The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1847-04-06 00:00:00

LIABILITY OF PROVISIONAL COMMITTEE MEN.

SOWLER v. SimrsoN.—ln this case Messrs. Baines,
Pashley, and Sowler appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs.
Martin and Hugh Hill for the defendant, and the action
had been brought to recover £lO 17s. 11d. for work
and labour done. The plaintiff, Mr. Thomas Sowler, is
the proprietor of the Manchester Courier, and the de-
fendant, Mr. Samuel Simpson, was an attorney at Lan-
caster, but is now living independent, and the action was
brought to recover the amount named from the defendant
as a provisional committee man of a contemplated line of
railway which was to have been called " The Newcastle
and Carlisle Railway Company." The company was pro-
visionally registered on the 22nd September, 1845, after
' which several advertisements appeaaed in the different
newspapers, which contained the list of provisional com-
mittee men, and a copy of these advertisements was sent
to 'Mr. Simpson, he having consented to act upon the
committee. The advertisement for the payment of
wl;,ich the action was brought appeared on the 18th
and 25th of October. The evidence to render the de-
fendant liable was to show that he had taken an ac-
tive part in promoting the formation of the line, and had
recommended the solicitor, Mr. Coulburn, to advertise in
the provincial papers. Mr. Martin addressed the jury
for the defendant. He said the attorney in the case for
Mr. Sowler was Mr. Coulburn, the very man who had
acted for the railway company. Mr. Sowler had nothing
whatever to do with the action more than having lent his
name, and it had been brought by Mr. Coulburn, who
was really the responsible party to Mr. Sowler, to save
himself and those who acted with him from their respon-
sibility ; for the truth was, Messrs. Coulburn and Norris,
attorneys, got lip the company, conjointly with the three
promoters whose names had been mentioned, for their
own benefit, and they were the persons who had taken
the steps for the purpose of carrying the project out.
Mr. Simpson, being a provisional committee man, was
not liable merely because he had manifested a desire that
the matter should be made public. The learned Baron
left it with the jury to decide whether, in their opinion,
the defendant had rendered himself liable by the part he
had taken in the different interviews which bad been de-
posed to. If they should have any doubt that he had
authorised the insertion of the advertisements, then the
plaintiff was not entitled to a verdict. The jury retired,
and after an hour's absence returned a verdict for the
plaintiff.

ACTION UPON A POLICY OF INSURANCE.
WHITEWELL V. HARRISON, (s. .r.) —ln this case
Messrs. Watson and Henderson appeared for the plain-
tiff ; and Messrs. Martin and Crompton for the defen-
dant ; and the declaration was upon a policy of an in-
surance of a vessel hence to Quebec and back. Mr.
Watson stated the case to the jury. The plaintiff, he
said, was the owner of a vessel called the Governor Hal-
kett, which, subsequent to the transaction forming the
subject of the present inquiry, was lost, and the action
had been brought against the defendant as underwriter
upon a policy of insurance which had been entered into
so far back as the Ist of April, 1845. The vessel in ques-
tion belonged to Mr. Whitwell, and was chartered on the
13th of March, 1845, to Rigby and Mercer, on a voyage
from Liverpool to Quebec, where she was to take in a
cargo of pine deal, with which to return to Wallasey
Pool. She proceeded to Quebec, leaded her cargo, and
left Quebec on the 19th of July. On the 26th of August
she made land. She had fallen in with bad weather, but
ultimately, on the sth of September, arrived in the river
Mersey, and came up near to Wallasey Pool, having with
her a steam-tug and a pilot on board. When she came
up close to the pool, it was found that there was not suf-
ficient water to carry her over the mouth of the bar of
the pool, and she was directed to be brought up in the
neighbourhood of Seacombe, where part of her cargo was
discharged, with the view ligtening her, in order to get
her into Wallasey Pool. On the 14th September it was
discovered that she had sustained very serious injury ; the
water had got into the vessel, her keel was out of the
water, she had parted from her cable, and had driven up-
on a bank. It would seem that he had either come upon
a rock, or pricked upon an anchor. Ultimately her rig-
ging was taken off, and on the 18th September, by the as-
sistance of two steam tugs, she was taken into Wallasey
Pool, where the residue of her cargo was discharged.
The defendant (remarked Mr. Watson) said that the
plaintiff had been damaged and injured by the perils of
the sea. The question would be, whether or not these
injuries had been sustained during the voyage, or when it
could be said the voyage had terminated ; and the point
which the jury would have to decide was, whether or not
the vessel had arrived at her port of destination when she
was so damaged. By the charter and policy of insurance
Wallasey Pool was the place where the -vessel was to be
discharged.
Captain Hillman, master of the vessel at the time of the
occurrence which gave rise to the present action, deposed
to the facts relative to the matter ; and Mr. Joseph Cooke,
superintendent of pilots, spoke to the situation in which
the vessel was lying in the Mersey, and deposed that, in
his opinion, the captain, under the circumstances, had
acted judiciously in taking his vessel to the place in the
river where he had done, and discharging part of her cargo.
This closed the case for the plaintiff, and it being now
half-past five o'clock, his lordship adjourned the case
until two o'clock the following day, and the court then
rose.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—FRIDAY.
This day being Good Friday, the court did not open tit
two o'clock.

WHITWELL V. HARRISON.

This case, which had been adjourned from the preceding
day, was proceeded with, and Mr. Martin addressed the
jury at considerable length.
The JUDGE laid down the law briefly to be this—that as
soon as the vessel reached Wallasey-pool, in the Mersey,
and was mooftd there for twenty-four hours, and dis-
charged a part of its cargo, the liability of the underwriters
ceased ; and that that ceased whether or not the captain
intended to proceed further up Wallasey-pool, there to
discharge the remainder of his cargo. TI e lury returned
a verdi; t for the defendant.