The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-06 00:00:00

LAW INTE.

TIIIS DAY.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings at Nisi Prins, before the Lord Chief Baron and a
Special Jury.)

PENHALO.N AND OTHERS V. THE MERSEY DOCKS AND

HARBOUR BOARD.

The further hearing of this case was resumed this
morning.
The plaintiffs were the owners of the ship Sierra Nevada,
bound from the Chincha Islands to Liverpool, and sued the
defendants to recover damages for injuries sustained by rea-
son of the negligence and improper conduct of the defend-
ants in allowing a large bank of mud to accumulate in the
Wellington Half-tide Dock at Liverpool, which rendered
the dock unfit for use, and caused the vessel wa striking
thereon to break her back. It appeared that the vessel
in question was built in 1854 by the celebrated Ameri-
can builders, Messrs. Tobin and Littlefield, at Ports-
mouth, New Hampshire, United States, and was of 1,942
tons register. Her first voyage was to the Chincha Islands,
for a cargo of guano. About 2,400 tons were obtained, and
taken in through the ports in the second deck, preparations
have been previously made so as to admit of the weight
being equally distributed about the hold of the vessel. She
was returning to the Hampton Road, and when rounding
Cape Horn encountered the usual rough weather that it
almost invariably met with there, and it was found that
she made very little water, and performed her voyage in a
satisfactory manner. The keel of the vessel was per-
fectly straight and unusually strong, and if at any time
there is any disarrangement of the keel, or kelson, the
ends of the planking in the immediate neighbourhood
would open and water be admitted. If a vessel
bends or curves downwards she, what sailors call,
" sags," and, as a matter almost, of course, lets in water.
Sagging has another effect—the mainmast of a vessel rests
on the kelson, which is a large piece of wood running along
the top of the keel, and in this ship she got additional and
very considerable strength from the fact that she had what
aro called sister kelsons, one fastened on either side of the
kelson. The mast is secured by what are termed the
shrouds. If a vessel sags or sinks in the keel or spine of
the ship, as a matter of course the mainmast would sink
and, necessarily, the shrouds be less taut; the very con-
struction of the vessel prevents the possibility of the under
part of her suffering without distinct indications of w1,4.t.
is going on exhibiting themselves above. There is a'diffe
once in putting a ship together existing between the
American and English mode; in the latter method the
planking is put on to the ribs, and the ceiling, as it is
termed—that is, a lining with planks to form the
hold—placed on the upper side of the ribs, and
tho whole secured by a bolt running entirely through them;
while in the former method the planking is fastened on to
the ribs from the outside, and the ceiling from the inside to
the ribs, and it is a matter of opinion as to which is the
better or stronger plan to adopt ; the stanchions are upright,
springing from the kelson, and across which-the ship's beams
go ; and in the Sierra Nevada the beams and stanchions
were secured to one another by metal fastenings, so that one
part alone could not be pushed up if the vessel "hogged"
or curved up, or sink if the vessel " sagged ;" all must be
moved in either event. The Sierra Nevada arrived in the
Mersey on the 12th &April, and in attempting to get into
the dock her progress was interrupted by, as the plaintiffs
say, a mud bank rising above the sill of the dock.

The defendants pleaded not guilty, and that the ship was
not the property of the plaintiffs.

Mr. Wilde, Mr. Cleasby, Mr. Aspinall, and Mr. Lush-
ington were counsel for tho plaintiffs ; Sir F. Kelly, Mr.
Edward James, Mr. Forsyth, and Mr. Quain represented
the defendants.

The case had not concluded when we went to press.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)
SINGULAR ACTION OF TROYER AND DETINUE.-.

HAMILTON V. PARLOW.

This was an action of trover, damages laid at £10; and
there was another count for detinue, plaintiff alleging that
defendant had illegally seized and detained certain clock
movements, the property of plaintiff.
Mr. Buchanan, for the plaintiff, stated that Dr. Hamil-
ton had purchased some time ago certain clock movements
of a person named Bevan. Bevan was in arrears with the
landlord (defendant), who distrained, and seized two of the
clock movements, hence the present action.

Plaintiff fully bore out the statement ; and, in cross-exa-
mination by defendant, said ho knew that Bevan had been
charged criminally with pledging certain watches entrusted
to him to repair. He was not, nor had ho been, in partner-
ship with Bevan. Bevan agreed to take the movements at
the condemned price.

Defendant contended that the seizure was perfectly
regular; that plaintiff and Bevan wore mixed up together,
and, in fact, plaintiff had assisted Bevan in his business.
Mr. Buchanan said there was no evidence to warrant such
a statement.

His Honour said—lf defendant thought he could make
out anything, he could bring up Bevan by habeas corpus.
As far as the evidence went, it was positively sworn that
these movements were plaintiff's property, and as such,
plaintiff was extitled to recover.
Defendant then said ho would give up the movements.
Mr. Buchanan observed that plaintiff would rather have
the money.

Defendant—The movements are not worth £lO.
llis Honour—Then, this case must be adjourned at do
Pendant's cost, to produce evidence as to value.

LANDLORD AND TENANT-ROW