The Express.
London, England, 1864-04-06 00:00:00

THE MUMS; WEDNESDAY EVENINGb APRIL 6, 1864.

420.V.PLATEJ) TARGET 9.
Lord R. MONTAdt gam notice' that as that day
mooch he should move for plans and at bearing upon
Ste relative mentent the Chaen and targets.
I/AMORY 3315PE0TOR8.
Colonel EDWARDS pm notice that as Thursday he
should ask the Home Secretary whether sabinspeotom of
factories were required to be at lomat 25 year of age before
they were appointed ; whether the new scale at salmis, did
not give them any annual isressre at pay, but required 30
rears of service before the maximum of 5001. a year we. at-
tained ; whether the penooal expenses when away from home
were only 125.. while the sons allowances in other depart-
ments were 155., aad in some mass 11. per day, and if
why the allowance to these officers had not been raised
to the average standard.

)U8 ILILIPENDITURE.

Mx. L. SMITH gave notice that on Tuesday, dprLll9,
shank! more that the select committee appointed in the
emend session of the present parliament to inquire into the
expenditure for the miscellaneous genic* be reappointed,
and report to the hones whether in their opinion any reduc-
tion out be effected in that brace:hot the public expenditure.

that • certain rate should be levied upon the land fpr the
benefit ce the poor let it be in the posmodon of whom it
might, glie dale:him she government bad met with in
acting urn theprincipie they had adopted wool, In his
oPilliesdliVeClLOß of the S:WHEW:Mit wrimpad •
'trees objection tot the victim. He admitted that the
present system of assessment might be uneetisfaiitory, but
thwoomequenes of agreeing to the motion would be that
In perishes where one half of the property had for 200
years put belonged to thegovernment, the whole of the
net of the property would be relieved from • charge which
it bad borne fora period that wee practically immemorial,
and that would be an operation footman* to lthe endow-
ment of the ntrepayen of that particular perish out of the
national exchequer. It was in short a peered to throw
on the rural pariabes and those plasm which did not
poems government establishments a new
.and gratuitous
burden. for the ptupose affordiog • gratuitous relief not
founded on justice to the mere handful of parishes that
happen to have each establishments.
F. BARING remarked that an attempt to intro-
duce • bill would reveal the difficulty of dealing with this
subj.*
After a few observations by Mr. Dutton, Mr. B. Carter,
and Mr. Augeretein, and • brief reply by Aldermai;
Solommis,
The house divided, when the numbers were :
For the motto° 3O
Against it 52-22
TURNPIKE TRUSTS COMMITTER _

Upon the motion thattite;;Wctc;mmiite; on Turnpike
Trusts' omelet of 15`nuenbers,
A Mr. FERRAN D objected to the construction of this com-
mittee, and suggested the postponement of the nomination
of members for a week, with a view of adding ono or two
names of members of the manufacturing counties.
Mr. CLIVE defended the construction of the committee.
The motion was then mused to.
'SUPPLY.

On the motion for bringing up the report of supply,
Mr. YORKE asked a question of the noble lord the Secre-
tary to the Admiralty relative to the captains who bad been
placed upon the retired list in 1846, sod wished to know
whioydry were not entitled to the key of 255. a day.
C. PAGET said there were some few gallant of
who came under the order of council of 1860, and it might
perhaps be considered that their position wee not to them an
advantageous one, still it was not so prejudicial as supposed
by the hoo. member. These officers had had thenpii of
retiring, but they bad elected to remain upon the active list,
and they bad had the bloat of an immediate rise in their
pay from 10t or 12s. 6d. to 18.. per day, but in the
noun. which they had take° they had loft the
rise to 26e. per day. In dealing with this case
the Duke of Somerset had given it very serious
consideration, and he had come to the conclusion
that it could not be treated as an exceptional one.
Several o®oo3ll had preferred the retirement under the
order of 1860, as giving them en immediate rise in pay, and
which they would not have had but for that order. The
committee of last year also considered the matter, end were
of opinion that these officers ware not entitled to any °rasp-
timbal privilege.
The report was then agreed to.
THE UNION RELIEF Apr) ACTS CONTINUANCE

The amendments to this bill were considered and agreed
to, and the bill ordered to be reed a third time tomorrow.
The house adjourned at 20 minutes to 9 o'clock.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Kmaerox Aram 5.
(Beim Obiit Airtime Edo ands 51;stial Jury.)
MULL AND ANOTILII 9. COWIN AID #11101111!L
. . .

The plaintiffs In this action were Mr. Thpron, the pro
pristor of the Argyll-rooms, sod M. Louis JOU", the
son of the late M. Jai», and the defendants were Mr.
Maplaeon, the lessee of Hie Majerty's Theatre, sad his
treseerer, Mr. Cowen, and it ins »es& to mom a sum
of 701., which it was alleged was a balanoe remaining in the
hands of the latter at the tertnication of the short prome-
nade woos» season at Her Majesty's Theatre lad December.
llerjeant Parry and Mr. Waskia Williams we» for the
plaintiffs ; and Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Prentice were
for the defendanta.

The COIN occupied the court several hours, bedthe real
question at issue appeared to be a very simple one. From
the opening statement of the plaintiffs counsel it seemed
that last Novembes M. Jullien, with Mr. Signal', entered
into an t with Mr. Maplseca for the use of
Her Majesty'sbe Theatre for aperiod of six weeks, for the pur-
pose of giving Promenade Concert. under the direction of
M. Jollies, it being 'rouged that the season should termi-
nate with a " hal d'opera, and Mr. Mapleson was to receive
onalifth of the clear reee/pla every night, it being guaran-
teed that his share should be 201., to be made np,,to that
amount if the one-fifth of the receipts did not produce
that sum, and he was to receive one-third of the receipts
taken at the ball. The speculetion did not appear to have
turned out • very enoceisful one ; but it was stated that
all she tradesmen and .11 the artistes were paid, and at the
close of the 11(411100 there was • sum of about 7W. in the
bands of Mr. Cowen, the treasurer, who, it should be stated,
was appointed to that office by the other defendant, Mr.
Mapleson. It apparel that when M. Junin applied for
this money the only objection that was made to giving it
up was that during the period M. Jullien had,been in pto-
main of the theatre, an .rgan that formed part of the
theatrical properties had received some damage, which under
the agreement he was bound to make good. The intros of
this damage was estimated by Mr. Robson, the well-keowu
organ builder, who was well acquainted with the instrument,
at 351. ; but Mr. Davison' another eminent organ-builder,
who was called in by the defendants, estimated the damage
at between 701. sod 801., and this seemed to be the real
question at issue between the parties, the plaintiffs ad-
mitting their liability to repair the instrument, but object-
ing to the jvioe of the repairs as estimated by the defendanta,
and they *ought to recover by the present action the money
that was admitted to be in the hands of the defendant
COllOll, leaving the question rebiting to the repair of the
organ to be disposed of afterward.. The matter was soma
what complicated by the fact of the defendant Cowen, who
of muse had no interest in the matter, having paid the
701. into court, and applied to one of the learned judges
(Mr. Justice Mellor) to release him from the responsibility
of being a defendant io the action, and his lordship, it ap-
thereupon made an order that Mr. Mapleson should
Casubstituted u the defendant in his place. This created
• good deal of technical difficulty with regard to the plate
that had been placed upon the record, but the substactial
question was whether the plaintiffs had nude out their
elaim to the balance that remained at the close of the season.

The case, se above stated, occupied a considerable time,
and resulted to the jury returning a verdict foe the
plaintiffs.
(Before the Chief Baron and a Special Jury.)

INONVONGIR V. THB LONDON. BRIGHTON, AND sours COAST

RAILWAY COMPARY.--IRONRONORR ANo Inn V. TUB AML

-IMOIIIIOIIIOII3 711.11 TOCINOILE V. THI
These were actions to recover damages for injuries sus-
tained by the fins-mentioned plaintiff, his wife and son, by
the negligeom of the defendants.
Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q.C. and Mr. Garth were coun-
sel for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Han-
nan appeared for the company.
These actions arose out of an accident of a serious cha-
racter that occurred on the 18th of October last to an ex.
curios train returning from Portsmouth to London, at the
Three Bridges Station, upon which occsaiou, it will be
recollected, a great many of the passengers mooned injuries.
The cue thet was tried was that of the principal plain-
tiff, James Ironmonger, who, it appeared, was in the ser-
vice of Mr. Drew' who carries on au extensive business as •
publicans' biscuit manufacturer, at Shadwell, mid was em-
ployed by him to carry his goods to the different customers
in a van, receiving, as was stated, wages to the amount of
41. per week. by salary and commimmo. The negligeoce
was admitted, and the only question was whet amount
of damages the plaintiff was entitled to recover. Acoordiag
to the evidence adduced on his behalf be received a severe
is jury of the side of the head, and on the ribs and other
parte of the body, the consequence of which was that he
was partially paralysed, and it was also stated that his left
eye was injund, and that he would in all probability lone
the sight of that eye, and possibly, by sympathy, also that
of the other. Dr. Jams, of the Blackfriamroad his usual
medical atteedatit, Dr. Foster. of Guy's Hospital, and Dr.
Yates Hogg, the eminent oculist, deposed to these facts,
and expressed their opinion that the plaintiff had received
injuries of a permanent character which would prevent him
for • long time, and possibly altogether, from following his
mailman, occupation ; and it appeared that ewer since the
scoideat be bad not been able to do anything in
the way of earning • livelihood. Oa the part of the
company it was contended that the injuries were not by any
means of the serious character represented. and Mr. '
Dyer, a
medical gentleman, of Forest-hill • Dr. Manakin, of the
Epileptic Hospital, and also are of the physicians of the
London Hospital; Dr. Wilkes, of Guy's Hospital and Mr.
Haynes Walton, the senior surgeon of the Ophthalmic Hos-
pital, were called as witnesses, and the effect of their evi-
dence was to show that the eyes of the plaintiff were quite
perfect, and that no trace of any derangement was
observable in those organs, and also that there
were not any symptoms of paralysis observable,
and Mr. Walton observed that if there had been originally
soy of the appearances that were spoken to by Dr. Hogg,
they had passed away, and the healthy condition of the eye
of the plaintiff was perfectly restored. All these geodes.'
also expressed their opinion that in a very short time the
plaintiff would be enabled to resume his usual occupation.
The Chief Baron having summed up the whole of the evi-
dence on both aides,
. . .

The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict for
the plaintiff—damages, 44.10/.
The other two actions were not tried, the company having
made an offer which was accepted without going into any
widows.