The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-04-15 00:00:00

RANKIN V. SPEED.

Mr. CRESSWELL, assisted by Mr. CROMPTON, appeared for
the plaintiff, and Mr. ALEXANDER for the defendant.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff. Mr. Rankin,
who is an old man of nearly eighty, and in humble circum-
stances, for damages sustained by him from the defendant's hav-
ing run over him in his gig, in School lane, Liverpool, on the
3d of November, 1834, by which he had broken the plaintiff's
leg. In consequence the plaintiff had lost his business, and had
been reduced to great distress. The defendant had, after the
accident, taken the plaintiff into his gig, and had afterwards
given him a sovereign, but thought that sufficient compensa-
tion for the injury.
James Wilson and a sailor named Hughes proved the acci-
dent having occurred, and that the defendant was driving at a
rapid‘ rate.
(i r. Samuel M'Cullock, surgeon, deposed to being sent for
and attending the plaintiff. His thigh bone was broken and
did not unite for nearly seventeen weeks after. The plaintiff
was poor, and was upwards of eighty years old. He had made
no charge.
James Cotteral deposed to the defendant being a cooper, and
having had six journeymen under him; he was also one.
Since this accident the plaintiff's business had been entirely
lost, and his shop shut up.
Mr. ALEXANDER, in defence, said it was most singular that
this action should be brought now, 15 months after the accident.
It appeared to him that some person was behind the plaintiff,
who had urged him on by telling him that a lucrative business
could be made out of it. Mr. Speed never, till the writ was put
into his hands, had any idea but that the circumstance was
purely the result of an accident. He had no objection to the
old man being made comfortable, but he hoped the costs would
not be allowed to go from the defendant to the real parties who
brought the action.
The JUDGE summed up, and the Jury returned a verdict for
the defendant, amount of damage subject to a reference.

WA LBANK V. PRESCOT.-AN ATTORNEY'S BILL.

Mr. C RES S EL t. and Mr. WIGHTMAN appeared for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. ALEXANDER for the defendant.
Mr. CRESWELL, in opening the case, said the defendant had
formerly been a clerk with Mr Morris, attorney, of Wigan, and
had been employed by the plaintiffs, who are the assignees of
John Swinden filenkorn, a bankrupt, for the sale of some of
his property. The defendant now resided at Manchester, and
had been introduced to the plaintiff by Mr. Morris, and they
had employed him on that recommendation. The defendant
sold the property for about £5OO, and, on being applied to for the
money, rendered in an account that he had paid off a first mort-
gage of £4OO, to Mr. M. which he was not authorised to do, and ,
for the balance tendered in his bill for the sale of the property
£lOl 2s. 9d., by which he made the plaintiffs debtors to him.
He thought it rather too bad that the attorney's costs of selling,
propertv to the amount of £5OO should be £lOO.
Mr. WIGHTNIAN.—We must now proceed to tar the bill.
His Loii ns HIP, to Mr. Alexander.—Have you any objection
to have the bill taNed ?
Mr. ALEXANDER.—I have •no objection. Then, supposing
the £lOl be established as a reasonable charge for work done,
the defendant will be entitled to a verdict?
His LORESHlP.—Certainly. • ,
Mr. ALEXANDER, for the defence, contended that the defen-
dant had been authorised to hand over the amount of mortgage
by Mr. Morris; of Arigan, who employedliim as his agent, and
who was attorney for the assignees, and also for the first mort-
gage, and that be had had much trouble, besides being 1:50,0ut of
pocket. He had had•twelve journeys, and had written twenty-
five letters on one part of the subject and thirty-six On another,
and' had otherwise had much trouble, which reduced his charge
of £lOl 2s. 9d. to a reasonable charge.
Mr. Morris, of Wigan, deposed to having formerly employed
the defendant as his clerk, and that he was employed as attorney
to the assignees, and also to the first tn.,rtgage, and that he
authorised the defendant to act for him as agent. He did not
know where the account of the defendant now was, and he
could not tell whether the copy produced was a copy of the bill.
His LORDSHIP advised that the bill should be referred to
some gentleman to be taxed.
The Jury intimated their readiness to tax the bill. (Laugh-
ter.)
Verdict for the plaintiff by consent, subject to a reference,
the costs to abide the event.