The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-08-26 00:00:00

Dr tation

NISI PRIUS COURT
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE
NIIARROTTLE Y. RYLANDS.—This cause, whi
5 in the first list, was fixed to come on this morning,
RS it had excited considerable interest the court was

-WEDNESDAY

...ire than usually cro e
taken their seats in ti• tl
the court.
'nester. Miss Harbottle is the
4Pectshle gentleman, now

and a number of ladies had
e gallery long before the opening of
laintiff and defendant reside in Man-
' .ighter of a highly re-
isc of business. Mr. Rylands
,Li
an extensive manufacturer eneral ha
been retained for the plaintiff, andAttorney-G the Solicitor-Generald ter the defendant, and as each of these gentlemen would
ecei,e a retaining fee of at least 300 guineas, it is
,'`uent the parties were in earnest about the matter. The
Vanns who had attended to hear the trial, were, however,
taTrned to disappointment, and the only public notice
i„`en of the case was by Mr. Martin, who said to the
r"ge• " I suppose your lordship is aware the great cause
tlnbettled." His lordship intimated assent. It appearsf
e Attorney and eer
Solicitor-Gnal had a consultation
fete , on Tuesday night, when it was agreed that the de-
4'4"A should pay the sum of £4,000, with taxed costs.
1. er Coming to this arrange.!ment, the Attorney and So-
tikc_lt°,-General left by the nine o'clock London train, and
..7rvecord was withdrawn. The plaintiff's father was in
'"o t for a short time during the morning.
ACTION ON A CHARTER PARTY.
,tor9BELL AND ANOTHER Y. WATSON AND ANOTHER.
n tilts case r. Watscn and Mr. Crompton appeared
th_c th,t pla,utiffs, and Mr. Martin conducted the case for
Tdfendans. Mr. Watson stated the case. This cars
,11 action brought to recover the Hun of £1304 IGs. 4d. as
Nrnattes hy reason of the defendants not having loaded a
I,i". on board the plaintiff's vessel, according to the sti-
,ciations of a-charter party. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Has-
'od Good, were shipowners of Hull, and the owners

1j! veinpi

called Wilson. of 181 tons register, which was
vrer."elt" erPool in September of last year. The defendants
of eaYo,ung gentlemen—one of them was in the university
sot kridee, and the other he (the learned counsel) did
foilnp
vr whether he was in business or not. The jury
ttoq T
Tor the plaintiff, rn
daagesl39l 4d.—Execu-
r half the sum in a fortnight.
GLt ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE.
The " v• WHARTON.—In this case, David Glen was
knotilitiotiff, and Heury Wharton the defendant.—Mr.
hi,r;l.les and Mr. James appeared for the plaintiff; Mr.
The in, and Mr. Ramehay were counsel for the defendant.
tittatrit!tiff is a porter in the employ of a gentleman
Higgins, of Liverpool, and he brought the action

to recover damages for an injury alleged to have been in-
flicted upon him by the carelessness of the servants of the
defendant, who is a master porter. It appeared that, on
the 6th of June last, the plaintiff was employed by a Mr.

. .
• Gilliat to remove cottons from one end of the warehouse,
called Rigby's warehouse, in Sefton-street, to the other.
He dragged the cottots in a truck along the gangway,
upon each aide of which the cottons were piled up. The

men of the defendant were also breaking up cottons, and
one of the bales. which was being removed by them from
the top of one of the piles, was rolled down upon the
plaintiff, who was taken up much injured, and it was for
this injury that compensation was now asked. For the
defendant it was alleged that the man at the top of the
pile, instead of rolling the cotton down into the gangway,
should have let it down endways, not into the gangway,
but into a vacant space at one end of the pile. The sur-
geon proved that the collar-bone of the plaintiff had been
broken, and that he was otherwise seriously injured, so
that he was unable to follow his employment, for which
he usually received 21s. a week, from the 6th of June to
the Bth of August. The case for the defendant was, that
it was purely an accident, and that there was no negli-
gence on the part of any of the defendants servants. The
jury found for the plaintiff, damages £l6.

DOE DEM GRUNDY AND UX V

BOYCE.

In this case, which was tried on Friday week, and a

. .
verdict given for the plaintiff, Mr. Knowles now applied,
upon an affidavit made by Mr. Child, the defendant's at-
torney, for a rule nisi, to move for a new trial, on the
ground that the deponent had reason to believe the docu-
ments produced by David Gillmore were similar in ap-

pearance to those produced at a trial on Saturday, which
were ordered to be impounded. The affidavit also stated
that deponent believed. in the event of a new trial, he
could produce such evidence as would lead the jury to
disbelieve the testimony of Mr. Gillmore, and to believe
that the aforesaid documents were not genuine. The rule
nisi was granted.

CROWN COURT.—THURSDAY.
Frederick Harris, 20. was charged with kering, at
Bury, killed and slain John Sudgen. Art indictment,
charging the prisoner with the capital offence, was dis-
missed by the Grand Jury, and a true bill was found
against him for manslaughter.
It appeared that for several weeks there bad been a
tarn-out at Messrs. Walker, Smith, and Company's
work's, in consequence of an attempt on the part of the
employers to introduce longer hours for the same wages.
An ill-feeling had arisen on the part of the turn-outs to-
wards the wen who had replaced them, and petty skir-
mishes had taken place between them at different periods.
On the 26th of May last, the prisoner was along with
some other men, at Mr. Charleston's beer-house in It3ch-
dale-road, about eight o'clock in the evening. Four men
were fighting outside, and making a noise, and the pri-

Boner, ;rho Ead a stick in his hand, went to the door and
stood ; whilst there ha drew a dagger out of his stick, and
closing it, exclaimed, " I would like to run the b-
through." Adding, also, that he would take some per-
son's life that night before he slept. He afterwards went
down Rochdale-ward, waving his stick in the air, followed
by a number of boys and girls shouting. At the corner of
Chapel-street he turned down in the direction of his lodg-
ings, still heading the crowd, which had by this time in-
creased to upwards of a hundred- When he reached his
lodgings at the corner of Butcher-lane and Chapel-street,
the crowd hooted him, and cried out " Ba," and used
other expressions of derision. Whilst ascending the steps
of his lodgings, be was closely pressed by the crowd, and
turning round drew the dagger from its sheath, and st.b-
bed the deceased several times in the pit of the stomach,
after which he made several attempts to stab other per-
sons around. He afterwards went into the house, when
he showed a part of the dagger, and said he had " stuck
the other part into a b- 's guts. The deceased called
out several times " I am stabb..d," and was afterwards
conveyed to Dr. Wardleworth's, On the Wednesday

following Sudgen died, and a post martens examination
was made upon him by Dr. Wardleworth, who fuund up-
wards of five inches of the dagger an inch deep in the
spine. The prisoner, on his way to brideweil, admitted
that he had stabbed the dece.+sed.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and his Lordship
postponed passing sentence.
James William Ferguson, who had been convicted on
the previous day on a charge of having forged a warrant
for the payment of money, was placed at the bar. His
Lardship stated that upon consideration of the case, he
found it would be necessary to withdraw the sentence 1a.9
had already passed upon the prisoner. He was then tried
on a charge of having feloniously stolen a watch from J.
M'Kay, a soldier, on Monday, the sth May, from the
barracks at Salford. It appeared from Mr. M'Kay's
statement, that on the sth of May, he was in barracks at
Salford, when the prisoner came in, and lie went to the
Duke of York public-house and drank with him. While
in the public-house, M'Kay told the prisoner that his
watch wanted repairing, upon which the prisoner said his
father was a watchmaker, and the only one in the country
that could repair Geneva watches. The prisoner then
went out for a few minutes, and returned again, and told
M'Kay that be had made a wager with a man in an ad-
joining room, and if he would lend him his watch, he
would return it in a :minute or two. It was given to
him, and he left the room. About a quarter of an hour
afterwards he was caught on his road to the Manchester
and Li►erpool Railway. The Judge briefly summed up,
and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. The prisoner
was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment and hard
labour.

1 NISI MUTTS COURT
l-
ALKOZO BREACH Or CONTRAC-.
ROBB v. STARKEY.—This was an action arising out of
an alleged breach of contract on the part of the defendant,
in not having delivered a cargo of guano to the plaintiff.
The damages were laid at £l,OOO.
It appeared from the statement of the counsel and the
witnesses, that the plaintiff, Mr. James Robb, was a
merchant at Aberdeen, and the defendant, Mr. John
Jackson Starkey, a merchant, carrying on business at
Liverpool. In November last, plaintiff being anxious to
purchase a cargo of guano, authorised Messrs. Corrie and

-TII IJ RN nAT~

Co. to negotiate for that purpose. Messrs. Corrie and
Co. then entered into a contract with Messrs. Bourne,
brokers, who, it was said, acted on the part of the de-
fendant, for the purchase of 500 tons of guano, per the
ship New Brunswick, from Ichaboe, to be delivered be-
tween the Ist February and the Ist April, of the present
year. The plaintiff, it was alleged, was to name the port
of delivery, and the price of the guano was to be £5 15s.
per ton. The vessel arrived on the 16th January, and
some communication touk Owe between the parties as to
the delivery, it being stated by the defendant that the
ship could only enter four ports, on account of her great
draft of water, namely, London, Liverpool, Bristol, and
the Clyde. The plaintiff wished the guano to be delivered
at Dundee, and wrote a letter to that effect. Some dif-
ference then arose, and the vessel was eventually ordered
off to London, and the cargo soli there. This was said
to be in direct violation of the terms of the contract.
The amount sought io be rec,vered was the difference in
the price of the article, which had taken place between
the time of the contract and the period at which it ought
to have been delivered.

A number of witnesses were examined for the piaintifrs

he view of estantiAing the contract, but it
was contended, on the part of the defendant, that no such
contract bad been made, and that the matter had arisen
out of a misunderstanding, the parties being all gentlemen
of high standing in the commercial world, who had no
other desire than that of acting with perfect fairness.
his LortosniP observed that it was merely a difference
which had arisen out of each of the parties standing
strictly on their rights, and intimated that an arrange-
ment had better be made, if possible.
After some conversation between the learned counsel
on both sides, an agreement was entered into, and a ver-
dict taken by consent for the plaintiff, for the sum of
£5OO.

case, witt:

DISPUTED ACCOUNT

GORMAN v. BUDDY.--Thomas Gorman, a provision-
dealer, of Liverpool, was the plaintiff, and John Boddy,
grocer, of Halifax, the defendant. The action was to
recover the sum of £3l, alleged to be due from the de-
fendant for ten firkins of butter supplied to him on the
sth of April of the present year.
The defence was, that the plaintiff had not complied
with the order sent by the defendant, be having sent for
ten firkins, while twelve were forwarded; in consequence
of which, he refused to take them. It was also alleged
that the butter was of inferior quality to a parcel formerly
sent, which was one of the terms of the order.

His LORDSHIP said the defendant 'vas sued for goods
sold and delivered, whereas the goods had never been
delivered.

The plaintiff was nonsuited, but leave was given to his

counsel to move