Selecting Goods for a Landlady and its Consequences: Pinsent v Cocks: Mr. Collier and Mr. Karslake were counsel for plaintiffs; attorneys Messrs. Little and Billing, and Mr. M. Smith and Mr. Coleridge were counsel for the defendant; attorneys Messrs. Beer and Rundle: Mr. Collier stated the case: The plaintiffs were the Messrs. Pinsent, extensive drapers, etc. of Devonport, who brought this action against Capt. Cocks, a retired captain of the marines, living at Plymouth, a gentleman of fortune, to recover £111 4s for articles of furniture supplied. The circumstances of the case were plain and simple. Captain Cocks was an old customer of the plaintiffs, and on the 1st of September 1856, he called upon them and said something of the following effect: “I want to speak to you about some furniture”. The communication was a little mysterious, for he said, “A person will call tomorrow, who will select some goods; it is all right; she is furnishing for me”. He did not mention the sex of the person at first, but afterwards he did say “A lady will call”. Of course, the plaintiffs did not wish to enquire who the lady was; they had known Captain Cocks for many years, and they said, “Very well, Sire, the goods shall be supplied”. Captain Cocks went further, for he looked at some floor cloths and said “Yes, that pattern will do for me, and the lady will call tomorrow or the next day, she will select the articles, because she is furnishing for me”. On the following day, the lady called, selected some articles, and ordered them to be sent to No. 7 Osborne Place, Plymouth. They were accordingly sent to the place where the lady resided and where Captain Cocks also resided; and the gallant gentleman daily walked over the carpets and floor cloths which he now refused to pay for. The bill was sent to Captain Cocks at Christmas, and in January he called upon Messrs. Pinsent and said, “This not for me, but for Miss Hibbert”. They said “Really, we do not know Miss Hibbert”. “Oh!” Said Captain Cocks, “Send the bill to me with her name; it will be alright, you shall be paid”. The Messrs. Pinsent wishing to oblige Captain Cocks altered the heading and sent in the bill to Miss Hibbert. She, however, had not, nor never would pay it. He (the learned counsel) understood that the defence set up by Capt. Cocks was that he would not pay because they had trusted Miss Hibbert; but he could only say that if the gallant Captain succeeded, he would be entitled to a good deal of credit for having found “A new way to pay old debts” (laughter). A person would have nothing to do but to go to a tradesman, order goods, have his name struck out, and Mr. or Mrs. Brown’s name substituted, and then there would be an end of the debt! Such a mode as this would be very convenient for half pay captains to double their incomes; because they would get what they paid for and what they didn’t (laughter), it was a short double shuffle between the captain and the lady – neither of whom would pay. Mr. M. Smith for the defence, said the goods were supplied to Miss Hibbert, who had taken a lodging house, that Captain Cocks lodged with the lady, and that he merely selected a floor cloth for his own use. In reference to Mr. Collier’s observations about doubling the income of half pay Captains, the learned counsel said his friend ought, he thought, to have spoken with more respect of a class of men who formed a considerable part of his constituency (laughter) but whether they voted for him or not was another matter. He contended that if the plaintiffs believed that defendant was liable, they would never have altered the bill. Captain Cocks, the defendant stated that he was a half pay captain of marines. In September 1856, he was lodging with Mrs. Collins at Osborne Place. Hiss Hibbert and her mother, Mrs. Westaway took a house in the same place, and the witness arranged with Miss Hibbert to lodge with her and her mother, as he had lodged with them several times before. Witness had been a customer of the Messrs. Pinsent for some time. Miss Hibbert requested the witness to call upon the plaintiffs and see some floor cloths for the hall. He did so and selected one, which he said was for Miss Hibbert. He never gave orders for any of the other articles or said that he was furnishing, or that the goods were for him. Witness’s daughter lived with him. Mr. Joseph Nicholson, Manager of the Messrs. Pinsent’s business at Devonport stated that Capt. Cocks had been a customer of his employers for many years. In September 1856, Capt. Cocks called and said to witness “I want to speak to you about a person who is coming to select some goods, they are for me; she is furnishing for me”. Witness said that was quite sufficient, and called a young man to attend to him, who showed him some articles. A female subsequently came to the shop. Cross examined: He believed the house occupied by Miss Hibbert was a lodging house. Thomas Pinsent Horton, a buyer, in the employ of the Messrs. Pinsent stated that he was in company with the last witness when he talked with Captain Cocks. Mr. Mitchell, a shopman in the employ of Messrs. Pinsent, said he was in the shop on the day in question. He was called by Mr. Nicholson to attend to Captain Cocks who said he wished to see some floor cloth. Witness said, “We do not keep them in the store”, but showed him the pattern book. He looked through it and fixed upon one. The captain then said “A lady will be here to see some carpets, tell her that is the canvas I have fixed on. Be sure and remember the one” Witness said he should, as they were numbered; after the witness saw a lady about some carpets. He had never seen her before. She selected some Brussels carpets. Mr. Pearse, also a shopman in the plaintiff’s employ, remembered two ladies coming to the shop after Captain Cocks had seen Mr. Nicholson. One of them said she wanted to look at some counterpanes and blankets and she selected a lot of goods – carpeting, mattresses, damask, trimmings for bed furniture etc. Witness asked where she was to send them and she said 7 Osborn Place, on the next morning for Capt. Cock’s inspection. Witness went with the goods on the following morning and asked for Capt. Cocks. The servant said he was not in and told him to take them into the drawing room. A lady, whom he had seen the day before, selected the articles, consisting of counterpanes, damask, carpeting for bedrooms and trimming for bed furniture. Witness did not know her name, nor did she tell him. A fortnight ago witness saw a paper with “Lodgings” on it in the window of the house. Mr. R.S. Pinsent, one of the plaintiffs, stated that in January 1857, Captain Cocks called upon him and said, “You have charged me with the furnishing goods, and you ought not to have done so; you should have charged then to Miss Hibbert”. Witness replied that he knew nothing about Miss Hibbert; that they had trusted Capt. Cocks with the goods and should look to him for payment. Witness also added that the goods were supplied, believing them to be for him, and they should not have gone out excepting on his (Capt. Cocks’) responsibility. The captain then said “You must apply to Miss Hibbert for payment; she will pay you. It will be alright”. Cross examined: Witness thought he said the things were for Miss Hibbert; he could not recollect exactly but to the best of his recollection he did say so. He would swear that he did not say they were for him; he said, “You must send the goods to Mrs.Westaway” or “they are not for myself, you must send them to No 9 Lockyer Street”. Witness said he was going to lodge with Miss Hibbert. Miss Caroline Hibbert stated that she ordered the goods at Messrs. Pinsent’s and said they were for her; but she could not pay ready money for them and should require credit. She requested Captain Cocks to select a floorcloth, as she thought he had better taste in the selection of such articles than she had. She had not been in the position to pay for them as yet. A bill of sale had been given to Captain Cocks by the witness, which was done in consequence of a creditor pressing for money. Captain Cocks had lent her £100 to purchase articles of furniture. Mr. Smith summed up and Mr. Collier replied: His Lordship said the question for the jury to determine was purely one of credit in respect of the evidence of the witnesses on either side. The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0741 Devonport: Richard Steele Pinsent: 1820 – 1864