Explore the full ebook collection and download it now at textbookfull.

com

Law of tort Cooke John

https://textbookfull.com/product/law-of-tort-cooke-john/

OR CLICK HERE

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Browse and Get More Ebook Downloads Instantly at https://textbookfull.com

Click here to visit textbookfull.com and download textbook now
 Your digital treasures (PDF, ePub, MOBI) await
Download instantly and pick your perfect format...

Read anywhere, anytime, on any device!

Law of Tort 13th Edition John Cooke

https://textbookfull.com/product/law-of-tort-13th-edition-john-cooke/

textbookfull.com

Question and Answer Tort Law Neal Geach

https://textbookfull.com/product/question-and-answer-tort-law-neal-
geach/

textbookfull.com

Tort Law Principles 2nd Edition Bernadette Richards

https://textbookfull.com/product/tort-law-principles-2nd-edition-
bernadette-richards/

textbookfull.com

The Blame Game 1st Edition C.J. Cooke [C. J. Cooke]

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-blame-game-1st-edition-c-j-cooke-
c-j-cooke/

textbookfull.com
Tort 6th Edition Paula Giliker

https://textbookfull.com/product/tort-6th-edition-paula-giliker/

textbookfull.com

Construction Law 12th Edition John Uff

https://textbookfull.com/product/construction-law-12th-edition-john-
uff/

textbookfull.com

Employment Law A Quickstudy Laminated Law Reference 2nd

Edition John Sanchez

https://textbookfull.com/product/employment-law-a-quickstudy-
laminated-law-reference-2nd-edition-john-sanchez/

textbookfull.com

Acing Criminal Law 3rd Edition John Burkoff

https://textbookfull.com/product/acing-criminal-law-3rd-edition-john-
burkoff/

textbookfull.com

The Palgrave Handbook Of Psychological Perspectives On

Alcohol Consumption Richard Cooke

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-
psychological-perspectives-on-alcohol-consumption-richard-cooke/

textbookfull.com
 foundations series
‘This textbook has a winning formula. It is largely devoid of legalese and unnecessary jargon foundations series
but nevertheless avoids the pitfall of seeming to patronise its readers.’
Mariette Jones, Senior Lecturer in Law, Middlesex University

‘Cooke’s style is a digestible delivery pitching somewhere between the real intellectual voice
and the accessible lecturer’s voice. In this respect, it is the best text in this part of the market.’ Twelfth Edition
Alison Turnbull, Senior Teaching Fellow, Birmingham City University

‘The author should be commended on doing a very good job – he has made
Tort law clear and easy to access without over-simplifying a complex area.’ Twelfth LAW OF
TORT
Kate Harrington, Lecturer in Law, University of Exeter Edition

LAW OF TORT
LAW OF TORT John Cooke
John Cooke
Twelfth Edition
Law of Tort, part of the Foundations Series, offers a comprehensive, clear and straightforward
account of the law ideal for LLB and GDL students.
This twelfth edition has been fully updated with all recent developments in tort law, including:
• A new chapter on the liability of the public authorities
• An explanation of the impact of the Defamation Act 2013
• An examination of significant recent cases, such as Lawrence and another v Fen Tigers Ltd
[2014] and Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2012].

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

John Cooke was formerly Professor of Common Law at Liverpool John Moores University.
He has had thirty years of teaching experience and has lectured and researched in Obligations
(contract/tort/restitution), Media Law and Medical Law. He has written widely in the field.

Cooke
foundations series

www.pearson-books.com

Cover © Fuse /Getty Images

CVR_COOK2822_12_SE_CVR.indd 1 03/02/2015 16:13

 Law of Tort

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd i 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 foundations series
Written with learning in mind, these texts allow students to gain a solid
understanding of the law. Each book presents the subject clearly and
accessibly for effective and satisfying study.

All our texts within the Foundations Series can be supported by

MyLawChamber which provides online study support through the interactive
Pearson eText, Case Navigator, Virtual Lawyer, practice questions, online
glossary and legal updates, all located at www.mylawchamber.co.uk.

Available from all good

bookshops or order online at:
www.pearsoned.co.uk/law

ii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd ii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 Twelfth Edition

Law of Tort

JOHN COOKE
Emeritus Professor of Common Law
Liverpool John Moores University

iii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd iii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 PEARSON EDUCATION LIMITED
Edinburgh Gate
Harlow CM20 2JE
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1279 623623
Web: www.pearson.com/uk

First published 1992 (print)

Second edition published 1995 (print)
Third edition published 1997 (print)
Fourth edition published 1999 (print)
Fifth edition published 2001 (print)
Sixth edition published 2003 (print)
Seventh edition published 2005 (print)
Eighth edition published 2007 (print)
Ninth edition published 2009 (print)
Tenth edition published 2011 (print)
Eleventh edition published 2013 (print and electronic)
Twelfth edition published 2015 (print and electronic)

© Pearson Professional Limited 1992, 1997 (print)

© Pearson Education Limited 1999, 2011 (print)
© Pearson Education Limited 2013, 2015 (print and electronic)

The right of John Cooke to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with
the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

The print publication is protected by copyright. Prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval
system, distribution or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or
otherwise, permission should be obtained from the publisher or, where applicable, a licence permitting
restricted copying in the United Kingdom should be obtained from the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd,
Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.

The ePublication is protected by copyright and must not be copied, reproduced, transferred, distributed,
leased, licensed or publicly performed or used in any way except as specifically permitted in writing by the
publishers, as allowed under the terms and conditions under which it was purchased, or as strictly permitted
by applicable copyright law. Any unauthorised distribution or use of this text may be a direct infringement of
the author’s and the publishers’ rights and those responsible may be liable in law accordingly.

All trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. The use of any trademark in this text
does not vest in the author or publisher any trademark ownership rights in such trademarks, nor does the
use of such trademarks imply any affiliation with or endorsement of this book by such owners.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence (OGL) v3.0.
www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence. Contains Parliamentary information
licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Pearson Education is not responsible for the content of third-party internet sites.
ISBN: 978–1–292–06282–2 (print)
978–1–292–06287–7 (PDF)
978–1–292–06283–9 (eText)

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for the print edition is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for the print edition is available from the Library of Congress

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
19 18 17 16 15

Cover: © Fuse / Getty Images

Print edition typeset in 9/12pt Stone Serif ITC Std by 35

Printed in Malaysia

NOTE THAT ANY PAGE CROSS-REFERENCES REFER TO THE PRINT EDITION

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd iv 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 Brief contents

Preface xv
Table of cases xvii
Table of statutes and other statutory material xxxiii
Acknowledgements xxxvii

Part 1 General principles of tort law 1

1 General principles 3

Part 2 The tort of negligence 31

2 General principles of negligence 33
3 Duty of care 43
4 Psychiatric damage 65
5 Economic loss 83
6 Liability for omissions and third parties 116
7 Liability of public authorities 124
8 Breach of duty and proof of negligence 148
9 Causation and remoteness of damage 166
10 Defences to negligence 206

Part 3 Specific areas of negligence and breach of statutory duty 231

11 Defective premises 233
12 Defective products 262
13 Breach of statutory duty 280
14 Employer’s liability 293
15 Medical negligence and related issues 304

Part 4 Torts based on land 329

16 Trespass to land 331
17 Nuisance 342
18 Rylands v Fletcher and liability for fire 377

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd v 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 BRIEF CONTENTS

Part 5 Miscellaneous torts 393

19 Liability for animals 395
20 Trespass to the person 407
21 Defamation 427
22 Privacy 478
23 Deceit, malicious falsehood and passing off 506

Part 6 Parties, defences and remedies 515

24 Vicarious liability 517
25 Joint and several liability 530
26 Limitation 535
27 General defences 543
28 Remedies 547

Glossary of terms 570

Index 572

vi

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd vi 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 Contents

Preface xv
Table of cases xvii
Table of statutes and other statutory material xxxiii
Acknowledgements xxxvii

Part 1 General principles of tort law

1 General principles 3
Introduction 3
What is a tort? 3
Elements of a tort 4
The interests protected 5
Fault and strict liability 9
Objectives of tort 12
Alternative systems of compensation 14
A compensation culture? 15
The boundaries of tort 17
Tort and crime 20
The position of minors 20
The Human Rights Act 1998 21
Human rights and tort law 25
Access to justice 25
Summary 26
Further reading 28

Part 2 The tort of negligence

2 General principles of negligence 33
Elements of the tort 33
History of negligence 34
The interests protected 36
Problem areas 37
Liability in contract and tort 39
Summary 42
Further reading 42

vii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd vii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

3 Duty of care 43
Introduction 43
Historical development 44
Other tests 58
Conclusion 61
Summary 63
Further reading 64

4 Psychiatric damage 65
Introduction 65
Problems raised 66
The medical background and public scepticism 66
Historical development 68
Types of claim 69
Primary and secondary victims 69
Primary victims 70
Secondary victims 75
Conclusion 80
Summary 81
Further reading 82

5 Economic loss 83
Introduction 83
Arguments against the recovery of pure economic loss in negligence 84
Historical development 86
Development of the Hedley Byrne principle 88
Development of liability for economic loss outside the Hedley Byrne principle 98
The extended Hedley Byrne principle 104
Conclusions 108
A new matrix for economic loss? 110
Summary 114
Further reading 115

6 Liability for omissions and third parties 116

Introduction 116
Liability for omissions 116
Liability for the acts of third parties 121
Summary 123
Further reading 123

7 Liability of public authorities 124

Introduction 124
The framework for actions 126

viii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd viii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

Human rights 131

The ‘education’ cases 139
Summary 146
Further reading 147

8 Breach of duty and proof of negligence 148

Introduction 148
The reasonable man test 149
Factors determining negligence 152
Proof of negligence 160
Summary 164
Further reading 165

9 Causation and remoteness of damage 166

Introduction 166
Factual causation 167
Remoteness of damage 188
Novus actus interveniens 196
Conclusion 200
Summary 204
Further reading 205

10 Defences to negligence 206

Introduction 206
Volenti non fit injuria 207
Contributory negligence 212
Ex turpi causa 221
The rescue cases 227
Summary 228
Further reading 229

Part 3 Specific areas of negligence and breach of

statutory duty

11 Defective premises 233

Introduction 233
Occupiers’ liability 233
Landlord’s liability 252
Builder’s liability 254
Question 259
Summary 260
Further reading 261

ix

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd ix 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

12 Defective products 262

Introduction 262
Liability in contract 263
The negligence action 263
The narrow rule in Donoghue v Stevenson 264
Consumer Protection Act 1987 269
Compensation culture 277
Question 277
Summary 278
Further reading 279

13 Breach of statutory duty 280

Introduction 280
Does the statute give rise to an action for damages? 281
Was the duty owed to the claimant? 287
Breach of duty 287
Causation 289
Defences 290
Breach of statutory duty and negligence 290
European legislation 291
Summary 291
Further reading 292

14 Employer’s liability 293

Introduction 293
The employer’s personal duty of care 294
Defences 298
Question 302
Summary 303
Further reading 303

15 Medical negligence and related issues 304

Introduction 304
The battery action 306
The negligence action 315
Summary 326
Further reading 327

Part 4 Torts based on land

16 Trespass to land 331

Introduction 331
Forms of trespass to land 332
Title of the claimant 335

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd x 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

Defences 336
Remedies 338
Summary 341
Further reading 341

17 Nuisance 342
Introduction 342
Statutory nuisances 344
Public nuisance 344
Private nuisance 347
Question 354
Nuisance and fault 362
Remedies 363
Defences 366
Question 367
Nuisance and human rights 369
Question 373
Summary 374
Further reading 375

18 Rylands v Fletcher and liability for fire 377

Introduction 377
The claimant’s case 379
Defences 385
The future of Rylands v Fletcher 388
Liability for fire 390
Summary 391
Further reading 392

Part 5 Miscellaneous torts

19 Liability for animals 395
Introduction 395
Dangerous and non-dangerous animals 396
Trespassing livestock 403
Special liability for dogs 405
Remoteness of damage 405
Summary 406
Further reading 406

20 Trespass to the person 407

Introduction 407
Battery 410
Assault 411

xi

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xi 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

Defences to assault and battery 412

False imprisonment 414
Intentional infliction of emotional or physical harm 419
Question 424
Summary 425
Further reading 426

21 Defamation 427
Introduction 427
Reform 428
Features of defamation 428
Damages 430
Libel and slander 432
The claimant’s case 433
Defamatory meaning 433
Reference to the claimant 438
Publication 440
Libel and internet publication 443
Defences 444
Truth ( justification) 445
Honest opinion 447
Absolute privilege 454
Qualified privilege 456
Remedies 470
Parties 471
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 471
Defamation and the Human Rights Act 1998 472
Question 474
Summary 475
Further reading 476

22 Privacy 478
Introduction 478
What is privacy? 479
The general principle 481
The position in English law 481
Case law and principles on privacy since the Human Rights Act 1998 487
Limits to protection 500
Remedies 501
Conclusions on privacy 503
Summary 503
Further reading 504

23 Deceit, malicious falsehood and passing off 506

Deceit 506
Malicious falsehood 509

xii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

Passing off 511

Summary 513
Further reading 513

Part 6 Parties, defences and remedies

24 Vicarious liability 517

Introduction 517
Justification for imposing vicarious liability 518
Who is an employee? 519
In the course of employment 522
The employer’s indemnity 526
Employers and independent contractors 526
Principal and agent 528
Conclusion 528
Summary 528
Further reading 529

25 Joint and several liability 530

Introduction 530
Successive actions 531
Contribution between tortfeasors 532
Summary 533
Further reading 534

26 Limitation 535
Introduction 535
Accrual of causes of action 536
Limitation periods 536
Defective buildings and latent damage 540
Miscellaneous limitation periods 541
Fraud or concealment 541
Summary 541
Further reading 542

27 General defences 543

Introduction 543
Mistake 543
Inevitable accident 545
Necessity 545
Summary 546

xiii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xiii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 CONTENTS

28 Remedies 547
Introduction 547
Damages 547
Effect of death on an award of damages for personal injuries 561
Injunctions 565
Self-help 565
Question 565
Summary 567
Further reading 569

Glossary of terms 570

Index 572

xiv

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xiv 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 Preface

The major area of change since the last edition has been defamation. The Defamation Act
2013 is now in force. Whether it will make a substantial difference to litigation in defama-
tion is still a matter of controversy. Perhaps the major legal innovations have yet to come
in the area of new technology. What was noticeable in the Leveson Report was that it
shone a spotlight on what is a fading and obsolete method of reporting, newspapers. The
more complex area of new technology must wait for another day.
Nuisance has also had a relatively lively period with decisions in Lawrence v Fen Tigers
and Barr v Biffa.
The structural change to the book is the addition of an extra chapter on Liability of
public authorities (Chapter 7). This topic was previously dealt with in the old Chapter 6.
The much litigated area of liability of the police in negligence has moved from Chapter 3
to the new Chapter 7.
Thanks go to the editorial and sales staff at Pearson for their great assistance.
My thanks go to my wife Joan for her support and to my former colleagues and students
at Liverpool John Moores University for everything they have taught me.
I have attempted to state the law as it was at 20 July 2014.

John Cooke
22 July 2014

xv

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xv 1/30/15 10:38 AM

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xvi 1/30/15 10:38 AM
 Table of cases

4 Eng Ltd v Harper [2008] EWHC 915 (Ch) 187, 508, Allason v Haines [1996] EMLR 143 455
513 Allen v Gulf Oil Refining Ltd [1981] 1 All ER 353 368,
371, 375
A (children) (conjoined twins: surgical separation), Allied Maples Group v Simmons & Simmons [1995]
Re [2001] Fam 147 311 All ER 907; [1995] 1 WLR 1602 186
A v B (a company) [2002] 2 All ER 545 491, 498 Allin v City & Hackney Health Authority [1996]
A v Hoare [2006] 1 WLR 2320 (CA); [2008] 2 All ER 7 Med LR 91 79
1 (HL) 420, 538, 539, 542 Allsop v Church of England Newspaper Ltd [1972]
A v Liverpool City Council [1981] 2 All ER 385; [1982] 2 QB 161 436
AC 363 286 Ancell v McDermott [1993] 4 All ER 355 130
A v National Blood Authority [2001] 3 All ER 289 269, Anchor Brewhouse Developments Ltd v Berkley House
271, 274, 276 (Dockland Developments) Ltd (1987) 38 BLR 82
AB v Ministry of Defence [2012] UKSC 9 539 334
AB v South West Water Services Ltd [1993] 1 All ER Anderson v Newham College of Further Education
609 549, 550, 551 [2003] ICR 212 217
AB v Thameside & Glossop Health Authority [1997] Anderson v Oppenheimer (1880) 5 QBD 602 380
8 Med LR 91 79 Andreae v Selfridge & Co Ltd [1938] Ch 1 359
AK (adult patient) (medical treatment: consent), Andrews v Schooling [1991] 3 All ER 723 256
Re [2001] 1 FLR 129 308 Aneco Reinsurance Underwriting Ltd (In Liquidation)
Abouzaid v Mothercare (UK) Ltd [2000] EWCA Civ v Johnson & Higgins [2002] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 157 94
348; [2000] All ER (D) 2436 (Dec) 271, 276 Angel v H Bushel Ltd [1968] 1 QB 813 470
Acton v Graham Pearce [1997] 3 All ER 909 56 Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1978]
Addie v Dumbreck Collieries [1929] AC 358 244 AC 728 45–7, 51, 63, 100, 103, 256, 257
Admiralty Comrs v SS Volute [1922] 2 AC 242 218 Archer v Brown [1984] 2 All ER 267 551, 567
Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] 1 All ER 821 24, Argyll (Duchess) v Duke of Argyll [1967] Ch 302 485
307, 326 Arthur v Anker [1996] 2 WLR 602 339
Ajinomoto Sweeteners Europe SAS v Asda Stores Ltd Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2007]
[2009] EWHC 1717 (QB); [2010] QB 204; [2010] 1 WLR 398 (CA); [2008] UKHL 25; [2008]
2 All ER 311 510 3 All ER 573 (HL) 20, 408, 413, 544, 545
Alcoa Minerals of Jamaica Inc v Broderick [2000] Ashton v Turner [1981] QB 137 225, 226, 566
3 WLR 23 195 Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v
Alcock v Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Wednesbury Corpn [1948] 1 KB 223 128, 130
Police [1991] 4 All ER 907 (HL); affirming [1991] Aswan Engineering Establishment Co v Lupdine Ltd
3 All ER 88 (CA); reversing in part [1992] 1 AC 310 [1987] 1 All ER 135 268
(QBD) 62, 69, 73, 77–9, 81, 82, 300 Atkinson v Newcastle Waterworks Co (1877)
Alexandrou v Oxford [1993] 4 All ER 328 52, 128–30, 2 ExD 441 282
135 Attia v British Gas plc [1987] 3 All ER 455 65, 80
Aliakmon, The. See Leigh & Sillavan Ltd v Aliakmon Attorney General v Cory Brothers & Co Ltd [1921]
Shipping Co Ltd 1 AC 521 380, 389
Alker v Collingwood Housing Association [2007] Attorney General v Guardian Newspapers (No 2)
1 WLR 2230 253 (Spycatcher case) [1990] 1 AC 109 486

xvii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xvii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Attorney General v PYA Quarries Ltd [1957] 2 QB 169 Bisset v Wilkinson [1927] AC 177 507
344, 374 Blake v Barnard (1840) 9 C&P 626 412
Attorney General v Times Newspapers [1973] QB 710 Blake v Galloway [2004] 3 All ER 315 208
268 Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Co (1856) 11 Ex 781
Austin v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2009] 149
UKHL 5; [2009] 2 WLR 372; [2009] 3 All ER 455 Blyth v Bloomsbury Health Authority (1987) 5 PN 167
(HL); affirming [2008] 1 All ER 564; [2007] 322
EWCA Civ 989 (CA); affirming [2005] EWHC 480 Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK Onshore Ltd [2010]
(QB) (QBD) 414, 417 UKSC 35 335
Bogle v McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd [2002] EWHC
B (adult: refusal of medical treatment), Re [2002] 490 277
2 All ER 449 308 Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee
Badger v Ministry of Defence [2006] 3 All ER 173 215 [1957] 2 All ER 118; [1957] 1 WLR 582 85, 154, 155,
Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883 308, 309, 316–19, 321, 322, 326
170, 184, 187, 323, 326 Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997]
Baker v T E Hopkins & Son Ltd [1959] 1 WLR 966 211, 3 WLR 1151 154, 155, 171, 317, 319, 322, 324, 326,
228 327
Baker v Willoughby [1970] AC 467 180, 181, 204 Bollinger (J) v Costa Brava Wine Co Ltd [1960] Ch 262
Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance 512
Co Ltd [1995] 2 All ER 769 93, 193 Bolton v Stone [1951] 1 All ER 1078; [1951] AC 850
Barber v Somerset County Council [2004] 2 All ER 385 156, 158, 159, 248, 346, 359
299–300 Bone v Seale [1975] 1 All ER 787; [1975] 1 WLR 797
Barclays Bank plc v Fairclough Building Ltd [1995] 365
1 All ER 289 214 Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269 471
Barker v Corus UK Ltd [2006] 3 All ER 785 8, 173–5, Bonnick v Morris [2003] 1 AC 300 462
177, 178, 533 Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613
Barkway v South Wales Transport Co Ltd [1950] 170
1 All ER 392 162 Bookbinder v Tebbitt [1989] 1 All ER 1169 447
Barnes v Lucille Ltd (1907) 96 LT 680 399 Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92 49, 62, 63
Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Bowater v Rowley Regis Corp [1944] KB 476 208
Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428 168 Bower v Peate (1876) 1 QBD 321 351
Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 312; Bowlt v Clark [2006] All ER (D) 295 (Jun) 400
[2012] 3 All ER 380 xv, 358 Boyle v Kodak [1969] 1 WLR 661 290
Barrett v Enfield London Borough Council [1999] Boyton v Willment Bros Ltd (1971) (unreported) 302
3 All ER 193; [1999] 3 WLR 79 23, 53, 54, 143 Bradford Corp v Pickles [1895] AC 587 10, 27, 360
Barrett v Ministry of Defence [1995] 3 All ER 86 120, Breeden v Lampard 21 March 1985 (unreported) 399
131, 142, 209 Brice v Brown [1984] 1 All ER 997 80
Basely v Clarkson (1681) 3 Lev 37 322 Bridlington Relay Co v Yorkshire Electricity Board
Batty v Metropolitan Realisations Ltd [1978] QB 554 [1965] Ch 436 359, 360
39 Bristol & West Building Society v Fancy & Jackson
Baturina v Times Newspapers [2011] EWCA Civ 308 [1997] 4 All ER 582 186, 214
437 Bristol & West Building Society v Mothew [1996]
Bayoumi v Protim Services Ltd [1996] EGCS 187 256 4 All ER 698 185, 186
Behrens v Bertram Mills Circus [1957] 2 QB 1 396 British Celanese v A H Hunt [1969] 1 WLR 959 381
Bellew v Cement Co Ltd [1948] IR 61 361 British Chiropractic Association v Singh [2010]
Benjamin v Storr (1874) LRCP 400 346 EWCA Civ 350 453
Bernstein (Lord) v Skyviews & General Ltd [1978] British Railways Board v Herrington [1972] 1 All ER
QB 479 334 748; [1972] AC 877 244, 249
Berry v Humm & Co [1915] 1 KB 627 562 Brooke v Bool [1928] 2 KB 578 530
Bhamra v Dubb [2010] EWCA Civ 13 49 Brooks v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2005]
Bird v Jones (1845) 7 QB 742 414 2 All ER 489 135, 138

xviii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xviii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Brown v KMR Services [1995] 4 All ER 598 185, 193 Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605;
Brown v Ministry of Defence [2006] All ER (D) 133 [1990] 1 All ER 568 47, 48, 50, 60, 61, 63, 91, 94–6,
(May) 557 97, 115, 144
Brown v Rolls-Royce Ltd [1960] 1 WLR 210 153 Capital & Counties Bank Ltd v Henty (1882)
Brown of Madingly (Lord) v Associated Newspapers 7 App Cas 741 435
Ltd [2007] 3 WLR 289 (HL); affirming [2007] Capital & Counties plc v Hampshire County Council
EWHC 202 (QB); [2007] All ER (D) 11 (May) (QBD) [1997] QB 1004; [1997] 2 All ER 865 52, 53, 56,
499 128, 129, 130, 144
Bryanstone Finance Co Ltd v de Vries [1975] 2 All ER Carmarthenshire County Council v Lewis [1955]
609 459 1 All ER 565 121
Bull v Devon AHA [1993] 4 Med LR 117 315 Carslogie Steamship Co v Royal Norwegian
Bunker v Charles Brand & Son Ltd [1969] 2 QB 480 235 Government (The Carslogie) [1952] AC 292 198,
Bunt v Tilley [2006] 3 All ER 336 442 205
Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd (1994) Carstairs v Taylor (1871) LR 6 Ex 217 380
120 ALR 42 379, 388 Cartledge v E Jobling & Sons Ltd [1963] AC 758 537
Burstein v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2007] 4 All ER Carty v Croydon London Borough Council [2005]
319 452 2 All ER 517 153
Butterfield v Forrester (1809) 11 East 60 213 Cassell & Co Ltd v Broome [1972] AC 1027 470, 549
Byrne v Deane [1937] 1 KB 818 437, 440 Cassidy v Daily Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1929]
2 KB 331 437
C (a child) (HIV testing), Re [2000] Fain 48 311 Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2 KB 343 315, 320
C v D [2006] EWHC 166 (QB); [2006] All ER (D) 329 Castle v St Augustine’s Links (1922) 38 TLR 615 345,
(Feb) 420 373
CJD Litigation: Group B Plantiffs v Medical Research Caswell v Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries Ltd
Council [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 161 75 [1940] AC 152 217
Cadbury-Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd Cattle v Stockton Waterworks Co (1875) LR 10 QB 453
[1981] 1 WLR 193 512 86, 114
Calgarth, The [1927] P 93 237, 245 Cavalier v Pope [1906] AC 428 252, 261
Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Dredge Century Insurance Co v Northern Ireland Road
Willemstad (1976) 136 CLR 529 103, 112 Transport Board [1942] AC 509 523
Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd [2008] All ER (D) 170 Chadwick v British Railways Board [1967] 1 WLR 912
(Mar); [2008] EWHC 454 (Ch); [2008] EWCA Civ 68, 73, 227
1427 (CA) 113 Chapman v Lord Ellesmere [1932] 2 KB 431 445
Cambridge Water Co v Eastern Counties Leatherwork Charing Cross Electricity Co v Hydraulic Co [1914]
plc [1994] 1 All ER 53; [1994] 2 AC 264 351, 363, 3 KB 772 388
373, 374, 377–82, 384, 389–92 Charleston v News Group Newspapers [1995] 2 All ER
Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers [2002] All ER 313 434
(D) 448 (Mar) (QB); [2003] 1 All ER 224 (CA); Charman v Orion Publishing Group Ltd [2008]
[2004] 2 All ER 995 (HL) 489, 491, 493, 497, 501, 1 All ER 750 467
503 Chatterton v Gerson [1981] QB 432 307
Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers (No 2) [2005] Chaudhry v Prabhaker [1988] 3 All ER 718 89
4 All ER 793 430, 481 Cheng Albert v Tse Wai Chun Paul (Final appeal (civil)
Campbell v Newsgroup Newspapers [2002] All ER (D) no 12 of 2000) (2000) 10 BHRC 525, HK CFA 451
513 (Jul) 430, 470 Chester v Afshar [2005] 1 AC 134; [2004] 4 All ER 587
Canadian National Railway Co v Norsk Pacific (HL); [2002] 3 All ER 552 (CA) 178, 180, 323,
Steamship Co [1992] 1 SCR 1021 103, 112 325–7
Candler v Crane, Christmas & Co [1951] 2 KB 164 Chic Fashions (West Wales) Ltd v Jones [1968]
86, 96 2 QB 299 334
Candlewood Navigation Corp Ltd v Mitsui OSK Lines Chipchase v British Titan Products Co Ltd [1956]
Ltd (The Mineral Transporter) [1986] 1 AC 1 101 1 QB 545 288
Canterbury v Spence (1972) 464 F 2d 772 321 Christie v Davey [1893] 1 Ch 316 10, 27, 361

xix

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xix 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Great Customs and Excise Commissioners v Barclays Bank
Britain) v West Yorkshire Fire and Civil Defence plc [2006] 4 All ER 256 60, 91, 107, 115
Authority [1997] 2 All ER 865 52, 53, 56, 128, 129 Cutler v United Dairies [1933] 2 KB 297 227
Church of Scientology of California v Johnson-Smith Cutler v Wandsworth Stadium [1949] AC 398; [1949]
[1972] 1 QB 522 455 1 All ER 544 284
Cinnamond v British Airports Authority [1980]
2 All ER 368 334 D v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust; K
Claimants appearing on the Register of the Corby and another v Dewsbury Healthcare NHS Trust; K
Group Litigation v Corby Borough Council [2008] and another v Oldham NHS Trust [2003] 4 All ER
EWCA Civ 463; [2009] QB 335 346 796 (CA); [2005] 2 All ER 443 (HL) 55, 131, 139,
Clift v Slough BC [2010] EWCA 1484 460 142, 285
Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority D & F Estates Ltd v Church Commissioners for
[1998] 3 All ER 180 203, 204, 223, 224 England [1988] 2 All ER 992 100, 101, 256–8, 261
Cocks v Thanet District Council [1983] 2 AC 286 283 DP and another v United Kingdom [2002] 3 FCR 385
Coco v AN Clarke (Engineers) Ltd [1968] FSR 415 485 131
Collins v Wilcock [1984] 3 All ER 374 410, 411 DPP v Jones [1999] 2 All ER 257 333
Coltman v Bibby Tankers Ltd [1988] AC 276 296 Daborn v Bath Tramways [1946] 2 All ER 333 157
Colvilles v Devine [1969] 1 WLR 475 163 Dann v Hamilton [1939] 1 KB 509 208, 210–12
Commission of the European Communities v UK Darby v National Trust [2001] PIQR P372 158, 238,
[1997] All ER (EC) 481 276 247
Condon v Basi [1985] 2 All ER 453 208 Davie v New Merton Board Mills Ltd [1959] AC 604
Connor v Surrey County Council [2010] EWCA Civ 296
286 127, 145 Davies v Davies [1975] QB 172 405
Consorzio del Proscuitto di Parma v Marks & Spencer Davies v Mann (1842) 10 M&W 546 213
plc [1991] RPC 351 511 Davies v Powell Duffryn Collieries Ltd [1942] AC 601
Conway v George Wimpey & Co Ltd [1951] 2 KB 266 562
523 Davies v Swan Motor Co (Swansea) Ltd [1949] 2 KB
Co-operative Group (CWS) Ltd v Pritchard [2011] 291 215
EWCA Civ 329; [2012] 1 All ER 205 214, 414 Daw v Intel [2007] 2 All ER 126 300
Cook v Alexander [1974] QB 279 457 De Beers Abrasive Products Ltd v International
Cook v Lewis [1952] 1 DLR 1 179 General Electric Co of New York [1975] 1 WLR 972
Cook v Square D Ltd [1992] ICR 262 297 510
Cooke v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [2004] Defreitas v O’Brien [1995] 6 Med LR 108 318
1 All ER 797 556 Delaney v Pickett [2011] EWCA Civ 1532; [2012]
Cope v Sharp [1912] 1 KB 496 337 1 WLR 2149 222
Corr (administratrix of Corr decd) v IBC Vehicles Ltd Delaware Mansions Ltd v Westminster City Council
[2006] 2 All ER 929 (CA); [2008] UKHL 13; [2008] [2002] 1 AC 321 352, 366
2 WLR 499; [2008] 2 All ER 943 (HL) 201, 223, 566 Dennis v Ministry of Defence [2003] EWHC 793 (QB);
Costello v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [2003] All ER (D) 300 (Apr) 361, 365, 560
[1999] 1 All ER 550 135 Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd
Cotton v Derbyshire Dales District Council (1994) [1993] AC 534 471–3, 488
Times, 20 June 243 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337 86, 87, 507
Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV v Export Credits Dickins v O2 plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1144 301
Guarantee Dept [1999] 1 All ER 929 526 Dixon v Were [2004] EWHC 2273 (QB); [2004]
Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Co Ltd v Veitch All ER (D) 356 (Oct) 555, 556
[1942] AC 435 11 Dobson v Thames Water Utilities Ltd (Water Services
Croke v Wiseman [1981] 3 All ER 852 557 Regulation Authority (Ofwat) intervening) [2009]
Cummings v Grainger [1977] QB 397; [1977] 1 All ER EWCA Civ 28; [2008] 2 All ER 362 350, 366, 369,
104 398, 403 371, 372, 560
Curistan v Times Newspapers [2007] 4 All ER 486 458 Donoghue v Folkestone Properties Ltd [2003] 3 All ER
Curtis v Betts [1990] 1 WLR 459 397–9 1101 248

xx

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xx 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 34, 35, 44, 45, Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002]
47, 63, 83, 84, 99, 116, 262–9, 278 1 WLR 1052 (CA); [2003] 1 AC 32; [2002] 3 All ER
Dooley v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd [1951] 1 Lloyd’s 305 (HL) 168–70, 172–7, 179, 180, 183, 197, 204,
Rep 271 68, 74, 75 205, 235, 324, 325, 533
Doughty v Turner Manufacturing Co Ltd [1964] Farrell v Avon Health Authority [2001] Lloyd’s Rep
1 QB 518 190 Med 458 75
Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2001] QB 967; [2001] 2 WLR 992 Farrell v Merton, Sutton and Wandsworth Hospital
487, 492 (2000) 57 BMLR 158 75, 79
Douglas v Hello! Ltd (No 3) [2005] 4 All ER 128 497 Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ
Douglas v Hello! Ltd (Nos 5 and 6) [2006] QB 125 492 46 423
Dove v Banhams Patent Locks [1983] 1 WLR 1436 536 Ferguson v Welsh [1987] 3 All ER 777 237
Downs v Chappell [1996] 3 All ER 344 185 Fitzgerald v Lane [1989] AC 328; [1987] 2 All ER 455
Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd [1969] 2 QB 158 196, 179, 220, 533
508 Flood v Times Newspapers [2012] UKSC 11; [2012]
Draper v Hodder [1972] 2 QB 556 395 4 All ER 913 (SC); reversing [2010] EWCA Civ 804
Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Salaam [2003] 2 AC 366 (CA), reversing [2009] EWHC 2375 (QB) 458, 465–8
519, 522, 525, 526 Fowler v Lanning [1959] 1 QB 426 409
Dulieu v White & Sons [1901] 2 KB 669 68, 71 French v Chief Constable of Sussex [2006] EWCA Civ
Dunne v North Western Gas Board [1964] 2 QB 806 312; [2006] All ER (D) 407 (Mar) 300
386 Fritz v Hobson (1880) 14 Ch D 542 346
Dymond v Pearce [1972] 1 QB 497 347 Froggatt v Chesterfield & North Derbyshire Royal
Hospital NHS Trust [2002] All ER (D) 218 (Dec) 80
EEPTU v Times Newspapers Ltd [1980] 1 All ER 1097 Froom v Butcher [1976] QB 286 216
471 Fytche v Wincanton Logistics plc [2004] 4 All ER 221
E v Dorset County Council, See X (minors) v 288
Bedfordshire County Council
E v English Province of Our Lady of Charity [2011] GKR Karate (UK) Ltd v Yorkshire Post Ltd [2000]
EWHC 2871 518 1 WLR 2571 463
Easson v London & North Eastern Railway [1944] Galli-Atkinson v Seghal [2003] EWCA Civ 697; [2003]
1 KB 421 161 All ER (D) 341 (Mar) 78
Eastern and SA Telegraph Co Ltd v Cape Town Galoo Ltd v Bright Grahame Murray [1995] 1 All ER
Tramways Co Ltd [1902] AC 381 387 16 97, 184, 185, 205
Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police for the Garden Cottage Foods Ltd v Milk Marketing Board
Metropolis [1995] QB 335 130 [1984] AC 130 291
Elias v Pasmore [1934] 2 KB 164 333 Gee v Metropolitan Railway (1873) LR 8 QB 161
Ellison v Ministry of Defence (1997) 81 BLR 101 161
379, 381 General Cleaning Contractors v Christmas [1953] AC
Entick v Carrington (1765) 19 State Trials 1029 332 180 241, 297
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Mardon [1976] QB 801 Gillick v West Norfolk & Wisbech Area Health
39, 89, 507 Authority [1986] AC 112 311–13, 326
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Southport Corp [1956] Ginty v Belmont Building Supplies Ltd [1959]
AC 218 331 1 All ER 414 290, 302
Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays [2008] 1 All ER 530 239 Glasgow Corp v Muir [1943] AC 448 152
Evans v Triplex Glass Co Ltd [1936] 1 All ER 283 266 Glasgow Corp v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44 239, 260
Even Warnink BV v Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd [1979] Glass v Cambridge Health Authority [1995] 6 Med LR
AC 731 511, 513 91 320
Glass v United Kingdom [2004] 39 EHRR 15 311
F v West Berkshire Health Authority [1989] Gloster v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester
2 All ER 545 309, 312, 326, 337, 411, 425, 545 Police [2000] PIQR 114 398
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] Godfrey v Demon Internet [1999] 4 All ER 342 456,
1 QB 439 410 442

xxi

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxi 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Gold v Haringey Health Authority [1987] 2 All ER 888 Hall v Holker Estate [2008] EWCA Civ 1422 164
322 Hall v Simons [2000] 3 All ER 673 54, 55, 64
Goldman v Hargrave [1966] 2 All ER 989; [1967] Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004]
1 AC 645 117, 123, 351, 353, 373, 375, 379 EWCA Civ 576; [2004] 4 All ER 920 180
Goldsmith v Bhoyrul [1997] 4 All ER 286 471 Hambrook v Stokes Bros [1925] 1 KB 141 68
Goodwill v British Pregnancy Advisory Service [1996] Hamilton v Al Fayed [2000] 2 All ER 224 455
1 WLR 1397 106 Harris v Birkenhead Corp [1976] 1 WLR 279 234
Gore v Stannard [2012] EWCA Civ 1248; [2013] Harris v James (1876) 45 LJQB 545 354
1 All ER 694 391 Harrison v British Rail Board [1981] 3 All ER 679 228
Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council Hartley v Mayoh & Co [1954] 1 QB 383 287
[2004] 2 All ER 326 118, 126, 127 Hartman v South Essex Mental Health and
Gorris v Scott (1874) 9 LR Exch 125 287 Community Care NHS Trust [2005] IRLR 293 300
Gough v Thorne [1966] 1 WLR 1387 216 Haseldine v Daw [1941] 2 KB 343 242
Gran Gelato v Richcliff Ltd [1992] 1 All ER 865 105 Hatton v Sutherland [2002] EWCA Civ 76; [2002]
Grant v Australian Knitting Mills Ltd [1936] AC 85 2 All ER 1 74, 301
265, 266 Hatton v United Kingdom (2003) 37 EHRR 611; [2003]
Gravil v Carroll [2008] EWCA Civ 689; [2008] All ER All ER (D) 122 (Jul) 299, 300, 370
(D) 234 ( Jun) 525 Hawley v Luminar Leisure Ltd [2006] All ER (D)
Gray v Thames Trains Ltd [2009] UKHL 33; [2009] 158 ( Jan) 521
4 All ER 81 203, 204, 222, 223, 226, 229 Hay v Hughes [1975] QB 790 562
Greater Nottingham Co-operative Society v Hayden v Hayden [1992] 4 All ER 681 563, 564
Cementation Piling & Foundations Ltd [1988] Haynes v Harwood [1935] 1 KB 146 117, 122, 227
2 All ER 971 98 Hayward v Thompson [1981] 3 WLR 471 438, 439
Greatorex v Greatorex [2000] 4 All ER 769 74 Heaton v Axa Equity & Law Assurance Society Ltd
Green v Chelsea Waterworks Co (1894) 70 LT 547 388 [2002] 2 All ER 961 531
Greene v Associated Newspapers [2005] QB 972 471 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964]
Greenhalgh v British Railways Board [1969] 2 QB 286 AC 465; [1963] 2 All ER 575 39, 41, 45, 47, 57, 58,
236 59, 80, 87–91, 98–101, 104–9, 114, 115, 256, 507
Greenock Corpn v Caledonian Railway [1917] Heil v Rankin [2000] 2 WLR 1173 558, 559, 569
AC 556 387 Hellewell v Chief Constable of Derbyshire [1995]
Gregg v Scott [2005] 2 AC 176; [2005] 4 All ER 812 1 WLR 804 486
169, 176, 183, 184, 187, 205, 324 Hemmens v Wilson Browne [1993] 4 All ER 826
Griffiths v Arch Engineering Co [1968] 3 All ER 217 52, 338
266, 267 Hemmings v Stoke Poges Golf Club [1920] 1 KB 720
Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2002] 338
1 WLR 3024; [2001] 2 All ER 437 431, 462, 463, 549 Henderson v H E Jenkins & Sons [1970] AC 282 164
Group B Plaintiffs v Medical Research, See CJD Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd [1994] 3 All ER
Litigation 506; [1995] 2 AC 145 42, 47, 59, 90, 106, 108–10,
Groves v Lord Wimborne [1898] 2 QB 402 282, 286, 115, 144
293 Herd v Weardale Steel Coal & Coke Co Ltd [1915]
Guardian News and Media Ltd, Re [2010] UKSC 1 500 AC 67 416, 425, 426
Guzzardi v Italy (Application No 7367/76) (1980) Herring v Boyle (1834) 1 Cr M&R 377 416
3 EHRR 333, ECtHR 417 Hevican v Ruane [1991] 3 All ER 65 77
Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospital NHS Trust Hewison v Meridian Shipping PTE and others [2002]
[2002] 3 WLR 1425 242 EWCA Civ 1821; [2003] ICR 766 226
Hey v Moorhouse (1839) 6 Bing NC 52 333
Hague v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison; Hickman v Maisey [1900] 1 QB 752 332, 333
Weldon v Home Office [1991] 3 All ER 733; [1992] Higgs v Foster [2004] EWCA Civ 843; [2004] All ER (D)
1 AC 58 415 21 ( Jul) 249
Hale v Jennings Bros [1938] 1 All ER 579 386, 387 Hilder v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers
Haley v London Electricity Board [1965] AC 778 49, 156 Ltd [1961] 1 WLR 1434 156

xxii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [1988] J (a minor), Re [1992] 2 FLR 165 314
2 All ER 238 54, 130, 133, 135, 138 JEB Fasteners v Marks Bloom & Co [1983] 1 All ER 583
Hinz v Berry [1970] 2 QB 40 559 95
Holbeck Hall Hotel v Scarborough Borough Council JT (adult: refusal of medical treatment), Re [1998]
[2000] 2 All ER 705 352, 375 1 FLR 48 314
Holden v White [1982] 2 WLR 1030 236 Jaensch v Coffey (1984) 54 ALR 417 77, 78
Hollywood Silver Fox Farm v Emmett [1936] 2 KB 468 Jagger v Darling [2005] EWHC 683 (Ch) 497
362 Jameel v Dow Jones & Co [2005] EWCA Civ 75 429
Holmes v Wilson (1839) 10 A & E 503 333 Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe SPRL [2007] 1 AC
Holt v Payne Skillington [1996] PNLR 179 41 359; [2006] 4 All ER 1279; [2006] 3 WLR 642, (HL),
Holtby v Brigham & Cowan (Hull) Ltd [2000] 3 All ER reversing [2005] 4 All ER 356 (CA), affirming [2003]
421 170, 187 EWHC 2945 (QB), [2004] 2 All ER 92, QBD 429,
Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] 2 All ER 294 462, 463, 465, 466, 468, 473, 498
47, 117, 121, 122, 128, 134, 141, 196, 200 James McNaughten Paper Group Ltd v Hicks
Hone v Six Counties Retail Ltd [2006] IRLR 49 301 Anderson & Co [1991] 1 All ER 134 96
Horrocks v Lowe [1974] 2 WLR 282 469 Jameson v Central Electricity Generating Board [1999]
Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] 2 WLR 141 531
2 All ER 909; [1987] AC 750 174, 182, 184, 205, 324 Jan de Nul (UK) Ltd v AXA Royale Beige SA [2002]
Housecroft v Burnett [1986] 1 All ER 332 558 1 All ER (Comm) 767 366
Howard Marine Dredging Co v Ogden & Sons [1978] Janvier v Sweeney [1919] 2 KB 316 419, 421
QB 574 89 Jaundrill v Gillet (1996) Times, 30 January 400
Hucks v Cole (1968) 112 Sol Jo 483 318 Jayes v IMI (Kynoch) Ltd [1985] ICR 155 217, 220
Hudson v Ridge Manufacturing Co Ltd [1957] Jebson v Ministry of Defence [2000] 1 WLR 2055 120
2 QB 348 295, 303 Jeynes v News Magazines Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 130
Hughes v Lord Advocate [1963] AC 837 190, 191, 205, 435
240 Jobling v Associated Dairies Ltd [1982] AC 794 180,
Hughes v National Union of Mineworkers [1991] 181, 204
4 All ER 355 130 John Monroe (Acrylics) Ltd v London Fire and Civil
Hulton & Co v Jones [1910] AC 20 438 Defence Authority [1997] 2 All ER 865 52, 53, 56,
Hunt v Severs [1994] 2 All ER 385 558, 568 129
Hunter v British Coal Corp [1998] 2 All ER 97 70, 71 John Summers and Sons Ltd v Frost [1955] AC 740 288
Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1996] 1 All ER 482 (CA); John v MGN Ltd [1996] EMLR 229 431, 473
[1997] AC 655; [1997] 2 All ER 426 (HA) 345, 346, Johnson v BJW Property Developments Ltd [2002]
348, 350, 356, 359, 360, 365, 372, 373, 374, 375, 3 All ER 574 390
384, 420, 421 Johnson v Coventry Churchill International Ltd
Hunter v Chief Constable of West Midlands [1981] [1992] 3 All ER 14 297
3 All ER 727 55 Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority [1991]
Hurley v Dyke [1979] RTR 265 265 2 All ER 293 40
Hurst v Picture Theatres Ltd [1915] 1 KB 1 336 Jolley v Sutton London Borough Council [1998]
Hussain v Lancaster City Council [1999] 4 All ER 125 355 3 All ER 559; [1998] 1 WLR 1546 (CA); [2000]
Huth v Huth [1915] 3 KB 32 441, 475 3 All ER 409; [2000] 1 WLR 1082 (HL) 159, 191,
240, 248
ICI Ltd v Shatwell [1965] AC 656 209, 210, 290 Jones v Boyce (1816) 171 ER 540 152, 217
Innes v Wylie (1844) 1 Car & Kir 257 412 Jones v Ruth [2011] EWCA Civ 804; [2012] 1 WLR
Inverugie Investments Ltd v Hackett [1995] 1495 423
1 WLR 713 (HL) 338 Jones v Livox Quarries Ltd [1952] 2 QB 608 223, 226
Iqbal v Prison Officers Association [2009] Jones v Wright [1991] 2 WLR 814 (QBD); reversed in
EWCA Civ 1312 409, 416 part [1991] 3 All ER 88 (CA) 76
Island Records Ltd, ex parte [1978] Ch 122 287 Joseph v Spiller [2010] UKSC 53 432, 447, 448, 450
Iwanczuk v Poland Application No 25196/94 Joyce v O’Brien [2013] EWCA Civ 546; [2014] 1 WLR
(unreported, 15 November 2001) 422 70 222

xxiii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxiii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Joyce v Sengupta [1993] 1 WLR 337 430, 510 Lawrence v Fen Tigers [2014] UKSC 13; [2014] 2 All ER
Junior Books Ltd v Veitchi Ltd [1983] 1 AC 520 46, 98, 622 xv, 344, 358, 364, 367, 368
100, 101, 256, 257, 267 League Against Cruel Sports v Scott [1986] QB 240 332
Leakey v National Trust for Places of Historic Interest
K v Secretary of State for The Home Department or Natural Beauty [1980] QB 485 352–5, 371, 373,
[2002] EWCA Civ 775 122 375, 379, 380, 389
K and another v Dewsbury Healthcare NHS Trust, See Leigh & Sillavan Ltd v Aliakmon Shipping Co Ltd (The
D v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust Aliakmon) [1986] 1 AC 785 102, 111, 115
K and another v Oldham NHS Trust, See D v East Lennon v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2004]
Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust 2 All ER 266 59, 90
Kaye v Robertson [1991] FSR 62 61, 481, 486, 504, 510 Letang v Cooper [1965] 1 QB 232 409, 540
Kearns v General Council of the Bar [2003] 2 All ER Lewis v Daily Telegraph [1964] AC 234 435, 436
534 475 Lewis v Tims [1952] AC 676 419
Keenan v United Kingdom (2001) 10 BHRC 319 203 Liebeck v McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd [1994] Extra
Kelsen v Imperial Tobacco Co [1957] 2 QB 334 334 LEXIS 23; 1995 WL 360309 (Bernalillo County,
Kemsley v Foot [1952] AC 345 448, 449 N.M. Dist. Ct. 1994) 277
Kennaway v Thompson [1981] QB 88 363 Liesbosch Dredger v SS Edison [1933] AC 448 195, 196
Kent v Griffiths [2000] 2 WLR 1158 56, 128, 135 Limpus v London General Omnibus Co (1862) 1 H&C
Keown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust [2006] 526 523
1 WLR 953 245, 260 Lippiat v South Gloucestershire Council [1999]
Khatun v United Kingdom (1998) 26 EHRR CD 212 4 All ER 149 355
350 Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215; [2001]
Khorasandjian v Bush [1993] 3 WLR 476 348, 412, 2 All ER 769 (HL) 522–6
419, 423 Lister v Romford Ice & Cold Storage Ltd [1957] AC 555
King v Sussex Ambulance NHS Trust [2002] ICR 1413 526, 529
157 Llandudno UDC v Woods [1889] 2 Ch 705 339
Kirkham v Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Lloyd v Grace Smith & Co [1912] AC 716 526
Police [1990] 3 All ER 246 202, 209, 222 Lloyds Bank v Savory [1933] AC 201 153
Knightley v Johns [1982] 1 All ER 851 58, 199 London Artists Ltd v Littler [1969] 2 All ER 193 463
Knowles v Liverpool City Council [1993] 4 All ER 321 Lonrho v Shell Petroleum Co (No 2) [1981] 2 All ER
296 456; [1982] AC 173 281, 284, 286, 291, 302
Knupffer v London Express Newspaper Ltd [1944] Lorsé v The Netherlands Application 52750/99
AC 116 440 (unreported) 4 February 2003 422
Kubach v Hollands [1937] 3 All ER 907 267 Loutchansky v Times Newspapers (No 2) [2002]
Kuddus v Chief Constable of Leicestershire 1 All ER 653 442–4, 470
Constabulary [2001] 3 All ER 193 549–51 Lowe v Guise [2002] QB 1369 558
Lowery v Walker [1911] AC 10 236
LNS v Persons Unknown [2010] EWHC 119 (QB) Lucas-Box v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1986]
503 1 WLR 147 447
Lagden v O’Connor [2004] 1 All ER 277 195 Luxmoore-May v Messenger May Baverstock [1990]
Lamb v Camden Borough Council [1981] QB 625 197, 1 All ER 1067 153
200
Lane v Holloway [1968] 1 QB 379 413 M (a minor) v Newham London Borough Council,
Lange v Atkinson (No 2) (2000) 8 BHRC 500 462 See X (minors) v Bedfordshire County Council
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corp (1997) 2 BHRC M v Hampshire County Council, See X (minor) v
513 462 Bedfordshire County Council
Langridge v Levy (1837) 2 M & W 337 507 MB (medical treatment), Re [1997] 2 FLR 426 314
Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] AC 643 160, 296 MS v ATH [2003] QB 965 564
Law Society v KPMG Peat Marwick [2000] 4 All ER 541 McCall v Abelesz [1976] QB 585 284
96 McCartan Turkington Breen (a firm) v Times
Law Society v Sephton [2006] 3 All ER 401 536 Newspapers Ltd [2000] 4 All ER 913 458

xxiv

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxiv 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

McCullough v May [1947] 2 All ER 845 512 part [2001] 3 All ER 698 (Tech & Constr Ct) 353,
McDermid v Nash Dredging and Reclamation Co Ltd 361, 369, 371, 375, 392
[1987] AC 906 297, 522 Mariola Marine Corp v Lloyd’s Register of Shipping
McFarlane v EE Caledonia Ltd [1994] 1 All ER 1 68, 71, (The Morning Watch) [1990] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 547 97
78 Market Investigations Ltd v Minister of Social Security
McFarlane v Tayside Health Authority [2000] 2 AC 59 [1969] 2 QB 173 520
107 Mason v Levy Auto Parts of England Ltd [1967] 2 QB
McGeown v NI Housing Executive [1994] 3 All ER 53 530 374, 381
236 Matthews v Ministry of Defence [2003] 1 All ER 689
McGhee v National Coal Board [1973] 1 WLR 1 23
169–71, 173, 176, 179, 182, 204, 323 Matthews v Wicks (1987) Times, 25 May 404
McHale v Watson [1966] ALR 513 151, 152 Mattis v Pollock [2003] 1 WLR 2158 525
McKenna v British Aluminium Ltd (2002) Times, Maxim’s Ltd v Dye [1977] 1 WLR 1155 512
25 April 350, 384 Maynard v West Midland Regional Health Authority
McKennitt v Ash [2006] All ER (D) 02 (Feb) (QB); [1985] 1 All ER 635 318
[2007] 3 WLR 194 (CA) 493, 496–8 Meah v McCreamer (No 1) [1985] 1 All ER 367 203
McKenny v Foster (t/a Foster Partnership) [2008] Meah v McCreamer (No 2) [1986] 1 All ER 943 203
All ER (D) 73 (Mar); [2008] EWCA Civ 173 402 Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co Ltd (1920)
McKew v Holland, & Hannen & Cubbitts (Scotland) 122 LT 44 416
Ltd [1969] 3 All ER 1621 200, 219 Merivale v Carson (1888) 20 QBD 275 451
McKinnon Industries Ltd v Walker [1951] 3 DLR 577 Merrett v Babb [2001] 3 WLR 1 60, 91, 93
361, 374 Mersey Docks & Harbour Board v Goggins & Griffith
McLoughlin v Jones [2002] 2 WLR 1279 68, 75, 77, 78, (Liverpool) Ltd [1947] AC 1 521
80, 81 Metropolitan Asylum District v Hill (1881) 6 App Cas
McLoughlin v O’Brian [1983] AC 410 68, 77 193 368
McMullin v ICI Australia Operations Pty Ltd (1997) Metropolitan International Schools Ltd (t/a
72 FCR 1 112 SkillsTrain and/or Train2Game) v Designtechnica
McWilliams v Sir William Arrol & Co Ltd [1962] Corpn (t/a Digital Trends) [2009] EWHC 1765
1 WLR 295 186, 289 (QB); [2010] 3 All ER 548 441, 442
Maga v Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham Midland Bank Trust Co Ltd v Hett, Stubbs & Kemp (a
[2010] EWCA Civ 256 525 firm) [1979] Ch 384 39, 536
Maguire v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council Miles v Forest Rock Granite Co (Leicestershire) Ltd
[2006] 1 WLR 2550 235 (1918) 34 TLR 500 385
Mahon v Osborne [1939] 2 KB 14 162, 320 Miller v Jackson [1977] QB 966 361, 363, 367
Mahon v Rahn (No 2) [2000] 4 All ER 41 456 Mineral Transporter, The, See Candlewood Navigation
Majrowski v Guys and St Thomas NHS Trust [2006] Corp Ltd v Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd
4 All ER 395 519 Ministry of Justice v Carter [2010] EWCA Civ 694 319
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 64 ALJR 316 181 Mirvahedy v Henley [2003] 2 All ER 401 397, 398,
Malone v Lasky [1907] 2 KB 141 348 401, 406
Malone v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1979] Mitchell v Glasgow City Council [2009] UKHL 11 24,
Ch 344 488 118, 121–3, 126, 128, 129, 355
Malyon v Plummer [1964] 1 QB 330 563 Monk v Warbey [1935] 1 KB 75 283
Manchester Airport plc v Dutton [2000] QB 133 335 Monsanto plc v Tilly [2000] Env LR 313 337
Mansfield v Weetabix Ltd [1998] 1 WLR 1263 151 Monson v Tussauds Ltd [1894] 1 QB 671 432
Mapp v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1998] 2 WLR Morgan Crucible Co plc v Hill Samuel Bank Ltd [1991]
260 435 1 All ER 148 97
Marc Rich & Co v Bishops Rock Marine Co Ltd and Morgan v Odhams Press Ltd [1971] 1 WLR 1239 439,
Others (The Nicholas H) [1995] 3 All ER 307; [1995] 474, 476
3 WLR 227 48, 102, 258 Morgans v Launchbury [1973] AC 127 528
Marcic v Thames Water Utilities [2004] 1 All ER 135 Morning Watch, The, See Mariola Marine Corp v
(HL); reversing [2002] 2 All ER 55, (CA); reversing in Lloyd’s Register of Shipping

xxv

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxv 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Morris v Murray [1990] 3 All ER 801 210–12 Normans Bay Ltd v Coudert Brothers (a firm) [2004]
Morris (t/a Soundstar Studio) v Network Rail All ER (D) 458 (Feb) 183
Infrastructure Ltd [2004] All ER (D) 342 (Feb) 360 Norwich City Council v Harvey [1989] 1 All ER 1180
Morrison Sports Ltd v Scottish Power UK plc [2010] 84, 99
UKSC 37 286
Morrison Steamship Co Ltd v Greystoke Castle [1947] OLL Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1997]
AC 265 86 3 All ER 897 56, 129, 138
Mosley v News Group Newspapers [2008] All ER (D) OBG Ltd v Allan [2007] 2 WLR 920 6, 10
322 498 O (a minor), Re [1993] 2 FLR 149 311
Mosley v United Kingdom [2011] ECHR 48009/08; Ogwo v Taylor [1988] AC 431 235, 241, 260
[2011] All ER (D) 66 (May) 501 O’Kelly v Trusthouse Forte plc [1983] ICR 728 520
Mowan v London Borough of Wandsworth [2000] Orchard v Lee [2009] EWCA Civ 295 152
All ER (D) 2411 (Dec) 355 Orme v Associated Newspapers Ltd (1981) The Times,
Moy v Pettiman Smith [2005] UKHL 7 155 4 February 440
Muirhead v Industrial Tank Specialities Ltd [1986] Ormrod v Crosville Motor Services [1953] 1 WLR 1120
QB 507 100, 267 528
Mullaney v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police Oropesa, The [1943] P 32 199
[2001] All ER (D) 191 (May) 135 O’Rourke v Camden London Borough Council [1997]
Mullin v Richards [1998] 1 All ER 920 151, 216 3 WLR 86 283
Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1990] 2 All ER O’Shea v MGN Ltd [2001] EMLR 40 439
908 35, 47, 90, 100, 103, 104, 110, 115, 257, 258, Osman v Ferguson [1993] 4 All ER 344 130, 134, 138
261, 267 Osman v United Kingdom [1999] FLR 193 (ECHR) 23,
Murphy v Culhane [1977] QB 94 222 54, 64, 119, 123, 131, 134, 138, 139, 142, 147
Murray v Express Newspapers plc [2008] Fam Law 732 Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Miller Steamship Co Pty
495, 503 Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 2) [1966] 2 All ER 709;
Murray v Ministry of Defence [1988] 2 All ER 521 416 [1967] 1 AC 617 159, 248, 365, 373, 375
Musgrove v Pandelis [1919] 2 KB 43 391 Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock &
Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance Co v Evatt [1971] Engineering Co (The Wagon Mound No 1) [1961]
AC 793 89 AC 388 188–90, 192, 194, 196, 205, 362, 566
Owens v Brimmell [1977] 2 WLR 943 210, 215, 566
N v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2006]
EWHC 3041 525 Pacific Associates Inc v Baxter [1990] 1 QB 993 98
NHS Trust A v M; NHS Trust B v H [2001] 2 WLR 942 Page v Smith [1995] 2 All ER 736 68–70, 72, 73, 82
24, 308, 309 Page v Smith (No 2) [1996] 3 All ER 272 71
NHS Trust, An v MB [2006] 2 FLR 319 308, 314 Page Motors Ltd v Epsom & Ewell Borough Council
Nash v Sheen [1953] CLY 3726 413 (1982) 80 LGR 337 355
Natural Life Health Foods Ltd v Williams [1998] Pakenham-Walsh v Connell Residential [2006]
2 All ER 577 110 All ER (D) 275 (Feb) 301
Nettleship v Weston [1971] 2 QB 691 11, 27, 150, 210, Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] Lloyd’s Rep
211, 566 Med 351 54, 78, 122
New York Times v Sullivan, See Sullivan v New York Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] AC 367 157
Times Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital
Newstead v London Express Newspapers Ltd [1940] NHS Trust [2002] QB 266 107
1 KB 377 438 Parry v Cleaver [1970] AC 1 559, 568
Ng Chum Pui v Lee Chuen Tat [1988] RTR 298 163 Parsons v Uttley Ingham & Co [1978] QB 791 191
Nicholas H, The, See Marc Rich & Co v Bishop Rock Pasley v Freeman (1789) 3 TR 51 506
Marine Pearce v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust (1998)
Nichols v Marsland (1876) 2 Ex D 1 387 48 BMLR 118 322
Niemietz v Germany (1993) 16 EHRR 355 494 Peck v United Kingdom (2003) 36 EHRR 41 488, 500
Nitrigin Eireann Teoranta v Inco Alloys Ltd [1992] Pemberton v Southwark London Borough Council
1 All ER 854 258 [2000] 3 All ER 924 350

xxvi

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxvi 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

Performance Cars v Abraham [1962] 1 QB 33 170, 180 R (on the application of Lumba) v Secretary of State
Perl (P) (Exporters) Ltd v Camden London Borough for the Home Department; R (on the application
Council [1984] QB 342 121 of Mighty) v Secretary of State for the Home
Perre v Apand Pty Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 180 60, 112 Department [2011] UKSC 12; [2011] 4 All ER 1
Perry v Kendricks Transport Ltd [1956] 1 WLR 85 418, 548
384–7 R (on the application of Rogers) v Swindon NHS
Peters v Prince of Wales Theatre (Birmingham) Ltd Primary Care Trust [2006] 1 WLR 2649 316
[1943] 1 KB 73 386 R v Billinghurst [1978] Crim LR 553 413
Phelps v London Borough of Hillingdon, Anderton v R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS
Clwyd County Council, Jarvis v Hampshire County Trust ex parte L [1998] 3 All ER 289 415
Council, Re G (a minor) [2000] 4 All ER 504 141, R v Colohan [2001] 2 FLR 757 423
143, 145, 285 R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte K
Phillips v Britannia Hygienic Laundry Co Ltd [1923] (minors) [1999] QB 1131 564
2 KB 832 283, 284 R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison ex parte
Phipps v Rochester Corp [1955] 1 QB 450 240 Hague [1992] 1 AC 58 284
Pickett v British Rail Engineering Ltd [1980] AC 136 R v Ireland [1998] AC 147 412
557 R v Meade (1823) 1 Lew CC 184 412
Pigney v Pointer’s Transport Services Ltd [1957] R v Rimmington, R v Goldstein [2006] 1 AC 459
1 WLR 1121 201 344, 345
Pirelli General Cable Works Ltd v Oscar Faber & R v Secretary of State for Social Services ex parte Hincks
Partners [1983] 2 AC 1 540 (1979) 123 Sol Jo 436 316
Pitcher v Martin [1937] 3 All ER 918 395 R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame
Pitts v Hunt [1990] 3 All ER 344 211, 212, 217, 220, (No 4) [1996] QB 404 291
225, 228, 229, 566 R v Secretary of State for Transport ex parte Factortame
Platform Home Loans Ltd v Oyston Shipways Ltd (No 7) [2001] 1 WLR 942 291
[1999] 2 WLR 518 214 R v St George (1840) 9 C & P 483 412
Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co Ltd, Re [1921] 3 KB R v Wilson [1955] 1 WLR 493 412
560 188, 189, 201 RHM Bakeries (Scotland) Ltd v Strathclyde Regional
Pollard v Photographic Co (1888) 40 Ch D 345 485 Council 1985 SLT 214 389
Pollard v Tesco Stores Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 393; Rabone v Pennine Care Care NHS Trust [2012] UKSC 2
[2006] All ER (D) 186 (Apr) 271 559, 560, 563
Port Swettenham Authority v TW Wu [1979] AC 580 Rahman v Arearose Ltd [2001] QB 351 200
525 Rainham Chemical Works Ltd v Belvedere Fish Guano
Portland Management Ltd v Harte [1977] QB 306 335 Co Ltd [1921] 2 AC 465 380, 381, 389
Practice Note (Official Solicitor: Declaratory Ramzan v Brookwide Ltd [2010] EWHC 2453 (Ch);
Proceedings: Medical and Welfare Decisions for [2011] 2 All ER 38 339, 340
Adults who Lack Capacity) [2006] 2 FLR 373 310 Rance v Mid-Downs Health Authority [1991]
Pride (D) & Partners (a Firm) v Institute for Animal 1 All ER 801 225
Health [2009] EWHC 1617 385 Ratcliff v Evans [1982] 2 QB 524 509
Prince Radu of Hohenzollern v Houston [2008] Ratcliffe v McConnell [1999] 1 WLR 670 247, 251
EWCA Civ 921 466 Ratcliffe v Plymouth & Torbay Health Authority
(1998) PIQR P170 162, 320
R (a minor), Re [1991] 4 All ER 177 313 Ravenscroft v Rederiaktiebolaget Transatlantic [1991]
R (a minor), Re [1993] 2 FCR 544 311 3 All ER 73 77
R (on the application of Burke) v General Medical Read v J Lyons & Co Ltd [1947] AC 156 381–5
Council [2006] QB 273 310 Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of
R (on the application of Greenfield) v Secretary of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497 520
State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 14 Rees v Darlington Memorial NHS Trust [2003] 3 WLR
560 1091 107
R (on the application of KB) v Mental Health Review Reeves v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
Tribunal [2004] QB 936; [2003] 3 WLR 185 560 [2000] 1 AC 360; [1999] 3 All ER 897; [1999] 3 WLR

xxvii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxvii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

 TABLE OF CASES

363 (HL); reversing in part [1998] 2 WLR 401 (CA) S (adult: refusal of medical treatment), Re [1992] 4 All
198, 202, 209, 219, 220, 222, 228, 249, 566 ER 671 325, 314
Reid v Rush & Tompkins Group plc [1989] 3 All ER S v W (child abuse: damages) [1995] 1 FLR 862 540
228 41, 294 Salmon v Seafarers Restaurant [1983] 1 WLR 1264 241
Revill v Newbery [1996] 1 All ER 291 250 Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [1999] 4 All ER 609; rust [2008] UKHL 74 203
[1999] 3 WLR 1010 459, 461–7, 470, 472, 473, 477 Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board
Rhind v Astbury Water Park Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ [1991] 1 AC 294 42, 294
756; [2004] All ER (D) 129 ( Jun) 249 Schloendorff v Society of New York Hospitals 105 NE
Richardson v LRC Products Ltd [2000] Lloyd’s Rep 92 (NY 1914) 306
Med 280 271, 274, 276 Scott v London and St Katherine’s Dock Co (1865)
Richardson v Pitt-Stanley [1995] ICR 303 284 3 H&C 596 161
Rickards v Lothian [1913] AC 263 380, 382 Scott v Shepherd (1773) 2 W BI 892 408
Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] Scullion v Bank of Scotland plc (t/a Colleys) [2011]
2 All ER 985 337, 338, 384, 546 EWCA Civ 693; [2011] 1 WLR 3212 93
Rimmer v Liverpool City Council [1984] 1 All ER 930 Seaga v Harper [2008] 1 All ER 965 463, 475
252, 258 Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and
River Wear Commissioners v Adamson (1877) Rural Affairs v Meier [2009] UKSC 11; [2010]
2 App Cas 743 332 1 All ER 855 331, 339
Robb v Salamis Ltd [2007] 2 All ER 97 288 Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan [1940] AC 880
Roberts v Gable [2008] QB 502 467 351–4, 373, 375
Roberts v Ramsbottom [1980] 1 WLR 823 150 Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Co [1895]
Robinson v Balmain Ferry Co Ltd [1910] AC 295 416, 1 Ch 287 363, 364, 375
426 Shell UK Ltd v Total Oil [2010] EWCA Civ 180; [2010]
Robinson v Kilvert (1889) 41 Ch D 88 359, 374 3 All ER 793 102
Robinson v Post Office [1974] 1 WLR 1176 194 Shevill v Presse Alliance [1998] 2 AC 18 429
RockNRoll v News Group Newspapers [20130 Shiffman v Order of the Hospital of St John of
EWHC 24 (Ch) 496 Jerusalem [1936] 1 All ER 557 385
Roe v Minister of Health [1954] 2 QB 66 152 Shine v London Borough of Tower Hamlets [2006] All
Rogers v Whittaker (1992) 175 CLR 479 322 ER (D) 79 ( Jun) 156
Roles v Nathan [1963] 1 WLR 1117 241, 243, 260 Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal
Rondel v Worsley [1969] 1 AC 191 55, 134 Hospital [1985] AC 871 321, 322, 326
Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129 549, 550, 567 Sienkiewicz v Grief [2009] EWCA Civ 1159 174, 178
Rose v Plenty [1976] 1 WLR 141 536, 523 Simaan General Contracting Co v Pilkington Glass
Ross v Caunters [1979] 3 All ER 580 19, 27 Ltd [1988] QB 758 99
Ross v Fedden (1872) 26 LT 966 380 Simmons v Simmons [1996] CLY 2874, CA 205
Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd [2007] Sindell v Abbott Laboratories 607 P 2s 924 (1980)
4 All ER 1047 72, 548, 567 179
Rouse v Squires [1973] QB 889 199 Six Carpenters Case (1610) 8 Co Rep 146A 333
Rowley v Secretary of State for the Department of Skinner v Secretary of State for Transport (1995)
Work and Pensions [2007] 1 WLR 2861 127 Times, 3 January 129
Rushmer v Polsue & Alfieri Ltd [1906] 1 Ch 234 Slipper v BBC [1991] 1 QB 283 444
357 Smith v Austin Lifts Ltd [1959] 1 WLR 100 212
Rux v Slough Metals Ltd [1974] 1 All ER 262 290 Smith v Baker [1891] AC 325 208, 217, 228, 293
Ruxley Electronic and Construction Ltd v Forsyth, Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2008] UKHL
Laddington Enclosures Ltd v Forsyth [1995] 3 All 50; [2008] 3 All ER 977 119, 123, 128, 130, 136–8
ER 268; [1996] AC 344 365 Smith v Eric S Bush (a firm); Harris v Wyre Forest
Rylands v Fletcher (1865) 3 H&C 774; (1866) LR 1 District Council [1990] 1 AC 831 59, 85, 59, 90, 92,
Exch 265; (1868) LR 3 HL 330 (HL) 6, 12, 26, 27, 108, 115
214, 329, 342, 350, 354, 373, 374, 377–92, 527, Smith v Kenrick (1849) 137 ER 205 379
570, 571 Smith v Leech Brain & Co [1962] 2 QB 405 193, 566

xxviii

A01_COOK2822_12_SE_FM.indd xxviii 1/30/15 10:38 AM

Other documents randomly have
different content
followed which, although they made no settlements, revived public
interest in the American possession and made the route a
comparatively familiar one. When John Smith returned to his native
land he found the colonization of Virginia occupying a prominent
place in the minds of his countrymen. It was a project precisely
fitted to satisfy the nobler ambition which now fired him to devote
his talents and energies to his country’s service. It promised to
combine with a useful career a sufficient element of novelty and
adventure, and he lost no time in allying himself with the chief
promoters of the movement.
The territory of Virginia had been granted to Sir Walter Raleigh by
Queen Elizabeth. The latter died in 1603, the year before Smith’s
return to England, and her successor, James the First, imprisoned
Raleigh on a charge of high treason and confiscated his possessions.
In 1606, the King issued a charter for the colonization of Virginia to
a company, which Smith joined with five hundred pounds of his own
money. But previous to this he had been one of the most diligent
workers in the promotion of the scheme, inducing merchants and
noblemen to support the project with capital and persuading
desirable men to volunteer as colonists. Neither object was easy of
attainment and the latter was the more difficult. Numerous broken-
down gentlemen of indifferent character were eager to embrace the
chance of retrieving their fortunes in a new land, and hundreds of
dissolute soldiers out of employment offered their services to the
promoters. But the need was for farmers, mechanics, and laborers,
and few of these could be induced to leave their homes in the
prosperous state of the country at that time. Consequently the
organizers of the expedition had to content themselves with a poor
assortment of colonists who, but for the presence of Captain John
Smith among them, would assuredly have added one more to the list
of failures connected with North American colonization. It was due to
him mainly, and almost solely, that the settlement at Jamestown
survived and became the root from which branched the United
States of America.
 The expedition, when at length it was organized, consisted of
three vessels carrying, aside from their crews, one hundred and five
colonists. The largest of the ships, named the Susan Constant, was
barely one hundred tons burden, the second, named the Godspeed,
was somewhat smaller, and the third, the Discovery, no more than
twenty tons. Their commanders were Captain Christopher Newport,
Captain Bartholomew Gosnold and John Ratcliffe respectively. Other
important members of the expedition were Edward Wingfield, a man
with little but his aristocratic connections to recommend him; Robert
Hunt, a clergyman, whose name should be linked with that of John
Smith as one of the saviours of the colony, and a few whose
introduction we may defer until circumstances bring them
prominently upon the scene. For the rest, forty-eight were
gentlemen of little account, about thirty were men of lower estate,
but no greater usefulness, and only a score belonged to the artisan
and mechanic class. Smith had engaged and fitted out a few men
with whose quality he had some acquaintance, including Carlton and
Robinson, the only two Englishmen of his own command who had
escaped from the disaster in the Valley of Veristhorne.
In the last days of the year 1606, this ill-assorted company sailed
out of the Thames under conditions calculated to create dissensions
from the outset. King James, one of the most feeble monarchs who
ever occupied the English throne, had reserved to himself the right
to select the Council by which the colony should be governed,
allowing to that body the privilege of electing its President. But for
some reason, which it is impossible to surmise, the choice of the
monarch was kept secret and names of the Council enclosed in a
box which was to be opened only when the party reached its
destination. Thus they started upon the voyage without a
commander or any recognized authority among them, and each man
of prominence, feeling satisfied that the King could not have
overlooked his superior claims to a place in the Council, assumed the
tone and bearing of an accepted leader whilst resenting similar
action on the part of others.
 The need of acknowledged authority was felt from the outset.
Newport, Gosnold, and Ratcliffe, were, for the nonce, merely sailing
masters and had as much as they could well do to fulfill their duties
in that capacity. The expedition emerged from the Thames to
encounter contrary winds and stormy weather, so that it was forced
to beat about off the coast of England for weeks without making any
progress. The emigrants began to quarrel, and among the principal
men of the party there broke out a spirit of jealousy which was
never allayed. This was directed chiefly against Captain Smith. His
companions were forced to admit to themselves that this self-
possessed and confident young man was their superior in all those
qualities that would be of most account in the strange land for which
they were destined, and they had sufficient discernment to realize
that no matter who might become the nominal President of the
colony, John Smith would be its master spirit and actual leader. This
was made manifest in these first few weeks of trying delay. Did one
of the ship-captains need assistance? John Smith was a practical
navigator and could both handle a vessel and read the charts. In the
dispositions for defence in case of attack, he had to be relied upon
as the best gunner and leader of fighting men among them. When
the voyagers became troublesome none but John Smith could
effectually quiet them. A few words in his calm firm tones would
quickly quell a disturbance. Some of these men had served under
him and had learned to respect his character. The others instinctively
felt that he was a man of sense and strength—one of those rare
creatures who rise to every emergency and lift their subordinates
with them.
Men of broad and generous minds would have rejoiced to think
that they had among them one who was capable of steering them
through all their difficulties and whose experience would help them
to avoid many a pitfall and disaster. There were a few among the
gentlemen, such as George Percy, Parson Hunt and Scrivener, who
took this sensible view of the situation. On the other hand,
Wingfield, Kendall, Ratcliffe, Archer and several more, conscious of
their own inferiority, became possessed by an insane jealousy of our
hero. This grew with the progress of the voyage and constant
discussion of their silly suspicions, until at length they had fully
persuaded themselves that Captain John Smith was a dark
conspirator who entertained designs against themselves and
contemplated treason against his King and country. They believed,
or professed to believe, that he had distributed creatures of his own
throughout the three vessels with the intention of seizing the
expedition and proclaiming himself king of the new country as soon
as they should arrive at it. With this excuse they made him a close
prisoner when the vessels were in mid-Atlantic.
When the party charged with this disgraceful office approached
him on the deck of the Susan Constant, Smith handed to them his
sword without a word and went below smiling grimly. He had long
since fathomed the weakness and the incompetence of these self-
constituted leaders. He knew that the time would come when his
services would be indispensable to them and he was content to
abide it in patience. They should have realized that, if their
suspicions were just, he had but to raise his voice and the vessels
would be instantly in mutiny. But they had not sufficient intelligence
to perceive that if John Smith was the dangerous character they
assumed him to be their best course was to propitiate him rather
than to arouse his enmity. Instead of being impressed by the self-
confident manner in which he yielded to confinement in the hold
they gained courage from the incident and actually thought that they
might go to any extreme without resistance on his part. So, when
the vessels made land at the West Indies, these masterful gentry
erected a gallows for the purpose of hanging our hero, or, perhaps,
of frightening him. Now we know that they could not have
undertaken a more difficult task than that of attempting to strike
fear into the heart of John Smith, and as to actual hanging, whilst he
had a considerable sense of humor, it did not carry him so far as
taking part in a performance of that sort. When they brought him on
deck and solemnly informed him that the gallows awaited him, he
laughed in their faces and told them that it was a shame to waste
good timber, for he had not the remotest thought of using the
contrivance. In fact, he took the matter with such careless assurance
that they wisely concluded to abandon the project and sailing away,
left their useless gallows standing.
Steering for that portion of the mainland where the former ill-fated
colonies had been planted, the vessels were soon out of their
reckoning and beat about for several days without sight of land.
They had been already four months upon a voyage that should have
occupied no more than two and had made serious inroads into the
stock of provisions which was calculated to furnish the store of the
settlers. They began to grow fearful and discontented. Many wished
to put about and sail homeward, and even Ratcliffe, the captain of
the Discovery, favored such a course. Whilst they were debating the
proposition, a violent storm arose and luckily drove them to their
destination. On the twenty-sixth day of April, 1607, they entered the
Bay of Chesapeake.
Eager to see the new land of promise, a party of the colonists
went ashore that day. They wandered through forest and glade,
cheered by the genial warmth of the southern clime and delighted
with the beautiful scenery and luxuriant vegetation. But before they
returned to the ships they were reminded that this natural paradise
was in possession of a savage people who could hardly be expected
to respect King James’s gift of their land to strangers. As the
exploring party made their way back to the shore they fell into an
ambush—the first of many which they were destined to experience.
They had not seen a human being since landing, and the shower of
arrows that proclaimed the presence of the Indians came as a
complete surprise. Neither redman nor paleface was quite prepared
for intimate acquaintance at this time, and the sound of the muskets
sent the former scurrying to the hills whilst the latter hurried to the
shelter of the ships, carrying two men who had been severely
wounded.
Thus the Jamestown colonists came to America. How little they
were qualified for the work before them we have already seen. As
we progress with our story we shall see how often they brought
misfortune upon themselves and how the wisdom and energy of one
man saved the undertaking from utter failure.
 XIV.
POWHATAN AND HIS PEOPLE

The President and Council are established and a settlement made at

Jamestown—Newport and Smith go on an exploring expedition—They meet
Powhatan, the great Werowance of the country—They are feasted and
fêted by the old Chief—A quick return to Jamestown and a timely arrival
—The Indians attack the settlers and take them unawares—Gallant stand
made by the gentlemen adventurers—The appearance of Newport and his
men prevents a massacre—A fort and stockade are hurriedly erected—
Smith is tried on a charge of treason and triumphantly acquitted—
Captain Newport returns to England with the two larger ships.

It was, indeed, a fair land to which the white men had journeyed
from over the seas. Smith says of it: “Heaven and earth never
agreed better to frame a place for man’s habitation. Here are
mountains, hills, plains, rivers, and brooks, all running most
pleasantly into a fair bay, compassed, but for the mouth, with fruitful
and delightsome land.” The country was covered, for the most part,
with virgin forest. Here and there a small clearing afforded a site for
a cluster of wigwams around which lay fields of maize or other
cereals. The birds and animals that we prize most highly as table
delicacies abounded in the wilds, and the waters swarmed with fish.
A very small proportion of the land was occupied. The Indian
villages were few and miles apart. The country round about the
Jamestown settlement was in the possession of the Algonquin tribe,
divided into many bands, generally numbering not more than a few
hundred souls, each band under its own chief and all owning
allegiance to a king or werowance named Powhatan. There was
constant intercourse between the villages, and their men joined
together for purposes of war, or the chase. Rough forest trails
formed the only roads between the different centres, whilst blazed
trees marked by-paths that led to springs, favorite trapping grounds,
or other localities of occasional resort.
The royal orders permitted the opening of the box of instructions
as soon as the colonists should have reached Virginia, and they lost
no time in satisfying their anxiety to learn the membership of the
Council. It appeared that the King had selected for that distinction
and responsibility, Edward Wingfield, Bartholomew Gosnold,
Christopher Newport, John Ratcliffe, George Kendall and John Smith.
The last named was still in irons and his fellow-councilmen were,
with the possible exception of Newport, unfriendly to him. It was
decided that he should not be admitted to the body, and the
remaining members proceeded to elect Wingfield, Smith’s arch-
enemy, to the position of President.
For the next two weeks and more, the colonists remained upon
the ships. Meanwhile they explored the surrounding country for a
favorable site on which to settle. The Indians with whom they came
in contact during this time treated them with the utmost kindness,
freely furnishing food and tobacco, which latter few of the settlers
had ever smoked, although Raleigh had introduced the leaf into
England some years earlier. Everything was so strange to the
adventurers, many of whom were absent from their native land for
the first time, that they forgot for a while their discontent and
jealousies in the interest and wonder excited by new sights and
scenes.
We can imagine, for instance, the mixed sensations of the
strangers when a band of Rappahonacks marched towards them,
headed by their chief playing upon a reed flute. They were all
fantastically trimmed, we will say, for their only dress was a coat of
paint. The chief, as befitted his rank, was the most grotesque figure
of all, but the effect was equally hideous and awesome and the
Englishmen were divided between merriment and fear. On one side
of his head the chief wore a crown of deer’s hair dyed red and
interwoven with his own raven locks; on the other side, which was
shaven, he wore a large plate of copper, whilst two long feathers
stood up from the centre of his crown. His body was painted crimson
and his face blue. Around his neck was a chain of beads, and strings
of pearls hung from his ears which were pierced to hold bird’s claws
set in gold. He and his followers each carried a bow and arrows and
a tomahawk with stone head.
At length it was decided to settle upon a little peninsula jutting
into the river. There was a great deal of disagreement about this
site. Smith favored it, mainly because its comparative isolation made
it easier to defend than a location further inland, but he was allowed
no voice in the selection. It was, however, an unfortunate choice, for
the ground was low and marshy and no doubt a great deal of the
later mortality was due to the unhealthy situation of the infant
settlement of Jamestown. Here, however, the colonists landed on the
thirteenth day of May and set up the tents in which they lived for
some time thereafter. There is too much to be done to justify the
absence of an available strong arm and Smith, although virtually a
prisoner still, is allowed to join in the general labor and this he does
cheerfully without any show of resentment on account of his past
treatment.
The President gave evidence of his incapacity from the very
outset. Relying implicitly upon the friendly attitude of the Indians he
refused to allow any defences to be considered, and even went so
far as to decline to unpack the arms which had been brought from
England, declaring that to do so would be a display of distrust which
the savages might resent. The latter, who were permitted to go in
and out of the camp with their weapons, were no doubt for a time
divided in mind as to whether the white men were superhuman
beings invulnerable to arrows or only a species of foolish and
confiding fellow-creatures such as they had never known. Wingfield
had most of his men busy felling trees and making clapboards with
which to freight the vessels on their return, for it must be
understood that these colonists were practically employees of the
company that had been at the expense of sending them out and
which expected to make a profit on the investment. It was necessary
therefore to secure cargoes for shipment to England, but the
position should have been fortified and houses erected before all
else.
Newport was anxious to have more extensive information of the
country to report to his employers who entertained the belief—
absurd as it seems to us—that by penetrating one or two hundred
miles farther westward the settlers would come upon the Pacific and
open a short route to India. Newport therefore organized an
expedition to explore the river. He took twenty men and was glad to
include Smith in the party. There was no opposition on the part of
the Council to the arrangement. Indeed, it was entirely to their
liking. None of them was over keen to penetrate the unknown with
its possible dangers and each was reluctant to leave the settlement
for the further reason that he distrusted his fellow-members of the
Council and was jealous of them. As to Smith, they had made up
their minds to send him back to England a prisoner, to be tried on
charges of treason, conspiracy, and almost anything else their
inventive minds could conceive.
So Captain Newport and his party proceeded slowly up the river in
their shallop, greeted kindly by the Indians in the various villages
along the banks and feasted by them. The travellers in their turn
bestowed upon their entertainers presents of beads, nails, bottles,
and other articles, trifling in themselves but almost priceless to the
savages who had never seen anything of the kind. At length the
party arrived at a village named Powhatan. It was located very near
the present situation of Richmond, and perhaps exactly where the
old home of the Mayo family—still called “Powhatan”—stands. This
village was governed by a son of the great Werowance. The capital
of the latter was at Werowocomico, near the mouth of the York
River, but he happened to be at Powhatan at the time of Newport’s
arrival. I say that he happened to be there, but it is much more likely
that he had been informed of the expedition and had gone overland
to his son’s village with the express intention of meeting the
strangers, about whom he must have been keenly curious.
Powhatan was the chief of all the country within a radius of sixty
miles of Jamestown, and having a population of about eight
thousand, which included two thousand or more warriors. Although
over seventy years of age, he was vigorous in mind and body. His
tall, well-proportioned frame was as straight as an arrow. His long
gray hair flowed loose over his shoulders and his stern and wrinkled
countenance expressed dignity and pride. The English learned to
know him for a keen and subtle schemer, to whom the common
phrase, “simple savage,” would be altogether misapplied. He was
sufficiently sagacious to realize from the first that in the white men
he had a superior race to deal with and he made up his mind that
the most effective weapon that he could use against them would be
treachery.
On this occasion, he dissembled the feelings of anger and fear
that he must have felt against the intruders and received them with
every sign of amity. To his people, who began to murmur at their
presence and displayed an inclination to do them harm, he declared:
“They can do us no injury. They desire no more than a little land
and will pay us richly for it. It is my pleasure that you treat them
kindly.”
In the meanwhile, his keen penetrating glance was taking in every
detail of his visitors’ appearance, scrutinizing their weapons and
dress, and closely examining their faces as they spoke, for the
settlers had picked up a little of the language.
When the voyagers, after being feasted and fêted at the village of
Powhatan, continued their journey up the river, the “Emperor,” as the
early writers call him, furnished them with a guide, whose chief duty
doubtless was to act as spy and report their movements to him.
Newport proceeded up the river until it became too shallow to admit
of further progress. He then turned and commenced the descent. He
had not gone many days’ journey when he began to notice a change
in the attitude of the Indians which prompted him to hasten on to
the settlement with all speed. It was well that he did so for the
settlers were in a critical situation.
We have seen that Wingfield altogether neglected to place the
colonists in a position to defend themselves from attack. During the
absence of the exploring expedition he had so far departed from his
foolish attitude as to permit Captain Kendall to erect a paltry
barricade of branches across the neck of the little peninsula, but this
was the only measure of safety he could be induced to take. The
Indians were permitted to come and go as freely as ever and the
arms were left in the packing cases. Of course it was only a matter
of time when the Indians would take advantage of such a constantly
tempting opportunity to attack the newcomers.
One day, without the slightest warning, four hundred savages
rushed upon the settlement with their blood-curdling war-whoop.
The colonists were utterly unprepared and most of them unarmed.
Seventeen fell at the first assault. Fortunately the gentlemen
habitually wore swords, these being part of the every-day dress of
the time, and many of them had pistols in their belts. They quickly
threw themselves between the unarmed settlers and the Indians and
checked the latter with the fire of their pistols. Wingfield, who
though a fool was no coward, headed his people and narrowly
escaped death, an arrow cleaving his beard. Four other members of
the Council were among the wounded, so that only one of them
escaped untouched.
The gallant stand made by the gentlemen adventurers only
checked the Indians for a moment, and there is no doubt that every
man of the defenders must have been slain had not the ships
created a diversion by opening fire with their big guns. Even this
assistance effected but temporary relief, for the Indians would have
renewed the attack at nightfall, with complete success in all
probability, but the appearance of Newport at this juncture with his
twenty picked and fully armed men put a different complexion on
affairs. The reinforcement sallied against the attacking savages and
drove them to retreat.
It is hardly necessary to state that all hands were now engaged
with feverish zeal in erecting a fort and stockade. Some demi-
culverins were carried ashore from the ships and mounted. The arms
were uncased and distributed and certain men were daily drilled in
military exercises, whilst a constant guard was maintained
throughout the day and night. From this time the intercourse
between the whites and Indians was marked on both sides by
caution and suspicion.
When the defences had been completed, Captain Newport made
preparations for an immediate departure and then the Council
informed Smith that he was to be returned to England a prisoner for
trial. Fortunately for the future of the colony, our hero rebelled
against such an unjust proceeding, saying, with reason, that since all
persons cognizant of the facts were on the spot, it was on the spot
that he should be tried, if anywhere. His contention was so just, and
the sentiment in his favor so strong, that the Council was obliged to
accede to his demand. He protested against a moment’s delay,
declaring that, if found guilty by a jury of his peers, he would
willingly return to England in chains with Captain Newport and take
the consequences.
The trial resulted in a triumphant acquittal. There was not one iota
of real evidence adduced against the prisoner. Wingfield and others
had nothing but their bare suspicions to bring forward. It did
transpire, however, in the course of the proceedings that the
President had not only been moved by malice but that he had
endeavored to induce certain persons to give false evidence against
his enemy. On the strength of these revelations, the jury not only
acquitted Captain Smith but sentenced the President to pay him two
hundred pounds in damages, which sum, or its equivalent, for it was
paid in goods, our hero promptly turned into the common fund.
Smith accepted his acquittal with the same calm indifference that
had characterized his behavior since his arrest and showed a
readiness to forget past differences and encourage harmony among
the leaders. Mr. Hunt also strove to produce peace and goodwill in
the settlement but the efforts were useless. When Newport left them
in June, the colony was divided into two factions, the supporters of
Wingfield and those of Smith, who was now of course free of his
seat at the Council board. And so it remained to the end of our story
—jealousy, meanness, incompetence and even treachery, hazarding
the lives and the fortunes of the little band of pioneers who should
have been knit together by common interests and common dangers.
 XV.
TREASON AND TREACHERY

The colonists experience hard times and a touch of starvation—Fever seizes

the settlement and one-half the settlers die—The entire charge of affairs
devolves upon Captain Smith—President Wingfield is deposed and
Ratcliffe appointed in his place—Smith leads an expedition in search of
corn—Returns to find trouble at Jamestown—The blacksmith to be
hanged for treason—At the foot of the gallows he divulges a Spanish
plot—Captain Kendall, a Councilman, is involved—His guilt is established
—He seizes the pinnace and attempts to sail away—Smith trains a cannon
upon the boat and forces the traitor to land—He is hanged.

Just before the departure of Captain Newport with the two larger
ships—the pinnace, Discovery, was left for the use of the colonists—
Mr. Hunt had administered the communion to the company in the
hope that the joint participation in the holy sacrament might create a
bond of amity between them. On that occasion Captain Smith had
modestly addressed the assembled settlers, urging them to forget
past disagreement, as he was ready to do, and address themselves
energetically to the important business of the community.
“You that of your own accord have hazarded your lives and
estates in this adventure, having your country’s profit and renown at
heart,” he said with earnestness, “banish from among you
cowardice, covetousness, jealousies, and idleness. These be enemies
to the raising your honors and fortunes and put in danger your very
lives, for if dissension prevail among us, surely we shall become too
weak to withstand the Indians. For myself, I ever intend my actions
shall be upright and regulated by justice. It hath been and ever shall
be my care to give every man his due.”
The plain, frank speech moved his hearers, but in the evil times
that quickly fell upon them good counsel was forgotten and strife
and ill-nature resumed their sway.
The colonists had arrived too late in the year to plant and they
soon began to experience a shortage of provisions. The grain which
had lain six months in the holds of leaky vessels was wormy and
sodden, unfit for horses and scarcely eatable by men. Nevertheless,
for weeks after Newport left, a small allowance of this formed the
principal diet of the unfortunate settlers. The woods abounded in
game, it is true, but they were yet unskilled in hunting and dared
not venture far from their palisades, whilst the unaccustomed
sounds of axe and hammer had driven every beast and most of the
birds from the neighborhood. They must have starved but for the
sturgeon that they secured from the river. On these they dined with
so little variation that their stomachs at last rebelled at the very sight
of them. One of this miserable company, describing their condition,
says with melancholy humor: “Our drink was water; our lodgings
castles in the air.”
But lack of food was only one of the hardships which befell the
poor wretches. There were but few dwellings yet constructed, and
being forced to lie upon the low damp ground, malarial fever and
typhoid broke out among them and spread with such fearful rapidity
that not one of them escaped sickness. Hardly a day passed but one
at least of their number found a happy release from his sufferings in
death. Fifty in all—just half of them—died between June and
September. The unaccustomed heat aided in prostrating them, so
that at one time there were scarce ten men able to stand upon their
feet. And all this time the Indians kept up a desultory warfare and
only refrained from a determined attack upon the settlement for fear
of the firearms. Had they assaulted the stockade, instead of
contenting themselves with shooting arrows into it from a distance,
the colonists could have made no effective defence against them.
 Shortly, the whole weight of authority and the entire charge of the
safety of the settlement fell upon Captain Smith. He was sick like the
rest, but kept his feet by sheer strength of will, knowing that
otherwise they would all fall victims to the savages in short order.
Gosnold was under the sod. Wingfield, Martin and Ratcliffe were on
the verge of death. Kendall was sick and, moreover, had been
deposed from his place in the Council. In fact, all the chief men of
the colony were incapacitated, “the rest being in such despair that
they would rather starve and rot with idleness than be persuaded to
do anything for their own relief without constraint.” In this strait the
courage and resolution of one man saved them as happened
repeatedly afterward. He nursed the sick, distributed the stores,
stood guard day and night, coaxed and threatened the least weak
into exerting themselves, cunningly hid their real condition from the
Indians, and, by the exercise of every available resource, tided over
the terrible months of July and August.
Early in September, Wingfield was deposed from the presidency.
His manifest incompetency had long been the occasion of discontent
which was fanned to fever heat when the starving settlers
discovered that the leader, who was too fine a gentleman to eat
from the common kettle, had been diverting the best of the supplies
from the public store to his private larder. The climax which brought
about his downfall, however, was reached when it transpired that the
President had made arrangements to steal away in the pinnace and
return to England, leaving the settlement in the lurch. Ratcliffe was
elected to fill his place. He was a man of no greater capacity than his
predecessor, but it happened that conditions improved at about this
time and the undiscerning colonists were willing to give him credit
for the change.
Early fall brings ripening fruit and vegetables in the South. The
Indians, who fortunately had no idea of the extremity to which the
colony had been reduced, began to carry corn and other truck to the
fort, glad to trade for beads, little iron chisels or other trifles. Wild
fowl came into the river in large numbers and, with these welcome
additions to their hitherto scanty diet, the sick soon began to recover
health and strength. Smith, so soon as he could muster a boat’s
crew, made an excursion up the river and returned with some thirty
bushels of corn to famine-stricken Jamestown. Having secured
ample supplies for immediate needs, our hero, who was by this time
generally recognized as the actual leader of the colony, put as many
men as possible to work building houses and succeeded so far as to
provide a comfortable dwelling for every one but himself.
Our adventurers, convalescent for the most part, now experienced
a Virginia autumn in all its glory. The days were cloudless and cool.
The foliage took on magic hues and presented patterns marvellously
beautiful as an oriental fabric. The air, stimulating as strong wine,
drove the ague from the system and cleared the brain. The fruits of
the field stood ripe and inviting whilst nuts hung in profusion from
the boughs of trees amongst which fat squirrels and opossums
sported. Turkeys with their numerous broods wandered through the
woods whilst partridges and quail abounded in the undergrowth.
Where starvation had stared them in the face the colonists now saw
plenty on every hand and, with the appetites of men turning their
backs upon fever-beds, ate to repletion. With the removal of their
sufferings, they dismissed the experience from their minds and gave
no heed to the latent lesson in it. Not so Captain Smith, however. He
realized the necessity of providing a store of food against the
approach of winter, without relying upon the return of Newport with
a supply ship.
The Council readily agreed to the proposed expedition in search of
provisions, but it was not in their mind to give the command to
Captain Smith. Far from being grateful to the man who had saved
the settlement in the time of its dire distress and helplessness, they
were more than ever jealous of his growing influence with the
colonists. None of them was willing to brave the dangers and
hardships of the expedition himself nor did they dare, in the face of
Smith’s popularity, to appoint another to the command. In this
difficulty they pretended a desire to be fair to the other gentlemen
adventurers by putting a number of their names into a lottery from
which the commander should be drawn. The hope was that by this
means some other might be set up as a sort of competitor to Smith.
There were those among the gentlemen who penetrated this design
and had sufficient sense to circumvent it. George Percy, a brother of
the Earl of Northumberland, and Scrivener, were among our hero’s
staunch adherents. Percy contrived that he should draw the lot from
the hat that contained the names. The first paper that he drew bore
upon it the words: “The Honorable George Percy.” Without a
moment’s hesitation he showed it to Scrivener, as though for
confirmation, and crumpling it in his hand, cried:
“Captain John Smith draws the command,” and the announcement
was received with a shout of approval.
“Thou hast foregone an honor and the prospect of more,” said
Scrivener, as they walked away together.
“Good Master Scrivener,” replied the young nobleman, with a
quizzical smile, “one needs must have a head to carry honors
gracefully and I am fain to confess that I deem this poor caput of
mine safer in the keeping of our doughty captain than in mine own.”
It was early in November when Smith, taking the barge and seven
men, started up the Chickahominy. The warriors were absent from
the first village he visited and the women and children fled at the
approach of his party. Here he found the store-houses filled with
corn, but there was no one to trade and, as he says, he had neither
inclination nor commission to loot, and so he turned his back upon
the place and came away empty-handed. Now, if we consider the
impression that must have been made upon those Indians by this
incident, we must the more keenly regret that so few others were
moved by similar principles of wisdom and honesty in their dealings
with the savages. In his treatment of the Indian down to the present
day the white man appears in a very poor light, and most of the
troubles between the two races have been due to the greed and
injustice of the latter. John Smith set an example to later colonists
which, had they followed it, would have saved them much bloodshed
and difficulty.
 Proceeding along the narrow river, the expedition arrived at other
villages where the conditions better favored their purpose. The
Indians seem to have gained some inkling of the impoverished state
of the Jamestown store, for at first they tendered but paltry
quantities of grain for the trinkets which Smith offered to exchange.
But they had to deal with one who was no less shrewd than
themselves. The Captain promptly turned on his heel and marched
off towards his boat. This independent action brought the redskins
crowding after him with all the corn that they could carry and ready
to trade on any terms. In order to allay their suspicions as to his
need, Smith declined to accept more than a moderate quantity from
any one band, but by visiting many, contrived without difficulty to fill
the barge and, as he says, might have loaded the pinnace besides if
it had been with him.
We will now leave Captain Smith and his party bringing their boat
down the river towards home and see what is going on at
Jamestown in the meanwhile. We shall find throughout our story
that the master spirit of the colony never leaves the settlement but
that some trouble breaks out in his absence. This occasion was no
exception to the rule. One day, shortly before the return of the
expedition, Ratcliffe, the President, fell into an altercation with the
blacksmith, and in the heat of passion struck the man. The blow was
returned, as one thinks it should have been, but in those days the
distinction between classes was much more marked than in these
and the unfortunate artisan was immediately clapped in jail.
To have struck a gentleman was bad enough, but the hot-headed
north-country blacksmith had raised his hand against the
representative of the sacred majesty of the King and that constituted
high treason. A jury of his fellows found him guilty and he was
sentenced to be hanged without delay. A gallows was quickly
erected and the brawny blacksmith, after receiving the ministrations
of Mr. Hunt, was bidden to mount. But the condemned man craved
the usual privilege of making a dying speech, and the request was
granted. To the consternation of the assembled colonists he declared
that he was in possession of a plot to betray the settlement to the
Spaniards, and offered to divulge the details on condition that his life
should be spared. This was granted. Indeed, it is difficult to
understand how the colonists could have entertained the design to
hang almost the most useful man among them.
In order to appreciate the blacksmith’s revelation, we should
understand that although Spain had some years previously entered
into a treaty of peace with England, she remained keenly jealous of
the growing power of the latter nation and never ceased to employ
underhand methods to check it. Spanish spies were numerous in
England and were to be found among all classes, for some of the
Catholic nobility were not above allowing their religious zeal to
outrun their sense of patriotism. In particular was Spain concerned
about the new ardor for American colonization, of which one of the
earliest manifestations was the settlement at Jamestown, and it is
more than probable that she had sent several of her secret agents
out with the expedition from England. However that may be, Captain
Kendall, erstwhile member of Council, was the only one accused by
the reprieved man. A search of the traitor’s quarters disclosed
papers that left no doubt as to his guilt.
The searching party had just returned to the Council room with
the incriminating documents when Captain Smith landed his party
and entered the fort to find the settlement in the greatest state of
excitement. He at once joined the Council and was in deliberation
with the other members when a man burst in upon them shouting:
“Captain Kendall hath seized the pinnace and is about sailing away
in her.”
The Councilmen rushed from the chamber without ceremony and
made towards the shore. There, sure enough, was the pinnace in
mid-stream and Captain Kendall hoisting her sail to catch a stiff
breeze which was blowing out of the river. The spectators stood
open-mouthed in speechless dismay, or bewailed the escape that
they seemed to consider accomplished. That was not the view of
Captain Smith. He took in the situation at a glance and as quickly
decided upon counteraction. Running back to the fort he had a gun
trained on the pinnace in a trice and shouted to its occupant to
come ashore or stay and sink and to make his decision instanter.
One look at the determined face peering over the touch-hole of the
cannon sufficed the spy. He brought the boat ashore and within the
hour was shot.
 XVI.
CAPTIVE TO THE INDIANS

Peace and plenty at the settlement—Smith sets out to discover the source
of the Chickahominy—He falls into an ambush and has a running fight
with two hundred warriors—Walks into a swamp and is forced to
surrender—Opechancanough the chief of the Pamaunkes—Smith is put to
a test of courage—He figures in a triumphal procession—Has suspicions
that he is being fattened for the table—He sends a timely warning to
Jamestown and diverts a projected attack by the Indians—Smith is dealt
with by the medicine men—A strange, wild ceremony enacted by hideously
painted and bedecked creatures.

The close of the year 1607 found the settlement in good

circumstances. The store was well stocked with maize, peas and
beans, smoked venison and fish, dried fruits and nuts. Warm coats
and coverings had been made from fur and feathers and a large
quantity of wood had been cut and stacked for fuel. There did not
appear to be any danger of hardship in Jamestown during the
ensuing winter, although such a careless and incompetent lot as our
settlers were apt to create trouble for themselves out of the most
favorable conditions. There were only three persons in authority—
Ratcliffe, Martin and Smith. The first was a man of mean ability and
doubtful integrity. Martin, honest and well-meaning, was a constant
invalid and incapable of any degree of activity. Smith was by this
time recognized by all as the true leader of the colony and the only
man in it who could secure obedience and maintain discipline. When
he was in Jamestown, order prevailed and work progressed. When
he left, the settlers scarcely pretended to heed the orders of the
other members of the Council. Indeed, Percy and Scrivener, who
were known to be in full accord with Smith, had greater influence
with the rank and file than Ratcliffe or Martin. In fact the north-
country nobleman and the Londoner played the part of faithful
watchdogs during the Captain’s absence, and it was arranged that
one at least of them should always remain at Jamestown when
Smith went abroad.
As we know, inaction was positively abhorrent to our hero and,
the settlement being now thoroughly quiet and quite prepared for
the winter, he determined on an expedition designed to trace the
Chickahominy to its source. Exploration was one of the chief duties
of the colonists and Smith, as he tells us, hoped that he might soon
discover “some matters of worth to encourage adventurers in
England.” The Indians along the river had been so friendly during his
foraging trip the month before that he felt safe in making the
present journey, but his military training and natural prudence would
not permit him to relax his usual precautions. But there was one
important feature of Indian tactics with which the American colonists
had not become familiar. They had yet to learn how large bodies of
redskins would watch a settlement, or track a party on the move, for
days and weeks without allowing their presence to be known. Ever
since their landing, the settlers had been under the sleepless eye of
spies lying hidden in grass or behind trees, and from the moment
Captain Smith left Jamestown his progress had been flanked by a
body of savages moving stealthily through the woods.
 THE SETTLERS HAD BEEN UNDER THE SLEEPLESS
EYE OF SPIES LYING HIDDEN

The barge proceeded fifty miles up the river without incident, but
presently the stream became too shallow to admit of its going
farther. A canoe was secured from a village in the vicinity, with two
Indians to paddle it. In this Smith decided to push on to the head of
the river, taking with him two of his men. The remainder he left in
the barge, instructing them not to go on shore and to keep a sharp
lookout until his return. Twenty miles onward the canoe travelled
when an obstruction of fallen trees brought the party to a halt. It
seemed probable that the source of the stream could be but a few
miles beyond and Smith determined to seek it on foot accompanied
by one of the Indians. The other and the two Englishmen he left in
the canoe, cautioning them to keep their matches burning, and at
the first sign of danger to fire an alarm.
Smith had hardly gone a mile through the forest when he was
suddenly startled by a shrill war-whoop. He could see no one and he
had not been warned of danger by his men as agreed. He
concluded, therefore, that they had been surprised and killed with
the connivance of the guide. Even as the thought flashed through
his mind he grappled with the Indian beside him and wrenched the
bow from his grasp. It was done in an instant, and as quickly he
bound an arm of the savage to his own with one of his garters. He
had not completed the act when an arrow half spent struck him on
the thigh and a moment later he discerned two dusky figures
drawing their bows upon him. These disappeared at the discharge of
his pistol, and he was congratulating himself on having routed them
so easily when two hundred warriors, hideous in paint and feathers,
rose from the ground in front of him. At their head was
Opechancanough, the chief of the Pamaunkes.
The situation would have suggested surrender to the ordinary
man. There could be no use in Smith’s contending against such
numbers and to retreat to the river would be no less futile, since his
men in the canoe must have been captured. It was not, however, in
our hero’s nature to give up until absolutely obliged to do so. He
could see no possibility of escape but he proposed to make it as
difficult as possible for the savages to capture him. With this thought
he placed the guide before him as a shield and prepared, with a
pistol in each hand, to meet an onrush of the warriors. But they had
no mind to rush upon those fearful fire-spitting machines and kept
off, discharging their arrows from a distance that rendered them
harmless. Seeing this, Smith began to retire, keeping his face
towards the enemy and holding his human buckler in place. The
Indians responded to this movement by cautiously advancing and at
the same time they sought to induce the Englishman to lay down his
arms, promising to spare his life in case he should do so. Smith
positively declined the proposition, insisting that he would retain his
weapons but promising not to make further use of them if he should
be permitted to depart in peace; otherwise he would use them and
kill some of his assailants without delay. The Indians continuing to
advance upon him, Smith let go both his pistols at them and took
advantage of the hesitation that followed to retreat more rapidly.
Of course this combat was of the most hopeless character and our
hero must ultimately have been shot to death had not an accident
suddenly put an end to his opposition. Still stepping backward and
dragging his captive with him he presently walks into a deep morass
and reaches the end of his journey in more than one sense, for it is
in this swamp that the Chickahominy rises and he has fulfilled his
undertaking to find the head of the river. It was at once clear to the
dauntless explorer that he must yield, and that quickly, for he and
his Indian were fast sinking in the icy ooze of the bog. He threw his
pistols away in token of surrender and his savage adversaries rushed
up and extricated him from his perilous situation.
It was with feelings of curiosity and interest on either side that
Captain John Smith, the leader of the colonists, and
Opechancanough, the chief of the Pamaunkes, confronted each
other. Both men of noble bearing and fearless character, they must
have been mutually impressed at the first encounter. The chief’s
erect and well-knit frame towered above the forms of his attendant
warriors and, together with the dignity and intelligence of his
countenance, marked him as a superior being. In later years he
played an important part in colonial history and met a shameful
death by assassination whilst a captive in the hands of the
authorities of Virginia.
Smith, whose presence of mind never deserted him, immediately
addressed himself to the task of diverting the chieftain’s mind from
the recent unpleasant circumstances and with that end in view
produced his pocket compass and presented it to the savage. The
Pamaunke was readily attracted by the mystery of the twinkling
needle which lay in sight but beyond touch, and when our hero
showed how it pointed persistently to the north, the wonder of the
savage increased. Having thus excited the interest of his captors,
Smith went on to hold their attention with a more detailed
explanation of the uses of the instrument. He described, in simple
language and with the aid of signs, the shape and movement of the
earth and the relative positions of sun, moon and stars. This strange
astronomical lecture, delivered in the depths of the forest, at length
wearied the auditors and they prepared to set out on the return
journey, for they had no thought of killing the captive at that time.
He was a man of too much importance to be slain off-hand and
without learning the pleasure of the great Powhatan in the matter.
They did, however, tie him to a tree and make a pretence of drawing
their bows upon him but, as the paleface met the threatened death
without so much as blinking, the savages derived little satisfaction
from the amusement. Before taking the march, Smith was given
food and led to a fire, beside which lay the body of Emery, one of
the men he had left in the canoe, stuck full of arrows.
The return of Opechancanough to the settlement of the
Pamaunkes was in the nature of a triumphal procession. As the band
approached a village they gave vent to their piercing war-whoop and
entered it chanting their song of victory. In the midst of the
procession walked the Chief with Smith’s weapons borne before him
and the captive, guarded by eight picked warriors, following. A
ceremonial dance took place before the party dispersed to their
various lodgings for the night. The captive was well treated and had
an excellent opportunity to study the natives and their habits, for
Opechancanough carried his prize on a circuit of many villages
before finally bringing him to the capital of Powhatan. Nor did the
peril of his situation prevent our hero from exercising his usual keen
powers of observation, for he has left us a minute account of his
strange experiences during these weeks of captive wandering.
Every morning bread and venison were brought to the Englishman
in sufficient quantity to have satisfied ten men. His captors never by
any chance ate with him and, remembering the reluctance of
Eastern peoples to partake of food with those whom they designed
to harm, this fact excited his apprehensions. These Indians were not
cannibals but he had not that consoling knowledge, and the insistent
manner in which they pressed meat upon him raised a disagreeable
suspicion that they were fattening him for the table. The thought of
death—even with torture—he could endure calmly, but the idea of
being eaten afterwards caused him to shudder with horror. We can
not help thinking, however, that the sinewy captain might have
visited his enemies with a posthumous revenge had they recklessly
subjected him to such a fate and themselves to such grave hazard of
acute indigestion.
But the captive’s concern for the settlement at Jamestown
outweighed all other considerations. He surmised with reason, that
having him in their power, the Indians would endeavor to overcome
the colonists, whose natural incapacity to take care of themselves
would be enhanced by the belief that their leader was dead. He was
racking his brain to devise some means of communicating with
them, when chance threw an opportunity to him. It seems that in
the encounter preceding his surrender to Opechancanough Smith
had seriously wounded one of the Indians. He was now called upon
to cure his victim and replied that he might be able to do so if in
possession of certain medicine which could be obtained from
Jamestown. The Chief agreed that two messengers should bear a
letter to the settlement, although he could not believe that a few
lines scrawled upon paper would convey any meaning, much less
elicit the desired response.
The messengers journeyed to the fort with all speed, and as they
were not permitted to approach closely, left the note in a
conspicuous place and there received the reply. Of course Smith took
the opportunity to warn the settlers of the projected attack, and
prayed them to be constantly on their guard. He also suggested that
some show of strength, as a salvo from the big guns, might have a
salutary effect upon the messengers. The latter, after they had
received the medicine requested, and turned homewards, were
treated to such a thunderous discharge of cannon and musketry that
they ran for miles in terror of their lives and arrived at the village
well-nigh scared out of their wits. Their account of this terrible
experience decided the Indians not to attempt a descent upon
Jamestown and their respect increased for a man who could convey
his thoughts and wishes by means of such a mysterious medium as
a letter appeared to them to be.
Although the Indians had Smith unarmed and completely in their
power, they were not at all satisfied of his inability to harm them,
and the question seems to have caused them considerable anxiety.
The medicine men of the tribe undertook by incantations and other
species of deviltry to ascertain whether the captive’s intentions
towards them were good or otherwise. Smith was led in the morning
to a large house in the centre of which a fire burned. Here he was
left alone, and presently to him entered a hideous creature making
unearthly noises in his throat to the accompaniment of a rattle,
whilst he danced about the astonished Englishman in grotesque
antics. This merry-andrew’s head was decorated with dangling
snake-skins and his body painted in a variety of colors. After a while
he was joined by three brother-priests who set up a discordant
chorus of shrieks and yells, whirling and skipping about the house
the while. They were painted half in black and half in red with great
white rings round their eyes. Shortly these were joined by three
more medicine men equally fantastic in appearance and actions. The
ceremony was maintained by these seven throughout the day, much
to the disgust of Smith, who soon found it tiresome and
uninteresting and particularly so as it involved an absolute fast from
dawn to sundown. In the evening women placed great mounds of
food upon the mats of the house and invited Smith to eat, but the
priests refrained from doing so until he had finished.
This performance was repeated on the two successive days, but
we are not told what conclusion was reached by all the fuss.
 XVII.
POCAHONTAS TO THE RESCUE

After a weary circuit of the Indian villages Smith is brought to

Werowocomico—He is received by Powhatan in the “King’s House”—The
chiefs in council decide to put him to death—He is bound and laid out,
preparatory to being killed—Pocahontas intervenes at the critical moment
—Powhatan’s dilemma and Opechancanough’s determination—“The Council
has decreed the death of the paleface”—“I, Pocahontas, daughter of our
King, claim this man for my brother”—The Indian maiden prevails—Smith
is reprieved and formally adopted into the tribe—They wish him to remain
with them and lead them against his own people.

One morning, shortly after the episode of the medicine men,

Captain Smith learned, to his great relief, that commands had been
received for his removal at once to the capital. He had no idea what,
if any fate had been determined upon for him, but he was heartily
tired of the weary wanderings and suspense of the past weeks and
ready to face the worst rather than prolong the uncertainty.
Werowocomico, the principal seat of the “Emperor” Powhatan, was
short of a day’s journey distant, and Opechancanough, with his
illustrious prisoner, reached the town as the early winter night was
setting in. The capital of the Werowance consisted of about thirty
large wigwams, or “houses,” as the earlier writers called them, and a
number of smaller ones. These for the nonce were reinforced by the
tepees, or tents, of the many Indians who had come in from distant
villages for the occasion which was no ordinary one. The large
wigwams were made in the form of the rounded tops of the wagons
called “prairie schooners,” which in the days before railroads were
used upon the continent of North America for long-distance travel.
These wagon tops were sometimes taken off and placed upon the
ground to serve as tents, when the occupants would be lying in a
contrivance exactly like the ancient wigwam in shape. The latter was
commonly big enough to contain a whole family and sometimes
harbored an entire band of fifty or sixty natives. In that case it had
two rows of apartments running along the sides and a common hall
in the middle. The structure was composed of a framework of
boughs covered with the bark of trees or with skins—sometimes a
combination of both.
Smith’s captors approached the capital in triumphal fashion,
chanting their song of victory and flourishing their weapons in
exultant pride. The town was prepared to give them the reception
usually accorded to victorious warriors returning from battle. Great
fires burned at frequent points illuming the scene with a garish light
in which the bedaubed and bedizened savages looked doubly
hideous. Chiefs and people were attired in all their fantastic finery
and even the children made some show of tawdry ornament. The
women had prepared food with even more than ordinary profusion
and had laid the mats in anticipation of the prospective feasting. A
double line of fully armed and foully painted warriors—“grim
courtiers,” Smith calls them—formed an avenue to the “King’s house”
along which the captive passed into the presence of the great
Werowance, whilst the spectators “stood wondering at him as he
had been a monster.”
At the farther end of the wigwam, upon a platform, before which a
large fire blazed, reclined the aged but still vigorous chieftain, upon
a heap of furs. On either side of him stood the principal chiefs and
medicine men of the tribe, whilst the women of his family grouped
themselves behind. Two dense walls of warriors lined along the sides
of the wigwam leaving a space in the centre which was covered by a
mat. Upon this Smith took his stand and calmly surveyed the scene
which was not without an element of rude beauty. A loud shout had
greeted his entrance. In the profound silence that followed, two
women—“the Queen of Appamatuck and another”—came forward
with food which they placed before him and signed to him to eat.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com