Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
10 articles on this Page
[No title]
TAXES ON TIURST.-Parliamentary returns prove that for the last financial year drinkers of tea, coffee, cocoa, chocolate and chicory, contributed £5,073,938 t,) the public revenue; while drinkers of spirits, wine, and malt liquors, paid £ 20,020,550 taxation. This is exclusive of tax on licenses for making and selling these articles, or on the sugar to sweeten them.
NOTES FROM THE DOCKS.
NOTES FROM THE DOCKS. THURSDAY EVENING. Ships continue to arrive in large numbers every tide, and all the docks are now as full as they con- veniently can be worked. This has given an im- petus to trade, while freights have slightly declined, except for Bermuda and Odessa, which have an up- ward tendency. The iron trade has fluctuated considerably since our last, Scotch warrants having gone down to 56s., but in consequence of rumours of the intention of the miners to strike for an advance in wages, prices have again gone up to 58s. cash, and 59s. 3d. at three months. Bars are nominally £ 7 to L7 5s., an indis- position Being manifested to take first orders at these prices.
FROM THE BILL OF ENTRY OFFICE.
FROM THE BILL OF ENTRY OFFICE. EXPORTS. Destination. Ship. Coal. Iron. Shippers. ■July 22. Basse Indre Rosalie, F. 60 Insole & Son Messina Britisher, B. 520.. Insole & Son Lisbon Lusitano, Port. 274 Balleras Cadiz Canada, B. 2&0.. Harrison Bros. Galstz Alert, B. 370 Powell tte Son Singapore Virginia, B. 11gB.. Lletty Shenkin ConstntinopleAntonio Luca,Ras.656 Powell & Son Palermo Parkside, B. {bar%u Lhrnvin-on Co. Mataro Black Cot, B. 155 C. E. Stallybrass Hamburg Elise, Prus. 500 Nixon, Taylor,&Co. Bermuda Asia (s.s.), B. 1132 Nixon, Taylor &Co. Trieste Celeste, Aus. 664 Powell ifc Son St. Nazaire NouveauPacifique, F 140 Coffin & Co. Bordeaux Beatrice (s.s.), B. 350 Powell & Son Altona Ellen & Mary,B. rails 221 Guest & Co. Cape G.HopeNavarino, B. 663 Lletty Shenkin Hamburg John Slater, B. rails 300 Heath & Co. Trieste Lucerne, B. 550 Iifetty Shenkin July 23. Helsingberg Zelie, F. rails 50 Rhymney Co Newcastle De- laware Lung Bird, B. rail 1000 Dowlais Iron Co. Altona Pursuit, B. rail 160 Abrdare iron Co. Point deGalle Queen of the Avon, B. ptnt fuel 650 H. Worms St. Jago de Cuba Superior, Sw. 319 S. Thomas Corfu Concordia, Aus, 050 Powell & Son ConstntinopleEsther, Rus. (ilO Powell & Son Nantes Jeune Triphine,F.J20 Coffin & Co. Hennebon Bonne Marie, F. 58 TroedyrhiewCo. ConstntinopleJules, F. 280 W. Holm Gibraltar Mountain Lass, B. 180 D. Davis Bordeaux Francoeur, F. 140 Coffin & Co. Malta Enterprise, B. 520 H. Worms Genoa Adala, M,Video 500 A. Matthyssens Bordeaux Alexandre, F. 160 Shepherd & Evans Havanuah Sentari, B. 850 Abrdare CoalCo. Alicante Sarah Phillips, B. rails 298 Bhymney Co July 25. Bermuda Lady Mulgrave,B. 41)0 Nixon, Taylor &Co. Syra Noemi, Aus. o70 J'owell Sz Son SanSebastian Ellen & Lucy, B. 258 A. Venard Martinique Isly, F. 530 A. Venard Odessa Giovanni, Gen. 580 H. Worms Altona Harriet & Jane, B. rail 167 Guest & Co. Bermuda Caprera, B. 944.. D. Davis Bordeaux Julie, B. 175 H. Worms Malta Minerva (s.s.), B. 500 Nixon, Taylor,&Co. July 26. Bayonne Alexandre & Marie, F. 172 H. Worms Malta Idea, Gen. 450 Boedtingalt Co. Samana Bay Aquitaine, F. 706 Abrdare CoalCo. Galatz Winsome, B. 215 J. H. Wilson St. Brieux Dewdrop, B. 78 TroedyrhiewCo. Bermuda Albacore, B. 345.. D. Davis Alicante Teaser, B. 105 Schmalz & Co. St. Brieux Flying Dutchman, B 110 F. P. Carrel Ancona Prince Albert, B. 384 Harrison Bros. Malta Pandora, Gen, 484 N. Powell & Co. ConstntinopleAzzardoso, GeR. 270 H. Worms Syra Prospero, Savarello, Gen 480 Powell ttz So-n Bari Royal T&r,B. 208 Harrison Bros. July 27. Altona John Stonard rail 150 Guest & Co. Monopoli Ready Rhino rail 203 L. Testulat Havre Ada Florence 175 H, Worms Qaimper Bonaventure 55 H. Worms Nantes Quatre Freres 100 Coffin & Co. Bayonne Aimable Rose 147 H. Worms SanSebastian Ebonomy 238 A. Venard Singapore Albatross 494 Fothergill& Co. Stockholm Noel Raphael 17(0).. Cory Bros. St. Jago de Cuba Jane Symons 505 J. C. Rust Beyrout Teja 498 Powell & Son Smyrna Ocean Queen 272.. H. Worms Nantes Prudent 145 Coffin & Co. Gibraltar Flying Fish 147.. W. Barter &Co. Gibraltar Maelota 157 Heath,Evens& Co. July 28. Cape deVerds Jennie Eastman, U.S. 1706 Lletty Shenkin Hamburg Anne Whyte, B. :!30 Nixon, Taylor &Co. Ancona Brunette (s.s.), B. 600 Harrison Bros. Varni Nice,Aus. 410 Powell & Son Corfu Tussin, Aus. 591 Powell & Son Havannah Solide, F. 352 Insole & Son Malta Pietro, Gen. 400 H. Worms Lisbon Sidney Hall (s.s.), B. 420 Nixon, Taylor & Co. Alicante Herzog Bogislaw, Bus 325 H. Worms Bermuda. Viliage Girl, B. 380 D. Davis Corfu Samson B. 816 Powell & Son Fecamp Henry & Margaret, B. 165 Troedyrbiew Co. Nantes Caroline, F. 85 Cory Bros. Jersey Velocity, B. 38 J. Morel & Co. Rio Janeiro Williams, B. 3t)9 H. Worms July 22. Bordeaux, Beatrice (s.s.), B., 273, Star, J. Rowe Trieste, Lucerne (s.s.),B., 532, Sheen, M. Thompson Malta, Ricardo, B., 286, Azzopardi Malta, Saturno, B., 229, Schiaffino, S Decandia Malta, General Chasse, B., 542, Carneau, S. Decandia Patras, Minerva (s.s.), B., 497, Goodwin, Harrison Bros. Cronstradt, Triad, B., 91, Johnson, Cory Bros. Altona, Pursuit B., 90, Arnold, Cory Bros, Altona, John Stonard, B., 86, Heron, J. Douglas Smyrna, Medea, B., 190, G. Morton, W. Y. Edwards Corfu, Hentha, Ny., 300, Honsken, Cory Bros. Cronstadt, Surprise, B., 230, Whitmore, Cory Bros. Constantinople, Ganges, B., 422, Nicolas, S. Decandia Callao, William Wright, B., 752, Williams, E. C, Downing St. Brieux, Flying Dutchman, B., 66, Mallet, F. P. Cartel July. 23. Alexandria, Marietta, Sicily, 200, Jerzello, S. Nash and Co. Alexandria, Pavizza, Aus., 350^:G3adalich. L Ivancich Alexandria, Numa, Aus., 200, Posehich, L. Ivancich Madeira, Glamorgan, B 109, Lloyd, S. Nash & Co. Naples, Netuno, Nap., 200, Albano, S. Nash & Co. Martinique, John Cockwell, F., 319, Robin,'J. Mary church & Co. Genoa, Geronima, Ity., 292, Ferrari, G. B. Avegno Alicante, Warlock, B., 305, Dobson, G. S. Stowe Havre, Ada Florence, B., 94, Bateman, N. Powell and Co. Alicante, Fraser, B., 66, Brown, & Co. July 25. Civita Vecchia, Tom John Taylor (s.), B., 602, Shaw, J. H. Anning Aden, Asiana, B., 1192, Shaw, H. Cadenne Alicante, Henroz Bogislaw, Prlls., 216, Benzow, Cory Brothers Bordeaux, Julie, Prus., 120, Spiagelberg, Cory Bros. Genoa, Temperance, Italy, 580, Dodero,:A. T. Lucovich Constantinople, Luca Padre, Rus., 710, Craglievich, A. T. Lucovich Trieste, Romano, Aus., 320, Ivancich, A. T. Lucovich Alexandria, Ariel, Aus., 3/6, Bielich, A. T. Lucovich Valencia, Genius, Ger., 100, Mohring, G. W. Jessen Bermuda, Albacore, B., 249, Petherick, Ogleby and Davies Croisie, Bonaventura, F., 30, Donet, J. Morel & Co. St. Nazaire, Etoiie de la Mer, F., 97, Lalande, J. Morel and Co. St. Sebastian, Deaux Louis, F., 80, Benegot, J. Morel and Co. Malta, Pirate, B., 419, Cassar, S. Decandia St. Thomas, Trio, Nor., 240, Fredericksen, Page Ohlsen and Co. Havanna, Caledonia, F., 400, —— Page Ohlsen & Co. Fernando Po, Hannah, B., 400, James, J. Owen Santander, Ellen Mary, B., 133, Durwent, Jones and Rees Boston, Emma F. Henriman, U.S., 436, Henriman, S. D Jenkins Gibraltar, Broughty Castle, B., 70, Dunnett, H. W. Moreton and Son Alexandria, Johanna Friedrik, Meek., 353, Dude, F. Ahrens Fecamp, Henry Margaret, B., mo, Steele, Morgan, Son and Co. Ancona, Lima, B., 215, Jones, Rowlands & Thomas Genoa, Camatic, Gen., 500, Storace, G. Murzi& Co. Alexandria, Nordstjernen, Nor., 144, Carlsen, Tellefsen and Hoist. Altona, Mary Jane, B., 135, Bastih, G. Sully Manfredonia, Billow Crest, B., 178, Canner, G. Sully St. Paul de Loando, Blencathara, B., 833, Richards, Rowlands & Thomas July 26. St. Paul de Loando, Hannah, B., 483, James, J. Owen Tarragona. Sifters, B., 109, Nicholas, J. Owen Smyrna, Mary Matthews, B., 125, James, W. Y. Edwards. Rosano, Onward, 8., 257, TrtW, S. D. Jenkins Cape Good Hope, City of Bangor, Anier., 50fi, Edgerly, S. 1). Jenkins Nantes, Julien Marie, P., 89, Farde),C.David&Toms Ancona, Brunette (e.), B., 481, Warne, Harrison Bros. Altona, Wesley, B., Le Conteur, F. P. Carrel Alicante, Lady Mansell, B., 95, Lihon, F. P. Carrel St. Jago de Cuba, Amanda, Ham., 275, Thomsen, F. P. Carre4 Mauritius, B. B. Greene, B.. 528, Pearce, F. P. Carrel Quimperle, Eva Honorine, F., 50, Goolven, Morel & Co. Nantes, Caroline, F., 54, Lallemer.t, Morel & Co. St. Brieyx, Dewdrop, B., 50, Laming, Morel & Co. 'Hamburg, Arm Whyte, B., 198, Ritchie, Noel & Gascoyne Malta, Geroniua, Gen., 292, Ferrari, G. B. Avegno Salonica, Roma, Gen., 200, Morciani, G. B. Avegno Barcelona, Pilar, Sp., 267, Rodrejeuz, Page & Ohlsen Bermuda, Caroni, B.,257, Bailey, C. Napier Gibraltar, Flying Fish, B., 86, Heayn. James Lee Caen, Omnibus, B., 71, Evans, Davies & James Hamburg, Matchless, B., 143, Brander, Davies & James Jxily 27. Nantes, Heloize, F., 48, Morgan, J. Morel & Co. St. Nazaire, Reine des Cieux, F., 97, Baron, J. Morel and Co. St. Nazaire, Amelie Marie, F., 77, Le Boulicarat, J. Morel & Co. Nantes, Adrienne, F., 80, Briant, J. Morel & Co. Sables d'Olonnes, Jeune Daniel Aime, F., 70, Le Ro- neliec, J. Morel & Co. Pont l'Abbe, Edonard, F., 45, Jezegabel, J. Morel & Co. San Sebastian, Cora Leoo, F., 87, Rsussel, J. Morel & Co. Corfu, Samson (s.), B., 590, Robinson, M. Thompson Malta, Nicolina, B,,291, Messina, Ogleby & Davies Gothenburg, Capella, Swe., 129, Pettersen, Cory Bros. Barcelona, Adelide Bertha, Prus., 395, Sfeefeiclt, Cory Bros. Nantes, Penson, F., 89, Olive, Clarke Bros. Lisbon, Sydney Hall (s ). B., 357, T. Waite, Chris. Rapier Genoa,Rosa, B., 211, Galcagno, W. Y. Edwards Ancona, Voloscano, Aus., 280, D'Ancona,A. T. Lucovich Quebec, Empire, B., 6:i0, Coward, Rowlands & Thomas Quebec, Harmony, B., 849, Morris, Rowlands & Thomas Palerma, Maria Anna, B., 143, Jones, Rowlands and Thomas Palma, Aeton Queen, B., 96, Williams, Rowlands and Thomas Palma, Oransa, B., 159, Jones, Rowlands & Thomas Alexandria, Constable, Geno., 173, Demaschi, S. De- candia Corfu, iSamssn (s.), B., 590, Bobinson, M. Thompson July 28. Havre, Romona, B., 111, Anthony, W. T. Edwards Swinemunde, Achilles, Prus., 300, Tropp, Cory Bros. Smyrna, Konigen Elizabeth, Prus., 207, Rieck, Cory Bros. Alexandria, Alabama, B., 1432, Wallace, Powell & Son Montreal, Cambria, B., 418, J. Graham, E. C. Downing St. Thomas, Arche d'Alliance, F., 2()8, Bobert, Noel and Gascoyne
--GLAMORGANSHIRE SUMMER ASSIZES.
GLAMORGANSHIRE SUMMER ASSIZES. (Continued from 7 th page.) Be thought the jury, from their knowledge of local matters, and having seen the place, would be able to form a much better opinion than either himself or bis learned friecd, of the wall, whether it was a relic of a wall which had existed at one time; or whether it was a prevented attempt to exercise an act of ownership. He referred to the evidence of Lewis Evans, and submitted that it showed that David Evans had been guilty of an attempt to get ap evidence, thus reducing the system of encroach- ment to a science, by doing a little now and a little then in acts of ownership. He pointed out that although the fence of the farm had been kept in thorough repair, yet, for more than a period of 60 years, it was admitted the wall in question had been little, if any, better than it was now. It had been shown that as soon as the steward became aware of the encroachment he ordered the wall to be de- stroyed, aud although that was immediately done, jet no action was taken in the matter by the defen- dant till 1863. Although it was well known that there were minerals under the Graig, yet no effort had been made for more than twenty years to work or lease them. He maintained that every fact came back to the question whether the wall was incon- sistent with the lord's possession. The issue of proof rested with the defendant, and be contended that their case had utterly failed. In conclusion he maintained that the burden of proof of bow the de- fendant came into possession of the land lay with the other side, and if they failed the plaintiff was entitled to the verdict. Mr. James then replied up. the part of the de- feDdant. He denied that the proof of ownership Jay with the defendant, further than to prove possession as far back as seventy or eighty years, and proceeded to notice the boundaries of the Cwm farm, including the Graig, which he maintained were not inconsistent with the deed of conveyance in 1841. Be contended that the existence of the wall had not been explained away by the plaintiff; but that it bad been fully proved that a wall did exist. He then referred to the existence of the potato garden, and submitted that it was of great importance towards establishing acts of ownership on the part of the defendant. He reviewed various points of the evidence, and concluded by asserting that the de- fendant had abundantly proved his possession of the land, as far as he could by acts of ownership. His Lordship summed up with great care, touching upon ail the principal points of the case. The jury retired to consider their verdict, and in a quarter of an hour they returned to Court, and Mr. W. D. Bnshell, the foreman, stated that they found a verdict for the defendant,—the ground having been acquired by twenty years nssge, but not being included in the original freehold." THOMAS v. THOMAS.—This was a similar case be- tween the same parties, and, by previous arrange- Hirnt, the same verdict was takfo—t.<? a verdict ad- verse to the Lord of the Manor.
CARDIFF COUNTY COURT.
CARDIFF COUNTY COURT. The CouDty Court sat on Wednesday and follow- ing days, before J. M. Herbert, Esq., Judge. Very few of the cases were of public interest. BUNDLE v TIIORMAN.-The plaintiff in this case is » Cardiff ship chandler, and the defendant a mer- chant. at 8, Lime-street, City, London. The plain- tiff's foreman swore that he met the defendant, with the captain, on board the Indus, bound from Cal- cutta to Hayti. The defendant, whom be believed to be the owner, ordered four iron knees for the ship, costing £16, and the captain subsequently or- dered other matters for the ship, making the amount up to aboat £.10, for which the action was brought. The defendant deposed that he was DAt the owner of the ship. The captain and owner, Barry, owed him .£1200, and be had come to Cardiff to see about it, and while conversing with the captain, the plaintiff's foreman came up, and the captain ordered the knees Df him, in defendant's presence. The captain paid defendant .6700 on account of the debt, and gave defendant a mortgage on the vessel for the remain- ing 1500. In pursuance of an arrangement between them, defendant accepted and paid the bill of Mr. Sully, shipbroker, on of the disbursements &f the Indus at Cardiff. Mr. Ingledew, for the plaintiff, after looking at the documentary proof which the plaintiff produced in regard to the owner- ship, admitted that Capt. Barry was the owner, and therefore that the plaintiff could not recover of the defendant anything beyond the iron knees. His Bononr said, neither cou!d the plaintiff recover that. He did not believe that the defendant had ever or- dered the knees. There was no pretence, bethought, of a case against the defendant. He non-suited the plaintiff, and ordered him to pay the defendant's ex- penses. NORTH v. DAVID.—This was an action to recover the price of three barrels of beer, supplied to the East Dock Hotel. Mr. Ensor appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Spencer for the defendant. The defendant's name was over the door. The plaintiff alleged that he had supplied the goods relying on the sredit of the defendant, who was the owner of the bouse and a farmer living at Llaribletian. The de- fence was that the person who really owed the money was a woman who had been keeping the 3jou36. His Honour said that as defendant's name was over the door, and he was the holder of the license, he was evidently either the landlord or a sleeping partner in the business, and in either event he would have to pay the debts of the concern. ALLEN v. Ev ANs.-Tbis was an action for ser. want's wages. The plaintiff alleged that she had been beaten and summarily dismissed without cfause by her mistress. For the assault she brought the defendant before the magistrates, when she was fined la. For the wages she now sued, claiming t'l. The defendant had paid 10s. lid. into court, and endeavoured to avoid payment of the remainder by pleadiijg that the defendant had broken various ar- ticles. The Judge gave a verdict for 4s. lid. more ihan had been paid into court. THOMAS V. DAVID YOUNG.— Mr. Ensor appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ingledew for the defendant. The plaintiff is a ship chandler, and sued the de- fendant as owner of the Falmouth, of London, of which his brother, James Young, was master. The bill amounted to £ 16 14«. 9d. A witness named Parr, in the employ of the plaintiff, swore that he heard the defendant tell the plaintiff to let the ship have all that his brother wanted. Mr. Trounce, son of the broker of the ship, stated that David Young had paid him for going for the ship's papers, and said he had an iaterest of C70 in the ship. Both the brothers Young were examined. James "Young swore that he bought the ship for £ 170, his brother did not own a penny in her. Witness bad her repaired and insured for £200. The ship was lost in Falmouth harbour, and the insurance was paid part)y to witness and partly to the man of whom he bought the vessel, to whom a balance was due on the purchase money. His brother had never been io plaintiff's shop with him. The defendant testi- fied that he was mate of a steamer. He had never gone to plaintiff's shop all that he had to do with it was to back a note for j670 for hIS brother, as part of the purchase money. The Judge non.suited the plaintiff, allowing costs and attorney's fee. HARRIS V. STOTT.—The defendant keeps a furni- ture warehouse in Bute-road, and plaintiff, a Jew, lives a few doors off. Plaintiff and his wife swore that they traded an old bedstead to defendant, and paid 14s. 6d. in money, for what she represented to them was a new iron bedstead, but when it was taken to their house they found that it was an old one which had been broken and mended, and so they teturneiitto the defendant. They also said that the bedstead lay covered up with mattresses, so that tney naa no cnance of seeing that it had been „ broken, before it was brought to their house. The defendant stated, on the other hand, that the plain. tiff saw the bedstead, inspected it, and had his attention called to the fracture and mending by her, and that she took off 10s. of the price on account ef it. It was a perfectly new bedstead, and the fracture occurred in bringing it from the manufac. v, torer's. The Jadge awarded judgment for defendant, with costs. The plaintiff: I shall bring this before a superior court. His Honour: You nvW do as jou like—you can't get a judgment if you do. The r>Uinritfwife wanted to comment on the decision, liot the Judge stopped her, and she and her spouse Wt the court in high dudgeon. BfcLEN COTTER Y. JOANNA CRAWLEY.—In this case two voluble Irishwomen had a dispute about rint," but neither of them wanted to be sworn, and the Judge came near to throwing the case out on that account. The plaintiff in particular persisted in say- ing that she never tuk an oath in her life," while the defendant said she only owed tin pinse," and that was not worth taking an oath for. Finally, how- ever, each kissed the book" and told her story. The Defendant had been lodging with plaintiff, at lOd. a week, and she had received notice to quit, and gone away in arrear, she said of one week and the plaintiff alleged of six weeks, payments. After hearing the women abase and contradict each other for some minutes, his Honour split the difference" between ibem by gftig judgment for Is. 8d. JonN V. HALL.—Mr. Raby for plaintiff, Jolr. Reece :k>r defendant. The plaintiff sued to recover money loaned by plaintiff's wife to defendant's wife. The parties, Mr. Raby said, had lived near together. Plaintiff's wife lent the other woman X5 to get married with, which she repaid. Subsequently the defendant was ill and unable to continue his subscrip- tions to his benefit society, and the defendant's wife applying again to the plaintiff's wife for aid, received various loans, amounting in all to £1 19s. Of this, 4s. had been repaid by defendant's wife to plaintiff's son, but the defendant now repudiated the bili, alleg- ing that he had never authorised bis wife to contract the debt. His Honour said, there was no law by which a married woman could make her husband re- sponsible for money she bad borrowed, unless the lender had the husband's consent to the loan. The plaintiff would be non-suited. Mr. Reece applied for costs, but the Judge refused, saying defendant's wife could pay her husband's costs out of the money she bad borrowed. MARGARET CLARKE v. ISAAC PRICE.—The plaintiff summoned the defendant for non-payment of rent. On inquiring of the plaintiff, it appeared that defend- ant took the house from a third party; but having no furniture, he got the plaintiff to furnish the house, and to act as a kind of housekeeper. His Honour said she could not recover for these services as rent." The defendant, being sworn, stated that he was only a lodger in the house, and that he had paid a man, named Sandford, for every night he slept mere. j.ne piainun was nen-suitea. JAMES AND OTHERS v. EDWARDs.-The plaintiffs were three labourers. They were hired by the de- fendant, a farmer, to mow a piece of land, at 4s. an acre. He told them it was 19 acres, and paid them accordingly. They thought it was more, aad bad it measured by a surveyor, who reported it to be 2,31 acres. The defendant did not deny the latter mea- surement, but said it was a common practice with the farmers to call their fields less than the chain mea- surement would make it. His Honour said, where men were to be paid for their work by the acre, it was a dishonest practice to call the field less than it really was. He gave judgment for 17s., and-the expenses of the three plaintiffs. BARTER AND CO. v. VINCE.—This was an action in which Mr. John Bovey, of the plaintiff's firm, sought to recover t6 15s., of the defendant, who is captain and owner of the Alarm, being five per cent. commission on freight which be alleged he had pro- cured for her from the Dowlais Iron Company. Mr. Bovey said that the captain had sent for him, and on his going, requested him to get a cargo for his ship. After going about with him for m hour and a half, be succeeded in obtaining a cargo from the Dowlais Company for the vessel. Mr. S. Howard, a'gent of the Company, stated that Mr. Bovey intro- duced the captain first, but he would not then accept the cargo at their terms subsequently he came back with another broker, and agreed to the Company's terms. It was shown to be usual for the broker to have five per cent commision on the amount of the freight obtained by him for a ship. Out of this, one third was paid by the broker to the merchant. The r question in the present case was, whether the com- mission was due to the second broker, who actually chartered the vessel, or to the plaintiff Bovey, who introduced the captain to the freighters. The de- fendant was now at sea, and Mr. Ensor asked for an adjournment. His Honour offered one, on condition that defendant should pay the costi- of the day. This Mr. Ensor declined, and called evidence to rebut the plaintiff's case, by showing that the defendant bad been offered freight for 13s. Cd. by Mr. Anning, a rival ship.broker to Mr. Bovey, but the latter offered to get him 14s., and on going to the Dowlais Com- pany the defendant found that 10s. fid. was all that could be had, so he went tack to Mr. Anning, who charterf-d the ship, at 13s. 6d., with the Dowlais Com- pany. Mr. Anning's managing clerk stated these facts, and added that the custom was to give one- third of the commission to the broker who legiti- mately introduced the ship to the freighter. He did not deem it a legitimate i. trod nction for the broker to offer to get the ship a higher freight than be could possibly obtain, and in this way to get the business away from another broker. His Honour, when the case for the defendant was closed, bad Mr. G. Sully sworn, and examined him as to what would be the custom of the port under the circumstances as now stated. He said, the merchant would take one-third of the five per cent., and Mr. Bovey, as the intro- ducer, would be entitled to the other two-thirds, minus a gratuity to be agreed on to be given by him to the captain. His Honour accordingly gave judg- ment for the plaintiff for zt4 10s.. being two-thirds of five per etnt. commission. Mr. Ingledew was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ensor for defendant. INSOLVENTS. RK WILLIAM SAUNDERS, Shipwright, Bute Docks. -The insolvent came up for last examination and discharge. He was supported by Mr. Griffiths, and opposed by Mr. Stephens, on the part of Mr. Batcbelor, a creditor. After a short examination, bankrupt was allowed to pass. RE THOMAS L. PHILLIPS, surgeon, of Aberdare.— Insolvent sued for bis discharge in forma pauperis. His debts amounted to £ 260. Mr. Simons opposed his discharge, alleging fraud in contracting debts without intention of payment. The insolvent was ordered to apply for his discharge at Merthyr. RE FRANCIS JOSEPH AUBERTIN, Shipbroker and Wine-merchant, Cardiff.-The insolvent applied for his discharge. He was supported by Mr. Griffiths, and opposed by Mr. Ingledew. Miss Josephine Gattie, a countrywoman of the insolvent, stated that she had lent him various sums at different times,and had endorsed a bill for him for X-10, which she had to pay she had secured herself by getting a bill of sale of bis household furniture. Just before he be- came an insolvent she put the bill in force, and sold his goods, realizing £ 56 4s. After paying the arrears of rent, £ 5, and the cost of selling, she had no balance left to hand over to the insolvent's creditors. Mr. Ingledew elicited from the insolvent that in De- cember last he bad only £10, notwithstanding which he incurred liabilities to the amount of £40, by buy- ing goods of the creditors for whom Mr. Ingledew appeared. Mr. Ingledew pressed his Honour to de- clare this reckless trading, and to withhold the in- solvent's discharge. His Honour said, as the insol- vent bought the goods to sell again, he thought it was quite justifiable for him to incur debts of £40, when he had only XIO of his own. The insolvent r must pass.
Jparlmimiitarn .sunnnary.…
Jparlmimiitarn .sunnnary. MONDAY. In the House of Lords, Lord Stratheden raked up the old discussions as to the validity of the treaties respecting Denmark, and the answer, oft-repeated, was, that the Government recognised the fact that those treaties were now "modified." The Bill for guaranteeing the New Zealand loan, after some dis- cussion, passed the second reading. In the Commons it was decided, after a division, that the number of members on select committees on private bills should be reduced to four. Mr. Card- well, in reply to a question, stated that the latest in- telligence from the Cape was very satisfactory." In reply to Mr. Lindsay, Lord Palmerston stated that the Government had no intention of mediating between the American belligerents. Some discus- sion then took place in reference to the fortifications of the country. TUESDAY. In the House of Lords, Lord Ellenborough re- viewed the altered position of foreign politics, and lamented the fact that now-a-days treaties were not considered binding. He censured the Government for not deciding upon going to war on behalf of Den- mark, but hoped that the wicked proceedings of the Germans would bring upon them a heavy retribu- tion. Earl Russell replied, excusing the Government from not declaring war on the ground that they were not bound to do it, that the matter was exceedingly complicated and difficult, and that England would have been unsupported. This, probably, is the last discussion which will take place in the Upper House this session. In the Commons, Mr. Hennessy called attention to the case of Mr. O'MaIly Irwin, who applied re- cently to the metropolitan magistrates for summonses against Sir George Grey, the Home Secretary, on charges of perjury, treason, and other crimes. Mr. Irwin alleges that he has been the victim of official neglect and judicial error, and, through Mr. Hen- nessy, asks the House of Commons for redress. The motion was negatived. The House was then counted out for the third time since tho great debate. WEDNESDAY. Both Houses of Parliament were occupied in trans- acting formal business and pushing forward those Bills which are nearly ready for receiving the Koyal assent. The Globe states that the prorogation will take place on Saturday. Mr. Divett, M.P., died on Tuesday. The hon. gentleman had represented Exeter as a Liberal member ever since 1832.
[No title]
FEDERAL CEUISERS AND BLOCKADE RUNNERS.— LIVERPOOL, July 26 -The Syren, which arrived at Nassau on the 26tb of June, from Wilmington, was chased for 18 hours by two Federal gunboats, and bad to throw overboard 300 bales of cotton to escape. The Will-o'-the-Wisp, which arrived at Nassau on the 2d of July from Wilmington, reports that when making for the latter port she was discovered off Capo Fear by two Federal cruisers, which chased her, and one of their sbots hit her below the water-line, just as she was entering port, passing quite through her; and she was immediately grounded and tempo- rarily repaired. On coming out she grounded astern, but got off, and, though making much water, reached Nassau in safety. LABOUR IN BOMBAY.—The extreme dearness and scarcity of labour in Bombay has now become a very serious evil. Ships are condemned to be idle in harbour for days, and sometimes weeks together, be- cause there are not sufficient boatmen or coolies to be bad for landing and discharging cargo. The men employed at the cotton presses have struck for higher wages, as also have the whole of the scaven- gers of the island. Prices of all food stuffs con- tinue to rise daily, and have now almost reached famine rates. Rents have also enormously increased, and in some cases have quintupled in the short space of five years. The old Fort Police-office, which was rented by Government for 3M. a month in April last, now rents for 1501, a month.
MORE ABOUT THE BIUGGS MURDER.
I The following appeared in the|Second edition. MORE ABOUT THE BIUGGS MURDER. Bow-street, Saturday morning.—Fresh evidence was given respecting Mullor, in order to have a war- rant for. his apprehension more regular than the one already granted. A gentleman who chatted with Mr. Briggs before the train started, saw two men in the same carriage, one of whom he described, and particularly noticed that he had a very large hand.
1GLAMORGANSHIRE ASSIZES.
1 GLAMORGANSHIRE ASSIZES. FRIDAY. The Court opened at nine o'clock. The trial of prisoners was continued before Mr. Justice Crompton. FELONIOUS ASSAULT AT CARDIFF. Hans Felle, Joseph Williams, Charles Hoff, and Henry Campbell, were indicted for feloniously as- saulting and wounding Vincenzo Vigovich, and put- ting him in fear of his life, and stealing from his person twenty shilling, a pair of shoes, and ether property, at Cardiff, on the 25th of May, 1864. Mr. Coleridge prosecuted, and Mr. Bowen defended Campbell. Mr. Coleridge, having stated the case, called Eliza- beth Neckrews, a servant girl, who stated that about half-past twelve o'clock on the night in question she was on the corner of Nelson andFrederica-streets, and saw the prisoner Campbell on the corner, apparently keeping watch, while the other three prisoners had hold of the prosecutor. One of them said, take off his coat," on which the three men assaulted him, trying to pull his coat off his back, while one of them put his hand over the prosecutor's mouth, to prevent him from giving an alarm. The prisoner Felle struck the prosecutor on the face the others also struck him, and he fell prostrate on the ground. They then commenced searching his clothes. Felle pulled the prosecutor's boots from his feet, and put- ting them on the ground, tried to jump on his body, but missing his aim, kicked the prosecutor on the bead. The others also kicked him, and the three then ran away. Campbell came up from his post of ob. servation on the corner, and also kicked the prose- cutor; after which he followed the other prisoners in the direction of Nelson-street. This witness gave her evidence with a very evident determination to prove all she could, and drew down on herself his Lordship's reproof for testifying to several things that she supposed of the prisoners' intentions, as well as what she saw of their nets. She stated that she had known Felle before, but had never sesn the other prisoners previously. As soon as the men had run away, she hastened to give information to the police. Mr. Bowen cross-examined the witness and elicited that she was a prostitute, plying her vocation at the time the assault occurred. She fenced and pre- varicated with the questions for some time before making this admission. The prisoner Felle ex. amined the witness to show that she had quarrelled with him on account of his getting another man away from her, and that she bad threatened to have him transported. This she denied. Vigovich, the prosecutor, testified that he was an Italian seaman, and on the night in question he was returning to his ship, after midnight, when he met the four prisoners in Frederica-street. They canght ibis hands, forced them behind his back, threw him down, and rifled his pockets- He had his cap, his boots, and a sovereign taken from him, and they tried to take his coat, but were unable to take it off his back. He was unable to identify which of the prisoners gave him particular blows, but among them he was kick-^d aod bruised on the head. The shoes and cap now produced were those of which he was then robbed. P.S. Wines deposed that he was fetched to Fre- derica-street soon after the assault, and found the prosecutor bleeding from a wound on the.bead,and he was also bruised elsewhere. He had no cap or boots on. Witness subsequently went to a house of ill- fame, No. 8, Nelson-street, and found it fastened. He obtained admission, and found the four prisoners in the back kitchen. He found the boots identified by the prosecutor behind the back of the prisoner Felle, and the cap on the ground between where Campbell and Hoffe were sitting. Witness took the four into custody. Mr. Bowen argued that the evidence of the girl Neckrews was unworthy of belief, and that the prose- cutor, being suddenly assaulted from behind and thrown down, was in no condition to remember with distinctness the features of his assailants. From these points be contended that sufficient doubt exiiited to justify the acquittal of Campbell. The other prisoners also addressed the jury protesting their innocence of the crime; but none of them said anytbing to account for their subsequent possession of the stolen property. The prisoners were all found Guilty. Williams pleaded guilty of a previous felony, for which he was punished summarily by the magistrates at Car- diff. They were each sentenced to 12 years penal servitude. THE MANSLAUGHTER CASE. John Albert Ponting was arraigned on the coro- ner's inquisition, for manslaughter. He pleaded not guilty, and the form of trial was gone through. The Judge warned him to be careful in future in the management of engines, but said he fully agreed with j for fioding a bill for felony. He therefore directed the jury to give a verdict of Not Guilty, which they rendered accordingly, and the accused was discharged. the Grand Jury that there was in this case no reason NO BILL. The Grand Jury bad thrown out the iodictment for attempted rape against Morgan Williams, at Aberdare, July 6. NISI PRIUS COURT. His Lordship then commenced the trial of civil causes. SUIT BY A BANKRUPT'S CREDITORS. LEVIN AND ANOTHER V. PETRALI.—For the plain- tiff, Mr. Bowen and Mr. Coleridge, instructed by Messrs. Asburst and Co. For the defendant Mr. Giffard, instructed by Mr. Ingledew. Mr. Coleridge having read the pleadings, Mr. Bowen opened the case. Ha stated that in the year 1858, a person named Charles Plasket came to this town, and opened a watch and chronometer shop. He was set up in business, and greatly assisted by a Mr. Morris, of London. The defendant was em- ployed by this Charles Piasket as an assistant and workman. The business did not prosper, and in March, 1862, Piasket became a bankrupt, in the Bristol Bankruptcy Court, and the two plaintiffs were appointed the assignees of his estate, their duty being to collect and realise bis property for the benefit ef his creditors, of whom Morris was one of the most considerable. The property realised was very small. Afterwards, the defendant, from being foreman for Piasket, set up in business in the same line himself, next door to the shop in which Plasket's business bad been carried on. His old master, Plasket, was employed by the defendant, and subse- quently became a partner, the firm being Petrali and Piasket. In pursuing their inquiries after the property, the assignees found reason to believe that a considerable portion of what bad belonged to Plas. ket at the time of his baakruptcy, and which there- fore belonged to the creditors, had passed into the possession of Petrali, and also that moneys bad been received by the defendant on account of Flas- ket, which should have been paid over to the estate, but had not been. Previous to Plasket's bankruptcy the defendant himself became insolvent, and passed through the Insolvency Court in this town. Mr. Wilcocks was the attorney who too'k him through the court, and Plasket paid the costs due to Mr. Wilcocks,.amounting to XIS., Plasket also loaned small sums to Petrali about this time, so that alto. gether a debt of X20 could be proved from the de- fendant to Plasket's estate. After the bankruptcy the captain of a ship paid to defendant, on account of Plasket, a sum of £17. Defendant showed the money to Mr. Morris and asked him what he should do with it. Mr. Morris told him to pay it to the messenger of the bankruptcy court, who was in the house at the time; but he said that he had atlaim against Piasket, and he deducted that from the amount and paid over the remainder to the bank- rupt Piasket, instead of to the bankruptcy court. For this money Plasket had never accounted to the assignees. There was also a sum of £ 0 7s. which the defendant had received from a foreigner named Speaker, on account of Plasket; and a gold watch valued at £ 20, which had been sold to the captain of a ship by Piasket. Also, there were tools and other materials, of the value of £10, which found their way into the defendant's house about the time that the messenger of the bankruptcy court took possession of Plasket's estate. The box found its way back afterwards to the possession of the as- signees, but the tools were gone. There was a prac- tice of hiring out or rather loaning chronometers from shops in this town to captains of vessels. On Oct. 27,1862, six months after the bankruptcy of Plasket, a captain to whom he had thus lent a chro- nometer returned to this port, and brought the article back to Petrali, whom he bad known as Plas- ket's foreman, and for whom the latter wa* then working, and said he wanted to change the chro- nometer for a better one. A negociation was entered into, and it was agreed that the captain should buy another chronometer out and oat. He was to pay a certain sum as the first instalment of the price, and on his next visit to this port he was to pay the remainder. The old chronometer was returned, and Petrali in the agreement admitted having received this, which was evidently a part of Plasket's estate, and as such should have been banded over to the assignees. The agreement was signed by Petrali and Piasket, as partne/s. John Thomas, who described himself as having been accountant to Mr. Wilcocks, proved the receipt of money from Plasket for the solicitor's costs in taking defendant through the insolvency court. G. B. Avegno, ship-broker, stated that his office was immediately over the shop occupied by the de- fendant. He could not swear whose name was over the door. On being pressed, he said that the names Petrali" and Plasket" were both on the sign, but he could not correctly state what were the words over the door. The witness was examined in regard to purchases he bad made at the shop, but very little of definite information could be got from him. The judge remarked that he appeared to be a costive" witness. Joseph Tutfield was next called. He refused to be sworn until the plaintiff's attorney paid his expenses. Mr. Bowen remarked that a witness who demanded his expenses before swearing, would probably prove hostile, and be would, therefore, not call him at all. William Catford, a watchmaker's assistant, from London, stated that be formerly worked for Piasket, in Cardiff. He was examined in regard to the box of tools, which was alleged to have been stolen from Placket's estate. He stated that the day before the bankruptcy, Plasket sent the box of tools away by witness; and when it came back, several tools which were in it when it left were not there. He stated, however, that the tools jD the box were broken, so that the entire contents were of little or no value. William Morris, watchmaker, of Blackbeatb, stated that he had formerly been in business in Cardiff, and after leaving here, had sent Plasket.do,wa to takp to the business. This witness proceeded to confirm such parts of Mr. Bowen's opening address as re- ferred to matters of which he was cognisant. At the couclusion of this witness's evidence, at his lordship's suggestion, ajuror was withdrawn, and the case was settled by mutual arrangement, the de. fendant agreeing to give up the ehronometer referred to in Mr. Bowen's speech. The Judge said it was ob. vious that the estate would not be benefitted by the legal investigation of such complicated questions as would arise in the progress of the proceedings. VALIDITY OF A BILL OF SALE. JENKINS V. WILLIAMS.-—Mr. Bowen appeared for the plaintiff, instructed by Mr. Tennant. Mr. Giffard for the defendant, instructed by Messrs. Coke, Jones, and Curtis. Mr. Bowen sajl the facts out of which this case arose were as follow :—A person named Harris had a lease, under the Dowager Countess of Jersey, of a property at Briton Ferry. This he had mortgaged to the Second Aberaman Benefit Building Society, under which mortgage they foreclosed, for default, and took possession of the property. In the year 1862 they let to Elias Freeman, a ship carpenter and an industrious man, some premises thus acquired from Harris, for X14 a year. In February, 1804, Freeman had become in arrears for rent to the amount of ,£21. Meanwhile a dispute had arisen between Freeman and the defendant, who was a lessee of a ferry nnder Lady Jersey at Briton Ferry, the latter claiming that Freeman had not used the ferry as by agreement he was bound to do, but had used a boat of his own instead of the ferry. For this cause Mary Williams, this defendant, sued Freeman, and obtained a judgment against him by default for thirteen or fourteen pounds, besides costs. This fact having come to the knowledge of the Building Society, they directed their secretary to put in a distress to secure the rent, and on the 8th of Feb- ruary a bailiff was put in possession. It was ar- ranged that he should not be sold up, but that Freeman should resign the premises to Evan Jen- kins, who agreed to take them of the Building Society at the same rent as Freeman agreed to pay. It was also agreed that Freeman should sell his goods to Jenkins, and a bill of sale was accordingly executed, and registered in London according to law. On the 24th of February the sheriff levied on these same goods, at the suit of the present defen. dant, Mrs. Mary Williams. This being subsequent to the arrangement with Jenkins, the plaintiff, the goods belonged to the latter. Mrs. Williams deemed the transaction between Freeman and Jenkins a trick to prevent her from getting her money, and she consequently' levied on and sold the goods. Mr. Jenkins would swear that he had bought these goods, and in payment had discharged Freeman's debt to the Building Society, and it would be proved on the part of the latter that they had received the money. Freeman continued in the premises by permission of Jeokins, but the latter was entered on the parish books of Cadoxton as the tenant of the premises. William Jones, secretary of the Benefit Society, stated that the money due to them from Freeman had actually been paid by Jenkins. He had given them his note erf hand for £21 and had subsequently cashed it, but at a date after that of the levy made on his goods at the suit df the defendant. Evas Jenkins, the plaintiff, corroborated this evi. dence, and stated tbat ae bad since entering the premises paid-a-.rjnarter's rent and the poor ra^es-doe on the premises. He also swore that the goods were his, by bona fide purchase for the ,£21 paid to the Building Society on Freeman's account. In cross-examination by Mr. Giffard, the witness admitted that he did not absolutely buy the goods, but held them as aa alternative for the money which he had advanced. Mr. Giffard, for the defendant, argued that this was not a genuine transaction between Freeman. and Jenkins, but a counterfeit pretence got up to prevent Mrs. Williams, the defendant, from getting payment of her judgment against Freeman by seizing his goods. He argued that not a single document produced on the part of the plaintiff was correct-Dot one was reconcilable with the known facts of the case, without a long explanation from the witness who introduced it. Thus the order of the Benefit Society to their clerk to distrain for eighteen. month's rent was made at a meeting in January, when the rent was not due until February. The whole thing, he contended, was a juggle to deprive an honest creditor of money justly due to her. If the sale- had been bona fide, there would have been aDpraisers called in and the value of the goods would have beea: ascertained in the usual way but instead of that there was a pretence of selling them for £21, the exact sum owed to the society for rent. The good? might have been worth much more—enough to alsrf defray the debt due to the defendant. It was more than singular that the value of the goods should be to a farthing the same as the amount of rent due. It did not even appear that the expenses of the bailiff were provided for, the evidence being that the pre- cise sum of £21 was paid over by the plaintiff to the building society. The learned counsel read the affi- davits made in this suit in the proceedings in London connected with the registration of the bill of sale, and urged that the state of facts then sworn to by the witness Jones and the plaintiff was mate- rially different from that which they had "iven evi- dence of before this court. For instance, Jones bad affirmed that the £ 21 was paid to him on the day the distress was levied. Now, both he and the plaintiff stated that a note of hand only was given at that time, and that the cash for it was not paid until a subsequent day, probably not untii after this suit had been commenced. The plaintiff swore now that it was not at first a sale of the goods, but that he was to advance the money, and hold tLe'goods as security for his money. In the plaintiff's affi- davit he swore that his tenancy of the premises com- menced on the 19th of February. The document which was produced to prove that plaintiff was the tenant because he had paid a quarter's rent, stated the payment to have been made on the 1st of May, when, according to the plaintiff's own statement, the quarter had not expired. In fact-he had never been the tenant at all. He had never lived in the house, and the putting his came in the parish book as the occupier was a part of the fraud arid trickerv which had been resorted to for the petty object" of pre- venting the defendant from getting the thirteen or fourteen pounds and costs which a jury had awarded to her. On referring to the calendar; he found that the 1st. of May, on which this alleged payment "f rent had been made, was a Sunday; a clear proof, in his opinion, that the t-locument and the transaction of which it formed a part, was fraudulent. For the defendant only one witness was called, the collector of rates for the parish of Cadoxtofl, who deposed that the rates for the premises had been paid by Freeman, fmù not by the plaintiff. His Lordship summed up at great length, aftef which the jarj returned a verdict for the plaintiff' His Lordship said that it was a very proper verdict. as suits in regard to a transaction of this kind Gugbt never to be contested unless there was the clearest proof of fraud to be adduced to set aside the leged sale of the property. A LAND CASE. LEWIS v. NEU, AND OTHERS.—For the piaintift Mr. Williams, ihis was a case to prove titled land. Defendant not appearing, a verdict pro forma was entered for plaintiff. SATURDAY. The court opened at nine o'clock. SrIT RESPECTING THE PROPERTY OF AN IXTESTATS, JONESL'. 1VILLLDIS.-Fol' plaintiff, Mr. Giffard and Mr. Coleridge, instructed bv Messrs. C. H. and F. James; for defendant )1r. Bowen and Mr. Hughes, instructed by Mr. Jenkins. From the opening speech of Mr. Giffard and the evidence of Mr. F. James, it appeared that the action arose out of the death of one Nicholas; Jones, who died intestate, leaving sundry leasehold! property in land, and household furniture. of administration were taken, out t>v hia' t\VO unclef* the present plaintiff and a Mr. Howell S £ or»/ They agreed, to divide the property of the deceas<^ equally between them, and that each should pal half of the debts of the deceased. In pursuance 0 this verbal arrangement the uncles divided the for* niture, and the plaintiff also arranged with John Morgan, who acted for Howell Morg-m, as to what portions of the leasehold land should be by each party. Meanwhile Howell Morgan di?d, and. the present defendant, David Williams, herited his property. He was apprised by the soli* 'o. citors managing the affair of the state of the negO. tiation between Howell Morgan and the defendant, and he ratified it by signing an agreement as to the division of the land, and undertook to pay 'tW half of Nicholas Jones's debts JwhicTi Howe" Morgan would have paid, had he lived, in consideril" tion of receiving half of the leasehold. This under- taking he had not complied with—he had the leasehold but had failed to pay any of debts—consequently the plaintiff had had to them all. It was ultimately agreed to refer the matter t" Mr. H. Allen, as arbitrator. A SHIP CHANDLER'S BILL. RUNDLE Y. ATKINSON.—Mr. Giffard and Mr- Hughes appeared for the plaintiff, instructed by IngMlew, and Mr. Bowen for the defendant. Mr. Giffard, in opening the case,.grated that plaintiff was a ship broker and ship chandler, doi# £ business in Cardiff, and the defendant resided$ Hartlepool, and owned a ship called the Xorinan. September, 1803, this vessel traded to this port, being very much out of repairs, a bill of £172 1&>' was incurred by the captain with the plaintiff in tbiØ action, for the supply of goods to the ship, and th^ repairs effected on board of her. The defendant pa^ Y,70 on account of the claim, and no more, until tllo action was brought, when he paid X41 into court- The learned counsel said he had not the faintest ide* to what part of tho claim this payment applied, or o# what ground the payment, of the rest of the bi^ I was to be resisted. He should be able to 1 that the defendant offered to sell the vessel, 1 that the amount of this bill should be deducted I from the purchase money. Evidence was given at some length in support Of this statement. In cross-examination it was elicited that of th8 claim zC48 was for money advanced to the captain Black, and no special proof was given that thio money was for the vessel's use, as the captain WO not called as a witness. It also appeared that th3 bill for the amount claimed had been drawn oil son of the captain, who had formerly been h^ owner of the vessel, but subsequently to the delivery of these articles to the ship, had sold his share to the defendant, who thus became sole owner. TheSe facts were relied on by Mr. Bowen as a complet0 answer to the demand of the plaintiff. The bill iot the amount, drawn by plaintiff on young Black, had been dishonoured, and a second bill was drawn- The defendant gave evidence that he had been applied to for the money until after the bill had been dishonoured by the failure of youfl £ Black. The evidence for the defendant was proceedw when our second edition went to press.
.. CARDIFF TIMES AGENTS.
CARDIFF TIMES AGENTS. Merthyr Mr. Wilkins, Post-office. Aberdare: Mr Lloyd, printer. Pontypridd: Mr. Bassett, chemist. Bridgend: Mr, Leyshon, Post-office. Cambridge: Messrs. Davies, bookseller. DtHjM.-Mr.Hughee. S London': Mr. B. F White, 33, Fleet-street; Mf- Deacon, 154, Leadenhall-street; Messrs Revnell and C»j' Chancery-lane; Messrs. Hammond and Nephew, 77' Cheapside (near Bucklersbnry); Messrs. C Barker SOBS, Birchin-iane; Meews. W. H. Smith and Son, btxand Messrs. Mitchell and Co, Red Lion-court, Fleft street Mr. J. W. Tickers, 2, Covvper's-court, Cornell, Mr. George Street, 30, Cornhill; Messrs. Hooper Cull, 12 Ue°rge-8tr»et, Mansion House: Messrs. Ey and Co., 4, Bouverie-street, Fleet-street; Mr. R. Crossly 17, Moorgato-street; Mr. W. Riddell, Crosby-hail Cham- bers, Bishopsgate-strset; Mr. G. Kelly, 8, Camion-roy Westminster; Mr. W. J. Clarke, jun. 4, Corbet-street. Gracechurch-street f Messrs. Dean and Son, 11, Ludgate* hill; Mr. R Brown, Cranbourn-street, Leieester-squar Messrs. Pottle and Son, 35, Royal Exciiange. Liverpool: Messws. Lee and Nightingale, 13, Casti- street. Printed and published by the s»le Proprietor, DAVlD DUNCAN, at his General Printing Offices, 10, St. WW* street, in tlie perish of St. Mary, in the Borotigu Cardiff, in the County of Glamorgan. FRIDAY, JULY 29, 18W? ■ -0uxii>t I1*