The Sun.
London, England, 1833-12-13 00:00:00

MICHAIL V. MILLS.

This cause was also undefended; it was an action
brought by Messrs. Michael, of Bolton, to recover from
the defendant, a stay-maker, i❑ London, the sum of
M. 12s. for satteens, jeans, &c. supplied to the defendant
in 1831.—Verdict for the plaintiff.
The rest of the morning was occupied in trying causes
which were wholly destitute of public interest.

COMMON PLEAS-(THIS DAY,

(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Chief Justice TINDAL and
a Special Jury.)
CUNNINGHAM V. HILHOUSE.
This was an action to recover the amount of damage
done to a cargo of sugar consigned to the plaintiffs in May
last, from Tobago, in a ship called the Reliance, belong-
ing to the defendants. The damage way alleged to have
been occasioned in consequence of the vessel not being
sea-worthy.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE conducted the cue for the plain-
tiffs, and Mr. F. PoLLocs: appeared for the defendants.
It appeared that the owners of the cargo had recovered
the amount of their lose from tl.e underwriters on whose
behalf the present action was virtually brought, they,
since the time of paying the amount to the owners, having
discovered that the damage was done not by the ordinary
perils of the sea, but arose entirely from the ship's un-
worthiness. This was the real question for the Jury.
Captain Escott, the commander of the vessel, proved
that be took in a cargo of sugar at Tobago in March
last, and sailed with it about one o'clock mid-day of 25th
of May last. In about an hour after sailing a stiff gale
came on, and it became necessary to pump continually ;
and, at about four o'clock in the mo►ning, it was disco-
vered that some of the sugars had been washed over by
the rea, and the witness put into Grenada and had the ship
caulke‘l there, and the ship had then a safe voyage home,
though the weather throughout was very squally.
Cross-examined by Mr. F. PoLLocx—Nothing oc-
curred after leaving Tobago to make the ship " crank,"
except tt e stiff gale. The Reliance was Bristol built,
and vessels built at Bristol are more liable to " crank "
than ships built in London.
Captain Soper deposed that he had been forty years in
the West India Sea Service, and that from the account
given him by the last witness, Ise should say the vessel was
sea worthy, and that the damage was done previous to the
ship's leaving Tobago.
Another witness gave similar testimony.
Mr. F. POLLOCK addressed the jury on behalf of the
defendants, and contended that the underwriters, who were
really the plaintiffs, had not the least shadow of a claim
upon the defendants, for it was clear the damage was occa-
sioned t,y the ordinary perils of the sea. This was known
to the underwriters, tor, after the usual inquiries by them,
they had actually paid the amount of the damage done on
the claim being made by the defendants.
The Osier JUSTICE summed up the evidence, and the
jury after a short deliberation returned a verdict for the
defendants.

COURT OF EXCHEQUE-11.-(THIS ])AY.)

(Before Mr. Baron GURNKT and a London Common Jury.)
_ . _

LAMBERT V. BROCKLEBANE,
This action was brought to recover compensation in
damages for the injury done to the schooner of the plain•
tiff by the steamer of the defendant on the river Thames.
The plaintiff's case was not finished when our reporter left