Claim $19, damages to vehicle.
(Adjourned from yesterday.)
Insp. Wrisox, sworn, said.—On Thursday evening, the 29th, defendant was brought to the Station on a charge of breaking a trap. The mafoo explained to me that the defendant was driving very recklessly along the Pekin Road, and that the trap struck against stone at the side of the road. In consequence of the collision, the shafts, the front splashboard, and one of the side-boards, were broken, I understood that the accident occurred near the bridge in that locality. It was nine o'clock. Defendant agreed to pay the damages, which were estimated on the spot at $19—$15 for the damage to the trap, and $4 for the lamps, both of which were broken. T have since "had three carriage-makers examine the trap, and find that the lowest cost of repairing it would be $12 for the trap and $4 for the lamps. Defendant related to mellow the accident occurred. He said the Pony suddenly holted off with him and caused the damage; and he denied that anybody was with him at the time, He said he should not be in a position to the $19 before the end of the month. When he agreed to pay the amount, I told him that if he thought the charge excessive, and called the followin; day, T would go with him and soe if we coul not' get it done cheaper. He did not come, but Tmade enquiries nevertheless. He was in a state of intoxication.
Witness (to defendant)—You were decidedly the worse for liquor.
Defendant—I might have been a little excited, but I swore here the other day that I was not drunk; might not I be exch Witness Certainly you had the appearance of not being sabe His Hoxour—Why didn't you go to see Wilson as you promised.
fondant—Because on second thoughts I considered I was not liable; but I admit, your Honour, that 1 am to blame for not Being to see Mr. Wilson and telling him so.
His Honour—I think you are liable to the plaintiff. The hirer of a carriage is prima facie responsible for any damage that a vehicle may sustain while under his control; and if even, as in your case, another person drives for you, you are still the party held responsible. But at the time you yourself admit you were the only person in the trap; and you are bound to show to the Court' sufficient to make it believe that the damage or accident was not due to your own negligence. You certainly have not satisfied me that the accident was due to any such cause. If you could prove that the pony' was restive or unmanageable, and consequently you were not able to govern it, then you would not be held responsible, but this you have not done.
Defendant—I' think I have; Ihave maintained throughout that all the damage was done through the pony kicking.
His Hoxovr.—That may be; but the pony may be caused to kick by an incompetent driver. And as to your being sober, the Inspector distinctly affirms that you were not 80.
Defendant.—That-might have been excit ment, His Hoxour.—If it had been excitement, I don't think you would have acted in the way you did, It is not often that people leave a companion behind as you did; and all these things show you were more or less in a state of intoxication, Defendant.—Well, I don't consider I was to blame in the least.
His Honovr.—I don't want to press it, inst you too much, but it is very curious that you should have agreed to By the damages directly after the accident, the cause of which was perhaps better known to you On adjournment. then than remembered by you now. I give 'The original summons having been pro-judgment for $16, including the cost of the duced, lamps, and order you to pay the costs of the 'Mr.' Minter proceeded to raise an objection summons. under sections 19and 25of the Order in Council, to this Court dealing with the matter. Under Am-rose v. G. D. Sauspers, Alhambra, clause 19, the Law Secretary was "authorised.
Claim, $23.50 for money lent and goods sup-to hear and determine such matters and ques-plied. tions arising in suits and proceedings of a civil nothing; he did not nature, originally instituted in the Supreme even know what the claim was for.
Court, as the Judge from time to time, for the Plaintiff, a Canton man, was the late stew-despatch of urgent business, thinks fit to refer ard of the ship. The gist of his evidence especially to him." He contended that this was was to the effect that, when the ship was not a suit of a civil nature originally institu. at San Francisco he bought a new meerted in the Supreme Court. schaum pipe, intending to give his old pipe to His Hosovk.—The summons is issued by the cook. He strangely forgot to give it him, the Supreme Court. but lent it to the defendant, felling him at the Mr, Mitter.—In consequence of an order same time that if he lost it he must pay bim which was made that defendant should be its value, $13. At the same port he lent turned out of the command of the Aliambra defendant $5 and a linen shirt; on the voyage and I say that if the Consular Court has to Puget Sound, he noticed that the defendant power to take o man out of his' ship, it Aid not stoke the pipe, but being & superior as power also to require him to do what officer he did not like to ask him the reason. this summons requires hit, When at Puget Sound he lent defendant $1.50, is Honour—There is no Consular Court. and another shirt; neither the money nor Mr. Mitter—No, but there is the Consul, itts had been returned to him. They who if he has power to take a man out of his stayed two or three months at Puget Sound. to put him on shore, and to deprive him His Hoxour—Then why did you not ask of command, has surely the power to de-him there for them, and sue him for them if mand the production of his papers, he would not give them to you?
His Hoyour—I have nothing in evidence Plaintiff—Because he was a superior officer. to show me that the Consul took the man out His Hoyour—When did zon leave the ship? of the shi Plaintiff—On the 7th of January.
After some further argument, Counsel said His Hoxour—Have you ever asked him for he would leave it to be shown by the evidence them at all. that this was not a cause of action originally Plaintiff—On one or two occasions; the instituted in that Court. last time on board ship in Shanghai.
W. G. BEaptx, sworn, stated—I am the Defendant said the plaintiff's statements present master of the Adkambra, Defendant were false in every particular. He had was I believe lately master, and was on the 4th never borrowed anything from, nor had instant superseded by Messrs. Rustell & Ca., plaintiff ever asked him for them, and on cents. I went on that day to take charge, one on board had ever seen him with any of Captain Nelson refused to allow plaintiff's clothes. His boxes were on board Tam now in charge of the ship, but I Ship and open to inspection.
"His Hoxovr, having questioned the plaintitt have, not yet got possession of certain papers which are locked up in the after cabin. at great length, decided the case against Captain, Nelson at first objected to, my taking Defendant said he intended to take out a howe! ven mo certain necessary papers, charge, but subsequently yielded. He has not, summons against the plaintiff. including inventory of stores and furniture, survey reports and such other documents as he W. G. Beapte v, 0. H. Nztsox. may have relating to the ship. He may have Mr. Mitte for the defendant. copy of the charter-party, logbooks, seamen's The plaintiff is the captain of the ship accounts and all sorts of things. I have applied Aliambra; the defendant is her late captain for these, but he has not given me them, and and the suit was to recover certain papers Lapply to the Court in order that I may obconnected with the vessel. tain them, Mr. Mrzuze asked for the original summons Cross-examined.—Messrs. Russell & Ca,, the to be produced. agents of the vessel, advised me to apply to His Hoxour—Where is it? the Court, They ate agents for many things Mr. Minter—In the hands of the Court I besides. They are agents I believe for the owners of the Aliambra. I am shown a His Hoxocr—The defendant has the sum-letter bearing Messrs. Russell's signature. mons.
Couxset handed up this document, saying to be in the possession of the Court, Mr, Mrutzr—The original summons ought it was most important, because the witness said Russell & Ca. were agents for the ship, His Hoxour—The Court has only a memo-while by the letter handed in they were agents random of the contents of the summons. You for the owners of the ship. have the summons, and if you raise an objec-His Hoxour.—How can they be agents for tion on this point L must adjourn the case, to the ship, except as agents for the owners of have it produced. the ship?
Mr. Mrntzn(to his client)—Where is it?
Couxszt.—We will come to that presently Capt. Netsox—I have left it in the Hospital.
Tonly wish you now to note that document.
Mr. Mnuze.—then it should be in Court.
Cross-examination resumed—I don't know His Hoxour.—But you hear it is in the who the owners of the ship are. I have appossession of the defendant. plied to Captain Nelson for any papers re-Mr. Mizter.—Then it is against the 339th I to the ship, on the 4th, 5th and 6th. Rule, which is to the effect that the original had not a list of them when I came out from summons is taken out in this Court, and that the bottom of Me sampan. I asked him again 1 copy of it has to be served upon the defend to-day. I have*heard Captain Nelson men-ant, the original copy remaining in the hands tion the name of a Mr. William Thwing. of the Court as evidence.
I never heard Messrs. Russell speak of His Hoxour.—There is not a word in the him. I cannot recognise or reject him Rule about copies of summonses. There is only as owner; I am ignorant on the matter. the one summons, and that is served upuv the T look on Russell & Ca. as agents, and defendant. owners too, so far as I am concerned; and Mr. Mriter.—Suppose it is burned or lost. applied for the papers, on behalf of the His Hoxovr.—Then I would take evidence owners, through the agents. I have been of what the summons was. However, it is to the Consul, Mr. Medhurst, and to Mr. not burnt or lost; the defendant says it is in Spence to ask advice. I told Mr. Medhurst the Hospital. Ourmemorandam is as follows that I had applied to Captain Nelson for the "Summons to show cause why the defen-ship's papers and that he refused to give them. dant should not deliver to the plaintiff all The conversation was not official, but I Pra, of which he was lately master, which may ypers connected with the British ship Alhamwanted to get his advice as to how I could
be in his possession or control." get, the pesest: Mr. Medhurst told me the jest thing could do was to summon Captain Mr. Muter.—That is only memo., and not Nelson. The list I have stated I give from the original summons. my own knowledge as a shipmaster. I did His Hoxour.—Certainly not, but as you not know where any of them were. I didn't wish for it, and it is in your hands, I will ad-know that—Journ the ¢ase till this afternoon for its pro-His Hoxour here interrupted the cross. duction. examination to ask what it was Counsel desired to bring out. What was his position?
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.