The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-20 00:00:00

tending more to his wifethan to the interests of his
vessel, and he wrote to the plaintiff complaining
" that ladies on board were a great nuisance, as
they turned the head of the captain. Vessels were
built to sail for the benefit of the owners and not as
gondolas." The plaintiff eventually got a freight
for Liverpool, and on his arriving on his return
voyage tit Constantinople he received another letter
from the defendant written in the same strain, and
desiring him to send home his wife. The pr t
laintiteff re-
fused to do this, and wrote back an angry letter
his
the defendant, telling him " to get it out of
pumpkin head" that his wife had turned his head.
On the plaintiff's arrival at Liverpool he received a
letter dismissing him From the mastership of the
vessel ; and he was desired by the consul to give up
the command and his ship's papers to the owner,
which he did. The plaintiff then made a, claim for
what was due to him, and offered to take £4O if it
were paid to him then, as he was without moil
and in a foreign country. The defendant, however,
refused to pay him, and set up a counter claim for
the maintenance and passage of the plaintiff's wife
to Liverpool.
After a long trial the jury found a verdict for the
plaintiff for the full amount claimed.
GREEN AND WIFE V. THE LANCASHIRE AND WO"
SHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action to recover compensation for
an injury suffered by the plaintiffs wife at a
way accident between Wigan and Liverpool is
June, 1857. There was also an allegation that th.e
company had fraudulently endeavoured to settle
the damage sustained by , the plaintiff's wife bi
giving her 12s. as full compensation while she Was
suffering from the injury.
Mr. Pope appeared for the plaintiff, and gr.
Overend; Q.C., and Mr. Williams for the defend-
ants.
assenger train
It appeared that in June, 1857, a p
filled with third.class passengers came into colli-
sion with a luggage train near Wigan, and manyas
s
as 260 passengers were injured. The plaintin
wife was riding in one of the carriageOuld wag ca
violently thrown with her back against the l%
riage, and then pitched with her face aga in inst tor
window. She was bruised and injured hadhe
back, and she received a cut on the facel and far
her teeth loosened. Since that time she had ne':o
recovered the proper use of her teeth, and had POI,
in her back, which prevented her following
usual occupation of a washerwoman, by vgl.
she had formerly earned 6s. or 7s• a wee
r
Since the accident she had not earned altoget
ase
above 50s. When the surgeon of the companl W 0
dressing her injury he told her she 'Would perhaPoi
be better in a fortnight, and he gave he 125. 0„
compensation for the injury, which she -then
cepted. On the part of the defendants it was
tended that this sum of money was bona Ale glvei.
as compensation for what at the time was CO''
dered to be a mere slight cut on the face. •
His lordship having summed up,
anTdhfoeujnudrythfoautntdhea verelrydasicnt
oforfrtahuedploai art
on the
for I.s's
the P 01
the company.
Two other similar actions 'against the comPi.a,l32lo
were settled the defendants agreeing to pal •'"
damages for, one, and £l5 damages for the other.