McDougal v. Hughes. - This was an action brought to recover the sum of £80 as damages sustained upon an alleged breach of contract.  The circumstances were simply as follows.

In the month of October 1835, plaintiff through his agent purchased from the defendant six tons of flour, at the same time stipulating it was to be of good quality.  The agent did not personally inspect the quality, but left it entirely to put up such as was considered best.   The flour was packed in bags, put on board the ``Currency Lass" and sent down to Hobart Town; when there, it was discovered to be damaged, and in consequence plaintiff was compelled to dispose of it at a serious loss, which loss he now sought to recover back from defendant.  Upon the trial which came on upon the 25th March last, his Honor Judge Burton in putting the case to the assessors directed them to find for the defendant, as plaintiff who had sufficient opportnnity to inspect the flour before it was put on board had neglected to do so - defendants therefore were not responsible for the flour wen at Van Dieman's Land, and they found accordingly.

Mr. Foster now on the part of the plaintiff moved to have the verdict set aside upon the ground that defendant's verbal undertaking to put up the best flour was tantamount to a warrant.  Having argued at considerable lengthy [sic].