The Express.
London, England, 1863-02-18 00:00:00

PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION.

Mr. M. OIBSON moved fora select committee to inquire
into the present system of legislation with regard to under-
takings requiring the authonty of private acts of Parlia-
ment, and whether any improvements could be made
therein. . . .

—Mr.WHALLEY observed that the tendency of previous
inquiries upon this subject had been to increase rather
than diminish the expenses of private billlegulation.
The motion wu speed to.
ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN (IRELAND) BILL.

Thia bill, u amended, was considired.
The house adjourned at half-past 12 o'clock.

TRAFFIC RETURNS.

Mlles Pas. Met- Total. Tots],
RAJIWAY9. open sewn dawdle. 184.2 1461
Week ending Nov. 33. a a 4 A
Zan I OULU :
Bengal Dtvlsinn 473 3,848 6,313 9,761 8,179
North-Weat Provinces 2293 1,243 3,133 3,376 3,932
We.k ending Jan. 30.
Buffalo and lake Huron l6l} —. •• 1.226 8,008
Watt ending Feb. 14. 1463 1302
Cork and Bandon
Glasgow & South Western 156 7,n4 7,.97
Week ending Feb. 15.
Oreat Luxembourg
London and Nineteen
North London
Oawestry and Newtown
aLlanidloeadt Newtown 42 841 663 904 433

RHVIINEY RAILWAY.—The half-yearly meeting
of this company was held yesterday at Gray's-inn Coffee-
house. Mr. Boyle presided. The report stated that the
memos Mae half•year had been 26,43.5/. Os. 100. This
Will au increase of 4,6361.105. 100., or 21i per cent. above
the revenue for the same period of 1861. A dividend at the
rate of 2 per cent. per annum was recommended. The
chairman said be could congratulate the proprietors on the
improving prospects of the company. They could look on
the difficulties of the company as things of the past. If
they did not immediately attain to great prosperity they
might count on a safe and steady progress. The in-
arises in the traffic was decided, and they were
sure of getting a share of the good trade which
was going. They would sae in the report that
• line was projected from Cardiff to Caerphilly,
and he thought it was their interest to promote its con-
, &traction. They would not, however, be called on by the
arrangements they bad made to pay any portion of the
parliamentary expenses for the promotion of the line in
question. After some further remarks be concluded by pro-
posing the adoption of the report. The motion having been
*wooded, Mr. Hutchins moved as an amendment that the
douse relating to the Cardiff and Caerphilly line should be
deleted from the report. The amendment was seconded,
but it was withdrawn after a long discussion. hovers!
matters connected with the accounts were then explained
by the chairman, and the report was unanimously adopted.
A resolution authorising the payment of a dividend at the
rate of 2 per °eat. per annum was then agreed to, and the
meeting terminated with the ordinary compliment to the
chairman.

hirrioroisrair Faa Hootrrril., DsvoNsumuo.
aquaria, Crrir.—The earteratii number patients relieved
daring the week ending February 14 was :—ldedical, 1,517 ;
rerriati. 740—total, 2..Z7: of which SO were new cases.
Tat BIIDEMAID'II WISH, —Pinen AND LUBIN'S
WIDDINO PILFOXII for the season, 1863. Emblematic Champ
Tower. Myrtle. sad lay of the Valley—three bottles In a ow,
fa,arla seat.-11, sMtoadsfreet, W.--(Adverttemseali

Rain Inttiliconct.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH -Fn. 17.
•

- - -
(Before Mr. Jnati; Blackburn, and joiTiMon Juries.)
The court we occupied the greater portion of yesterday
and the previous day in &Amami' of an action far the
o amount • builder's bill. The cireumetancas at the oue
were only such u should have been investigated by an arbi-
trator, and not tried with the solemnity of • court of
=and the intervention of • jury. Had that course
opted • considerable period of time would have been
saved, that might have been profitably employed in dis-
posing of more important matters, and the cue in all pro.
liability more advantageously settled with regard to the
suitors.
JURORS' GIIIVANCE.
_ . . _

Great complaint wu made by the jurymen in attendance
of the misconduct of their brother jurymen who made it •
rule not to attend ; the consequence wen that one half the
jurymen had to do the work of the absentees, and ware
thereby proportionately inconvenienced with regard to their
business avocations.
His Lordship raid he was ready to do all he could to
make the duties fall as light and as equal as possible upon
them, and he directed that the panel should be called over
aed the absentees fined. He reminded the jurymen that it
often happened the panel was not so large am it appeared,
from the names of deed men, absent persons, and those who
were above age, being au the list. He advised them to look
after the overseen, and see that the bate were properly
made out in future.
The panel was then celled over, and the absent jurors
were fined 51. each.
It is but right to say that when two courta are lining
at the same time the jurors are scattered over the two, and
it sometimes happens that theims:nreLwaiting in one court
whilst their names are probably • called in the other.
Two courts of Queen's Bench -have sitting every day
since Friday, and are likely to continue till the sod of these
sittings.

COURT OF EXCREQUKR.—FIa. 17.
Sittings at Null Pritis at Gaildbill.—(Briari Lard Chid
Baroc Polka and a Spoilt Jury.)
WOOD (ALD7I3IB7RATIUX) V. THE LONDON DOCK CONPANT.

loomarr._

This was an action by the widow of a Custom-house
officer to recover compensation in damages for the loss of
her husband, who she alleged bad been drowned in come-
, quence of the negligence of the defendants.
Mr. Digby Seymour, Q. 0., Mr. Denman, QC., and Mr.
Bereeferd, were counsel for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Giffard
and Mr. Murphy for the cowpony.
On the 13th November last the deceased. George Wood,
was engaged upon a vessel called the Albert alongside a
quay the London-docks. He left at five o'clock in the
evening to report himself, and bad to par along the side
of the quay, which was encumbered with piles of jute,
which left only a space of 7 fart from the water's edge. It
was a very foggy night, and miscalculating the boundary of
this narrow p•ssage, he walked into the dock and
was drowned. His body was dragged up next day
within five or six feet of the place where he fell in. His
sip was found in a punt immediately under the bows of the
Albert, and the official book in his poolost contained an
entry to the effect that he had left off duty at 5 o'clock. His
watch had stopped at a minute and • half after 5. The negli-
gence alleged against the company was that they had left
too narrow • pangs for prisms to pass along, that it was
not properly lighted, and that a rope or chain ought to
have been suspended between the poste at the edge of the
quay to prevent persons falling into the water. It apposed
that on the evening in question another person was drowned
in the dock, and that next day the company had a rope put
up to prevent similar accidenta. It also appeared that
the St. Katharine's Dock Company were in the habit
of suspending chains at the aide of the quays, but that
neither the defendants, nor the East or West India Dock
Companies adopted the same precaution. The deceased was
about 40yeara of age, and in the receipt of about 1001. • year,
which included salary and overtime. He left • widow and
a son nine years old totally unprovided for. Mrs. Wood
said the bad received 91. from the Customs, and bad ap-
plied to the Treasury for •pennon , but they told her that
the dock company was On cross-examination she
said she had not heard that the Treasury had agreed to
grant her • pension of 151., and she doubted very much
whether they would give her anything.
Mr. Giffard did not adduce any evidence for the defence,
but contended that the accident arose entirely from the neg-
ligence of the deceased himself, ss instead of hugging the
merchandise, and thus avoiding all danger, he took a abort
out in order to save • corner, and slipped into the dock.
With regard to ropes or chains being placed round the
quays, he said they were not only not but
would seriously impair the usefulness of • deck, 'entail
as enormous expense upon the different dock companies
throughout the country. The London Docks were but •
substitute for the river, and it would be absurd to call upon
the authorities to protect the public from falling into
the Thames by placing ropes along its beaks. Persons an-
mod in the docks were expected to take greater precautions
for their safety than if they were walking in the street, and
if they omitted to do so they must take the consequences.
The Lord Chief Baron, in summing up, Lid it down as •
general rule of law, whether as regardeddocks or public
thoroughfare", that it was sufficient to make reasonable pro-
vision against an ordinary and usual state of things, and that
if an extraordinary and unusual state of things, arose then
the persons exposed to it must take unusual ewe of them-
selves. They had no right to complain of any one if, when
any unusual peril arose, they took no more than usual can
of their safety. If the jury thought the dock company had
made reasonable provision against an ordinary danger, they
were entitled to their verdict ; but, on the other hand, if
in their judgment they had not, then they ought to give a
verdict for the plaintiff. On the subject of damages, he
said the fact of her getting • pension from the Treasury
ought to make no difference in their estimate of the da-
mages, as she was not entitled to one as • matter of right.
The jury, after being locked up for about two hours,
returned into court, when the foreman stated that there
was not the smallest chance of their "peeing to a verdict,
as they were almost equally divided in opinion.
The Lord Chief Baron said although, after they had ex-
pressed such discord, any verdict they might arrive at would
inspire him or anyone else with vary little confidence, be
did not think he should be justified in releasing them until
the rising of the court. He was, however, of opinion—and
he hoped if he were wrong the legislature or the House of
Lords would correct him—that there was a certain stage at
which be ought to dismiss • jury without their delivering a
verdict, and that the ancient practice of starving a jury into
a verdict was unfit for the intelligence of the present any.
A Juryman—There are seven on one side and five on the
other, and se our convictions am very strong indeed, there
is no hope whatever of our agreeing to a verdict. It is a
matter of pure conviction on both sides, and not of obstinacy.
The Lord Chief Baron—lf that is the general result of
your deliberations I think 1 should be justified in dismissing
you at once.
Several jurymen here said that that was a correct rep's-
sentation of their opinions.
Mr. Denman said he had no objection to that course as
far as the plaintiff was concerned.
The Lord Chief Baron said he was not surprised that in
such • smothers should be a great difference of opinion
among the jury.—The jury were then discharged.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
FEB. 17.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
LIMERICK v. LIXERICE (EARL).
In this case, in which Lady Limerick bad obtained •
judicial separation, on account of her lord's adultery,
The court awarded her permanent alimony at the rate of
1211. a year in addition to her ladyship's private property.
Dr. Virambey appeared for the petitioner. Mr. Herbert
for the respondent.