New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-05-02
LAW COUR 7 S.

Liability Of Prophs;ors q Hoie,, II viii,
Man C0rRT-Beiore Judge LyLch--''."ef
e. VILE " H3rard.-Suit against the P'oP,,Ie1o'
r.. ths Ir,inr House 10 recover the value OF pa
The plaintiffs aye mefchahts az d si'.ii'. e. -
-, beinr ia New York, bought small paoA-
q Goods az Jsfirey' store AID directed u 70
h. e.,, T.. Tue Irving House, where he put up Inc
'...3s 49, b,inr there next morning, MI y. wen,
., ~, .i-e lf Mr. Jafrey 70 inquire the reason ana
,.ss Tod hat they had been seat at II CLOCK 'ne
d-v 5as,-e Il vas denied az the house thar me-
had been c.-. The suit IS against the P'oP''eO' "
the Irvin- House 70 recover the vslue-
tn. r,-t-r Of Mr. Jaffrey proved that he eit ne
eo.-js HI the Office OF the Irving House, on lne
cognfa~. A. n O'Clock in the presence Of tns wv
Liz thar one Of them, who was within the couh
tor .aid 70 vas all night. After Mr.. ~ caDeu y
know why they not seat, the porter " en- 81 W
TO the Irving house saw the cerS' ana 'o'o nm
that be- hal laid the goods upon the counter ~ n'
..e,., while he vas talking 10 the other CLERK
WHO was about leaving for Wal ST. .s
Tbe cl.- Ks both testified that no such buhd'J "a"
b.en left there-that il 1t had Il "ouia nav 49,
entered IN their pack age book ard "ouid nas ~
sent 70 Mr Needles room ou' lne' ND not
e,-ry and therefore they were certain i o1u-- ~.
bav. b-en delivered, because ihey pau NJ,
/ Lro,,r an instance OF such AZ ohiss'Vh az!
@i,o stated that 30 packages had been let 'nV'e'
ana entered IN this way, on that day' .,..,,. e.
III Cour, charged that an lnn-keeper Is nsp'e Oi
all ach yee sent 70 MS hOuft dN- ici' '"'N' 49,
a a. II the person having charge Of the baggage
,6s, If he role were otherwise great mischief
,,igbt arise from the dishonesty Of ser' anus or
,Ssous lingering about the establishment, and the
want Of yi1ance aud care on the part " lanaioi Us
10 protect the baggage of their guests they having
go much better opportunity OF care In respect y "
than they themselves. II the Jury In this case are
of oniuion that the package was delivered on the
counter under the eye OF the clerk. the dele ndah'
is RESPONSIBLE Verdict for plaintiffs for the price
Of the goods.
Wharfage al Bulsheed for Oyster Boats &e 400 c.u
IGgucs vs. Deckcr.-Suit 70 recover slOo, iaIl
Wharfage for oy ster boats lying in the slip between
Fuller and Dey SITS the boats gyms neau y" ~
! the bulkhcad and dischafging their cargoes over
| the bows For defense 1t was conteuded under
the rule recently laid down in one OF our Courts ID
/ n cose AGAINST Grnnell, Minturn Co. that YES
sells Wing WHITTIER bows IN the bulkhead must be
considered SIS outside vessels lying at the per- ana
liable 20 pay but half wharfage and that 10 Iehde'
/ them liable for whole wharfage at the Duihneau'
they mus. be lying broadside to 1t
The Cont held that the defendants scow, usually
discbarging CARGO over the bow by means OF a regu,
ar platform she does not come within that class OF
/ cases in which half wharfage only can De chargeu
| rs being outside at the pier. The usual term oi
| dock berth as 10 vessels loading and unloading by
broad.ide does not apply TO vessels like the de
fendauts which load and unload by bow and stern
Lnud TIE plaintiff is entitled to full wharfage Judg-
mept accordingly for amount-For plaintiff Mr.
Rowland for defendant Hr. Cbas. Jones.
| Point under the Lien Law .rc, -.
! Ian Wagner VS.. AusttH.-The Piantlh hled amen
| for work done on house which Mr. Austin owned
The house was not finished by the time the orgi
nal contractor agreed TO do it. The owner set up
bv way OF defense 10 this claim OF the workman
| for amount due him by the contractor clam 'or
| damages against the contractor for not finishing
the house at the time agreed, which would absorb
Az I-e tAsence due TO the contractor on The WORK
1t appeared that the WORK had been done oy
plaintiff after the expiration of the time, which II
was contended having permitted was waver OF
set off by the owner as to the claims OF the work
men.
The Court charged, upon the authority OF case
in Hill. that the lien of the plaintiff could not be
discharged by an offset for damages against he
contractor and gave judgment for plaintiff for the
balance due the contractor independent OF the set
0 For plaintiff, Mr. Van Antwerp; for defend
ant, Mr.. Austin.
! L. S COMMIssIoSER's OFFIcE.-Jemes Dick
| nson. cook and steward of the bark Samuel and
Thomas, charged with attempt at revolt IN re
| lusing 70 do duty, was committed
! CAargc Of cruel and unusual PuRiShmenf-
/ John Wood mate of the ship Ariel, was complained
OF by one Of the seamen for alleged cruel and unu
s, III punishment, &c; kicking bin and generally
ID treating hm throughout the voyage Held io
| examination.