The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-08-20 00:00:00

NISI PRIUS COURT.-YESTERDAY.

SILCOCK v BLEASDALE.—In this case the plaintiff it was
stated owned some cottages near the road between Wigan
and Bolton, which had been so much injured by the sinking
of the ground on which they stood, owing to the defendant
mining for coal near and under them, that they were in a
dangerous state, and would probably have to be rebuilt. The
defendant had refused permission to the plaintiff to go into
his pit to ascertain whether the ground was undermined ;
and he was compelled to sink a shaft himself, when he found
that a considerable portion of the land belonging to himself,
and on which the cottages were built, had been undermined.
After some conversation between the respective counsel, the
case was referred to arbitration, with certain powers. Da-
mages (nominally) £6OO.

LIABILITY OF SHIP-OWNERS CHARTERING THEIR VES-
SELS, TO HEAVY EXPENSES, IF INCURRED ABROAD
IN THE PROSECUTION OF THE VOYAGE.-VAUGHAN V.
FITZ-HUGH AND ANOTHER.

Mr. CROMP PON opened the pleadings.
Mr. ALEXANDER stated the details of the case. The plain-
tiff was a merchant at Honduras, the defendant a merchant
of this town, and the action arose out of the chartering of a
ship which was to bring to this town a cargo of mahogany
and logwood from Honduras. The ship went out, but at
Demerara, on the way thither, an epidemic prevailed, of
which the captain, the mate, and several of the crew died.
Another captain was appointed, necessaries provided, and
she proceeded to Belize, in the bay of Honduras, where,
after other misfortnnes, she incurred further expenses, and
took in a part of her cargo—logwood. She afterwards pro-
ceeded to Bilboa on the Spanish main, where, after great de-
lay from bad weather, she took in a quantity of mahogany.
Here she was driven on shore, in a storm, and finally became
a complete wreck. The captain returned to the agent of the
owners at Belize, and who was also charterer of the ship, and
took steps for the sale of the vessel, &c. Considerable ex-
penses were incurred for cordage, boats, anchors, wages of
labourers and seamen, &c., incurred while the vessel was on
the coast, and which were provided •by the agent, Mr.
Vaughan. It was to recover the_several sums thus advanced
by Mr. Vaughan, for the use of the ship, and which he (the
learned counsel) should prove were required, and were judi-
ciously applied to the best advantage, under the circum-
stances this action was brought. He then • called his wit-
nesses.

Captain John Stirling sworn.—ln July last year I was at
Demerara. The ship Prince Regent was there. The agents
of the owner, Messrs. Walmsley and Blacklock, gave me the
command of her. She was then short of her crew. There
were but two or three men on board. Ten men, including
the captain, had died. She was short of stores. She had
not provisions enough to complete the voyage. .I was taken
ill myself. Her riggings were very deficient. She had not
tackle or boats sufficient to take in a cargo at Honduras.
The carpenter alone could work, and he was caulking the
sides. We employed labourers to load her. We had a diffi-
culty in getting hands, and that detained her. We were also
detained in getting ballast. We got 14 men. Some of them
were ill. Seventeen would not have been enough. They
were not efficient, and behaved ill. All of them but six or
seven were imprisoned by the magistrates. I applied to Mr.
N. Vaughan for supplies, by order of Mr. Blacklock. The
mate died, and I was ill myself. I took part of our cargo on
board at Belize. We afterwards went to Ulloa, on the
Spanish Main. Dues had to be paid at Belize. We after-
wards went to Orna, where dues had to be paid. We were
obliged to call at Ulloa, the capital of the settlement, and
there to pay dues before landing at Ulloa. We had to pro-
cure- assistance in loading at Ulloa, and to get new tackle
and a boat. While loading at Ulloa we had bad weather.
We there lost an anchor and cable. Finally the vessel was
wrecked at Gilboa. I then went to Belize to Mr. Vaughan,
and appointed an agent for the underwriter and all concern.
ed. The ship was a total wreck. She was sold. She could
not have been got off. She was sold for £l3l currency, or
about £BO sterling. I and Mr. Vaughan were afterwards
brought before the magistrates for wages, and paid wages to
men to the amount of the sale. (The captain here produced
accounts of disbursements. Some beef was supplied which
was tainted, and he required an account to be struck out.
At Omoa, Mr. Galme paid port dues, &c., and he (witness)
gave him an order for repayment on Mr. Vaughan.) I was
paid some wages. Mr. Fitzhugh said he had received the in-
surance, deducting the expenses at Honduras. The deduc-
tion he said was £lB7. I believe on account of commission
on the sale of the cargo. They told me they had received
the insurance on the freight. The gross amount of the dis-
bursements paid by Mr. Vaughan was £845, and there was
an omission for an account of £24—in all £869.

Cross-examined by Mr. CRESSWELL.—I gave Mr. Vaughan
several copies of the charter party. The vessel was char-
tered for Mr. Vaughan by his brother. He told me so. I
have no vouchers. I gave them back to Mr. Vaughan, who
has them there, He paid tonnage dues in my presence. A
voucher was given for the amount. We took 65 tons of log-
wood in bond at Honduras. We had eight or nine men to
assist for four or five days. I saw the moneypaid for a boat,
£lO currency, for lifting an anchor and cable. The boat had
to go 70 miles. The shippers were not bound to do this. It
is not usual. We got a kedge anchor, and two anchors of
about 56 lbs. weight to warp off the mahogany. I did not
see the water and provisions paid. I got a boat at Ulloa,
and gave an order on Mr. Vaughan. (Witness spoke to
some of the items in the accounts paid and others not) The
provisions stated were got. The chain cable charged was
bought at Belize, and I saw it paid for. Witness spoke to
other amounts paid.
Re-examined.—lt is customary and necessary to have a
pilot on board while the ship is on the coast. I was 101 days
on the coast, and during that time only 35 days, owing
to the weather, in loading the cargo. The labourers had to
be kept on board all the time, the same as the seamen. The
country is unhealthy, and it is usual to give the men gin, for
which £9O is charged. I saw the labourers paid. All the
provisions stated were received on board.
Mr. Kennedy, a merchant of Honduras, said the Prince
Regent arrived in December, and was wrecked in February.
She was lost in a gale. Her loss in such a gale caused no
surprise. I have looked at the disbursements. So far as I
can judge the charges are all correct. The amount charged
for pork, and which appears to be high, I know to be correct.
I sold pork at Honduras at the time at the same price. I
am agent for Lloyds' at Honduras. I see none of the ex-
penses that, under the circumstances, could have been
avoided.

The charter party was here put in by Mr. Alexander, and
read.

_
Mr. CRESSWELL addressed the jury for the defendants at
great length. He dwelt upon the fact that it was specified
in the charter party that a sum not exceeding £2OO should
be given to the captain by Mr. Vaughan, but not so large a
sum as that which was sought to be recovered, namely, £9OO.
No freight could meet such a demand. Mr. Vaughan, as
charterer of the vessel, was bound to have used all due
economy, and to avoid all possible delay. The tonnage dues,
he•admitted, it was necessary that the shipowner should pay
He next came to the provisions, and the delay. It appeared
that labourers had been kept at Ulloa for 101 days, when it
was probable 30 days might have sufficed. It was monstrous
to charge shipowners, who could not controul the parties
abroad, with such heavy expenses. The captain, indeed,
said the weather was bad ; but, admitting this to a certain
extent, great want of exertion was manifest. For it appeared,
on the captain's evidence, that, although only 1-Bth of the
cargo was taken at Belize, and 7-Bths at Ulloa; yet, strange
to say, the charges for labour, &c., were much greater at the
former than at the latter place. Then the charter party said
that the vessel should proceed to the ports named, to receive
and take on board a full cargo. It said nothing as to the
shipowner taking the cargo on board, and the natural in-
ference was that it should be sent alongside by the shippers,
so that all the captain had to do was to take it on board and
stow it. There was a charge for a boat of £3O to take off the
cargo on board, and also for anchors, and the expense of these
as well as a considerable sum for labour and provisions,
ought to be knocked off the bill, for the boat, &c., would not
generally be wanted by the ship afterwards ; and it was but
reasonable to suppose that such boats, &c., were provided in
the country by the shippers. Thus they would get rid of
£3O, for the boats £l6 16s. A large amount for labour had
also been paid to labourers at Ulloa, which might have been
saved, or reduced, if the captain had hired a crew, in place
of labourers, to load the vessel. Besides, the plaintiffs hadnot produced a single voucher for the bills said to be paid.
Captain Stirling was re-called, and said that the expenses
for labourers alluded to was not incurred at Belize. The la-
bourers were sent from that place to Ulloa, and had to be
kept on board all that time.

Mr. Kennedy was re-called, and Stated, that the praotiee

in Honduras was, for the crews of ships to take the timber to
the ships, which ay at anchor generally at a considerable dis-
tance. He had known a case in which a captain had to float
his timber alongside from a point nine miles from the ship.
If the logs came down the river in the round, they were
landed and squared on the quay, and thence floated or bound
by the crew. If not, they were generally left and measured
near the margin of the river or water, whence they had to be
floated, or bound, at the captain's charge or risk.
The learned JUDGE summed up. He said, that the £2OO.
only was stated as the sum to be given to the Captain for ex-
penses, it was not to be supposed that more was not to be
given if it were found necessary for the prosecution of the
speculation, and the navigation and proper mooring of the
ship. The case was indeed an unfortunate one for both par-
ties ; 113 ut as most of the items in the accounts %vac undis-
puted ; and others objected to had been supported by evidence
as fair as could generally be obtained in such cases, he was of
opinion that the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict. As to the
purchase of the boat and anchors for the loading of the ves-
sel, he conceived, in shipping such heavy articles as logs of
mahogany, the shippers were bound to find the means. He
handed the accounts to the jury, and left the case in their
hands. _ .

-----
The jury returned a verdict for the full amount claimed,
£869. 12s.

JONIS v. SMITH.

Mr. COWLING opened the pleadings.
Mr. ALEXANDER stated the details. The plaintiff was a
licensed victualler in Liverpool, the defendant a coach-pro-
prietor at Eastham. The plaintiff and some of his family
were desirous to attend the funeral of his sister, who had died
some days before in Wales ; and they therefore applied to
Mr. Smith for a carriage, to convey the funeral party. It
was agreed that they should go in a coach, which was brought
on the morning of the funeral, and they proceeded to Ha-
warden, in Flintshireovhere the interment was to take place.
They attended the funeral. It was in the month of Decem-
ber, and they could not leave on their way back before dark.
They left Eastham in the morning, attended the funeral, and
on their return, after crossing the ferry, they were upset by
the carelessness of the driver and the want of lamps. The
plaintiff had his leg much injured—so much so, that he
world never be so well as before ; and he had been confined
to his room for months in consequence. .
James M`Lean.—l am a vietnaller here, and know the
plaintiff. Mrs. Hanmer of Hawarden, was the sister of the
plaintiff. I attended the funeral with the plaintiff and others.
We went from this town about nine in the morning to East-
ham. We got into a stage coach. Mr. Smith said in reply
to a question by Mr. Jones, that they would be in time if
they got back by seven. Mr. Fowler enquired why there
were no lamps, and said that it was improper at such a sea-
son, not to have them, as the road was intricate. After the
funeral :we had dinner, and went back about three o'clock.
We crossed the King's ferry. The coachman was seated
after we landed, and gave the horses a lash, and in a short
time the wheels went on some stones, and the coach upset.
We were all thrown off. As soon as I came to myself I
heard Mr. Jones groan, and went and took him on my knee.
He was much hurt. We put him inside the coach, and took
him to Liverpool. He suffered much pain, and is yet lame.
Cross-examined by Mr. BRANDT.—In going to Hawarden
we stopped, I think at two houses. Some of the party had
some drink. I can't say whether it was mentioned at East-
ham that we should be back to go to Liverpool by the five
o'clock boat. We dined between two and three o'clock.
We had some drink. I had a glass of gin and water, and
one of ale. We had to stop at the other side of the Dee, be-
fore crossing the bridge. I can't say whether anything was
drunk. We called at the public house on the Cheshire side.
We only took what was customary. There were pipes
smoked. I smoked too. I only borrowed a whiff now and
then. It 'may be that persons smoking want some drink.
When we got on the coach there was a cry of " All's right !"
I am not positive that there was not ; but think if there
had been I should have heard it. There were four inside,
and eight or nine outside. We afterwards called at another
public house. The &achman was sober. He had not
driven us steadily before the accident. I don't know that
there was any singing.
Re-examined.—ln cominc, down from Hawarden, the
coachman drove rapidly, and I prepared to leap off into the
field in the event of the coach upsetting. We stopped at the
public-house on the Dee because the horses were there
stopped.
Jas. Fowler was at the funeral. I went with the plaintiff
the day begre, to the defendant. He agreed to take us from
Liverpool to Hawarden, by Eastham, and back, for £4 10s.
The defendant said we must be back in time for the 7 o'clock
boat. I said it was impossible to get back before. I noticed
the want of lamps, and said it was wrong. We left the
church-yard at Hawarden at about two o'clock. When we
got on this side of the Dee, the coachman asked if all was
right, and we replied, " Yes, all's right !" It was dark, and
before we got 100 yards we were upset. I fell upon the de-
fendant, who groaned much. I drank nothing but ginger
beer that day. One of the party asked at Gregory's (the
ferry-house) for a lantern, and offered to pay for the lend of
it, but Gregory said he had no other, and could not. Some
of the narty went into the ferry-house at the other side of the
Dee, and also into Gregory's, but I do not know whether
they drank anything or not.
Thomas Jones was present. I have heard what the last
witnesses said ; and it is true. The horses got quite unma-
nageable in corning down the hill at Hawarden.
Mr. Taylor sworn.—l am a surgeon. I was called in to
attend Mr. Jones, the plaintiff. He had a fracture of the
left leg, and contusion of the side. Erysipelus supervened.
He was confined for three months. There is still some
defect in his leg. My charge was £3 103.
Mr. Hallows, surgeon, also attended Mr. Jones. Mr.
Taylor's account is incorrect. The plaintiff may be nearly
50 years of age.
This was the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. BRANDT addressed the jury for the defendant, con-
tending that the accident arose from the imprudence of the
parties in the coach, in starting it off before the coachman
was ready, and not from any incapacity or negligence on his
part, or neglect on the part of the defendant.
Samuel Fry, coachman to the defendant, and drove the
party. We started at about ten o'clock. They smoked
from the first. They were very melancholy. They stopped
at the " Yacht" public-house. We stopped at the next
public-house. I did not see whether they drunk anything
then. We got to the church about a quarter-past one. I
did not see them look very sorrowful. They afterwards
dined at the inn. I had dinner also and some ale—two pints
of ale amongst three of us. They seemed when they came
out to be very tipsy, they rolled about so. The plaintiff
was put " inside" the coach. They were talking loud and
smoking. I drunk nothing after what I stated. I saw the
stones about 60 yards from the horses. I was standing at
my horses' heads when they came shouting " all right," and
singing. I could scarcely hold the horses. I had scarcely
got to my seat before the coach started. The plaintiff was
singing after the accident, and did not say he was hurt at all.
I drove off after, at about five miles an hour. We stopped
at the Yacht, and they had all something to drink there.
They came out very merry when they did come out. I never
heard Mr. Jones complain till he got to Eastham, where I
first heard of it. I did not hear Mr. Jones himself say
anything. The party made light of it.
Dr. Taylor recalled.—lt was the small bone of the leg, not
the large one.
Arthur Gregory, landlord of the Dee ferry-house, near
which the accident happened.—l did not see the coach till it
was upset. When they left they said " good night" moder-
ately loud. 'When they got in the coach to go, I heard them
cry " good night—all's right." This might startle the horses.
The accident happened about twenty yards from the place the
coach started from. The stones were near the middle of the
road. I can't tell whether they were in an improper place.
I helped Mr. Jones into the coach. He said he had hurt his
ancle and head badly. He did not say anything about the
driver being to blame. I heard Mr. Hanmer say that he
(Mr. H.) could drive.
George Simon.—l am ostler to Mr. Smith at the King's
Ferry. When the funeral party called they were all drunk.
They were shouting " all right !" I can't say if this startled
the horses. I was in the house at the time. I heard the
coach fall.

Mrs. Simon, wife of last witness.—l heard voices shouting
" all's right." The coach was then in the boat there. They
afterwards shouted all's right, and frightened me. It was
too dark for me to see distinctly. I ran up. Mr. Jones got
out from the inside of the coach. I did not know him before.
" He said he hurt her foot."

John Snow Berrington.—l am a coachman. I saw the
party at half-past ten. They had all pipes, and were very
merry,—more like a wedding party. It would have no dis-
advantage to have lamps. More difficult at night. Horses,
accustomed to coaches, will start off at the words " all right."
From Gregory's house there is a decline, where it would be
difficult to stop if a coach once started. Mrs. Rutter, of the
Yacht.—The coach came up between ten and eleven o'clock.
Most of them called and had gin and ale, they had a piper
with them ; some of them appeared to be rather drunk.
Davies, the defendant, clerk, at Eastham, said he was
by when the coach was hired. The party was to return in
time for the half-past five o'clock boat. Some of them
when they arrived came to Mr. Smith, and said the post-boy
was not to blame, and they hoped Mr. Smith would not turn
him off.

This being the defence,
Mr. ALEXANDER addressed the jury for the plaintiff,
dwelling on all the circumstances of the case, and particu-
larly on the evidence of witnesses for the defence, who were
all in the defendant's employment, or had a bias in his
favoir.

His LORDSHIP summed up. He considered that consi-
derable negligence had been shown, even according to the
testimony of several of the defendant's witnesses.
The jury could not at first make up their minds and
retired. In about an hour they returned, and give in a verdict
for the plaintiff of £4o—damages 40 shillings.

NON-FULFILMENT OF CONTRACT.-STOCKDALE AND
ANOTHER V. PITT.

In this case, which was stated by Mr. WIGHTMAN, (with
whom was another counsel for the plaintiff,) it was sought to
recover a sum in damages, for a breach of contract on the
part of the defendant. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Stockdale &
Son, were, he said, extensive soap manufacturers in this
town, and the defendant, Mr. Pitt, a wholesale grocer and
general dealer. In March, 1838, Mr. Pitt, as he should
show, had entered into a contract to purchase from the plain-
tiffs, fifty tons of soap, of the quality known as third-brown
soap, for which he was to pay 425. per cwt.; and as is the
practice in such transactions, he was to take it from the ma-
nufacturers as he wanted it from time to time. After taking
certain quantities away from time to time, Mr. Pitt made no
further enquiries for the remainder, and was reminded of his
contract. He stated that he was somewhat embarrassed by
the quantity of the article which he did not find to suit him,
and wished a portion of other qualities to be given along with
the remainder. This was complied with, a proportionate
price, according to the contract being charged for those other
kinds. The plaintiff finally declined to receive the remainder
of the soap after it had been manufactured, and it was sought
to recover damages to the amount of the loss thereby sus-
tained by the plaintiffs.. He called
George Nash Exton—l am a cleric of Messrs. Stock-
dale and son. Mr. Jno. Stockdale and Mr. Pitt were in
the private office in March, 1838. When they came out I
heard Mr. Stockdale tell Mr. Day, a clerk since deceased, to
make entry, of 50 tons of thirds brown soap, at 425. pet cwt.,
to Mr. Pitt, who was then present. I afterwards went to
Mr. Pitt's in July, and saw some of our soap there.
Cross-examined by Mr. CRESSWELL.—He got some of
the soap next day (in March), and on the 10th and 22d of
May 10 boxes of half a ton more. Mr. Pitt might have paid
in a good deal of money. We have manufactured from 80
to 100 tons a week, chiefly for exportation. We have ma-
nufactured some from clay : it is not worth so much, by 4s.
or ss. a cwt. It is anything but good. The ordinary price
of clay soap was nearer 455. than 40s. at that particular time.
The price fell rapidly till July, and then rose again from that
time. At the latter end of July it had fallen to 365. It was
445. to 455. in March. In January, 1838, it was about 455.
for a small quantity. It got higher to the time of the sale.
They began to put in the clay in 1836. We now sell third
browns without clay. The clay may be detected by the
naked eye. We are allowed to keep it in frame for a week
by the Excise. It dries, and we cannot keep it long without
loss. In the end of July the price was 365. We could soon
have made the quantity wanted. " Ay ! ay ! (said Mr.
Cresswell) there was plenty of clay to be had.'
Re-examined by Mr. WHIGHAM.—It was well known to
the trade that there was clay in third brown soap.
Thos. Brindley Slater-1 was in the employ of Messrs.
Stockdale. Mr. Pitt, the defendant, had previously bought
soap with clay in it. On the 3d March I called on Mr. Pitt
for an order, and he asked for a cheap soap that could be
sold for sd. I told him one price was 455. He came, and
the contract was made. I called on him relative to his con-
tract in July. He said he could not do with any more, the
price was so high, and wanted some of a different kind. In
November I took him an invoice of the remainder. He sa d
he would call. He called on Mr. Stockdale. On the 17tih
of December I called on him foy some money on accou t.
He gave me £lOO. I asked him if be wanted more soap.

I called again on him, and he paid me £5O. He asked me to
make out an account of all the old transactions, which I did.
I called several times, between then and January, 1839, and
he paid me all he owed, including all the soap delivered. He
said he did not want more soap then.
Cross-examined.--I never heard the defendant complain
of the 'quality of the soap. He never said so to me. The
soap we wished him to take was made four months. He was
a good paymaster.

'Georg CBannister Pix, chief clerk at Mr. Stockdale's, said
he had frequently sent to Mr. Pitt relative to the contract.
I sent a letter and an invoice to him. He returned, with a
memorandum to the effect—" This is a mistake—l'll call up."
He did call up some days after, and Mr. Stockdale showed
him the invoice, and said, " Do you mean to say this is a
mistake Mr. Pitt." He replied, " No, not exactly a mistake ;
but as the kind of soap you have will not suit me, I wish you
to let me have some of another quality." Mr. Stockdale
eventually allowed him to have some of other qualities of
higher prices. The prices were made in proportion to the 3d
browns, which was higher than the then market price. Mr.
Pitt afterwards called with two gentlemen to sample some of
the 3d browns. They were not allowed, and went away.
Mr. Joseph Crossfield.-1 am a soap-boiler in Warrington.
I know a desription of soap called 3d brown or common
brown. It is made with a portion of clay or earth. It has
been made 3d or 4th generally. If 3d brown were ordered, it
would be made with clay. Soap is made of palm oil, tallow,
rosin, and soda. The clay is china clay, and is used in place
of so much tallow or oil. The market price then would be
425. or 438.--varying in proportion to the quantity of clay.
The more clay introduced, the cheaper ought the soap to be.
Robert Taylor.—I am a soap boiler in this town, and in-
troduced the clay soap about four years ago. We have no
lower description.

Cross-examined.—We began to make third brown without
clay four or five months ago. It is now worth 40s. to 41s.
Mr. entsswELL then spoke in behalf of the defendant.
He contended that the plaintiffs in bringing this action had
taken a most untradesman,like course towards an old cus-
tomer, and that the only damages that could be awarded was
the difference of price, between what they could have got for
the soap as sold to Mr. Pitt, and what it could now be sold for.
He remarked that the clay soap, the abominable stuff of
which they should yet hear more, reminded him of a trial
at these assizes, relative to chicory, a few years ago, in which
he chanced to be engaged. All deleterious articles were gra-
dually introduced before the public became aware of them.
The trial alluded to related to the introducing of chicory
amongst coffee. The judge happened to inquire what chicory
Was, and he (Mr. C.) inadvertently replied, that it was a
substance with which to adulterate coffee. Upon which the
opposing parties immediately exclaimed, " Oh no ! it is an
article merely to mix with coffee ! (A laugh.) Now, he
should probably be met in the same manner in this case. A
little clay in the soap would not be detected : it would pass
muster ; but it was the nature of those who deteriorated
articles to go on increasing the deteriorating and cheap ingre-
dient. They would be told the clay was not to adulterate the
soap; but merely to mix with it, and by and bye, in place of
being soap mixed with a little clay, it would be clay mixed
with a little soap ! (A. laugh.) He should show that the
first quantity of soap sent by Messrs. Stockdaies', was of
middle or fine quality ; that the second was so bad that a
piece of it was brought back by a female and thrown at the
head of Mr. Pitt's shopman, with an indignant exclamation,
" Why should you sell me such stuff as this for soap ?" The
third parcel of the 3rd brown soap was equally objectionable,
and he conceived that his client was not bound to take it,
and that the contract was at an end. Much of it was thrown
back on his hands. He called the following witnesses :
Thomas Miller.—l am a tallow chandler, and haxe been
six years with the defendant. He sold some soap to Scholes
and Thwaites in March. No complaint was made of it, We
received the lot in Atay, which was quite of a different quality.
A woman came.to the shop with a piece of it and threw it at
me. I produce some of the soap. (Here the witness pro-
duced several pieces of the 3d brown soap, which seemed to
be almost yellowish clay. Its appearance excited great laugh-
ter in the Court. On close inspection it did not appear to
be so very bad.) We sold of the soap to numbers of parties.
(Here the witnesses mentioned the names of a number of
shopkeepers to whom they had sold it.) Mr. Thwaites gave
425. 6d. for the soap.
Mr. Wm. Thwaites.-1 am a grocer, and deal in soap.
I bought a box from Mr. Pitt on the 28th of March, 1838.
It was good soluble soap. It was a good deal better than
this. I should not like to offer such as this to my customers.
(He alluded to the sample produced.)
Mr. John Scholes.—l was a grocer in the end of March
last. I bought some soap from Mr. Pitt for 425. sd. and 435.
per cwt. It was free from clay. I got some like this in
August. I could not get rid of it, and sold it in chips, or
small pieces at an under price.
Thomas Hayshot, a grocer.—ln October last I ordered
some 5d brown soap from Mr. Pitt. It was like this, and I
returned it. It cost 425. k could get as good as this for 335.
William Lecumbre, a provision dealer, said he had bought
some of it, and it was so bad he could get nobody to look at
it. He returned it.

Mr. Walsh, a grocer in Everton.—l bought some soap
from Mr. Pitt. It was very bad. It was similar to this. I
returned it.

William Pinnington, a grocer and provision-dealer.--I had
the misfortune to buy some soap. I lost a good many of
my customers by selling it, and some of them returned it.
Ebenezer Jones.—l have been a soap-boiler for fourteen
years. This is not a fair article for 3d browns. This, in
March last but one, would be worth 345. Good 3ds would
be worth 41s. to 425.

Cross-examined by Mr. WIGHTMAN.-It is not customary
for soap-boilers to call clay soap 3d browns. I have made
large quantities of it., and sold it chiefly to Irshmen. The
highest price I have known it reach was 365. Witness
named many parties to whom he had sold, and in August,
last year, in Manchester, he had sold it for 365.
A gentleman in the employ of Messrs. Martindale—said
this is a very inferior quality. It would be worth 345. now.
In March 1838, it would be worth 365. The 3d browns made
before clay was introduced, was much superior to this.
Thomas Hazlehurst.—l am a soap-boiler at Runcorn.
Before clay was introduced, the lowest quality of soap was,
by us, called " exports." It was a superior soap to this. I
have been told that this soap contains 32 per cent. of clay.
Mr. Hare, tallow chandler.—l went with Mr. Pitt and
Mr. Leicester to Stockdale's, to see the bulk or quality. We
saw Mr. Fix. I did not myselfask for samples. Mr. Stock-
dale plumply refused to let us see it.
Mr. Mark Leicester.—Went with the above, and asked
Mr. Pix to see a sample of the soap, and the bulk. We
wished to see the bulk, because Mr. Pitt doubted whether the
soap was there or not. They refused to let us see either.
This appears to be a very bad quality of soap.
Mr. WIGHTMAN addressed the jury for the plaintiffs,
contending that Mr. Pitt was bound to abide by his contract.
The learned JUDGE perspicuously summed up the evi-
dence, dwelling on the fact that the plaintiff had entered into
a contract for an inferior quality of soap ; that he had not re-
turned any of it; as not being equal to the first at the time,
and that he had acted even until May last, as if under the
impression that the contract was not void.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict for
the plaintiff—Damages £l23—costs 40s.