The Express.
London, England, 1863-04-02 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Kutoszow, Aran. 1.
Both warts were engaged yesterday is trying civil
The Lord Chief Justice disposed of several special
jury mace, bet the greater portion of them were either re-
ferred or settled, and Pose of the eases that were tried were
of the slightest interest to the public.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—NOIMICH, MARCH 31.
PRII;11 COURT.—(Before Lord Chief Juidim Ede
arid a Common Jury.)

Mr. Keane and Mr. Markby for the plaintiff ; Mr.
Q.C., and Mr. Naylor for the defendant.
This was as action bieftbt to recover compensation for
an injury to the pLaintiff by having been bitten by the de-
fendant's dog.
The plaintiff was a labouring man, living at Oates'', in
this *minty, and appeared to be a seen of somewhat week
health, and a scrofulous disposition. I. January lest, se
he was on the high road seer bin house, he encountered the
defendant'. so., who had a dog with him. wbich attacked
the plaintiff, and bit him severely in the calf of the leg.
Erysipelas ennead, sod the plaintiff suffered a good deal
from the wound, which was not yet healed.
Upon this pert of the case there was no dispute, but the
defendant relied for his defence epos the well-known rule
of law that far the vicious acts of saintele which are by oa-
ten ordinarily free from vies (to which Glass dogs have
always been considered to belong) the owner is not liable
mikes he knows that his p ices ar animal is Ma exception
to the general rule.
la order to prove that the defendant bad this knowledge,
the plaintiff was called to prove that be himself bed been
attacked by the sense dog on a former occasion in the pre-
sence of the defendant.

A witness, named Ta bb. it, and a little girl, named Lettuce
Porter, were also celled to prove that the dog bed attacked
them. it was also shown that the dog generally west
muzzled.
On the other baud, the defendant and other witnesses
entirely denied the plaintiff's story about the bite on the
earlier oocssioo, and the defendant denied positively that he
had ever heard anything about the two other 'Maas deposed
to, or had any knowledge that the deg wee a savage one.
The jury apparently were satisfied that the defendant in
this spoke truly, for they without much hesitation found a
?Mild for the defendant.
ClOllll Coast.—(Before Mr. Justice Williams.)

Frederic& Burrell, clerk in the Royal Arsenal, wee in-
dicted for having, from motives of halm fraudulently
allured, takes away, aa..l detained Jaws Barrell, a price
under 21 years of age, out of the passerine and spirt the
will of her =other, Mary Asa Ryder. and of her guardian,
William Silver Ryder, with intent to marry or earnally
know her, on the 20th of January, 1863 ; and Henry
Richard Burrell was indicted for &Wog sad abetting
the set under which he was indicted waking the acceseary
a prise:4 Buyer sad Mr. Rare appeared for the tion ;
and Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. Drake for the defence.
It appeared from the opening of the learned corisel for
the prosecution, that the prisoners wen sacks, by Wand. al
the young wow, who was the amide, et the abbot sea

of a gentleman named Daniel Burrell, who died without •
will, and u the eldest son of Daniel Burrell died without •
will, his daughter beams premised of his freehold property
—she was also entitled to SOON property in Fakeoham, Lan-
caster, and Ilindolvestoa ; that she bad left eohool at Nor-
wich at Christmas, and came to Fakenhana ; but instead
staying with her mother and step-father, lifr. nyder, ypti oat
their will went to the house of Mr. Henry Burrell, her
uncle i and on the 19th she, accompanied by Frederick
Barren and Mrs. Henry Burrell, left for Loudon, but at the
Fakenbam station took one ticket, for Landon and two for
Darehaix, and on the next day Jane and Frederick Burrell
were married at Plumstead, near Woolwich, in which place
they resided, the prisoner having first obtained amaniege
Names, in order lo obtain which he wee obliged to perjure
himself.
Mr. Metcalfe, on behalf of the prisoner, raised the follow-
ing paints, which the learned judge agreed to reserve for
the opinion of the Court of Criminal Apeal :—l. Whether
upon the evidence the defendant bad-fraudulently taken
Jane Burrell from the possession of her mother. 2.
Whether she was in the possession of her mother at the
time she was taken away, within the meaning of the 'U-
tah'. 1 Whether the custody of the mother was suffi-
ciently alleged in the indictment.
His lordship baring summed up at considerable length,
The jury, after deliberating for lame time, returned •
verdict of Guilty against both prisoners, who were bound
over to appear at the next amino to receive sentence, if
Billed upon.

NORTHERN CIRCIIIT.-..-LIVERPOOL, APRIL 1.

CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron Idzalia.)

Ralph Wigosoll and Joseph Bond, the former an ex guard
in the service of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway,
and the latter a Muer residing at Manchester, were
charged, the one with stealing and the other with receiving
three cash boxes containing 1,1464 the property of the
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company. Oa the 24th
December last Wigaall had confided to his are
a number of Bash boxes to be distributed at
the . various stations on the !main line. Several of
the smaller boxes (which were placed in larger bone) con-
tained money to be used in paying the wage* of the railway
servants at various stations. Three of these boxes routine-
iog mosey were lost, and it was alleged by the prosecution
that they had boon abstracted from the larger boxes before
they got to Rochdale, the point at whisk the train of which
Wigaall wa. the guard met another train, and where • I
imager of Nixes should have taken place. Great confusion
had evidently been introduced into the &mammon* for some
boxes which should have bean received at Heckmoodwike
sad Cleckheaton were left by Wigaall at Low Moor, and
whoa Rowell, the guard of the Liverpool train, looked for
the boxes which he bad to distribute at Wakefield
and kfirtleld they were missing. The.. boxes contained
wages. la the course of • little time it same to the know-
ledge of the railway authorities that Wignall had been soma
in poeemaion of considerable sum of wormy on Christma-
ses, the day of the robbery' sod that Bond. whom, known
to be his associate, bad alto been sees with matey, and
bmard bowling that he bad plenty of fusels. Wigmil gam
two sorereigne to • young woman who had bees mosatly
married as a New-year's gift, which was deemed • anew
rims circumstance, arid in • day or two afterwards,
while Wigaall was at Bond's house, • workmen of Bond's
was called in and told by Wigaall that if a detective should
come and inquire for Band, the workman was to may that
he was out. These facts having coma to the knowledge of
the railway company, the primmer, were apprehended.
At the close of the came for the prosecution the learned
judge intimated that there was not *widows sufficient for
the matter to go to the jury. The prisoners were, there-
fore, discharged.
After the despatch of our parcel on Tossday evening, a
cam involving an action for libel against the Manchester
Guardian Society for the Protection d Trade was proceeded
with in the Nisi Prins Court. The plaintiff was George
Wsiburtos, milk broker and comorivoios agent in Man-
chester, and the defendant was Henry Whitworth, secretary
of the society in question. The libel complained
of appeared in • number of the society's circular
for August, 1862, which, after remarking that " in-
quiries respecting this firm (Mr. Warburton's) bane
been vary numerous chain the last three weeks," wooed
up by dating, " They are all members of the Doted 'Long
firm.' " These words clearly implied that the plaintiff was
a swindler, sad that the members of the "Lag Ina," in
attempting to get goods, referred to him.
Mr. James, Q.C.. contended that • mem offensive thing
could not be pablishrel .of • respectable tradesman,
nor cue sin likely to be productive of most
mime injury to • Fathom in Mr. Warburson's
position. Mr. Warburton was absent is London elm
the statement was published, and was informed of it
by mosivior notice el its publiestios through a Freemams'
club with which he was ormosoted. He applied at the
society's office, bat no redraw was obtabra4 He sodas-
vowed through the medium of his friends and attorney to
get a retractation of the statement inserted in the society's
journal, be at the same time satisfying them beyond all
question that tbeT bad been entirely misled, and that be
had bees most asnously injured by the publication. No re-
tractation had, however, been made from that day to this; but
now the defendants found that they could cot justify the
statement, sod it was agreed that • verdict should be found
tor the plaintitt, &mess 40s. ; the mount of damages be-
yond that amount should be left to the decision of a gentle-
man who should determine the amount of the real substan-
tial damage the plaintiff had sustained. The defendanta
would also apologise met amply, and they undertook to
publish in their next circular a retmetation of the libel and
an apology for what had taken place.