The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-18 00:00:00

7.1118' TALKING _FISH.

(Before Mr. Justice Crompton and a Common Jury
BENSHIMOL V. GALLAGHER.
This was an action for wages, &c. The defendant
pleaded never indebted.

Mr. Pearce was counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. D
Seymour, Q.C., and Mr. Telford Salter were coup•
sel for the defendant.

The plaintiff is a native of Gibraltar, and towards
the close of the your 1858 he came to this country
wan a man named Cavanneh, the owner of the talk-
ing fish. He ettendcd to it at Gibraltar, and
in England up to the time of its death, and
this action was brought to racover £6l, for
wages, &c., during the time the fish was the
property of Mrs. Gallagher. The fish was first
exhibited in Lime-street, Liverpool. Whilst
there a man named Charles Pollard, the alleged
agent of the defendant, visited the exhibition,
and after some negotiations, purchased the fish
for her for £3OO. Plaintiff had had the education
and management of the fish. He wrapped it in
blankets at night and slept with it—(laughter)--
and kept it clean and attended to it by day, and
when Pollard purchased it he agreed to give the
plaintiff £1 per week, sone clothes, his board and
lodging, with permission to receive gratuities,
which, however, only amounted to a few shillings,
for the majority of the visitors, having seen the
animal and heard its sounds, were so satisfied with
the exhibition that they were glad to get away.
(Laughter.) It was a large seal and was kept in a
tub of water. Plaintiff denied that he was only to
have some clothes, his board and lodgings, and the
gratuities. This was a second trial, and singular
to say it was on the first occasion tried before the
same judge and on the same day of the month last
year.

The defence was that no agreement was made for
the payment of £1 per week. Plaintiff was only
to have his clothes, board, and lodging, and the
gratuities, and that those were the terms he after-
wards informed the defendant he had been engaged
by Pollard.
Pollard was called for the defence. He said the
plaintiff frequently got as much as 10s. and 15s. a
day from the visitors. He (Pollard) had been
offered £1 a week for the situation. He was living
with the defendant as man and wife. He was tried
once at the Old Bailey, not for bigamy, but for
stealing £2,000 worth of bills from the present
Emperor of the French. He had had bill trans-
actions with the Emperor. This took place about
fourteen years ago. He was honourably acquitted.
He did not know that he got off on a technicality.
Mr. Justice Crompton—Were you " honourably
acquitted on a flaw in the indictment"—(laughter)
—as the late Mr. Baron Watson used to say, or on
the merits ?

Witness—He was honourably acquitted on the
merits. Ho did not know a person named Eliza-
beth Pollard, and was never indicted with her. He
was never charged with causing the death of Dutch
Sam's widow. An inquest was held on her, and
the verdict was death from natural causes. De-

fondant has a house in May-street, Mount-pleasant,
Liverpool. It is not a brothel, but a house where
you barristers sometimes reside. (Laughter.)
Mr. Pearce—l don't go the Northern Circuit.

(Renewed laughter.)
-
Witness—Defendant has another house
in
Houghton-street, Liverpool. He did not know if
that was a brothel. He knew very little of the
defendant's private business, or how many years
he had lived with her. (Laughter.) He was a
teod n _ I a nit,
ohu t e)
arear
commission agent, but did not sell goods. (Laugh-
ter.) He took commissions on racing; he was a
racing broker, and did the best he could, like other
ge3nrtrle.mjuesntice c(Rraoinnewp
sort of broker
for bets ?

WAlristi.l eGissagh
—llaYeser was called and corroborated the
last witness with reference to the engagement with
the plaintiff r
eh
house
eaent.nyslh7reahnecaisrdmhaenrasgaeyd
otnhteh house
trial "that men and women coming to the
-street
producedatuhgei r
ht
emr
.)a r
It
ita
mg e i
gehe
tr t
have
fiacvaet ebse be
ne f odroen going t e
once
in o
1 a suspioious case. She had a wine license fof the
I house, She treated the plaintiff like a child of her
own, and gave him spending money when he re-
quired it. When the fish died he began to C.
(Laughter.) She then told him he might remain till
he got another situation, and he did so for four
months and she maintained him. When he first
came to England he spoke English so bad that he
wore five shirts at one time—(laughter)—net un-
derstanding when he was asked for his dirty linen.
egohmtong-s htrocnieFanny Francis was called, and her evidence given
on the former trial was read from the judge's notes.
She said the plaintiff had told her his agreement
was the same as that deposed to by the defendant.
With regard to the house in Houghton-street,
u in et,
many men brought their wives there, and some had
shown her their marriage certificates without her
asking for them. (Laughter.)
Mr. Seymour—l suppose they were
from church. (Laughter.)
The jury, after being locked u
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £45, the
same hamount as was given bythe jury in the first
trial.