The Press.
London, England, 1858-08-21 00:00:00

She added that the audience did not hiss her—she
was an exception.
In re-examination the plaintiff said that the reason
the defendant was not asked for the money was that
they were on much friendly terms with him, and they
thought he would pay it, without. She also said that
if she had been aware that the paper she was asked
to sign at Turin was a receipt, she certainly should
not have signed it. The defendant, always professed
great affection for her.
CONsTANCE CESARINI, the sister of the plaintiff,
proved that she accompanied her to Turin, and that
she played three or four months. She considered
that she was very well received by the public in the
character of Fenena.
By Mr. JAMES She did not play any other cha
racier. The reason for this was that she was not
asked to do so.
Mr. JAMES asked the witness whether Nabucco
was not a species of Nebuchadnezzar ?
The witness said it was.
By Sergeant SH€E : The opera of .11 Bravo did not
succeed at all.
Mr. JAMES here said, that the only answer he was
insuucted to make to the action was the receipt that
had been put in, and the only question was whether
his lordship thought such an instrument was binding
upon the plaintiff.
Mr. Justice WiLr.F.s said that, under the circum•
stances, he though. it was not.
Mr. JAMES then said that he could not call the de-
fendant to give his explanation of the matter because
he was not in this country, and he must therefore
consent to a verdict.
The jury consequently found for the plaintiff.

FETCHER V. HINDER.

This case, an action for arrest and false imprison-
ment, was tried at Bristol before Mr. Baron Channel'
on Monday last. The defendant pleaded " Not
Guilty," and a justification that he took the plaintiff
under the authority of a writ of ca. sa. The plaintiff
replied to this that notice of the withdrawal of the
writ had been given to the sheriff.
-

The plaintiff was a farmer at Fovant, in Wilt-
shire. The defendant was a sheriff's officer at
Salisbury. The action was brought to recover
damages for an arrest and false imprisonment, under
the following circumstances :—ln 1856 the plaintiff
was in difficulties, and endeavoured to make a com-
promise with his creditors ; two of those creditors,
however, refused to agree to the composition, and one
of them adopted proceedings, and obtained a judg-
ment. A warrant was issued and placed in the hands
of the defendant, but, as the creditor afterwards
came into the arrangement, and a notice having pre-
viously been given to the de'endant to suspend the
execution of the warrant for fourteen days, a notice
was put into the post.office, stating that the matter
had been settled and that the warrant was with-
drawn. The plaintiff then, on the 2nd of May,
returned to his Couse at Fovant. He saw the defen
dant on different occasions and spoke to him, hut
nothing occwred until Saturday, the 14th of Novem-
ber, when the defendant met the plaintiff and arrested
lam on the warrant. The plaintiff said the matter
was settled ; the defendant said it was not settled.
The plaintiff said he could show him the receipts if
be would go to his house. The defendant said he
would not look at any receipts. The plaintiff then
said he would pay him the money. The defendant
said he had no orders to receive money, and he must
g 0 to gaol at Salisbury, and the defendant accor-
dingly took him to Salisbury gaol on the Saturday
evening. He sent for Mr. Lee, a solicitor at Salis-
bury, but did not obtain his discharge until the
following Wednesday night,at half-past eleven o'clock.
Mr. Lee's charges were 1)1. 15s.
The plaintiff proved the arrest.
GEORGE GENGE : I am clerk to Mr. Swyre, a
solicitor at Shaftesbury, and was employed to settle
the actions of " Beek v. Futcher" and " Burleigh v
Fetcher." On the 23rd of April I sent a letter to the
defendant, stating that the matter was in course or
arrangement, desiring him to suspend the execution
of the warrants, and requesting to know his charges.
1 heard from him, stating that the charge would be
2s- I wrote to him offering him 11. Ils.
which he agreed to take, and I sent him a cheque
for the amount, and received a notice of withdrawal
of the warrant in Burleigh's case from Messrs. Cox
and Sons, his solicitors. What I (lid with it I don't
t sow, but I can't find it in the office.
--- EWER, a corndealer, and member of the town
council of Salisbury, knew of the arrangement of the
two actions in which Futcher was defendant. Knew
of a warrant being in the hands of Hinder. Subse-
quently, frequently saw Futcher at Salisbury. Had
a communication with Hinder in May or June.
Asked him it he wanted Futcher, as he was in
Salisbury. Hinder said no, lie did not want him.
WILLI/se FUTCHER, brother of the plaintiff, was at
Salisbury with him in July at the agricultural meet-
ing. Saw Hinder there, but did not know whether