The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-07 00:00:00

------
(_ .---
(:, -----
NEIe)--- e—
„,.......e._..---.,...e..........:0jr.....c.-3, G.....------..----
~,,,----- ~---- ---,...e,- -
--. ,
_• Y !
..----------..__---'-r_-s---x--g. —...-
041
1 1 R NE ,A - 1
,_
• • ,9._.-
,g--- '=-__,, ~,,--..- -_,,,,,.:„..,..,,,„,.,7
The jury retired, and on their return
-
, . that defendant was an infant, and th t.
.t. .. - ',..•:' P •
-----
1.i..-; '
I •"*./-, • ,A, ..„,_.
•,„,•• , .4,
~..t 4 N .
were not necessaries. Mr. Under-Sh r
,-..\
if)
1,. ` -.4'Z,-;' ~ ,k.
~.4.,:tr,-.7.- •tte-4.#-;
, 10-4ertri .. ,
IREitEivED 7 Aut.. !8•67..
,r . • : .. c
..
said the verdict would be for the defends o~
A_ ..,,,, -- ~
AS ..a.,,.... ---____._-_ • —,..-- .. , .i,,:• , N ', w
. , . 4, . ,• -,
-..1"..'• .I==, '%.,,.fts 2111-4-.‘ ..- I
s:'-'44 c.**4-,‘"--, "--;* ' 1 1 3
the pleas, and it was accordingly so entered.
------ -_--1 1 kc,94c. "-JP
..t iv ITik? -''\ 1;r56 *lt- '' ' ' e 4 , i ,_----.A.*:=,. ,"
..,
',,,,' L'..s =
S'A'''') , 'lhr'' s--
- , ‘*- It' -i'
, --"T,-,, -.. VOr ..,,,,, ;174.
, ------,,,
,;, ,
...1.,1,, , 4,
__,__
i-c„. 103 L',.,.
.), ~.., ''e. -,
(1V Ice ,
-...--,7/
THE MILK OF --p/
!5"..„..1,..r.-*--:',.---41.4vrvtel . T-27,
~,a-ifiz...4o-1...,,,dy,
\ -
\ ~
\;, , / 4- /

COJIMERCE.

PRICE.... 4d.
STAMPED sd.

In the Manchester County Court on TuPsf.laY
before Mr. E. Ovens, judge, an action was brought
by' T'
againsthotas Rogers,dward B
provisionroonh aedd,eaflaer
jri,leLor,
lgaatlee,
Fan E
rm,
near Ashton-under-Lyne, to, recover£so damages. The particulars of claim stated that
in January the defendant sold to the plaintiff a intik
round, goodwill, and shop and appurtenances in
Long -inillgato, Manchester, for £9) ; and that
the defendant agreed to supply the plaintiff with
r other
sup-
plede
good new milk at 2 1. per dozen quarts h'dow the
marketi
lust
a
price,.(a i but
compoundhad
do, and
o 01
had
fluid or substance, whereby the plaiutiff had lost the
price pail by him to the defendant, together with
the profits which he ought to have derived from the
business; and had otherwise been injured in his
business and reputation. There were also two
counts for misrepresentation. Mr. lliggin, for the
plaintiff, said that, soon after the plaintiff took pos-
session of the business which he had bought from
the defendant, complaints were made by his
customers of the quality of the milk. At length one
of the customers, named Travis, being possessed of
an instrument called a lectometer, tested a quantity
of the milk. The process was to get the milk to a
temperature of 60 degrees, and to place in it this
instrument, the index of which showed the propor-
tion of water in the liquid. In the instance in ques-
tion the lectometer showed that there were three
quarts of water, in a dozen quarts of the liquid sold
as milk. On the plaintiff remonstrating, the de-
fendant's wife said her husband would not supply
milk without water to the plaintiff or anyone else.
The plaintiff confirmed his counsel's statement, and
added that, though at first he sold a daily average of
36 dozen quarts, at the end of April he sold not more
than 14 dozen daily, and he finally sold for £9O the
business for which he had given £9O. The whole-
sale profit was about 11d. a quart, and the retail
profit 2d. per dozen quarts. Cross-examined by Mr.
Leresche—When the milk came from defendant he
(the plaintiff) added water in the proportion of one
quart to the dozen ; but he did so only to make
up the measure of 13 quarts to the dozen, which
which one of his customers required. He also got
' milk from another farmer, and in this he (witness)
put three quarts to the dozen. lie did not add any
water to the milk supplied to Travis. 'Joseph
Travis, milkseller, Cross-street, Swan-street, proved
the testing of the defendant's milk. He at first de-
nied that he had heard of annatto ; but afterwards
inadvertently remarked that a druggist had told
him that it was a colouring matter, and on being
questioned he said he had used it to give milk a
rich cast. The defendant, in answer to the judge,
said he did not know what was the usual proportion
of water iu milk sold by farmers to milk dealers.
Sometimes they rinsed their cans, and then put a
few quarts of water in them. The Judge—What
did you mean by agreeing to supply good milk?
Witness—Milk to suit customers. The Judge—
The defendant was a wholesale customer of yours,
and you have no right to put in all the water—you
onght, you know to have given him a chance. Wit-
ness--He should have suited himself in that. I
didn't tell him to put in any water. The Judge—
Then you put in the same water for wholesale cus-
tomers as for your retail customers, three quarts to
the dozen? Witness "teplied that he did not put in
that quantity of water, but he would not say that
in his milk there were not two quarts of water to
the dozen. The defendant's son said that when he
delivered the milk he had seen the plaintiff takeout
dozen canfuls and then put in their place a dozen
quarts of water. The plaintiff's late housekeeper
gave similar evidence. Of the defendant's milk, she
added, the plaintiff used on every occasion to take
four dozen quarts, put it in a churn, and then add
15 or 16 quarts of water, a little salt, and some an-
natto to colour it. Witness used to keep a milk-
ishop, and when the milk was pale she used to add
some annatto to it. Mr. Laresche—" That's my
case, your Honour."' The Judge—" And a very
nice case it is." In giving judgment, the Judge
said he had no doubt the plaintiff's real com-
plaint was that the defendant had put more
water in his milk than he ought to have
done, and that thereby the plaintiff bad not
had a fair chance of making a further addition.
As to the proportion, from the experience
he had had, he did not believe that four quarts of
water to the dozen was sufficient to prevent
customers buying the milk. It was simply impos-
sible to get at the truth in the present case. If the
plaintiff had come into court with clean hands he
(the Judge) would have awarded him the £5O he
claimed ; but this was not the case, for, in his
opinion, he put in the milk as much water as the
defendant put in it. By the contract " good new
milk" was to be supplied by the defendant, and he
I should consider the words to mean pure milk. Mr.
Leresche said the words only meant the milk of
commerce, which, he contended, the defendant had
supplied. The Judge said he should not take it
that there was a recognised practice of supplying
adulterated milk. The result of his judgment
would be that both parties would in effect be fined.
The plaintiff had already lost considerably, as he
only got £2O for what cost him £9O ; and defendant
would be a loser of £2O, for which sum he now
gave the plaintiff a verdict. Each must pay his
own costs. (He (the Judge) wished he had the
power to fine the plaintiff and defendant £lOO each.
—Manchester Guardian.

laws relating to the crown were promillgated. For
instance, it was enacted that the crown keepers
were to bechosen horn among four candidates,
without any distinction of religion. The practical
interpretation given to that enactment was, that one
of the keepers of the crown ought to be a Catho-
lic, and the other a Protestant. One keeper, at
least, was to be always near the crown, which was
to be deposited at Freiburg, ivhence it could be re-
moved, in time of danger, but only with the know-
ledve of the palatine.

From the peace of Nicolsburg to Joseph 11. the
crown always remained at Presburg. On the 7th
of April, 1781, the Emperor ,commanded the Go-
vernor of Presburg to remove the Hungarian crown,
together with all the insignia of the kingdom, to the
Treasury in Vienna. The Governor demurred, but
the Emperor insisted, and the crown was taken to
Vienna April 28, 1781. Six years afterwards,
when the Emperor Joseph revoked his reforms, he
also returned the crown to Hungary (Feb. 21, 1790).
When Prince Windischgraetz appeared with his
army under the walls of Buda towards the end of
1818, Kossuth and Ladislas Madaraz proceeded to
the chapel of the Royal castle, and bade the crown
keeper, Joseph Uermenyi, to hand it to them. The
revolutionary era had not impaired the respect in
which the venerable treasure was held, and the
keeper surrendered it with these words :—" I hand
you the holy crown with which fifty kings have been
crowned during eight hundred years." The people
compelled Kossuth and Madaraz to take off their
hats, crying; "Hats off." The crown was taken by
the Dictator to his retreat in Debreczin, and for a
time disappeared without leaving any traces.

Among the people it was said that the crown had
been carried off by angels to the grave of Arpad,
and could only be recovered by a bold man armed
with the sword of the great hero Kinizsi. In official
circles it was believed at first that Kossuth had taken
the Royal insignia to Turkey, in order to give to
his cause the prestige of legitimacy. But it BOOR
became evident that Kossuth could not have possibly
taken away the crown, because when he reached the
Turkish territory he was closely watched by Fetik
Pacha and a strong body of troops, and all war
materiel and other articles belonging to Austria
taken from him and his friends. The Austrian
Government, therefore, appointed a commission to
investigate the subject, and to take measures likely
to lead to the recovery of the crown. But that
commission acted so indiscreetly that the Govern-
ment dissolved it. Private inquiries were then put
on foot, under the supervision of the Lieutenant
Field Marshal Von Kempen.

During the spring of 1853 the country in which
the crown had been buried was submerged by an
overflow of the Danube. The place of concealment
was at the foot of the mountain of Allion, about an
hour's march from 010-Orsova, in the territory of the
regiment of the Roumanians of the Banat, near the
road leading to Wallachia. When Kossuth, then
in London, was informed of the inundation, he feared
that the crown would be washed away or destroyed,
and commissioned an agent to remove the treasure
from its hiding-place and convey it to London. The
Austrian police, however, seem to have been ap-
prised of the project. The country around the
mountain was watched, and when Kossuth's agent
began his voyage his description had already been
given to the Austrian Government, and the
,Seres-
sans were scouring the country in all directions.
Meantime the project of Kossuth to remove the
crown to London had transpired at Paris, and a
Hungarian exile who heard of it expressed strongly
his opinion against the removal of the crown from
the country. M. Von Kempen having been in-
formed of those words put some one in communi-
cation with the exile, who at length disclosed the
spot where the insignia had been buried. The
Auditor Kuryer who, as a member of the commission
of inquiry, had previously made investigations re-
lative to the crown, was sent to 010-Osova, where
he arrived September 5, 1853. The next day he
forwarded to Vienna a telegram announcing that
the spot indicated by the Hungarian exile had been
found out. On the morning of the Bth of the same
month the crown had been discovered ; the event
filled with joy the whole of Hungary. On the 20th
the crown was shown to the Emperor of Vienna,
and on the 22d it was again at Buda.—Herald.

INFANCY.

t

A remarkable case, " Cooper and another v.
Weston," was yesterday tried before Mr. Under-
Sheriff Burchell, in which the plaintiffs, Messrs.
Cooper and Isaac, house agents and auctioneers at
Pimlico,sought to recover of the defendant, a young
woman named Harriet Weston, a balance of £l7 6s
Gd for furniture bought at auction. Three pleas
pleaded, and two—infancy and immorality—were
relied upon. Mr. Purcell was counsel for the plain-
tiffs, and Mr. Thomas Johnson, an attorney,
ap-
peared for the defendant. Mr. Cooper one of the
plaintiffs, said he had let the defendant a house in
Stanley-street, Pimlico, when he knew she was not
married. He did not know she was not of age, and
she told him she was going to be married. He sent
her a catalogue of a sale, and she bought some fur-
niture, and the balance was £l7 6s 6d. He let her
another house, Cumberland House, 39, Cumberland-
street, Pimlico, at £7O a year, and she paid a quar-
ter in advance. A person was introduced as her
husband, and gave his name as George Weston. lie
did not know that she was a kept woman. A per- I
son named Cox, who had purchased the furniture on
commission, was called. The case on the part of
the defendant was that she was under twenty years
of age, and was kept by a gentleman. Her evidence
was to the following effect : She told Cooper she
was not married. She never told him that she
was going to be married. He said the landlord re-
quired a married lady, and he (Cooper) sent a per-
son to him to represent himself as her husband.
She had never represented herself as a married
woman. A clerk to the defendant's attorney,
Peter S. Parkins, and her housekeeper, a Mrs.
Baker, said that Cooper wanted the defendant to
get some person to represent himself as her husband.
She refused to do so. Mr. Philip By said he was
the landlord of the house, 39, Cumberland-street,
which was let by Messrs. Cooper and Isaacs,
through his agents, Messrs. Smith of Adelaide-
place, London Bridge. Cooper represented that
defendant was a married woman. A stout per -
son called on him, brought by Mr. Isaacs,
as Mr. Weston, the husband, and gave reference
to his tailor, and said he banked with the Bank of
England. He went to the tailor and was not satis-
fied, and then went to the house, and afterwards
called at the offices of Cooper and Isaacs, and there
saw the same stout man, who slunk away when he
saw him. He had endeavoured to get possession of
hid house, but had not succeeded. The defendant's
mother, a woman in a very humble position, proved
that her daughter had been born in July, 1847, and
had been a servant. The plaintiff Cooper was re-
called, and said there was not one word of truth in
what the defendant had said about the familiarities,
and as to the stout man being at his office when Mr.
Byfus called, he was there ou a matter of bit&ness,
and he knew nothing about him. The learned
Under-Sheriff, in placing the case before the jury,
declared that he had never heard such evidence in
all his experience. Either Cooper had beef guilty
of disgraceful conduct, or he had been the subject
of a most wicked conspiracy, and the jury would
have, by their verdict, to say to which side they
gave credence. There were several points for them
to consider—whether the defendant was an infant
and the goods were necessaries. Every one must
feel that Mr. Byfus was the witness of truth, and
the jury would not forget his evidence. Who had
imposed on that gentleman ? Was it Cooper, the
plaintiff, or the woman Weston, who had fallen
from her position of a servant, and was, it was said,
under the protection of a gentleman ? He re-
viewed the principal features of the case as disclosed
by the evidence, and left the questions for decision:

THE HOWDEN MYSTERY.—On Saturday Mr.
Clayton, of the firm of Claytenand Co., shipbrokers, agents
totho owners of the schoonec 'Lowden, of Goole, applied to
the stipendiary magistrates for warrants against two of the
crow of the Ilowden. He said the captain was very ill, or
he would have applied personally. The difficulty in the
case was that the body of the man found in the boat could
not be identified. Mr. Travis asked where the two men
were. Mr. Clayton replied that that was not known. r.
Travis observed that warrants could not be granted unless it
was known where the men were. Mr. Clayton answered -
that the chief object of this application was to get the
men's description inserted in the Police Gazette—the Hue
and Cry—but that could not be done until a warrant was
granted. Mr. Travis said the better plan would be for the
captain to go to Dungeness, where the plundering of the
vessel took place, and apply to the authorities. As yet it is
entirely unknown whether the two missing men aro alive
or whether they were murdered, and the mystery attend-
ing this very remarkable affair is as great as ever.
SINGULAR ACCIDENT.-011 Sunday night as the
last train from Welshpool neared Elmwood, on its journey
to Shrewsbury, the driver perceived four horses quietly
trotting down the track, about 3)0 yards ahead of the
engine. He turned on the whistle and otherwise tried
to frighten them off the rails, but without effect, and
as the train had got too near to be pulled up with
safety, there was no other course than to go on at full
speed. This was done, and the buffer of the engine striking
one of the horses full in the body, literally cut it into two,the
train passing on with a shock that was scarcely perceptible
in the hindermost carriages. A portion of the body of the
unfortunate horse, however, being left on the rails, threw
off the leading wheels of a third-class carriage, which was
dragged along in this condition for ab not 20() yards, when
the accident was
occurrence, but the consequences to them were limited to
de rable alarm
tti gh e the i up
asstsoel:ii;dr's I°)Yliit 81
ii;
' the inconvenience of having to wait half an hour while the
carriage was got on to the rails as tin.
[ADVERTISIMENT.]-I.l7?.eforti no one w;Ild y.tht, the valulble
13
preperties of Da trry s health-restoring Rev tlenta Ar..-03i,
Invalids and Infants' Food, since to the thousands of blessings
it has already received. from Invalids whose position hhade
~.zetetli,
deemed hopeless, we may now add that of his Holiness the Pone,-n
Rotawhtuelheivoe:irsiiieierodiehlitimte:aeFl
jitiAahui
telrhyhsir2hsiscebit,ishehee:Fan_xs:l,o,:cdßlori,efn)enifionctiifieley,
especially
.v.
Julylpholeisi restored ieihi
1(
y,lfe beßycni
no:
,iitirese,:lt e.nt,rot hpaiur
abandoningli,ii,.: ;i:`,:
at::
I
of unsuccessful medical treatment W)elailrilit!o:erpcfrraios,mi.n.3,
ina,,-e,llll.
hasan
and
ohli us cell
We ext,ra-1
—Care No. 53 216 Of canner
' '1
v.
\-I‘.it:ri. h'''ilotne."•-lfs
liverti er
vaonuci
the
palpitationl: t i t .
meaftfoerecevt etlholannml6l3ies,aol3.hoecal,ltitrha,3:
excellent food too highly."
n all over, bad
ddeebßilirteyll,lnue'ryoofussenveesns, agars'wi t with a
agita,tion. Cure No. 1,771: Lord e
Ldustdenoin.l,
at of
constant srlfeoe*pleostsne most intolerable ner-
vouswestin:; away.
manyss' years'' dyspepsia. No.
Stuart de Decies, Lord
asthma,
vomiting.—Maria Joly."
cough, constipation, flatulency,
.rom dyspepsia, nervousness,
49,832:
and rt'
" Fifty years' indescribable agony f
liver derangement,
of Frimley, Surrey, of 30 No.I
~ 46,270: Mr. Jamesßoberts,
Cureuauiency, spasms, sickness, nd
ir
blood,'
years'l t disused lungs, spittingao
Beware of the many unsavouryia i deafness.0 it ion --
Important
sloppy . .. v .
more than nmta Min
to which, without authority, Baronau Liehig's name is most auda-
ciously attached.
In tins at ls. lid.; 1 lb., 2s. 9d ,• 2 lbs., 4s. 61: 5 lbs., 11r.;
12 lbs., 225.; 24 lbs , 40s.—BARRY RI; De BARRY and Co., No. 77,
Regent-street, London• also Fortnam and fifteen, 182, Piccadilly ;
and at 61, Gracechurc'h-street; 4, Cheapside; 63, 150, and 208,
(Wind-street; 330, Strand; and all grocers_ani CheMists.i

VSpA
W' rp 4::
4fr k? '„ ;
bn,

~. i ~':6-