The Express.
London, England, 1864-11-04 00:00:00

PRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER •4, 1864:

dividoed of 51d. bed been paid, amounting to 3,4231.5 r. 81,
auttLere were other monies which were wholly lost, and
the sums enumerated by me as pretended assets were wholly
worthless, and so appeared in the books of the association as
pant due. With relsren. to the stateioset that there was
cash in hand at the time amounting to 38,7151. Os. Id., I ear
that there was only cash in hand at that time amounting to
29,6801. 41. lid., the difference being made up by uncleared
dialpicoured cheques, some of which Wel •
of no value. With reference to investments in
bank premises, I say that the value was under
IO,UOOI , although the same are entered in the
mce-sheet at the mum of 24,5'.f0/. 3e. Id. At the
time the said balance-sheet was circulated, I say that the
bask bad made no profit Whatever, but was wholly insol-
vent. I hive seen both Joseph W. Terry and Thos. Burch,
who told me that they entered the sums to the balance•
sheet because other basks did the same; and lastly, I say
that I make this complaint upon a res,dutioo of the liqui•
dators of the association so to do, and I believe if • summons
be issued against Mr. Terry, he will not appear thereto.
The information having been read over as evidence for a
remand, Mr. Sleigh and Mr. Metcalf applied that the de-
fendents might he admitted to bail.
Mr. Lewis said, on the port of the liquidators, the subject
of bail was left entirely at the discretius of Iris lordship.
Some dilletlliioll ensued as to the propriety of admitting
the defendaite to bail, both counsel asserting that they
were prepared with substantial bail ; but the Lord Mayor
ultimately declined to secede to the request, and the de-
fendants were remanded, bail being refused.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

BAIL COURT.—Nov. 3.

Sittinp ►t Nisi Prins, at Westminster.—(Before Mr.
Justice Blackburn and Common Juries.)

This was the first day of the sittings at nisi pins this
term. The list containedl2 entries, four of which bad been
struck out, leaving eight for trial. Of that number two
were undefended actions of ejectment, and in the other six
cases the parties did not appear. The next sittings will be
held on Wednesiay next.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—Nov. 3.

Sittings in Banco.—(Before Lord Chief Justice Erie and
Justices Bylee and Keating.)

NA9TERMA3 V. ILITCHING.—AcnoN TO RECOVER ♦ HANDICAP
STALL&

This was an action to recover 201., the amount for which
the Cleveland Haodimp was run at the Stokesby meeting,
and at the trial before Mr. Justice Keating, at the last York
&MIMIC the verdict was entered for the deleudaut subject to
the opinion of the court. . . .

Mr: 1) gby Seymour, q.c.. now moved for a rule to enter
a verdict for the plaintiff. It appeared that among the con.
ditions of the race was this —" Three horses the property of
different owners are to start or the public money will be
withheld ;" and there was also this other condition—" If
any dispute arise, such is to be settled by the stewards, and
from their decision no appeal is to be allowed to any other
authority." When ►he race was about to be run the stewards
retaliated to the plaintiff that there were out "three horses
the property of different owners" to start, and, therefore,
that he had no right to run hi► horse. The plaintiff, how-
ever, insisted upon his right to run, and he did run his hone,
and woo. At the trial the jury found that the stews de were
wrong in holding that there were not " three horses the pro-
perty of different owners" to start • and under these cir-
cumstances it was submitted that the plaintiff had a right to
the staked winch he bad won.

The Lora Chief Justice wee of a different opinion. A
dispute arose before the race was run, and the stewards de-
cided. It was true that the party thought that the stewards
had decided wrongly, but there was a condition which made
the decision of the stewards 6nal, and ousted every other
jurisdiction.
ltule refused.
SOULNS V. SEITEELTON.-PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.

The plaintiff io this ere WWI a wine grower in France,
and at the latter part of 1863 he entered into an agreement
with the defendant to act as bis agent fur the sale of wine
in London, from January The defendant, in Novem-
ber lnea, applied to the plaintiff for 100 dozen of wine, and
the wine was sent over, and placed in the defendant's name
in the docks. Previous to January 1&a the defendant's
wife died, and family circumstances p ted him carrying
out his contract with the plaint'ff. The present action
wee to recover 11281. 17s. —the price of the 100 dozen of
wine. _ _

Lush, Q.C., sod Mr. C. Pollock, appeared for the
plaintiff; sod Mr. Serjeust Perry sod Mr. Roll for the
defendant.

It appeared thata long correepondsnee had Famed, and
for the plaintiff certain pumas's were quoted to show that
the defendant had promised to psi for the wine.
.Ir. Serjeant Parry. for the defendant, said that there
were other purges in the letter■ which showed that the
defendant had never made an uncooditioull promise to take
the wipe himself ; but all he did was to say that he would
take the wine when some differences between him and C,apt.
Jay, his wife's father, were settled.
After some discussion, a verdict was entered for the
plaintiff for the amount claimed, subject to the opinion of
the full court as to what was the true meaning of the cot-
respoodeoce.

drawn with extreme nicety, that it was very difc•rlt to ex-1
plain the law to the jury. The learned counsel was cer-
tainly entitled to a rule on the ground that the verdict was
against the evidence.
Rule granted.
Sitttnp at Nati Prins at Weidminater.—(Before Mr. Baron
Martin and a °common Jury.)
- -

This was the first day of the nisi prias sittings at Mid-
dlenex. The list contained only sine entries ;of these two
only were tried, the others being struck out, undefended, or
made minuets. The Court will not sit again in Middlesex
until Wednesday next.

BANDSBB v. warra—" KICIIII6 ♦ WELSHER."

This was very extraordinary action for au assault, brought
by the plsi o tiff, a bettiug moo, agaiust the defendaut,Captain
White, the muter of the Emexand Suffolk bouuds.

Mr. Hui!diction, Q.C., sod Mr. Butler Rigby were coun-
sel los the plaintiff Mr. Hawk's., Q.C., sod Yr. Beery
James were counsel for the defendaat.

It appeared from the plaiutdrs evidence that he and the
defendant entered into abet at the Goodwood Races of 1863.
The plaintiff was the lager, when he said it was arranged
between them that the money should be paid at Tattersall's
OD the following M. edg and upon that day he went there,
y.
bat could oat find the defeodaat. At the Brighton Races,
which took place shortly afterwards, he met the defendant,
who according to his aoccmat mughly demanded the amount
from him. lhe plaintiff told him he mast wait a few mi-
nutes, he hoping to receive some money he had just won,
when he would pay him. The defendant, however, instead
of seceding to his request. rushed at him, caught him by the
collar, dragged Lim to the railings, and forced him with
great violence against them. He tried to throw him over,
but failed. He then took him to the gate and pealed him
out of the ring, kicking him with great violence in the back
part of the thigh. The blow was a very severe one, and he
had not recovered from it yet.
For the defence it was alleged that the plaintiff had
defaulted. and the defendant hearing subsequently that be
was one of the class of betting men called " Welshers "
who make a point of being absent when their beta beam:lie
due, bad ordered him to leave the ring when he met him at
Brighton. The plaintiff declined either to pay the money
or to leave the so:loser*, whereupon Mr. White took him
by the collar and led him to the gate, surrounded by a
crowd of gentlemen who bad also been " Welshed" by the
plaintiff. Who gave the kick the defendant did not know,
all that he could answer for was that he had nut doe, so.

11r. Baron Memo directed the jury to bad a verdict for
the plaintiff, telling them at the same time that the amount
of damages that ought to be awarded to him under the very
peculiar circumstances was entirely in theic discretion.
There wee no doubt that the plaintiff bad defaulted. Per.
haps tbey would not forget that fact in determining the
clue.

The jury found a verdict for the pltiotiff —damages,
ten guineas.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
Not 3.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

•
The court s►t this morning foe the first time after the
long station.
The divorce cause hit does not contain any cases that can
properly be said to be in arresr. There are 91 suits ready
for trial. of which 10 are for judicial eeparatioo five for
nullity of marriage, and one for restitution of conjugal rights.
The reef are for dissolution. Six are to be tried by epoch.'
and lc by common juries; the rest by the judge sitting
alone. There are two petitions in forms psuperia. Lest
term tlere were 133 cases in the list.

There are 11 probate causes, firs of wbich are to be tried
before special and two before common juries.