The Express.
London, England, 1855-07-23 00:00:00

WATSON V. WALSH.

This wss an issue directed by 'be Court of Queen's
Bench to determine the right to certain property seised by
the defendant, tinder an execution against Coulee Harvey,
and elsinied by the plaintiff as hie property.
Mr. Keating, Q C., and Mr. Gray appeared for the plain
and Mr. Waately and Mr. Carrington for the defers•
dart.

I—ftappeared that many years ego, Harvey, who was a
I tailor in London, and his wife aspirated, the letter shortly
afterwards going to live with the present pluntiß, Watson,
who had been an apprentice of Harvey's. After living a
Watson,: or Jo In London they removed to Liverpool, where
W partly by inheritance from his father, end partly
by basins. as a publican, acquired considerable property.
In 1863 he gave up his business in Liverpool, and
removed to Wolverhampton, paying upwards of 1,2001. for
the goodwill and stock of the Golden Coo lon there, upon
which he entered. Mrs. Harvey, by whom he bad had Rye
child:ea, continuing with him as his wife. In September
last the plaintiff went to Australia, leaving Mrs. Watson in
charge of the basin's' and property at Wolverhatiptoi,,
under a power of attorney. A short time age the defend-
ant, who several years since bad obtained a jegment
sitinst Harvey, believing Mrs. Harvey bad aeqaired by
gift from the plaintiff a right of property in the furniture
and effects at Wolverhampton, seised them under an execu-
tion as the property of her husband.
At the close of the cue for the plaintiff his Lordship
said there was clear legal evidence that the goads belonged
to Watson, and asked Mr. Whitely what evidence he had
to adduce in opposition to it.
Mr. Whitely said be could not present as evidence to the
jury anything beyond certain dealar.itions made to different
Erma by Mrs. Harvey that the goods belonged to her
Watson for the benefit of herself and her children by
His Lordship said it would be a monstrous thing to de-
prive • man in his absence of property clearly show. to
have belonged to him upon such evidence as that, and that
he should so direct the jury.
Mr. Whitely, after that intimation, would not press the
cue farther, and a verdict was entered for the plaintiff.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—Lmcour, has 21.
WO= EL MUM COLCILIDOI MID ♦ SPECI it. JULY.
RINISILL V. WRITIMRAD -111.71ACH OP PROMISE OP

Mr. fferjeent Miller and Mr. for the plaintiff; Mr.
Mellor and Mr. Adams for the defendant.
The dealaration stated that the plaintiff and defendant
bad agreed to marry each other, and that a remittable time
for such marriage having elapsed. the defendant had refused
to marry plaintiff. The defeadant pleaded that be never
to marry plaintiff, and issue was Joined on that plea.
rhiestrie was tried at the March assists before Baron Alder-
' son, and a verdict was gives for the plaintiff, with damages
126 L Application wu made to stay execution, and cubs*.
gustily a rule nisi was obtained is the Court of Exchequer.
The plated( is a widow, her last husband having been dead
shoat MR rare. She was in busbies. es • dosser in china
rued neelbenwero, and it was urged by her counsel that,
Mrs Wm defendant's promise of marriage, she had
ben business at a low. The defendant is a retired
farmer. in good eircunt.tances. The alleged promise of
marriage was contained In some letters pat in by plain-
tiff, which it was averred on her behalf had been writ-
ten by the defendant. • Os the ether side it was contended
that these letters were forgeries. The following are the let-
t" as road in court :
Wean; Jea. 19. 134.
10 paw Marie ltaewiL—l Will Now marts No woo= amen
the unto boa yen, Sift an • sure yen el that you stall MAW
nth meat Al Ilion emit mil bee my Widen *De beaus yen Aso a
Truing minas and De Det Ippon yea wed V I Nu I wit melt yen
%but& 1116 be tar keg. I weans I becobsen mey ruff
pm MI I will mate rue meads arise don't Mak tenon
alientittnew I tees Promoted you thle for do love you • tame AS
mom hen? Warrantee.
(Laughter.) The next letter was as follows :
Walnut, Thiry SI 51
W Dar Lady—l issieed • letter Sees yen Let IWO kat Mat
reat>• I ims Lure you that I haw Übe Maw tenant *fumy
Sub lowa great Desimeall hes been mom thea • Week. 1
bun Alas Wort to ens tes eml Ibsen bona is !baby, to mil.. mu
Ilea p to Tissue ttie Anemia, =I WM' I Sell retort I De cat
Mom I skis newer Wave_ yen. I Mum too *di to Dam
ens Out IDe Det en yes Mew that We Ma Witt 2 urge. Isar
did nee UR lust my yam& I Came to your Door ssr 4 time,
Irliat
but Item bra Chou pen Om sines yew Ifew beiglamer arm
tolleellmbes bat I OM Wen lOm you cad be year Muff
draltat 1 wee DOM that ta sins I theist car was
hie bet. I hem lief an a sew you my Dune Mrs.
Zama. Ile nomem• hum% teem pen.
Jame Worruntaa.
I Though every dry wail lees his lan he hue bees bill for some
i dem (Inualtes l.)
TM thirdletter was stated to have been written by dr,
Ihmiesit on being threatened with legal proceedings cones.
quest upon his having married another woman :
Wannest, Deeember 15, 1631.
Well Net amen Do robbed to pirated • yawn Ye Wy you
L will be Wu A poor Mount • Memptee many Dato—(bad luckier)—
. for 1 lave Thousand and you lave pout a: all. (avnewed lughter.)