The Express.
London, England, 1862-12-23 00:00:00

EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 23, 1862.

Lab) *ntellignut.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. —Dec. 22.
VW Tellu *ger, at Nisi Prim, at GailibilL—(Bahre
Lard Odd Cockburn and • Scoria Jury. )

puma r. BM 1. IS LUIS, BART., Q.C., AND &THEM

AIDIAULT AND FALSE 611111101111:111T.
Mullioned from yesterday's Express.)
Mr. Andarson, Q. 0., and Chancery barristar—l was trait-
'Mar on the occasion in question aDd as such president,
and had the regulation of the pinosetlings. The learned
geatisman than proceeded to give his version of the Imam,
which was very much to the same affect as that given by
Mr. Rodwell and Sir F. Slade. Hs said no one gave the
plaintiff in charge when be repeatedly asked who would
charge him, and it WY replied "No one." Mr. Bagshawe
said, ' Then I will go to the police-station with him." Wit..
nom kept his eye on Sir F. Slade, and was certain he never
touched the plaintiff or swore about the matter.
. .

Crowerninined by Mr. Collier—Yoe say you kept our
eye on Sir Frederick Slade, Were you afraid of him"
(Laughter,)
Mr. .ituderson— Certainly not. He did not give the plain-
tiff in &ergo. The plaintiff put himself under the protec-
tion of the police, and left with them. He understood ties
matter was to be die:weed at the polies-station. The plain-
tiff left in company of the police rather than in custody.
Mr. Oollier—Do I understand you to say that the plaintiff
went with the polies is his oompanioes ?
Witnew—A cab was got for him.
Mr. Collier—That is no answer to my question.
Witness—He did not go with them as his companions, but
Y pohoemen.•
Mr. Collier—And having him in charge
Wham—Having him in keeping aooording to arrange-
ment. _ _

By the Lord Chief Justice—There was not so much ex-
citement on the Bth as on the 9th. A change had come
over the plaintiff on the 9th. The letter of the 7th
November was read aloud, and was essential to an under-
standing of the evidenoe. The object of the Women was
frustrated by the loss of the letters.
Mr. Chambers—We dispute it.
The Lord Chief Justice—lt was neoesury to set out the
docipoeat in 'stenos in the evidence.
Mr. Thomas Chambers, Q.O , and Common Serjeant,
maid—l am one of the bsnchers, and was present on
the 9th July. The book might have been thrown across
the table ; but his impression was that it was handed from
one bendier to another, and then by the master treasurer to
the plaintiff. There was nothing offensive in the way in
which it was passed. The tone and manner of the plaintiff
was defiant. The learned gentleman then gave his account
of the prooeedings, which was similar to that given by the
other witnesses for the defence.
The Lord Chief Justice—ln your opinion, as a judge con-
versant with cross-examinations, was the crosa.eiuunination
ea the Bth July of the plaintiff condluted in an improper
manner?
Witness- I think not. I think is was an able cross-
examination, and I observed that Mr. Hudson in one parti-
cular part of it changed his manner. I judged from it that
be had become irritated, but he made no complaint of it.
Mx. Bovill, Q.C., was next called. Be said he was pre-
Rot on the Bth of July, but took no part in the examination
or crome-examination of the plaintiff. In his opinion there
was nothing improper in the manner in which he was cross-
examined. Mr. Rodwell was polite to him throughout.
The matter of the cross-examination might have been

mve to any man, because it conveyed an imputation upon
the plaintiff's character in connexion with the 'Miller mines,
and that matter was contained in the letters to which hi,
attention was called. _ _

Mr. Chambers—l must interpose, and protest against Mr.
Bova' nuking • speech, or eying his opinion upon the
bitten oontsind in the book.

--iii7i;;l=l,:i; not doing so Mr..Chadibers.
The Lord Chief Justice-1 think you had better not give
any opinion upon the letters, as we have them before us.
Mr. Bovill's examination continued—The plaintiff made
no claim to the lettere or the book on that occasion. Every-
thing seemed satisfactory, and the plaintiff's convenience
was consulted as to his appearing again on the following
evening, after he had attended Ms dinner party.
Mr. Chambers-1 think we have had that for the seventh
. .

Mr. Bovill said be mentioned it to show the good feeling
that existed on both sides. When the plaintiff tune on
the following evening and came into the room, he took off
his hat, but not his Inverness cope. At first his manner
was cool and collected as on the previous night. There was
nothing offensive in the manner in which the book was
passed to the plaintiff. Shortly after the disturbance com-
menced witness went out of the room and saw Meesn.
Perdue and Bye, the porters, and gave them some direc-
tions. On his return to the chamber he found
the plaintiff standing up, speaking and behaving
in • violent manner. When be shut the door he
stood with his back towards it for a short
tioue, and then walked back to his tonal place. He ex-
pected to see the plaintiff commit an assault upon the
heathers. It was frightful to see the state he was in. He
said he was prepared if witness would give him in custody
and take legal proceedings against him. He appeared to
have • particular wish for witness to give him into
custody.
Mr. Chambers again interposed, and said he would rather
Mr. Bovill would not make such observations.

Witness sail ha MY not desirous of taking that re-
sponsibility.
In crues.examination, Mr. Collier asked him if he saw
Sir F. Slade touch the plaintiff.
Mr. Bovill—No ; nor any other bencher. (Laughter.)
Mr. Collier—Nor any other man. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Bovill—l don'tmay that.
Mr. Chambers—l wish to correct the information I gave
on a previous day. "Any other mar" has, I understand,
reference to stump oratory, and not a song. (Loud laughter.)
Mr. Bovill—Yea, it is American. It was an imagine.
Con of the plaintiff's that he put his back to the door to
prevent him leaving. He was afraid the plaintiff would
commit personal violence on anyone who might en-
deavour to prevent him rushing out of the room, and wit-
ness went out and directed Mr. Perdew and Bye to get the
porters and stop anyone who might rub out of the Parlia-
ment Chamber. He thought he added he might send for
one or two policemen, in case they might be required.
There was a cry of "Police," in which witness joined.
There was a frightful struggle going on between the two
porters and Mr. Hudson. They were trying to take the
book from him, and he was kicking and fighting to prevent
it. The moment Bye came into the room the plaintiff
rushed at him, but the former was rather too quick with
his arm and put the plaintiff down on the floor. The
plaintiff was sometimes on the ground and sometimes on
the chair, whilst the porters were endeavouring to hold
him. He was unable to state anything about the charge, and
under what circumstances the plaintiff was takeu to the
police elation. He did not see any renewal of the attest(
while the plaintiff was being taken away by the police. If
there had been it must have attracted his attention.
The further hearing of the case was then adjourned, it
being arranged that the case should be proceeded with by
consent on Wednesday, in order to finish it should it go
over to-morrow (this day), which is the last day of the
sitting.
SECOND COURT.

Sittings at Niai Priva.—(Betors Mr. Justioe Crompton and
Common Jury.)
THE HOW IN THE JURY BOON.

This morning one of the gentlemen who wee locked up on
Saturday night &dammed his lordship, stating that he bad
read the report in the newspapers of the proceedings
that took place in the jury room, and he supposed his lord-
ship had read it also. He applied to have steps taken to
prevent the gentleman complained of from sitting on the
jury any more. Upon his entering the room he positively
refused to listen to the other jurymen, who endeavoured to
convince him that his opinion of the case was wrong, and
later in the evening he hurled a chair at another gentleman's
head. . . . .

His Lordship said that no doubt from what he had been
told the gentleman complained of bad acted in a manner that
would meet with the disapprobation at his brother jurymen.
He, however, did not think the court could interfere in
a case where the judge had left before the disturbance took
place. Had the court been sitting at the time, probably a
juryman acting in such a mincer would have been liable
to be charged with contempt of court. As the matter stood
he refused to interfere.
The juryman then withdrew.