328 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1818. 



sengers or the proprietors ought 

 to pay for the passage over these 

 two ferries, as whether upon the 

 present occasion the defendants* 

 coachman, who was also a pro- 

 prietor, was not in collusion with 

 the ferrymen and postmaster at 

 Conway, to make the passengers 

 pay an illegal demand; the fare 

 for the ordinaryFfoot-passengers, 

 being 1 f/., and for a horse and 

 rider 2d., while 6d. was demand- 

 ed of the outside coach passen- 

 gers, and \s. of the inside pas- 

 sengers. 



Hawkesworth, the defendants' 

 agent, proved, that the plaintiff 

 had taken his place from Liver- 

 pool to Holyhead, under the name 

 of James, in the beginning of 

 September last. The proprietors, 

 he stated, paid the passage over 

 the Mersey, but not the other 

 ferries. 



Selwyn, the plaintiffs clerk, 

 proved, that he went to serve the 

 defendants with the writ in this 

 action, and travelled by the same 

 mail. In the course of the journey, 

 he had learned from the mouth 

 of the coachman (the defendant 

 Atkinson) the particulars of the 

 transaction, which he (Atkinson) 

 related as follows : — A tall thin 

 gentleman came by the coach to 

 Conway, and having made great 

 objections to pay the fare of the 

 ferry, which he said positively he 

 would not do, one of the boatmen 

 obstructed him when he was 

 endeavouring to mount the coach, 

 whereupon Atkinson said to him, 

 " You have said a great deal 

 about the ferry ; to save your 

 word, I'll pay for you ;" to which 

 Mr. Salmon answered, " If you 

 do, I w'ont pay you again," when 

 Atkinson replied, " Oh! then 



I'm off;" and accordingly drove 

 off, but pulled up 7 or 8 yards 

 further off, on Mr. Salmon's 

 hailing him, and turned round to 

 the guard asking what he should 

 do, the guard said, •' drive on ;" 

 the guard being his master, he 

 did drive on. When the witness 

 returned by the same coach, 

 Atkinson further stated, " that it 

 was always usual for the passen- 

 gers to pay the ferry ; if they 

 did not, he drove off without 

 them, unless they had baggage, 

 which might be stopped by the 

 ferrymen ; upon one occasion 

 four passengers refused to pay at 

 once, and he drove off without 

 them : he should have driven off 

 without witness, if witness had 

 refused to pay." 



The defendants endeavoured to 

 show that the passengers always 

 paid the ferry, and that the coach- 

 man had not prevented the plain- 

 tiff from getting up to pursue his 

 journey. They first called ' 



Jones, who had been the ferry- 

 man for seven years ; he stated 

 that the passengers always paid 

 the ferry, lie never received it 

 from the coachman. The coach 

 stopped half an hour at breakfast, 

 and he usually demanded his fare 

 when breakfast was over, just 

 before the passengers mounted. 

 The plaintiff' refused to pay on 

 the occasion in question, upon 

 which witness extended his arm 

 to prevent him from mounting on 

 the coach, but there was nothing 

 else to prevent him. The coach- 

 man said he would pay to 

 save the plaintiffs word, he 

 having sworn he would not pay. 

 Plaintiff said, " If you do, I 

 won't pay again." The coach- 

 man said, " What are we to do 



now ?" 



I 



