The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-03 00:00:00

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, April 2.
Mr. Baron Alderson, having tried a few civil
causes yesterday, left last night.

NISI 15RIUS COURT.—OeforeMr.Baron ROLFE:
WOODROW V. THE LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAIL

WAY COMPANY.

This was an action on the case brought by the
plaintiff, a commission agent at Manchester, to recover
compensation in damages from the defendants for in-
juries received on their railway in February, 1849,
in consequence of their alleged neglect in having a
faulty tender on the line, whereby the train was
thrown off the rails and down an embankment,
breaking the plaintiff's leg, injuring his spine, and
causing him to lose a valuable appointment. The de-
fendants pleaded "Not Guilty," and, secondly that he
was not a passenger on that occasion.
Mr. Martin, 4.0., Mr. Cowling, and Mr. Lawrie
appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Knowles, Q.C.,
Mr. Atherton, and Mr. Rew, for the defendants.
It appeared that the plaintiff, who was a commis-
sion agent at Manchester, having business at Glasgow,
on the 10th of February, 1849, went to Preston,
where he took a second-class railway ticket for
Glasgow, the defendants' railway company being
common carriers from Preston to Glasgow, and paying
a mileage for that portion of the road beyond their
own line. The plaintiff travelled to Carlisle, where
he was required to get into another carriage belong-
ing to the London and North-Western Railway
Company. The engine, tender, and carriages were
examined at Carlisle. On arrivingn little beyond the
Rocliffe station, a few miles beyond Carlisle, the
engine and train ran off the rails and down an em-
bankment, breaking in pieces the carriage in which
the plaintiff was, killing three passengers, severely in-
juring several, and breaking the plaintiff's leg and
injuring his spine, owing to which injuries the plain-
tiff had lost a thriving business at Manchester. The
accident was stated by one witness, who bad closely
examined the wheels of the tender, to have been
caused by one of the wheels of the tender not being
firmly fixed on its axle, in consequence of which the
wheel had been forced three inches and a quarter in-
wards. The effect of this was to make the tender run
unsteadily on the line, and crossways, striking the
sleepers and knocking the rail out, thus leading
directly to the accident. From the evidence of the
surgeons called it appeared that the plaintiff had re-
ceived a comminuted fracture of the leg, a contusion
of the spine, a blow on the head, and a severe shock
to his system, from the effects of which he would never,
in all probability, thoroughly recover. He was laid
up three months in Carlisle, nursed by his mother,
and afterwards two months in Glasgow at his father's,
where he was removed. He had recovered now, but
looked pale and delicate. The doctors' bills amounted
to about 801., and his lodging bill at Carlisle was up-
wards of 301.

For the defence, the Learned Counsel contended
that this fault in the wheel was not a patent one, and
by no skill or care could have been discovered ; that the
wheel must have been in its place at Carlisle, where
the engine and tender were examined, and that the
removal of the wheel on the axle must have been
caused by some accident which the tender received
whilst running. The defendants by no means
wished to speak lightly of the plaintiff's sufferings,
and none could be more sorry than they for what had
occurred, and, had it been possible to settle this
matter out of court fairly to the plaintiff, and justly
to themselves, this action would not have been heard
of. If, however, the jury thought that the accident
arose from any fault or negligence of the defendants,
they must give the plaintiff such reasonable damages
as the circumstances of the-case demanded. His health
was restored and his business at Manchester would
be recovered.

His LORDSHIP, in summing up, directed the jury
that if, in their opinion, the plaintiff had made out
that the accident arose from the faulty construction
of the tender wheel and axle, the defendants were
liable for any damages which arose in consequence.
The mode of estimating such an injury by its value
in damages was very rough ; it was, however, the
only means of doing so, and if they were of opinion
that the defendants were liable they must give the
plaintiff fair compensati?a for the suffering and loss
which he had endured.

The jury retired, and after a short absence found
for the plaintiff—Damages 5001.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

REEXAMINATION OF ME. WALTEZ WATTS.

Walter Watts, late lessee of the Olympic and Maryle-
bone Theatres, who stands charged with stealing a
cheque for 1,4001., the property of the Globe Insur-
ance Company, was brought up again on remand
yesterday at the Mansion-house. The interest in the
affair seemed to be still unabated, and long before the
gates and doors of the justice-room were opened to
the public an immense number of well-dressed
people had assembled outside, and when the doors
were unlocked the rush into the court was terrific.
Mr. Alderman Gibbs sat for the Lord Mayor. Al-
dermen Copeland and Carden were also on the bench.
The prisoner was brought up at half-past one
o'clock, in the custody of D. Forrester.
Mr. Clarkson, instructed by Messrs. Freshfield,
appeared for the prosecution ; and Mr. Bodkin, in-
structed by Mr. \Vontner, attended on behalf of the
prisoner.
The first witness called was Mr. Henry Bien
Reynolds, of Tottenham, who deposed as follows :—I
am the ledger keeper of the bank of Glyn and Co.
It is my duty to check off the entries in the pass-
books against the entries in the ledger. After the
payment of a cheque of 1,4001. on the 14th of last
February, I found that there appeared an entry of that
payment in the Globe Insurance pass-book and in the
ledger. I see a place in the pass-book produced where
ithas been erased. The figures 4471. ls. 3d. have been
altered to 1,4001. I see no other erasure in the pass-
book. I perceive at the bottom striking the amount
upon the debit side. I see the whole
amount has been written on an erasure.
Ido not know Mr. Watts' handwriting. There was
an entry of 4471. Is. 7d., as well as the 1,4001. when
entered up in the ledger from the pass-book, on the
26th of February. That entry is also erased, and
I find it entered upon the spot where the 1,4001. had
been previously entered. It is usual to return
the cancelled cheques to the customers. It was
the custom of the Globe Insurance to send for their
pass-book every Wednesday.
Cross-examined—l am speaking of the general
practice of checking in the bank. A person calls
the items from the pass-book, and I check
them in the ledger, and I see a mark on the
ledger, which induces me to believe that the
items I have mentioned were called. It is the duty
of one clerk only to call the items from the pass-book,
and I tick off the items in the ledger. Tnis ledger
contains the accounts of all our customers. When I
am away fur holiday the ledger is checked by some
one else.
Re-examined—The total in the pass-book when
compared with the ledger, on the 26th February, was
22,0451. 73. 9d. on the debit side. I cannot say who it
was that called the items, but a party calls the items
in the pass-book, and I see that they correspond with
the items in the ledger. The sums called on the 26th
corresponded with those in the ledger. They in-
cluded the banking transactions from the 19th to
the 26th.
Mr. Henry Probin examined—l am a messenger at
the Globe Insurance, and I was the person whose
duty it was to fetch the pass-book of the company
from the bankers every Wednesday. From January
last, down to the present time, it has been my practice
to fetch it from the bank. I apply for it at the coun-
ter, take it and carry it to the office. On each Weds
nesday as 1 obtained it I always gave the puss
book to the prisoner. Mr. Watts's office was in
the third floor. I used to deliver to him the
book down stairs, in the bottom. I believe
the book was handed by Mr. Watts to the secretary.
Mr. Watts generally waited for it is our bottom
office, not in his office, and then he went up to his own
office. That occurred always on the Wednesdays, so
that when I came into the office from the bankers' I
found Mr. Watts generally on the ground floor, wait-
ing to receive it.
Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin—Generally speak-
ing I saw Mr. Watts. Sometimes I have taken
the book up stairs to him. In this year,
1850, I:have generally delivered the book below.
About ten clerks are engaged in the lower office, but
sometimes I found Mr. Watts in the entrance hall.
I bring the book open. The directors meet on
Thursday. The book was given to Mr. Watts, to
be laid on the secretary's table, where I have often
seen it while the secretary was in the room.
Re-examined—l have seen the book on the table on
Wednesdays and Thursdays—generally on Thursdays.
I have seen it this year on the table, but I cannot
say whether it was on a Wednesday or a Thursday.
Mr. Watts sometimes told me to go for the pass-book.
My place is to attend the hall, and Mr. Watts
has come from up stairs to tell me to fetch the
book. generally speaking, I have always found
him waiting in the lower office for the
book, and when I have given it to him he has
taken it up stairs. The office I have mentioned is on
the right. hand side of the hall, and Mr. Watts,
while waiting in that office, could see me through a
glass-door, and he sometimes came out to Idea me.
Mr. Clarkson said this was all the evidence he had
to offer on the subject of the 1,4001. robbery, which
he thought was sufficient to justify a committal on
that distinct charge, and he called for one accord-
ingly. He was prepared to go into other matters,
but he felt that he had advanced enough to justify
the Alderman committing the prisoner for trial.
Mr. Alderman Gibbs and Mr. Goodman, the chief
clerk, then retired to consider the application. On
their return, after a short absence,
Mr. Alderman GIBBS expressed a wish to have
another case proceeded with.
Mr. Front Rothney, a cashier in the London and
Westminster Bank, was next called. On the 26th of

..,