The Express.
London, England, 1863-12-09 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—Dec. 8.

ittisp at Mai Pries in Losdes.—(Before Lord Chief
Justice Erie and Special Juries.)
BOBINEBB OF 11111 COURT.

This eras the first day of the Sittiep-aiter term in Londca,
and the list contains 145 entries, sod no leas than 84 cease
are marked for trial by special juries. There are 65 re-
names.

THOMPSON AND OTHERB V. TIM BT. KATHARINE DOCK

COMPANY.-1088 OF OOTIUCH FEATEZR.S.

This was an action to reeves: the value of some ostrich
feathers which it was alleged lied beau lout whilst the pro-
perty was in the defendants' warehouse.
Mr. Lush, Q.C., and Mr. W. Williams appeared for the
plaintiffs ; and Mr. Price, Q.C., and Mr. Kemplay for the
defendants.
The plaintiffs, Messrs. Thompson and Co., were mer-
chants in London, and they had a branch house in
Africa. In October, 1861, the African house shipped
from the Cape • box containing ostrich feathers,
and they sent by post • specification containing a
description of the feathers sent. The gross weight of the
box, which was bound with iron, was nibs. The mode of
packing the feathers was to place among them a quantity
of pepper to prevent the ravages of insects ; and there was
also some cloth to absorb soy damp that might otherwise
damage the feathers. The net weight of the (esthete was
gabs. The box arrived in London on the 18th January,
1862, and it being the practice at the decks to open such
boxes for statistical purposes, this particular box was opened
in accordance with the practice. On the 21st January the
plaintiffs received from the Dock Company a statement of
what was in the box, but they did not observe that the
weight of the feathers was only 291 be. 4 os., instead of
401ba. About a fortnight afterwards, the plaintiffs sent
their broker, Mr. Hale, to examine the (esthete in accord-
ance with the usual custom, and he found that a quantity of
the feathers were not there, and that among those missing
was the most valuable wed in the box ,• that was
about 71b. of white feathers. Mr. Hale made further inquiries
which resulted in his ucerteining from the Dock Company
that the grow weight of the box in Africa having been
711b5., the gross weight in the docks was 731 be., the accre-
tion of 2lbs. being what would naturally arise from mois-
ture. The value of the lost feathers would at the present
time have been 3401., butat the time they reached thedocks
the value was only about one-half that sum. The plain-
tiffs contended that they were entitled to receive the amount
of the value at the time of the verdict. The question in
the cause was whether the feathers bad been lost whilst
they were in the charge of the Dock Company ; and upon
this evidence was given pro and coo. The evidence for the
plaintiffs wee to show that the property was lest in the
docks ; whilst, on the other hand, it was said that the miss-
ing feathers had never reached the docks. and that all the
feathers that arrived in London were banded over to the
plaintiffs. Another circumstance was that it was stated
that the parcel, short of the pepper, At., this morning
weighed 68th.. At the suggestion of the jury the box,
*lath, &c., but without the pepper, were weighed, and the
weight wee found to be 36th.. 2 or., which, with efdlbe. of
feathers, would have made 76th..
The jury, without retiring, found for tae defendants.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
Dec. 8.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

IN THE GOODS OF MEET BRANNAN GUICIL-A WHOLESALB

WILL STIALIL/L
Dr. Spiuka moved for probate of the substance of a will
executed by Mr. H. B. Quick, late of No. 7, Lawn-road,
Haverstock-hill, u contained in the affidavit of the widow.
The ciroutristasom of the cue were very curious. The de-
ceased married his seocod wife on the 22nd December, 1860 ;
end he proceeded at once toexeonte his will. He lived at that
time at Guildford, but he had afterwards removed to Lawn.
road. He was one of the sufferers by the aceideat on the
South-Western Railway by which Dr. Baily lost his life ;
and after then his memory became so impaired that he forgot
where be had placed his will. On the 16th Deoember, 1862,
his house was robbed, amongst other thing', of a jewel box
and a dressing-case. Latterly a convict in Pentonville
prison, named Charles Kimble, bad confessed that he wee
the thief, and he had made au affidavit in support of the
present application. He said he had entered the home by
climbing up to a bed-room window while the family were at
dinner. Ile found the will in the dressing-case ; he examined
it, and knew that it was a will ; for he was a "scholar,"
and he also knew from experience that people
were in the habit of keeping their will
such places. He gave it to a friend, who pro.
posed that they should hold it in order to see
whether a reward would not be offered for its recovery, but
after a time they thought it best to destroy it lest it should
lead to their detection. He declined to say who his friend
wax, for he did not wish to implicate him. He had found
no fewer than six other wills in different houses which he
bad robbed, and he had destroyed them all in the lame way
as he had Mr. Quick's, namely, by putting them into
the fire.
Sir J. Wilde did not say that probate of the substance of
the will as deposed to by Mrs. Quick might not ultimately
be granted, but the deceased had left a child by his first wife,
and another by the applicant, both of whom, being inter.
eated in an intestacy, must :in cited before anything could
be done.

BOULTING V._ BOUI.TT

Mr. Bagley, instructed by Mr. C. E. Lewis, now asked
that the wart would yam Ito ceder or make each a am
as should keep Colonel Waugh in prison until an appeal,
which had been lodged by the othcial managers of the Lon-
don and Eastern Banking Corporation, had been beard by
the Lord Chancellor on Saturday next. He moved epos an
affidavit made by Mr. Lewis, the solicitor to the *Mal
manager'he.
T Commissioner—l do not think that there can be any
objection to that.
Mr Sargood— Except that we say that you have no
jurisdiction. The learned counsel proceeded to contend that
he ought to have been served with a copy of the affidavit.
It was preposterous to suppose that the ooart would vary its
own order which was un&r appeal. The official managees
had been guilty of lathes, otherwise the appeal might have
been disposed of within the fourteen days. In the name of
common howdy be asked whether Colonel Waugh was to
be perpetually bsnlahed from his family.
.Mr. Linklater, for the unigneee, said that he certainly
thought that at the expiration of 14 days the canal was
thrown on the court of appeal to deal with the matter.
The Commisaioner—Would there be time to apply to the
Lord Chancellor in the meantime'
Mr. Linklater--Yea
The Commissioner—Then the oourse I shall take is an

- --- - —.-
obvious OWL I shall adjourn the applicatiou until three
o'clock to-morrow with leave to 'PO, to the Lord Chu"
cellor io the interval, with immediate notice to the bank-
rupt and &magnets.
Order wicordisigly.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

MIDLAND ClROUlT.—lsicserza, DEC. &

Yesterday afternoon Mr. Baron Martin arrived here and
op ed the commission of the winter arise. This morning
his lordship commenced the trials at the prisoners at the
Castle. There was but one cue for the borough—a cam of
street robbery.
Thomas Cooke and Jaws Taylor were indicted for steal.
ing a gold watch and chain and about 21. is money from the
perms of Mr. Pegg, of the firm of Pegg and Chapman.
Mr. Roberta prospected.
This was s garotte robbery.
The primers were faced Ouiky, and were sentenced each
to four years' penal servitude.
Jobs Pickard, John Mordent, and Joseph Wilson, were
with burglariously entering the dwelling-home el
1117. T d
ownslaand, of Stoney Stanton, on the Ilth October,
and stealing therefrom a quantity of plate. The prisoners
were also indicted for committing a burglary at the bows
of Mr. Brooks, at Croft. They were found Chsiay.
Pickard and Moretoo were each seutenced to laLears'
penal servitude, and Wilms to 18 years' panel meth