From the Southeastern Gazette, 17 April 1866.

County Court.

The monthly sitting of this court was held on Tuesday last, at the Town-hall, before C. Harwood, Esq. About 50 plaints were issued, out of which there were but nine for hearing.

Tomson and Wotton v. Carling.

This was a claim to recover £41 16s., for beer supplied to the “Railway Tavern,” at Broadstairs. Mr. Towne appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Minter (of Folkestone) for the defendant. The plaintiffs are brewers in Ramsgate, and the defendant is a pork butcher, and owner of the above-named house. It appeared that a tenant of his, named Terry, dealt with the firm for ale and beer, of which in February and March, 1865, he had a large quantity. About May, Terry became a bankrupt, having previously given a bill of sale for £299 to Curling. These facts having come to the knowledge of the firm, one of the partners, Mr. Wotton, arranged for a meeting at the house, to see what terms could be come to, the stock all remaining in the house. The bill of sale was produced, and it was found that Curling had a right by that document to the possession of the ale. Upon that it was intimated that unless the value of it, £64, was guaranteed to plaintiffs, they would oppose the bill of sale. Mr. Wotton and his clerk, Mr. Foster, both swore that Curling undertook to pay the £64 during the summer. £5 was paid on the 22nd August, and beer to the value of £17 10s. had been returned to plaintiffs, but it appeared that defendant’s manager, Dixon, was not successful, and the money had not been paid; hence these proceedings. Mr. Minter, for the defence, contended that there was no case to answer, inasmuch as the consideration for the arrangement was the compromising of an opposition in bankruptcy. The plaintiffs therefore could not recover, and, putting that out of the question, it would simply been undertaking on defendant’s part to pay the debt of a third party. That being the case, no action could be, as the application was not in writing. The third point was that Curling was to pay for the beer provided he sold it, which was not the ease. The defendant was called, and swore that Mr. Wotton promised him, if he guaranteed the payment of the £64, that he would not oppose Terry (who was his brother-in-law) in the Bankruptcy Court, and that Mr. Gwyn, the wine merchant, also would not oppose. The promise to pay was conditional on his (Curling’s) receiving the money for ale, and having received £5, he handed it to the plaintiffs. There was nothing in writing, and finding that the business did not answer, he desired the plaintiffs to fetch the ale away. James Maxted and John Hodgson gave corroborative evidence, and Mr. Towne having replied, his Honour said the case was full of difficulties, and in order to give it full consideration he should defer giving judgment until next court day.