The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-09-01 00:00:00

GEL!. V. DOUGLAS

G?orge Grll, cotnti,i,sion.agent at Goole, in Yorkshire,
Waitthe plaintiff, and. Joseph Douglas, a farmer near the
came place, the defendant. On Saturday, Octoln r 18,
1845. the defendant entered into a contract with the plain-
tiff to deliver to him, in the month of May, 1846.2 6 tubs
of red potatoes, at Ss. per hath.—a deposit of £2O to be
made, and to be taken into account at the settlement.
The deposit was made, the defendant received the money,
but had since refused to fulfil his part of the contract, al-
thoulh repeatedly applied to for the purpose. The de-
fence waQ, th it the plaint,ff was not ready and willing to
receive the potatoes. The jury found for the plaintiff,
damages £75

CROWN COURT.—WEDNESDAY.
Thomas Whitehead was acquitted of robbery at Man-

cbester

Joseph Wild, Squire Livesey, Joseph Smith, and Chas.
Entwielle were found guilty of burgkry, near Bolton, and
sentenced to ten years' tr,sportation each.
John.Carnes Wag found guilty of burglary at Manches-
ter. Not sentenced.
Cornelius Cain was found guilty of stabbing Patrick
Dranalle a' Manchester, and was bentenced to 14 years'
tran-por ation.
Matthew West was acquitted of a burglary at Man-
•chester.

Joseph Gardner was found guilty of burglary at Man-
chester, :TO sentenced to 7 years' transportation.
Robert Has thng was found guilty of burglary at Man-
chester. Not sentenced.
James Hunt was found guilty of manslaughter, and
sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
James Goalie was acquitted of a robbery at Manchester.

PRIUS COURT.—WEDNESDAY.
VALPF.Y AND OTHERS ItEYCOCK AND ANOTHER.
The plaintiffs in this case. Richard Valpey. John Par-
ker, and John Gibson, (»ssignees of Mr. Brown, Bir-
mingham ) commiqbion-agents at Leeds and Manchester,
sousht to recover from Gibson, Ord, and Co., who traded
under the firm of ‘• Heycock and C 0.," th- value of four
cases of woollen oods, under the following circomstances:
--The goods in question had been sent by Gibson, Ord,
and Co., the defendants, to Messrs. Leech, Harrison, and
Co., of Liverpool, at the desire of Brovin, the bankrupt,
in order to he shipped by them for A limn, Cazenove, and
Comoany, of Valparaiso. The goods were sent 'from
Manchester on the 26,h of March, and payment was to be
made for them on the 26th of April. They were put on
board a veseel called the Kestrel. Mr. Ali=on, who was
in this country, saw the goods, objected to Mr. Harrison
that they were not packed in the way desirable for a fo-
reign market, and they were sent back to Gibson, Ord,

and Co., to be placed in eight p•ielmees instead of four.
Whilst the goods were being repacked the day of payment
expired. and on tl'e 7th of May Brown b 'came a
bankrupt. The rpestion was whether Gibson, Ord, and
Co., had a right to keep the goods for the vendor's lien,
or whether the as'.iznees had a right to receive them for
the general benefit of the creditors, Gibson, Ord, and Co.,
coming, in alone with the other creditors. The facts, as
stated by Mr. Martin for the plaintiff, were undisputed by
Mr. Knowles for the defendant, and, without calling wit-
nesses, a verdict was returned for the plaintiff, subject to
a special case.

DELL V. HARRISON

John Bell, the registered officer of the Newcastle-upon-
Tyne Joint Stock Banking Company, was the plaintiff.
Anthony Harrison, chemical manufacturer, of SAith
Shields, was the defendant. The action was brought to
recover the sum of £S2J 16s. 6d. upon a banking account.
The defendant denied his Lability, except as to £202,
which had been paid into court. The defendant became a
partner in August, 18-15, with William Kirk, in a colliery
called the Farnancres Colliery, which had been originally
carried on by Kirk alone. Between August 13 and Octo-
ber 11, (when the defendant gave notice that he would
not be liable,) the colliery had overdrawn the sum of
£520 16s. 6d., and this was the subject of the action. The
facts of the case were invol, ed in sundry intricate cash
and bill transactions, and during the investigation the
Judge remarked on what he considered the odd way in
which the books of the bank had been kept. The point of
the case left to the jury turned upon the question, whe-
ther the account in the bank was a general account of
debtor and creditor, or whether certain items were allowed
to go in liquidation of certain other items. The jury con-
sidered the account a general account, and reduced the
verdict to £219 ss. Ild. At the conclusion of the case,
his Lordship said the mode of keeping the accounts re-
flected little credit on the management of the bank, and
they need not be surprised that it was winding up its
affairs.