The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-08-25 00:00:00

LISTER V. THE ST. HELEN'S RAILWAY COMPANY
. .

This was an action fur work and labour as an engineer.
The plaintiff had, it appeared, been in the service of the
Sankey Canal Company since the year 1831, as engineer,
at a yearly salary, and continued in their employment up
to the year 1815, when the Sankey Canal Comp tny was
amalgamated with the St. Helen's Railway Company. By
the act of amalgamation, it was provided that the passing
of this act was not to invalidate any contract entered into
by the company und?r the former acts. It was now sought
to establish a liability on the part of the new company to
pay the defendant on account of his services with the Old,
for work at extra hours, and on matters not included in
the retainer for which he received his yearly salary. The
plaintiff after the cause had proceeded some way submit-
ted to a nonsuit.

HILTON V WHITEHEAD AND ANOTHER

This was an action of trespass

The plaintiff, it appeared, was the owner of a house si-
tuate at Prestwich, the ground on which it was built hav-
ing been purchased by his father in 1834. The landlord
was a gentleman of the name of Starkie, who in the lease
still reserved the coals under the soil, with liberty of ac-
cess to win and get them, it being provided, however,
that sufficient pillars to support the soil should be left to
prevent injury to the persons having property in the sur-
face. It appeared that the persons to whom the coal had
been leased bad taken it from the ground immediately
adjoining the plaintiff s premises. A very small portion,
however, of the works was under the house. They had,
however, driven a level under it, and the house had in
consequence of the workings been so cracked and damaged
as to be almost uninhabitable. The damage, too, still
continued to increase. It appeared, however, that this
damage arose, not from the removal of the soil underneath,
sufficient of which remained amply to support the surface,
but from the effect of the level driven across under the
plaintiff's ground, which drained off the water and caused
the ground to sink.

Tne case was finally referred, with liberty to state a
case for the opinion of the court above.

SCHUSTER V. COOPER.

This was an action on a guarantee.
1t appeared that Mr. Schuster and his partners were
copper merchants, at Manchester. There was a firm in
that town of Wilson and Barton, copper-roller manufac-
turers, who some time ago fell into difficulties, and it was
finally arranged that their business should be carried on
under the superintendence of a committee of inspectors
for the benefit of the creditors. A large quantity of cop-
per was required to carry on the business, to the extent
of about £5OO per month, and at the desire of Mr. Bar-
ton, Mr. Cooper gave the document on which the present
action was brought, directed to Mr. Schuster, guarantee-
ing, " as chairman of the committee of creditors, the due
payment of any amount of purchase Mr. Barton may
make of you, not exceeding the total value of £500." It
appeared that subsequently to the presenting of the docu-
ment much more than £5OO worth had been received and
paid for. The question was whether this was a continu-
ing guarantee or no.

-A- verdict was finally returned for the plaintiff, with
l►berty to move for a nonsuit.

CROWN COURT,

-WEDNESDAY

Sarah Phillips, 22, was convicted for having, at Wigan,
feloniously received one piece of black cloth, three vest
pieces, and various other articles of cotton and woollen,
the property of John Fish.

bominick Holan, 20, was convicted of having, at Orms-
kirk, feloniously stabbed William Fairhurst, with intent
to do him some grievous bodily harm, and sentenced to
eight months' imprisonment.
Charles Pilling, 36, was convicted of having, at Salford,
feloniously attempted to strangle and suffocate, and with
having beat, wounded, and ill•reated Sarah Pilling, his
wifo, with intent to kill and murder her.
Robert Russell, 34, pleaded guilty to an indictment
charging him with uttering a forged acceptance, with in-
tent to defraud Mr. Smith, of Salford. He was also
charged with uttering another forged acceptance with in-
tent to defraud Ralph Robinson. Several witnesses to
character were called and the sentence was deferred.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—WEDNESDAY.