Thanks, people! That makes things a lot clearer regarding the litigants. It did occur to me, too late, to search the Times archive for the ship, but seeing as how I'm a mean old Yorkshireman, that will now have to wait until the next National Library Week (LOL). Thanks again everyone, Jim ___________________________________________________________ Tiscali Broadband from 14.99 with free setup! http://www.tiscali.co.uk/products/broadband/

jbwillerton@tiscali.co.uk wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006: >Thanks, people! That makes things a lot clearer regarding the litigants. > It did occur to me, too late, to search the Times archive for the ship, >but seeing as how I'm a mean old Yorkshireman, that will now have to wait >until the next National Library Week (LOL). I've forwarded Jim details of a report in the Times on 19 December 1852 about the first day of the case, heard before the Queen's Bench. Plaintiff was master of a vessel whose crew, bar the mate, all absconded in California in hope of joining "the diggings". He eventually got back, after some diversion and two new crews, 22 months later, after having spent a large amount of his own money to keep the crews happy. The case was his attempt to recover these claimed costs. Exasperatingly, there seems to be no report of any conclusion of the case. -- Iain Archer