The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-07 00:00:00

COOK V. WETHERELL.

Mr. Sergeant CEIANNELL, on the part of the defendant in
this case, moved for a new trial, and produced and read
several affidavits in contradiction of the evidence given on the
trial. The facts of the case have been before the public for
some time, so that it is not necessary to repeat them here.
The Learned Sergeant pointed out several inconsistencies
in the evidence given on the trial, and read to the court the
affidavits of several persons who, though not examined at the
trial, were alluded to by the witnesses, and who now denied
any knowledge of transactions in which they had been said to
have taken a part.
The rule to show cause why there should not be a new trial
was granted.
BANKRUPTCY COURT, Nov. 6.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.)
COSTS.—An application was made to the Learned Commis-
sioner in the case of Jones, who was a farmer in Bucking-
hamshire.

The odiciai assignee said that the fiat was issued on the
petition of the bankrupt, and there were not sufficient assets
to meet the expenses of working the fiat. In other cases,
under similar circumstances, the costs of the official assignee
were first secured, then the messenger, and then the solicitor
to the fiat. In the present instance the trade assignee had
offered the messenger a little snore than half the amount of
his bill.

The messenger said that his bill amounted to 71. 19s.
and his actual costs out of pocket 5/. 95., and he had been
offered 41., and unless he got paid but of the money in hand,
he had no remedy unless the bankrupt would be enabled after
he got his certificate.
The Learned CoststissloNnn said lie ought to be made
liable ; and no doubt, when an amendment was made to re-
concile the conflicting clauses, these cases would occupy
attention.

'The messenger said they had their authority direct from
the Court, and dared not disobey; they bad no party to
make a demand on.

The COMMISSIONER said—Till the law is altered the officers
must be protected as far as possible, and the messenger must
be paid in full.
In another case, before Mr. Commissioner Shepherd, in in-
solvent came up for his adjourned final order. The case had
been adjourned with an order to pay costs. A question
arose es to which party was to pay the costs of taxation,
and the costs had not been paid, and the opposing creditor
and his solicitor had had notice of the present application,
which they now opposed on the ground that the previous
costs had not been paid. . . .

For the insolvent it was urged that the tender ought to
be binding.
The opposing creditor said there were no assets.
The Learned Commission:a said the insolvent must pay
the costs under the order, the costs of taxation, and the
costs of the day to the opposing creditor.
SHERIFFS' COURT, Nov. 6.
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL).
BRADLEY V. ASHFORD.
The plaintiff in this action is a widow, and until lately kept
a beer-shop in Warwick-street, Golden-square.
The action was brought to recover the sum of 4/. 4s. Bd. for
beer, and ss. for money hut. The defendant pleaded that
he was not indebted. It was proved that the defendant was
in the habit of frequenting the house for three months, and
being served with beer, and it was put down to him in the book.
Mr. Crtoucii having addressed the jury for the defendant,
The jury consulted for nearly ten minutes, and then gave a
verdict for the full amount.

ADIJIIRAL7r,()CRT
HE T JANE.---SALVAGE
This was an action brought by the • Nov J.
writers, owners, and
crew of two smacks, named the Benevolence and the Friends'
Goodwill, to obtain a reward for alleged
rendered to the schooner Jane, of Rochester,
, on her
aalvage services
on the
voyage to that port from Middleborough, withwch,,,3iaclia,l
in the
29th of May last, was off the entrance of the
Thames, and early in the morning of the 30th, the
blowing hard from the N.E. by N., the weather densely
wind
thick, with heavy rain, grounded upon the East-flat ft
Barrow-sand. She was descried by the two smacks, which
came up to her assistance, and eventually the schooner wash
got off the sand, and carried safely to Sheerness. The negotia-
tions which took place between the master and the asserted
/salvor3 were matter of dispute between the parties, and
the subject of very contra lictory affidavits, the parties who
proceeded against the vessel contending that the schooner
was, in fact, abandoned by the master and crew; the owners
alleging that those parties, after. their services had been
declined, took advantage of the accidental absence of the
master, the jolly-boat having got adrift with the master in
it, and obtained possession of her, employing expressions
calculated to intimidate the crew, by inspiring them with
the apprehension that the vessel would be lost. The ship
was arrested for 250/., the vessel, cargo, and freight being
worth only 8001.
Dr. LUSHINGTON was of opinion that the vessel had never
bean abandoned by the master and crew; that the pretended
salvors had taken possession of her without the slightest
authority from the master; that the act approached as
come
as possible to an act of piracy as any case which had
clairen
I,.,abeforie_theauconsideration of the Court ; and that the
ali,,...e"nnd. eted by false swearing from the begin-
ninga.Prounced against the claim, and con-
demned the pretended, salvors in the costs.
THE
Messrs. Good
NtArty
This was a Cuit by
bottomry bond, against the andz.c Rigg, the holders of a
certain parties claiming to be brig
ilortAary Ann, and against
in possession of
the ship, and also against other part; claiming
cliartg.puty, The enier Qt. _ es claiming under a
141 OUP 1144 boGcliae bulk.