West Briton and Cornwall Advertiser. 13th February, 1852. NOTICE - All Creditors in South Dolcoath Mine, are requested to send in their respective Claims, immediately to Mr. PETER FLOYD, Tin Croft Mine, Redruth, in order that they may be examined and paid. January 14, 1852. EXETER DISTRICT COURT OF BANKRUPTCY - Tuesday, February 10 - In re T. P. DIXON, Printer &c., of Falmouth. Mr. G. W. TURNER said, that a summons had been forwarded by Mr. STOGDON, the solicitor of the assignees, for the attendance of Miss PINDER, with the bill of sale on the bankrupt's stock. He (Mr. Turner) had received a certificate from Mr. VIGURS, a medical gentleman at Falmouth, stating that Miss Pinder, who as above 80 years of age, was suffering from a disease of the lungs, and that she was now and had been for some time past confined to her house, and he was of opinion that a journey to Exeter would endanger her life. His Honor - Has she sent the deed? Mr. Turner - No. His Honor - She ought to have done that. Mr. Stogdon said the face that Miss Pinder had a nephew who was desirous of taking a journey to Exeter, at an expense of some GBP15, which the assignees did not feel themselves called on to incur. They thought that by summoning Miss Pinder, the deed would have been sent up. His Honor said, he saw no reason why the deed should not be sent to Mr. Turner, who was her agent. Mr. Turner said he would write and say that his Honor wished the deed to be forwarded for his examination. Wednesday, February 11. - In Re THOMAS HARRIS, grocer, Camborne - This was a meeting for the choice of Assignees, but as several creditors were desirous of being appointed trade assignee the choice was adjourned to the last examination. The bankrupt was unable to file his books and papers, and a bill of Exchange for GBP20 not yet due, he was unable to hand over in consequence of their being detained by Mr. BULLMORE, solicitor for a lien. The bankrupt it appeared consulted Mr. Bullmore, with reference to his circumstances, and that gentleman called a meeting of his creditors. His Penzance creditors did not attend the meeting, and blamed him for not consulting them instead of an attorney. His other creditors were willing to take what the estate would give. In consequence of that no arrangement was come to with his creditors, and he was obliged to petition this Court. His debts were about GBP1,092. His Honor said that Mr. Bullmore's claim being for services rendered before the bankruptcy, he was entitled to be paid, and ordered that his bill be taxed and discharged. An order was given to the Official Assignee to realise the estate, valued at About GBP300 as speedily as possible. STANNARIES COURT - Saturday, February 7. - ALLEN v. CLYMO - Wheal Tremayne in St. Ervan. On the motion of Mr. CHILCOTT, the rule nisi obtained in this case was made absolute for sale of the materials. LUKE v. SIMMONS - Wheal Violet. This case was heard on the preceding Thursday, and judgment was given this day. Mr. STOKES appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. ANTHONY LUKE of Charlestown; and Mr. CHILCOTT for the defendant, Mr. G. N. SIMMONS, the purser of Wheal Violet, in the parish of St. Stephens in Branwell. Judgment was that the decree must be for GBP92. 15s. 2 1/2 d., and the day of payment the 5th of April. PIKE and ANOTHER v. BLAMEY and COOPER - BELL and LANARTH - This was a purser's petition for arrears of costs due from defendants, one of whom, FRANCIS BLAMEY, Mr. STOKES stated is gone to California, and the other RICHARD COOPER, is in Portugal. The amount due from the first named was GBP3. 10s. 6d., and from Cooper, GBP1. 15s. 3d., the mine being divided into a great number of shares. On affidavits of service at the mine, Mr. STOKES obtained a decree pro confesso for payment in ten days after service. HAWKE v. BURGESS - Tin Bounds. This case was tried on the previous Tuesday, when a verdict was given for plaintiff. Mr. ROBERTS now moved for a rule nisi for a new trial, upon the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence; or for a rule for nonsuit, on the ground of misdirection, because as he submitted, there was no evidence to go to the jury. He addressed the Court at considerable length on these points, and the Vice-Warden said, I think it is quite clear you should have your rule nisi on those grounds. Rule nisi granted. Monday, February 9. - FOX and OTHERS v. ELLERY - Trewollack Mine. Mr. ROBERTS said this was a creditor's petition, in which there had been a decree for sale and a sale made. A dividend of ten shillings in the pound would be declared to the creditors generally, with the exception of the petitioning creditors who were adventurers in the mine, and who would be likely to get nothing. The mine had been suspended since the account was taken before the Registrar. He moved to confirm the Registrar's report. Report confirmed. TILLY v. BULL - West United Hills - This was a purser's petition for payment of GBP37 odd. On affidavits of service and non-payment, Mr. HOCKIN obtained a rule absolute for sale of shares. PAULL v. DANIELL - Camborne Consols - A creditor's petition, in which, on producing the necessary affidavits, Mr. Paull moved for a rule absolute for sale of the materials, rule nisi having been granted on the previous Tuesday. Rule made absolute. HARRISON v. ASHWORTH - Carthew Consols. This was a purser's petition, and a decree for payment having been granted, Mr. Paull moved for sale of defendant's shares. Rule Absolute granted. HARRISON v. SMITH - Penhale Mine - Also a purser's petition, in which Mr. Paull made a motion similar to those in the previous cases, and a rule absolute for sale was granted. MARTIN v. BATT - Wheal Trescoll - This was a creditor's petition by Mr. THOMAS MARTIN of Wadebridge, merchant, against the purser of Wheal Trescoll, in the parish of Luxulian. The petition alleged that between the 1st of January, 1850, and the 23rd of January, 1852, plaintiff had supplied merchandise to the mine to the amount of GBP438. 16s. 10d. Mr. STOKES moved, on affidavits, for an injunction to restrain the sale and removal of the machinery and materials. An affidavit by Mr. WILLIAM JENNINGS of Wadebridge, stated that on the 2nd of February, the purser in conversation with him, said he believed plaintiff's claim was correct, and told him the adventurers were endeavouring to sell the machinery and materials. The Vice-Warden, after hearing the affidavits, said, I think you have a reasonable fear that if you do not obtain the assistance of the Court, the machinery will be sold, and may give a great deal of trouble to pursue it. Therefore you will take your injunction in the usual form, restraining the removal and sale of the machinery and materials. Mr. Stokes said his client would be quite ready to assent to the sale, if the debt were made good, or otherwise secured. TRURO COUNTY COURT - At the monthly sitting on Friday last, there were eight cases, adjourned from the January sitting, and forty-four new cases. In BIRREL v. JOHN and THOMAS MACFADYEAN, Mr. STOKES, agreeably to his notice, at the last sitting, for a new trial and to set aside Mr. W. CLYMA's award in favour of plaintiff for GBP32. 10s. 0d.; but his Honor, after hearing affidavits and arguments on both sides (Mr. CHILCOTT appearing for the plaintiff) affirmed the award. In COCK v. SEYMOUR, a builder's valuation of the walls in dispute was presented; and his Honor made an order in favour of plaintiff for GBP5. DOG-CART ACCIDENT - Mr. PAULL appeared for the plaintiff, Captain DANIEL TOM, of Rosedale, near Truro; and Mr. STOKES for defendant, Mr. THOMAS SIMMONS, basket-maker, &c., Truro. The plaintiff's case had been partly heard at the last Court, and adjourned to the present sitting. Several witnesses were examined on both sides. It appeared that on the 27th of October last, defendant was rebuilding a house in Pydar-street, Truro, and had some of the materials deposited in the street, in front of the premises. In the evening, plaintiff and his brother, Mr. P. S. TOM, drove down the street in a dog-cart, which at the bottom of the street was upset and damaged. On the part of plaintiff it was asserted that the dog-cart was upset by coming in contact with the heap of materials which encroached on the carriage-way, and was placed there without any light or beacon to warn persons of its situation. Plaintiff therefore claimed, on the ground of negligence and carelessness on the part of defendant, the sum of GBP3. 3s. 7d., as the amount of damages sustained. On the part of defendant (who, with his wife and other witnesses were examined), it was asserted that plaintiff was driving down on the wrong side of the road, and that if he had kept the proper side there was ample room for two gigs to pass outside the rubbish; but that in fact the dog-cart did not come in contact with the rubbish, but was upset after passing it through the horse being frightened by the music at Wombwell's Menagerie, which was then exhibiting in the Cross, and by the blaze of lights connected therewith. With the view also of showing that the vehicle could not have been upset by the rubbish, the witnesses stated that it consisted merely of old plastering, with no stones in it; that nearest the gutter it was only seven or eight inches deep, and that outside it was not more than three inches deep. Defendant also stated that plaintiff was driving down at a very rapid rate, and that if driving slower he would not have upset even if he had come upon the rubbish; defendant likewise said, in reference to the charge of negligence, that having been spoken to by Mr. GEORGE HALL to remove the rubbish, he had given orders for its removal before the accident occurred, and it was removed the same night. In giving his decision, the Judge said, there were two facts in the case which were undoubted, first, that there was a heap of rubbish in front of the premises extending out to some extent, though the witnesses differ as to what extent; and secondly, that near that heap of rubbish the plaintiff's dog-cart upset. The question was, what was the cause of that upsetting, was it that heap of rubbish or not? Several witnesses on the part of defendant had stated their suppositions and speculations in the matter; but he thought if a fact were proved it was worth more than a great many speculations. He did not see that the plaintiff's evidence had been impugned; and he thought that a person in the dog-cart could tell better how the accident occurred than a person at some distance, who believes or thinks he knows how it occurred. The account plaintiff gave, in which he was confirmed by Mr. JOHN CLYMA, was that he was coming down the street at a tolerable pace, not an excessively rapid pace; that the off-wheel came on the rubbish, which threw the dog-cart off its balance, and then it upset. He thought that likely to have occurred, supposing it came in contact with the rubbish, that it would not upset immediately on the spot, but being thrown off the balance, it would run on a little way and go over on its side. It had been said on the part of defendant, that there was ample space for plaintiff to pass; and he (the Judge) thought if instead of occurring when it was dark, the accident had happened by day, when plaintiff might have seen the rubbish, and there being ample space to pass he might with proper care and caution have avoided it under those circumstances, to say there was ample space to pass might have been an answer to the action; but it was not an answer if the pile of rubbish was left there by night improperly and without warning of its position. What took place after the accident tended to show that defendant thought the rubbish was the cause of the accident, and that it might be the cause of another accident; for after this had occurred a lantern was tied to the scaffolding, which showed an opinion on the part of defendant that the public should have warning of the rubbish being there. On the part of plaintiff it was stated that defendant the day after said he was sorry the accident had occurred by means of the heap; that, however, defendant denied. Of course where house-building is going on there must be some rubbish near, but where he thought defendant was to blame was, that he did not that before which he did afterwards, namely put up a warning or beacon that people might know there was something to be avoided; and he could not but think on the whole that the accident had happened as stated by plaintiff, and that defendant must therefore be held liable for the damages claimed, GBP3. 3s. 7d. LOSS OF THE "AMAZON" - The inquiry at the Board of Trade into the circumstances connected with the loss of the "Amazon," was resumed on Tuesday. Captain CHAPPELL, secretary and joint manager of the company, bore testimony to the efficiency of the investigation made into the conditions of the crews and vessels of the company before they went to sea, and more especially of his own knowledge and from his own inspection in the case of the "Amazon." He thought hers was the best crew he ever saw got to sea in his experience of twenty-five years, and, indeed, did not know that he had ever seen a ship go to sea so perfect. The "Amazon's" supply of pumps was unusually large, and as to her boats, the arrangements in this respect doubled the requirements of the Board of Trade. In reference to the discipline of the crew, Captain Chappell denied that there was here any deficiency, saying that more than half had been long in the company's service that all had been on board seven days before starting, and that he did not know that it would be possible to give them a longer time than that. It had been proved that there was no undue anxiety on the part of the officers to be saved. Had they felt such, it would assuredly have been as easy for them as for ladies and infants to get off. Yet none were saved. Then, again, the men were on deck, the passengers below, and therefore, if there were more of the men survivors than of the passengers, it was not to be considered extraordinary, since evidently the men had the advantage. He had said that there were no officers saved - midshipmen he did not call officers. But, as regarded Mr. VINCENT, he must be permitted to say that it was abundantly proved in evidence that he did not quit the ship till the captain said "It is all over; take to the boats." He mentioned this in justification of a young man whom he thought unjustly run against now, but of whom he found it proved that he did not go till he had orders to go. Captain Chappell concluded by handing in to the board a list of twelve causes assigned in different quarters for the fire, and remarking that he himself could not say which, or whether any, of them was the true one. Other evidence was also given, but it was chiefly a repetition of that which had been received at the company's investigation, and Captain BEECHEY then announced that the inquiry was now closed, with the exception of some opinions to be taken on spontaneous combustion which had been offered, but which were not read. When their report was made, it would be sent to the Board of Trade. THE LATE REV. J. D. ADAMS - In our obituary of the 30th ult., we announced the decease of the Rev. JOHN DUNKYNE ADAMS, curate of Towednack, in this county. The funeral of that gentleman took place on Monday week, at St. Ives, and was attended by a numerous train of friends, comprising many of his late parishioners, the clergy of the neighbourhood, most of the gentlemen of the town, and several others from a distance. The burial service was performed by the Rev. URIAH TONKIN, vicar of Lelant, St. Ives, and Towednack, assisted by the Rev. D. E. DOMVILLE, incumbent of St. Ives. BRIG LAUNCHED - The brig "Lion" (late "San Giorgio,") after having been repaired and refitted was floated off from her ways on Friday, at half-past five o'clock, and was safely conducted along side of the old Pier. This fine vessel is the property of Messrs. H. WEYMOUTH, G. DAVIES, and others of Scilly; she will be commanded by Capt. E. ODGER, late of the "British Queen," and is intended for the Mauritius and Black Sea trades. BOAT WASHED ASHORE - In the West Briton of a fortnight since, it was stated that the stern of a boat marked "Grace" of St. Ives, THOMAS ROWE, master, had been picked up near Newquay. In order to allay the fears of Capt. Rowe's friends, we may state that this was part of an old boat which had been washed off St. Ives beach, during the previous high spring tides. ST AUSTELL PETTY SESSIONS - In our report last week, instead of W. SLOGGETT having been bound over to keep the peace towards GEORGE DINGLE, it should have been that Dingle was bound in GBP20 to keep the peace for twelve months towards William Sloggett. CORNWALL COUNTY COURTS - St. Austell - In the case of VERCOE v. VERCOE, of St. Dennis, it appeared that plaintiff ELIZABETH VERCOE, widow of the late Mr. WILLIAM VERCOE, son of the defendant, claimed three horses which were used by her husband at the time of his death, whereas the defendant claimed them as his, and said he only lent them to his son to form a team, for the purpose of carrying clay, &c., and that he was to give up either of them if his father should want it. Evidence was given at considerable length, and the case occupied the court nearly five hours, judgment being deferred until the next court. Mr. BISHOP of Fowey, appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. SHILSON defended the case. MARY BENNETTS, grocer, of St. Austell, obtained her final order as an insolvent. GRACE BENNETTS was again opposed by Messrs. HITCHENS and WARNE, but obtained the protection of the court for one month longer, for the purpose of the creditors further investigating her accounts. Helston - WILLIAM TRELOAR and JOHN PERRY, plaintiffs; and WILLIAM RASHLEIGH, PETER WATTERS, and JOHN WALTERS, defendants. Mr. HILL, solicitor for the plaintiffs; Mr. MOORMAN for the defendant. This case excited considerable interest in a full court. It was an action of pound breach brought to recover the sum of GBP50, as treble damages against the defendants, for having taken and carried away certain corn after it had been cut and gathered into arish mows, the same being impounded on the premises as a distress for rent. In the absence of Mr. Hill, Messrs ROGERS and PLOMER appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. It appeared from the evidence that the plaintiffs were owners of a tenement situate at Gweek, in the parish of Wendron, and that they let it to Mr. Peter Watters in 1838 at GBP28 per year. For the first two years Watters paid his rent in full, after that he paid various sums on account, and at Michaelmas 1850, there was due to the plaintiffs GBP90. 13s. 2d. In August, 1851, the plaintiffs directed their solicitor to have a distress levied on the tenement for the amount. After the distress was taken the tenant Watters, offered a bill of exchange for GBP70 in discharge of the rent which plaintiffs refused, and plaintiffs then offered to take a bill for GBP80, and to give up all the rent which would be due at Michaelmas, 1851, if Watters would get some person to join in the bill and give up possession of the estate; this Mr. Watters refused to do. On the 13th of August, 1851, certain live and dead stock, and also some growing corn, were taken in distress for the sum of GBP90. 13s. 2d., and at the expiration of five clear days the live and dead stock were sold by auction. The defendants attended the sale and tendered GBP10. 13s. 2d. as the amount due, which the plaintiffs refused to take. The plaintiffs continued in possession, and cut and saved the corn in arish mows. A few days after the corn was all saved it was taken and carried away. A number of men with wagons came to the tenement in the afternoon of the 10th of September last, and carried away all the corn to Mr. Rashleigh's mowhay. The lawful taking of the distress was proved, and also the cutting and laying up the corn on the premises. The evidence relied on to fix the defendants under the statutes was that the defendants were aware that the corn was taken in distress for rent, and that Messrs. Peter and John Watters were seen in the fields assisting with the wagons, and that Mr. Rashleigh had borrowed some of the wagons for the purpose of taking the corn to his mowhay. Mr. MOORMAN cross-examined the witnesses at some length, and endeavoured to shew that the distress was wrongful and not properly impounded; but, at the close of the plaintiffs' case, Mr. Moorman consented to a verdict for GBP25 and costs, and to give up possession of the tenant at once which the plaintiffs required. The plaintiffs consented to the terms, and the Judge accordingly directed the jury to find a verdict for the plaintiffs for GBP25 and costs. CORONER'S INQUEST - On Monday last, an inquest was held at Redruth, by Mr. JOHN CARLYON, county coroner, on the body of STEPHEN NICHOLLS, innkeeper, aged 54 years, who on Sunday morning was found suspended by a cord to a beam in a workshop behind his house. There was no doubt but he had himself committed the rash act; but from the evidence given at the inquest, it appeared that he had been in a low desponding state for some time. This had been remarked by several of his friends, one of whom attempted in vain to cheer him up. Last Saturday afternoon, between five and six o'clock he went to the brewery and purchased and paid for a kilderkin of ale; and from that time no person appeared to have seen him alive. On the following morning his step son, on going out into a meadow passing the workshop looked in and saw the deceased hanging. He gave an alarm, and a neighbour shortly arrived and cut the poor man down; but he had evidently been hanging for some hours, and it was supposed he went to the workshop immediately on his return from the brewery. The jury found a verdict of "temporary insanity."