought to
have hauled up her foresail, and hauled down her j b.
lie never knew a vessel speaking another with her foresail
set ; it was ❑ot seaman-like to do it.
Cross-examine:l—The first five guineas in the bill was
witness's charge for commission, and three guineas were
paid to the surveyors ; the bill had been all paid. T, e
time the repairs occupied depended on the state of the
weather, as the vessel was at anchor ; the repairs 'night
have been dune in less than a ►nonth, but not in a week ;
she was caulked all over. The expense of caulking lit r
would be 401. The shipwright's bill alone would be 311