The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-19 00:00:00

'EVENING, JUNE 19, 18t)7,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
:Sittings nt Nisi Prins, at Westminster, before the Lord
Chief Baron and a Special Jury.)
CIRELLA V. THE CRYSTAL PALACE COMPANY.

This was an action for the recovery of 5001. damages
for ii jury done to a model of Cronstadt exhibited at
the Crystal Palace la,t year, arising from the alleged
neglig-nce of the company's servant The plaintiff is a
Neapolitan exile, at present re,iding in Paris, and is a
brother of Prince Cirella. He is a gentleman of some
ability, and be constructed of board and plaster a model
of the town, fortification, and harbour of Cron-
stadt, which he consigned to the care of an
named Fiz, carrying on business in Loudon as a
merchant and Custom-house agent. He exhibited
the model in Piccadilly, where it was visited by parties,
connected with the government, and be was induced to
imagine from what passed that the government would
purchase it. The war however terminating about that
time, his hopes in than quarter were dissipated, and be
applied to the Crystal Palace Company who agreed to
its being exhibited there for a period of not less that,
six months, and if sold to be paid 10 per cent. c,m-
inis-iion. The model was accordingly sent to the palace
and placed in that part devoted to tropical plants, where
from heat, &c., it was said it received injury. The question
in di-pute was whether the company took sufficient care
of the model, and it was contended by the company that
Fiz approved of the spot f;r its exhibition, and that he
was to supply a glass case, which he decined to do, and
that the company to protect it put a calico awning over
it. In answer to questions from Mr. Sergeant Hayes
for the defendant, Fiz said that he offered the model to
the Crystal Palace C onpany for 2001.
Lora Chief Baron--Do I understmd that you have
the impudence to bring an action for 5001. damages for
injury done to a mod:I you valued at 2001 ?
Witness said he had done so, and on being further
questioned said he had no recollection of having offered
it to Mr. Fergusson, the manager, for 1001. or guineas.
The Lord Chief Baron—lf Mr. Fergusson swears that
you offered it to him for 1001., will you undertake to say
it is a falsehood ?
Witness said he could not, because he had no recollec-
tion of it. The injury to the model took place in the
early part of the year 1856, and the action was brought
In June following, but delayed till the present time.
Several witnesses were called, who stated the condi-
tien of the model at the present time, but the Lord
Chief Baron said that the injury must be assessed ac-
ccrding to its condition in June last year, when the action
was first brought. One of the witnesses, an Italian
modeller valued the model at 7001.
Mr. Sergeant Hayes contended that the model bad
received all reasonable care at the hands of the Crystal
Palace Company, and that no real damage or want of
care bad been proved against them by. the plaintiff's

agent.
Mr. Fergusson deposed that Fiz offered the model to
him for 2001. and afterwards said he should be glad to
take 1001. for it. He was quite clear on that point.
Fiz selected the spot where the model was to be placed,
which was in that part devoted to models, and witness
caused it to be protected by a covering, and it was only
removed on the day of the Queen's visit, the Peace fete
day. The model of Sebastopol made at the palace which
was twice the size of the one in question cost 401. That
was a correct one, but this was an incorrect one. Cron-
stadt was represented as a rocky island, whereas, in
truth, it was a low sandy ridge. He considered 50/. a
good price for it to a person who wanted it. Every care
had been taken of the model. The frame or basis of the
model did not appear to have been made of properly
seasoned wood.
The Lord Chief Baron in summing up, rem .rked on
the amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff. It
could not he called obtaining money under false pre-
tences, because that would be a crime, but it looked
very much as if it was made in the hopes that the defen-
dants would pay probably 20/. or 50/. rather than defend
this action. His lordship also remarked on the absence
of the plaintiff, and said that, in point of fact, the ac-
tion should have been brought by Fiz. His lordship
also called attention to the delay in proceeding with the
action.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendant.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commtssioner trolroyd.)

IN BE Bool'll.

This bankrupt was described as of the City Central
Saw Mills, Upper Whitecross-street, and bad presented
a petition under the Private Arrangement Act, but not
having filed any accounts, an argument was heard in the
private room ; Mr. Slater appearing for the petitioner,
and Mr. Chidley for creditors, when his Honour decided
tbat the case should be converted into a bankruptcy,
and it was afterwards heard in open court, and the 30th
of June appointed for choice of assignees.

~1 VI SIONS.