The Sun.
London, England, 1858-11-29 00:00:00

GREENE V. HAYES, BART.

Plaintiff claimed £450 commission for obtaining for the
defendant a loan of £30,000 on his estates in the county of
Donegal, Ireland, in June, 1857.
Defendant pleaded never indebted, the security never was
completed, and the money never was obtained.
After the examination of witnesses in the cause, the jury
found a verdict for tho plaintiff, subject to the opinion of
the Court on the facts of the case.

DIVORCE COURT.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
aVARCHMONT V. MAUCIIMONT.

Mr. Sergeant Pigott this morning replied, on behalf of
Mrs. Marchmont, to evidence adduced by the husband.
The learned sergeant, in the course of a very eloquent
speech, contended that the petitioner had made out her
case, and was, therefore, entitled to a verdict.

The petitioner (Mrs. Marchmont) was for a judicial sepa-
ration on the ground of cruelty. The pleas were a deniai
of the cruelty and condonation.

The learned counsel resumed his seat at a quarter past
four, when the Judge Ordinary said he would postpone his
summing up till to-morrow morning.

CITY SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Prendergast, Q.C.)
WOOD ENGRAVING AND STEREOSCOPIC PICTURES.-

JEWELL V. THORLEY.

Plaintiff is a wood engraver, and sought to recover £(5
for some engravings made from stereoscopic pictures at the
order of defendant, proprietor of Thorley's Patent Food for
Cattle.

Mr. Buchanan appeared for defendant, who objected
paying for the work as it was so indifferently accomplished
as to be perfectly useless. Mr. Buchanan called his Honou's
attention to the fact that in no one instance did the copy
resemble the original. In the original his Honour would
see Mr. Thorley, his father, and eight workmen, standing
round a resuscitated animal with wonder and delight.
(Laughter.)
His Honour Wonder !

Mr. Buchanan—Yes; just look at the other picture.
Now, in defendant's engraving intended for our almanack
the horse is a perfect disgrace—it does not look a bit as i

it had partaken of our patent food. (Roars of laughter.)
Altogether the picture is of no earthly use, and so we
refuse it.

Plaintiff insisted that it was well done, and well worth
the money.' Ho was pressed for time, and a finished affair
was not expected.

To rebut this Mr. Hodgson (Hodgson's time-tables), a
person of great experience, was called, and he stated that
plaintiff had ample time, and that the engraving was not
worth half what was charged for it.
His Hono!ir said that, looking at the stereoscopic pic-
ture, he thought it would be an arduous task to make a
reduced wood engraving at the price of £5 ; but, after the
evidence adduced for defendant, he thought a verdict for
£3 would meet the merits of the case.

AUCTION SALES..--IMPORTANT CASE..--FLINTOFF V.

NORRIS.

This was an application fora new trial. The particulars
of the former trial have appeared in this journal. The
claim was for some deficiency in a case of wine sold by
defendant at his public sale. On a former occasion plain-
tiff obtained a verdict, and now defendant sought for a now
trial on the following grounds :—That by the terms of the
contract plaintiff should have laid his complaint within one
week from the day of sale. That the plaintiff had paid the
duty—and that defendant had disclosed his principals upon
complaint being made. Plaintiff did not lay his complaint
until two months after the day of sale. Plaintiff insisted
that in the catalogue one of the terms was, " actual present
quality and quantity," and that defendant sent in the
account in his own name, and that therefore the verdict
should not be disturbed.

His Honour thought that he must grant a new trial on
the ground that plaintiff had not laid his complaint within
one week, and had paid the duty.

POUND V. • BARNETT:-IMPORTANT TO SHIP BROKERS.

Plaintiff is an extensive wine and spirit merchant of the
city and defendants are ship brokers. The action was
brought to recover a sum of £2.5 for demurrage of a barge
three days at 15s. per day. Plaintiff proved that he had
made arrangements for the craft, containing 100 puncheons
of rum, to be alongside the vessel for unloading upon a
certain day. Accordingly the craft was placed alongside
the ship, and was detained there six days. Plaintiff only,
claimed for three, and defendants had agreed to pay something.
The captain had absolutely refused to take the goods at
first.

Upon the part of defendant it was urged that the brokers
should not be made liable, as they were not responsible for
any misconduct on the part of the captain. It was also
impossible for the defendant to fix any precise time for re-
ceiving goods from complainant.
Plaintiff—l took care to inquire, and was informed that
the ship .would be ready to take the goods upon a particular
day. I made defendants a present, of three days. If lam
to lose this money it will make a difference of £2OO a year
to me ; besides these defendants have, on a former occasion,
paid a precisely similar claim.

Defendant thought it would be very hard to make ship-
brokers liable. It was very important, and certainly a
novel case.

His Honour thought that plaintiff should recover as in
the contract made or implied ; he only know defendants as
owners.

Defendant—The usual claim is ss. a day, and that we
never have objected to pay. That sum is always accepted.
His Honour thought that there was a custom, and ho
could only award plaintiff ss. a day. No doubt plaintiff
would be a loser.

Plaintiff—Oh, I shall indeed. This was a largo barge.
His Honour—Well, I will givo you a verdict for 11 58.

ROYAL ITALIAN OPERA HOUSE.—The panto-
mime which Mr. Harrison purposes producing at Christmas,
at this theatre, is being written by Mr. Bridgman and Mr.
Sutherland Edwards, and will be entitled " Little Rod •
Riding-Hood."
EXTENSIVE FIRE IN THE CITY. Yesterday
(Friday) morning, between the hours of three and four
o'clock, a fire broke out in the premises belonging to Messrs.
Whistler and Co., wholesale sugar dealers, &c., situate at
No. 8, Fenchurch-street, City. Tho amount of damage
done is thus officially reported by Mr. Braidwood :—" The
back sale rooms and • counting house on ground floor burnt
out ; the back rooms of the building are also seriously da-
maged by fire, and the rest of the house and contents by
water. The building was insured in the Bank of Englsnd
Fire-office; and the contents were insured in the Phoenix
Fire-office. The skylights over the back offices of Messrs.
Hankey and Co., the bankers, are also •damaged and the
glass broken. The offices situate at Nos. 2 and 3, in
Philpot-lane, have their back fronts seriously damaged by
.fire. The origin of the misfortune cOuldnot be ascertained."