The Express.
London, England, 1862-04-17 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 17, 18n.

Were this show to exhibit all the French breeds,
it would be much more extensive than it is. From i
the little sterns of Morrsn and the microscopic
Bretonne cows to the colossal animals of Coteutiu or
of Agawam ; from the stunted sheep of the Landes
or Asdswnes to the long-backed Diahley merinos,
there is a variety of types sufficient to till an inde-
finite space. No one who glances at the geolo-
gio-al structure of the surface of the couutry could
be astonished at this. It is clear enough that plains
and mountains, rocks and marshes, granitic, cal-
careous, clay or sandy soils, the sun of the north
or of the south, climates rigorous or temperate, dry
or damp, variable or constant, are circumstances
that wal'amount for this diversity. There are the
physical agencies which give rise to breeds. To
some extent these are variable. There are also

economic conditions, such as the movements of
population, the facilities of communication and
the opening of markets. The bovine breeds have,
for instance, hitherto been more used to plough the
land, and draw the load, and give milk, butter, and
cheese, than nurtured to produce meat. But now
a change arises in the public taste, and it is felt
that a bullock fattened after having worked five
years is as incompatible with juicy beef as to spend
four or five years in bringing a steer to maturity
when it can be done elsewhere in two or three.

M
Sesta.

3ard Middies'
1154 Lm.

lard ditto
Ith ditto
let Ada. Bat Tower U

Told

Is: Tower Huilsis ..
ttith hUddlonot
41011 ditto
SIM ditto
nil ditto
ditto
40th ditto
Loodun

Total

rzdikTewa, ilanh;it
Sth Sitio

6. 65 I
08...

sith ditto
Ittb ditto
ttlt ditto
lith ditto

Total

ad Lees Artlllery
Ord MkkUsses ditto
Ist Tower liamieta ditto
bed Ada Bat. itild411•1111
eth Middlesex ...
Milk ditto
lath Surrey
tells ditto
Slit ditto
tart ditto
Mt Lees
ea ditto
44th Kent

7. is I
...%,

Twr ....

1

lams I'OLCRTIZIL

Pavillon Oar Jens, E.
lorret (*oath *Me).
FaSoo Gardens, E.
lona ,south tide.
Illnolmonre D knorth alde..

IpLevel
lAtto
Ditto
Pavillon G
levell
liskarire
no level
ITho

north tilde)
twiddle).
ditto)
:ardent, K.
L juld,Uer.
U.

::;outh
uurth side.,

The Level isoath side .
Zaclosury L ,nurth
Ditt.l WWI
I.ritto ditto
1:011W ditto
Ditto ditto
DIM) ditto

Parilit7ttioiarden.
Ditto
Enclosure C.
The Lod ,tuiddle
Ditto ditto
Saint Yeter's Church.
Ditto
Ditto
Ditto
,north aide).
Sao ditto
Panat's Church.

taw inteittgcnct.

COI: LIT OF QI'EEN'S 13ENC Li. —ApRn. 16.
Sittings in Batico.—(Before Lora Chid Justice Cockburn,
and JUSUOIMICromptoo, Blockborm, sad Mellor.)
WILIONA Y. CHOKER. —CinnlIAL CSFORYATION.

Mr. James Browne said he was instrnoted by the appli-
cant, Mr. Joseph Neil AUKosaa, a director of the Notional
Bank of London, to apply for a rule nisi, calling upon Mr.
Arthur Charles Cruker to show cause why &criminal informa-
tion should not be tiled against hint fur having attempted to
provoke Mr. M'Kenna to challenge him to a hostile meet-
ing. The applicant resides at Kensington-gore, and on
Sunday, the btli of April last, he was walking through
Weettuorelmoi•placeon his return home from church when he
was met by Mr. Croker, who formerly held a commission io
the army. That gentleman actuated Mr. M'Kenna in •
load tone of voice, saying, " You are a scoundrel ; you
are a rascal ; you are &coward." These offensive words he
repeated walking backward, and in so loud a tone of voice
that it attracted the attention of the passersby, who turned
round and looked at the parties. He also taunted the appli-
cant with not striking him, by shouting out, " Now strike
me! Why don't you strike me r The applicant. in his
affidavit, ststei that he believed Mr. Croher intended him
to rush at him and strike him, or send him • challenge, but
be restrained his feelings ; aLd be was mayors of what he
had done to provoke such conduct from Mr. Croker. No
specific charge bad been made against him (Mr. M'Kenna),
and he was therefore unable to give any specific answer
or denial. If the words complained of had been
sent in a letter instead of being spoken there was
no doubt they would form the subject of • criminal infor-
mation, and the only doubt wee, whether the court would
grant a criminal information under the circumstances. The
gist of the case was an attempt on the part of Mr:Crokar to
provoke the applicant to commit • breach of the pesos, and
he (the learned counsel) apprehended that under the cir-
cumstances the court would grant • criminal information,
whether the words were written or oral.

The Lord Chief Justice said bedoubted if this was anything
mare than a police ease. He did not think the court ought
to interfere under these circumstances. It might be that
Mr. Croker did not want to fight a duel, but to induce Mr.
M'Kennato strike him, that he might bring an action against
him. The language used was unjustifiable, but he did not
think it was a case of sufficient gravity for the interference
of the court.

Mr. Browne said it was an encounter between twopew-
eons on a Sunday, with a Thew on one side to a pugi&tic
encounter._

The Lund Chief Justice mid that in ancient times It would
no doubt have led to a hostile meeting ; but happily men
don't fight now with martial weapons. as they used to do.
Mr. Browne mud he was not so sure of that. The recent
court-martial at Dublin wont rather to show the contrary.
Kr. Justice Blackburn said there was nothing in the aus
to show that it might not have been disposed of by a=
magistrate. There ought to be some grave grouna
for the asked-for interference of the court.

The Lord Chid Justine said th►t if there had been a
direct challenge to fight a duel it would have been a dif.
forest thing, and be quite agreed with the learned counsel
that in that case it would have been immaterial whether
the words were written or spoken to induce the court to in-
terfere. It might be as he bad already said, that Mr.
Choker's object was to bring an action.
Mr. Browne said he thought that was not probable, seeing
that Mr. Croker had been in the army.
The Lord Chief Justice said one was a man of pease the
others man of war, and under the circumstances he thought
this was only a case for a police magistrate. This court was
rather slow to put in force the strong power it possessed,
when there were other remedies for protection in existence.
Mr. Browne further urged the position of these persons
in society, and the possibility and probability of a hostile
message.
The Lord Chief Justice said he thought the applicant was
making the conduct of Mr. Croker of greater conserpsewee
than it probably assdbs, by asking for the interference al
the powers of thiscoart.
Mr. Browne remarked that it occurred on a Sunday, on
• public highway, and in the presence of friends and ac-
quaintances.
The Lord Chief Justice said that did not make any U-
.

Applwation refused.
STAN IN O. TIM GINA? WINTINN RAILWAY COMPANY.-

PlB//111/0113.11. LEFT LCCOAuI.

Mr. Kerslake, Q.C., said this was an action tried at
Guildhall at the last after term sittings, before Mr. Justice
Blackburn, whoa the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, damages 40e. The learned counsel now moved
to eater • acesnit, on the ground that there
was an widows to go to the jury. It wee au
action for delay, in not delivering to the plaintiff
within • reasonable time luggage which he hod left in the
cloak-room at Addicts& Plaintiff, who is • commercial
traveller came to London on a Saturday night by the de-
fendants/railway, and left his luggage at the cloak.room of
the up-line. On Sunday night he wished to leave by the
Great Northern for Sheffield, and on his way called at the
cloak-room at Paddington for his luggage. He found the
place locked up, and after some delay be went to the down
platform, where a train was starting, and then • porter VAS
cent lICTINNI with hint, and the begpge was given up to him,
I but too late for him to go to Sheffield that night, and in son-
sequence he brought this action. The learned counsel ow-
tended that the company. was not bound to keep persons day
and night at the clean-rooms, and that the scoommo-
datioo was for the paasengers travelling by the de-
fondants' line, and that all that was °scummy and required
of them was that the cloak-room should be opts for • rea-
sonable time before the arrival or de of the trains.
It was further contended by the defe ants that the luggage
in question was delivered within • reasonable time to the
plaintiff. After hearing the argument. of the learned
oonnael. _ _

The Lord Chief Justice said there ought to be no rule.
The question was one entirely for the jury. It was no part
of the conditions printed on the ticket given on the deposit
el luggage that the passenger should not have it given
up to him at any time that he claimed it because be did so
ao •Sunday. Although there might be difficulty and neces-
sary delay in getting luggage on a Sunday, yet the company
was bound to deliver it up without unreasonable delay, and
that was a question for the jury. He should not have been
dissatisfied it the verdict in this case bad been for the de-
fendants, and had it not been for a technical rule of the
court that the amount of the damages preiluded their hav-
ing a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was against
the evidgnee, he should have been disposed to have
granted it.
Mr. Justice Crompton said this was a bailment of a pe-
culiar character. The reasonable time must have refeieoce
to the surrounding circumstances, that of being wanted for
the various trains. The jury was the best judge of that,
and, under the circumstances, he thought there should be
no rule. _ _ _

The other learned Judges concurred.
Rule refused.

Thia was an action tried before Mr. Judie* Blackburn, at
Guildhall, to recover the price of certain paintings, when
the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. The plaintiff
was a dealer in paintings, and the defendant was a gentle-
man of property reading at Plymouth, and a collector of
valuable paintings.
Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., moved for a nil, for a new trial, on
the ground that the verdict was against evidence, and that
there appeared to be a misunderstanding on the part of the
jury by the way the verdict was given. The question was
whether the payment by Smith to • person named Sidney
was payment to him as the plaintiff's agent, which the
latter denied.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said the plaintiff appeared to be
carrying on a dishonest trade, that of manufacturing pic-
turee and selling them as originals. The defendant, who
appeared to be a large collector of picture., ought to have
known the difference.

.11V.715;leiidne;sTdthe defendant appeared to be food of
• wars Ruberus and a mutiny Cuyp. (Laughter.) Ile (the
learned counsel) believed the plaiutilf carried on his trade u
honourably as others.
Mr. Justin Blackburn—No doubt. The defendant was
• bona Gds am•frar. _

itr.Colerldo—itid he endeavoured to pass off on the
plaintiff a spurious production for en original Corregpio.
Mr. Josrise Blackburn said he thought him an honest
urn from the way be geve his evidence. He (the learned
judge) thought at the time that he wu glad he had not
taboo up picture buying. (Laughter.)
Mr. Coleridge appeared to doubt the great honesty of the
defendant's dealings with the plaiotiff.
The Lord Chief Justice—You think, then, they were pro-
bably " tarred with the same brush!" (Laughter.)
Mr. Coleridge—Yee. There was no evidence to show
that the pictures were not worth the money, and they were
afterwards sold for a very fair price.
Rule granted.
- -

go by default. The plaintiff sent a sheriff's officer to take
possession, who was met by an army of Amazons (upwards
of 30 women) with but cads mat hoiliog water. (Laughter.)
He, however, took possession, and let t Lis man, namso Hart,
hi possessive of the. promisee. The deteadent then went to
liart, and with an iron chopper compelled him "to hook
it," and turned him out. (Laughter.)
The Court said the learned counsel had stated enough
fo'rsi rule.

Bak granted.
APPLICATION TO STRIKE AN ATTORNEY MR THE ROLLS.
Mr. Hawkins applied for a rule calling upon an attorney
to show cause why be shouhl not he struck off the rolls for
misconduct, in filling up a fictitious order for the inspection
of certain documents, &0., purporting to be signed by Mr.
Baron Channel!.
The Court granted a rule.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—APRIL 16.
fittings in Saco.--(Bsfeee Lord Chief Justine &le, and
Justices Willis, Bylea, and Keating.)

LASTER AND ANOIIIII v. PLATINUM —Tag BILAVON
sa.rntos luatc.
_

Mr. Field moved, on behalf of the Sheriff of Warwick-
shire, for a rule, calling upon John and Lucy Williams and
their attorney to show cause whv the amouit'directed to be
levied upon a S. fa. should not be brought into court, and
the trial of an interpleader issue proceeded with. The
action was to recover 9'.271. 12s. 3d. from Mr. Fletcher, who
has become notorious u the trustee of the Bilstou Savings
Bank, and the plaiutiffs recovered judgment, and on Satur-
day, the 25th january, issued a S. fa., but when the officer
went to levy on. the Monday morning he found that a large
portion of Mr. Fletcher's property bad been removed by
the direction of the attorney for the Williams.., and de-
posited in different places. The officer seized this property,
and served the attorney with an interplsader summons,
which led to his saying that he acted for the Williams's,
and the matter stood **sr to enable them to be made par-
ties to the ioterplsader issue. Upon that very day ten or
twenty persons were employed by the attorney, and they,
with violence, took the goods out of the pompanos of Ws.
sheriff's officer, and the thiogs were afterwards sold, and a
great part of them had got into Mr. Fletcher's parsnips
again.
The Lord Chief Justine said a rule would be grated, but
if the statement made were supported there was very grave
misconduct, and counsel would consider how he should
frame his rule.

Rule granted.
CAVEY Y. LEADV

.-NUIR&NCE YBOM BURNING BRIMS.

Tho defendant in this case was a brickmaker at Plum-
stetd-oommon, and the plaintiff had a piece of ground close
by, upon which he grew apples and niece for sale. He
claimed damages upon the ground that in addition to the
annoyance from the stench and smoke his trees were in-
and, sad at the trial before Mr. Justice Wightman, at
e, the: jury awarded him 20/.
Mr. Prentice now moved for a new trial, contending that
the place was one in which it was proper to carry on the
business of brick burniag, that the learned judge had not
Koper)/ directed the jury, and that the direction he should
have given them was simply that given by Mr. Justice
Ryles in " Hole v. Barlow, by asking them to consider
whether the place was one proper and convenient for burn•
lug bricks.
Rule granted.
RICE V. SHEPHIRO. SINGULAR QUESTION AS TO

This was an action brought by the legal advisers of the
defendant's wife to reamer from the defendant the ►mount
of ► bill of costs incurred by the wife in proceeding for a
divorce upon the ground of cruelty. At the trial the ver-
dict was for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the
oourt whether such promedinip came within the nil° as to
necessaries supplied to a wife.
Mr. Denman moved for • rule to enter ► verdict for the
defendant, and maid that the way in which the action
happened to be brought was that the wife had stopped pro.
apothegm in the Divorce Court by returning to cohabitation.
He submitted that thaproceedings were not a necessary for
which the husband could be compelled to pay.
The apart bald, upon the authority of "Brown v.
Ackroyd," that the husband was liable.
Rule refused.
CLOTRIZR V. WIRSTZI.-DAMAGE DOW IN CONSTRUCTING

The plaintiff was a baker at Woolwich, and his oven bad
been damaged by tunnelling along the street duriug the
construction of the great sewer; and it was also said that
the premise* bad been shaken by a steam engine working
close by. The jury found for the plaintiff, damages 20/.125.
Mr. M. Chambers now moved for a rule for • noose&
The defendant was the contractor for executing the work,
but it was submitted that he was not liable, as from the
henna upon which the work was undertaken he was
nothing more than a servant to the Metropolitan
Board, and was acting under the immediate order d
their officers.. Moreover, the Metropolitan Baud's het
provided that amounts ander 501. for damages done should
be recovered by summary proceedings before magistrates.
The question whether au action in the superior courts
would lie for damage done to the amount of lam than 50/.
was an important one, inasmuch as as many as 120 claims
for small mums bad been made against the contractor,.
Rule grained.
VAN TOLL t. VIZ 80011 WNW RAILWAY COMPANY.—

The plaintiff in this ease, a l.dy, having been a passenger
upon the defendants' lbse,lati•begatthe London-bridge sta-
tion cloak-room, and remised a ticket for it. It appeared that
two tickets of the nine number were issued, and the bag
was handed to • from the gentleman who had ft•
calved the duplicate t in exchange for an umbrella.
When the gentleman found out the mistake he at once sent
back the bag, which the company forwarded to the plaintiff
in the country. Upon its reaching her she examined it, and
found some articles of jewellery missing, and she then sued
to recover the value of the property lost. At the trial
before the Lord Chief Justice in Middlesex the jury found
for the plaintiff for 20/. Subsequently, however, Mr. Lush
obtained a rule for a nonsuit, and today cause was
shown against this rule being made absolute.
Mr. Collier and Mr. Needham appeared to show cause ;
and Mr. T. Jones to support the rule.
The contention wee that the company was not
because there was printed at the back of the ticket handed
to the plaintiff, sod also stuck up in the office, a condition
that the company would not be liable for any parcel of the
vain of more than 101., unless it was declared and twin.
tend. There was no evidence to show that the plaintiff
knew of the existence of this condition, and her counsel
contended that the company could not limit their liability
in this way unless they proved express notice to the plaintiff.
The court took time to consider the matter.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.. —Aran. 16.
Sid i= Beim in Easter Tenn.—(Before the Lard Chief
and Barons Bramwell, Martin, and Wilde.)
PARKINS AND Will V. SCOTT AND Inn. --SIBOU LAZ CABE

of misdirection. The bill was payable twelve mouths after
nod wee given fur a tided ammo invented by the de-
fendant, which, at the sane, had attained a looser, range
than any other gun, being able to send a lull six nuke in
:ki secouids. Upon the seventh discharge the gun burst, and
it was found that it arose frogs a defect, which bad been
repaired by Mani of a plug. The deface was that the
gun Rai defective to the knowledge of the plaintiff, mid
that the acceptance to the bill was obtained by fraud.
Rule granted.
DAT V. VOSTIR.-81DUCTTON.

Mr. T. Jon*. moved to set aside the verdict upon a writ
of inquiry, directed to the Under.Bheriff of Cumberland, to
Meal the damages in an action for seduction, upon the
ground that the damages were excessive. The plaintdf,
who brought the action for the seduction of hie daughter,
was a brewer near Peuritb, and the defendant
was a farmer, 28 years old, with an income valued
at only 1581. a year. The daughter was 24, and bad given
birth to a male child, in respect of which she had obtained
• bastardy order against the defendant. The jury gave
8001. damages, which the learned counsel contended was an
unusually large amount in cases of this kind, in which there
was nothing especially aggfavoting.
Mr. Baron Martin said there might ban been some
aggravating circumstances known to the jury.
Mr. T. doses said it only appeared that the defendant
bad denied the parentage of the child, but that was generally
done in these cases. (Laughter.)
The Lord Chief Baron—You can take a rule, but it must
be at your own risk as to costa.
it
farms.
Mr. T.v.leiale said be was prepared to take it upon those

Rule granted.
TAYLOR V. NAM

saawinzLD, AND LINCOLNSIIIIIE

naLwit—Aocwicirr.

Mr. Macaulay said this woe an action by an unmarried lady
of great respectability to recover damages for injury done to
her knee by an accident from the carriage in which she was
running off the defendants' line, near Gainsivrough, on the
30th October, 1860. It was tried at Lincoln, and the
jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with 4001.
damages. Hs now moved to set aside the ver-
dict, and for • new trial, on the ground that
there was no proof of negligence on the part of the com-
pany. The accident did not arise from any defect in the
rails, but from a spring of the engine giving way, and the
company had received no intimation of any injury baring
bore done to any passenger until the action was brought by
the plaintiff two or three months ago.
The court ref used • Me.

lIABLHOROUGH,STRICET.
Schulte Johnson, /savage in the lat battalion of tk. k .
Fusilior Guards, charged with aasaulting mud ioLh,
Arthur Otway, Esq., of langhaiii-honso, I..ngliate,•l4
mud 'Leary brumuound Wolf, Esq secretary to ti.e L
High Commissioner of the lonian Lie., was brought up fo,
Foal examination. _

There was no additional evidence on the original char..
the particulars of which bare already been published, 41;1
the primmer was sent for trial to the Middlesex
The second charge, for stealing an umbrella from a Fresiii
gentleman, could not be proceeded with, as the coi.tui,',
who bad tho cade in build stated that Le had seen
tlermin to whom the umbrella belonged, and he deelnad
come forward to prosecute.
Under theme circumstances the prisoner wan only sent far
trial oo the first charge.
Pidrint (homey was charged with the following Mime:
Mr. Woodwell, stationer, No. 62, Bernerestreet, sod,
while crossing the road towards his shop, Le saw the pi,
loner and several other companion. standing close to ri,e
window in such an attitude as to lead him to suspect tlui
some robbery was contemplated. He was approaching the
party gradually when the prisoner turned round and cangin
sight of him, and immediately rsn off, followed by itk
others. He pursued and brought the prisoner lack, and ,„,s
examining the window found that it bad been broken by.„
bradawl being inserted into the frame, and that had he 0,4
arrived so opportunely a robbery would have been effeetai
Witness had previously bad his window robbed, awl tliaq
course had made him more than usually vigilant.
The .hopman to a neighbour Leto came forward and
stated that Iris Magee' shop window bad been att.:mend
about one hour before. _ _

The prisoner was remanded.
WESTMINSTER.
- -

A few days ago John Jenkins, a middle-aged menu
charged with intermarrying with Elisabeth Bates, his forint
wife being then and still living.
The accused was first married on the 29th of Slay, laC,
at Trinity Church, Bristol, in his own name, to Jane hrly,
and secondly on the 9th of December, 1855, at St.
in-the• Fields, in the name of dohs Chapel, to Elizabeth
Bates. The second wife, who knew be was inarried,ledim
so wretched a life, according to his owe account, that he,.
termined to rid himself of the incumbrance and undergo ta,
puslahment of the law in preference to being fartbe
troubled with her. To effect this he induced his brother to
procure the certificates of both nsarriagea, give him um
custody, and employ a solicitor to prosecute him, sad I.
wu remanded until yesterday, preferrieg confinemai
in the House of Detention to liberation spx
bail ; but when he again appeared before the magistm,
it was stated that the case could no further be
with sa both witnesses to the first marriage were .IZ4
I nobody could supply the defective proof, under 'pith
circumstances Mr. Paynter discharged him.
Prisoner hod no sooner emerged from the dock than Li
wise followed by his second wife, who was in court mita;
for him.

THAMES.
A strange-looking man, about 45 years of age, coming
under the description of shabby genteel, who refused s
give his name and address, was charged with assault*
Mr. John Wilke, a genemith.
The prosecutor said he was on his way home that tool
tog at half-past 1 o'clock, and was poising along New-stree,
Stepney, near the back of the London Hospital, whet Is
wee suddenly attacked by the prisoner, who seised hinibr
the collar with one hand and graxped his throat with the
other so tightly that he was acerly choked. He snuggled
es well as he wee able, but the prisoner continued to eon.
prim his throat. With a powerful effort be shook tile
off, and called out murder and police. A coostalle,
o. 312 K came to his issiatanes sod secured the prisoner,
John Idicher, a German police-constable, No. 312 H, g
very intelligent man, who had been often employed as is.
terpreter in this court, said that he beard the air ot
" murder," end police," at half-pest one o'clock that mmm
ing, and repaired to the spot, where he found the mooed.
tor and prisoner struggling. The former said, "I wont let
yea go' you wanted to rob Dn."
Mr. Woolrych asked Mr. Wilke if the prisoner attemptel
to rob him?
Mr. Wfilcs—l can't say he did. I don't know what tic
intestioas were. I thought be wanted to garotte me and to
rob me, and I was very much alarmed.
• The prisoner, in a subdued and rather cracked voice, raid
that he bad a severe fall on Saturds7 hut which injured his
head, and he determined on abstaining from all intoxicating
drinks. On Tuesdayy be wept out early and met with some
friends, whopievailed upon him to drink two glasses al
ale and some spirits and water on an empty stomach, and
when he west into the air he felt as if he was intoxicated
and could not tell what afterwards occurred.

/ElZeher;:dll;; prisoner walked very etoadily to the w•
tine-house,

irtWoolrych said that inquiries most be made rasped
the risoner, and remanded him.
IMr.sUy afterwards the prisoner informed Roche, th
paler, that he lived at the house of Mr. Deeble, brother
a well-known detective akar, at No. 31, Fashionstreo,
Spitallields, and that his mum wab Willis Rislop.