The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-10-04 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT.-
YESTERDAY.

M'VAY V. DICKINSON.—LIABILITY PVELICANS.—Ici
this case the plaintiff, who is a female, sought to recover the
sum of .eIS, the alleged value of a trunk and its contents
which had been left a Sunday or two previous in the house of
the defendant, who keeps a tavern. On the day stated, the
plaintiff and her brother called at defendant's, where they
had some drink, and on going away they left a trunk and a
parcel, the latter of which was taken up stairs and the former
was placed in the bar. When the plaintiff called for them, it
was found that the trunk and its contents had been taken
away, and no trace of it could be found. The action was
raised to obtain compensation for the loss.—Mr. Greatley, who
appeared for the defence, contended that his client was not
liable; and he farther disputed the correctness of the alleged
value. Evidence was adduced, at the conclusion of which
his Honour held that no proof of negligence on the part of
the defendant had been proved; he, therefore, gave judgment
for the defendant, but without costs.
MOSES, LEVY, AND CO. V. FITZPATRICK.—In this case the
plaintiffs sought to recover 43 17s. 6d., the balance of an
account for goods furnished at different times, amounting in
all to £26 105., which amounts had by eleven different pay-
ments been reduced to the sum now claimed. The defend-
ant, who did not dispute the accuracy of the original accounts
averred that he was entitled to discount on the sums paid,
which would amount to 175. 6d., leaving him indebted to the
plaintiffs in the sum of only, and this sum he had paid
into court. On the part of the plaintiffs it was shown that the
length of credit which the defendant had taken was so long as
to exclude him from any claim to discount. Judgment for
plaintiffs for the full amount claimed.
REYNOLDS V. CHEESE.—SERVANTS' WAGES.—ITIIIIie case
the plaintiff, Bridget Reynolds, a girl fifteen years of age,
sued Joseph Cheese, beerseller, in Albert-street, for the sum
of 3s. 9d., being five weeks' wages due to her at the rate of 9d
per week. Mrs. Cheese, who appeared for the defence, said
that on the morning on which the plaintiff was to leave her
service, she (the plaintiff) took a quantity of beer without
leave, and with which she had made herself very drunk, and,
therefore, she had withheld payment of the wages. This was
not denied, and his Honour, after reprimanding the plaintiff
for her grossly improper conduct in getting drunk, said that
in consequence of that misconduct lie should not allow her
anything for the last week's service. He gave judgment for
3s. and 2s. costs.
&mins v. ROBERTS.—In this case the plaintiff sought to
recover the sum of 205., for wages as a monthly nurse, in
which capacity she attended defendant's wife, during her
confinement. Defendant and his wife, it appeared, live sepa-
rate, and, at the time referred to, he allowed her 12s. per
week, to maintain herself and two children. Out of this sum
site averred she could not afford to defray the expenses of
her confinement. The defendant stated the plaintiff was
sister-in-law to his wife, who was, he said, a very dissipated
and bad character, who had been in gaol for stealing, and had
involved him in so many pecuniary difficulties, that be was
under the necessity of advertising that be would not be re-
sponsible for her debts, which circumstances were well known
to the plaintiff. Judgment was given for plaintiff.
BRENNAN V. MURPHY.—This was an action to recover pos-
session of a beam and scales, some weights, gas-piping, a
sign-board, and some other matters which had been, as he
alleged, lent to the defendant, but which he now refused to
return. Bath parties professed to be marine-store dealers,
and the plaintiff said that in February last he left Liverpool
and went to Dublin, at which time lie was not sure whether he
would ever return to Liverpool or not; but on going he agreed
to let the defendant have the use of the things claimed during
his absence. On examination, his Honour elucidatedttoh
Brennan made off to be out of the way of his creditors,
found
an,l that defendant had agreed to aid him. He also exacted
from the defendant that two of the weights had been
deficient, and were seized by the Inspector of
how it was
Measures.—His Honour remarked that be saw
; the de-
plaintiff went out of the way to cheat his creditors.
red to
endear ou
fendant agreed to aid him in this, and now
arties had en-
'cheat the plaintiff, while it was clear both
,pre He He must,
Weigh.ts and
deavoured to cheat the. public by false wog
of certain
however, under the circumstanceslof the ca.se
for the plaintiff, in so far as ordering restitution
articles, amounting In value to 195.
give judgment
'be other Mc § heron the court were net of general interest.