The Express.
London, England, 1862-05-21 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING,. MAY 21, 1862.

Mr. S. ESPC'OURT would accordingly withdraw the
bill He bad that morning received a communication from
a very iniloential body of managers, stating that it was in-
applicable to their cue, and promising to prepare a new
one themselves. He would not, however, anent to the
scheme to be propounded by those gentlemen unless he
found on examination that It gave proper securities to the
depoeiton. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER mid he was
may sorry that the labours of his sight hon. friend had been
brought to the same conclusion as that of the many others
who, without the mme advantages, had attended to the
subject. It had been frequently unsuccessfully treated by
those who bad filled the offille of Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, but no one of them had induced the Howe of Com-
mons to adopt his plan. From them it bad pulsed into the
hands of his right hon. friend, and he had been obliged to
consent to, he fringed not the reject, but the postpone-
ment at least, of his scheme. His right hon. friend said the
matter would now remain in the bands of the managers of
the savings banks, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
could only my that if any improvement mild be suggested
it would meet with no objection from the govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.) At the same time it was to
be observed that the main question had been disposed
of ; they were now able to tell the people .of Eng-
land who were desirous to lay by their savings, that
they wen able to do so with the most perfect security.
The government had now provided some 3,000 places of de-
posit where savings could be received, therefore there was
not the same cause for interference as existed heretofore.
The motion for the second reading of the bill was with-
drawn, and the order read and discharged.
LUNACY REGULATION' BILL.
Sir G. GREY, in moving the second reading of ale bill,
which had come down from the House of Lords, mid that it
was a measure which related exclusively to those who were
technically called Chancery lunatics, who had been so found
by ioquisition, or with respect to whom petitions had been
presented. It proposed in the first place to amend the
mode of procedure relating to the oonduct of commissions
issued by the Lord Chancellor ; secondly, to give adequate
power to the Lord Chancellor for applying the proceeds of
small properties for the advantage of lunatics upon affi-
davit, so as not to exhaust the whole property by the ex-
pensive course of a commission ; and thirdly, to provide for
the effectual visitation of this ciia of lunatics.
After a brief critical discussion. in which Sir H. Cairns,
Mr. Walpole, Mr. Malian, Mr. Henley, and the Attorney-
general took part, the bill was read a mooed time.
THE PUBLIC-HOUSIWOOTLAND) ACTS AMEND-
BILL.

On the motion of Yr. oisorritri, this bill ins recom-
mitted, for the purpose of adding clauses, and making
amendments in clauses 10, 12, and 32 of a verbal nature.
The amendments having been agreed to, and the new
clauses read a second time and added to the bill, the house
rammed.

THE LANDED PROPERTY IMPROVEIVIST (IRE-
LAND) OP
AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill was read a third time, and pared.
THE CROWN PRIVATE ESTATES BILL.

This bill was read a wood time.
THE UNIVERSITIES (800TLAND) ACT LICENDIIINT
(No. 2) BILL.
This bill was sho read a second time.

The other businem having been disposed of, the house
adjourned at twenty-8m minutes past 8 o'clock.

June 18. G. Shaw, Lincoln, dealer in clocks and watehes
—June 18. H. WlHowe, GoxhilL Lincolnshire, yeciesau—.lune IL
R. Smith, Ludborough, Lincolnshire, brick maker—lane 18. 0.
S lentharn, Li-scolushire, innkeeper--Sems it J. Deltas,
err:l7elco'. °n, Lincolnshire, innk-epee—J une6. W. G. Gray, Liver-
pool. attorney—Pune 6. J. Whitein.nd, Manchester, joiner—June
20. T. Lamb, Sale floor, Cheshire, plumber—June 21. J. Wool-
fall, Blackburn, plumber—June 18. 0. Gilbert, Oreatford,
culashire, publican—June 17. J. Jackson, Thurlby, Lincolnshire,
black .mith—Mny 29. T. Huddleeton, Steel-green, Cumberland,
labourer—June 20. IL L Down, Par, Cornwall. draper—July A
J. Yulfoni, Sheffield, pearl button manutactarer—July L. L
Bower, Sheffield, fruiterer—Juba 10. B. Scott, Creams, Cheshire,
surgeon's assistant—June 5. C. Gerrard, Warrington, Lancashire,
abopman—June 19. J. Dion, Nailatonc, Leiccetenhire, wheel-
wright—July 9. W. Cattail, jun., Northampton, dairyman-due
20. T. Howard, Little Wallingham. Norfoffi, baker—June H. B.
Huxley, Kienereley, Herefordshire, horsebreaker—June 18. J.
Poole, Bridgwater, Somersetabire, horse dealer—June M. C.
Maher, Crane Bridge, ilocnereeteture, blacksmith—Jun. 11. Har-
riet Leonard, Bristol, baker—June 11. J. Locke, Bristol, mediae'
rubber—June 11. J. Jones, Yllton, Glouceatershlre, maltster—
June 18. T. Simpson, Wolverliampta4 baker—June 13. G. Hart,
Cardingtonatreet, Hampstead-road, late Ironmonger—June 18.
J. P. Devitt, Wolverhampton, late retailer of beer—June 12. L
Williams, Willenhall, Staffordshire, mine surveyor—June 13. C.
Tigard, Bilsten, Staffordshire, manager of liquor vaults—June IL
Elizabeth Pilgrim, Fallsbury-crescent, Walworth, widow—Jane
3. F. Haines, Llanbaddock, Monmouthshire, haulier—Jun. 19.
G. Watling, Effilpdham, Norfolk, shoemaker.
HA N KEIIPTCI ES ANN ULLED.
. .

Mar 17. JOHN PITSOZZBLD, Brighton, marine store dealer.
JoV 11. MUIR! FOU/IJB, Johnetreet, Kennington-road, cab
tor.
Wig Jona SIGTH, Halifax, Yorkshire, cabinet maker.
May la. JOBS Masan; OrrelL Lancashire, manufacturer d
nail&

JOUST STOCK COMPANIIII ACTS.
MOHILIT 01W COAL AID COM COMPANY (TUMID). Juse 2, at
2, at, Built=llstreet —petition for wtDdlna-op.
FM/RATIONS OF DIVIDENDS.
(Mown BATWAID, Goodhunt, Kent, tanner-Ist dividend at
Su bd., any Thursday, at Stansfeirls, Basinghallstreet.
010202 :Asko ItlAnsit (separate estate), Osnaburghstreet,
Regent's-park. builder—lat dividend of 12e, et, any Thurs-
day, at Stansfeld's, Besdnghallstreet.

ninimums.
June S. J. Lilly, ehlawell-street, Finsbury, clothier—June S.
T. O. Pratt, Wllby, Northamptonshire, brickmaker—June O. W.
Curtis, Great Bericlismpstead Herta, rag puller—June S. J.
Bptiogett, Wellingtoa-chambers, Loudon-bridge, and Wad-
burst, Sussex, hop merchant—Junes 9. O. Han Winchester,
=dealer. and King's Worthy, Hants, sawm doe—
J. O. Kemp, Edward-place and Phillp-street,
roayewt,ntsZer
uoe .ymerchant—June
bbmachH.t.Rostr nboarn, 114ereforldi
Ifanageld, Cheuterton, bambridg7ehlie, boatwrigh=ans
12. J. L. Morton, Finch-lane, City, merchant—June 12. T. J.
Nicks, Tower-hill, City, provision merchant June 11. J. Smith,
Greenwich, vonmonger—June 1 & Bryan (sejsrats estate),
New Oxfordstreet, and Northampton, boot manrer—Jane
11 O. H. Murrell, Burlingham, Norfolk, brick maker—June 19.
S. Benaut, St. Jamee'sstreet, Hanover4quare, innkeeper—June
12. H. Blake Skids, Hants, corn merchant—June 12. J. Chap-
man, Cambridge, boototaker —June 12. J. Whitley, feeds, brass-
founder—June 12. W. Whitaker, Bradford, Yorkshire, merchant
—June 12. W. P. Davis, Cardiff, slats merchant—June 11. J.
Kills, Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, builder.

PAILTNIRBEITPB DMEIOLYID.
John Sharpies, R. Sham**, Jamas Sharpies, and Ann Sharpies,
Richton, Lancashire, farmers, so far as regards James Sharpies
—I. Halliday and B. Qswahaw, Rochdale, rag merchants—T.
Hollingworth and R. Buchan, Manchester, commisalou agents—
B. 8 ,aftrove and A. Martin, Clayton-oam thledoniangoad,
plumbers-1k M. Bulky and W. W. Raffles, Liverpool, cotton
brokers—T. Nunneieyand J. lfagarigia, Obeapeide, general Deaf-
ness sgenta—J. V. Besyy and K H. Haddon, Friday-etreet,
warehousemen—O. Sharp and S. Sharp, ledstons. Yorkshire,
steam thrashing machine propriMor. A. Scott, Leonid& Cal-
deal, and 8. Blandford ?aligns!' East, end Vidoringrove, Ken-
sington New Town, so far as regards B. Nand-
ford—R. Holt and E. wholesale grocere—T.
& Bullock, and R. Hanky, Btaffordahlre, maaufacturers
of earthenware, so far as mirds & Bulleek—W. Bharrock, Ho.
ben Sharrock, and Richard Shattuck, Southport, Lama/des,
far as regards Hobart Sharrock—R. Horwitz and A.
groom,heii! so
Mainghall.street—W. 8. Kelly and M. L Ingram, (al-
cotta, merchants—W. J. Wattsford and R. Pinch, Greenwich,
medical men—W. Pearce and H. Farrar, Poole, Dorset-
shire, and Christchurch, Hants, Ironmongers-8. Fry and C. 11.
Colepeper, Orsorchurch-street, photographic artists—M. Crowe
and 0. Bamford, Jun., Bristol, tailors—T. Atack and W. Prld-
geon, Market Essen, Lincolnshire, ironfounden—H. Newton,
jim., and J. Holdsworth, Jun., IClton-upon-Hull, sanitary
tube merchants--J. Gibson and J. Smith, Scarborough, builders
1 —W. T. Whittemore, J. S. Dickerson, E. Reed, and W. W. Gil-
bert, Liverpool and New York, merchants—W. Bentley, K Bent-
ley, and H. Bentley, Horton, Yorkshire, worsted spinners—J.
Mack well and F. Blackbird, Clasheugh or Ford Mill, Durham,
I paper makers - J. Sewell and H. Sewell, Walker near New-
castle-upon-Tyne, copperas manufacturers—A. Sleigh and F. W.
I Irving, Liverpool, brokers—The firm of Lewis Potter and Co.,
Olsegow, so far as regards R. Gilchrist.
SCOTCH SEQUBSTRATION&
JOHN LINDSAY, Cralgball, fanner, May 2s, at the King's Arms
lon, Hamilton.
ALUM'S= Cilium; Edinburgh, wine merchant, May SO, at
Dowell and Lyon's Rooms, Edinburgh.
Jogs Marro, Edinburgh, bellhanger, May in,, at Cay and Black's
Rooms, Edinburgh.

Lab. inttlitgout.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-MAY 20.
APPEALS.
1107111111.111 MOWN.

As this house still retains its jurisdiction in cases of I
divorce between subjects of her Majesty resident in India,
the following case came before their lordships this ,day.
Th. petitioner, Gore Boland Munbee, is • Lieutenant-
Colonel of Engineers in that part of her Majesty's Indian
army attached to the presidency of Bombay. On 28th of
September, 1846, the petitioner, being then thirty-one years
of age, was maivied to Sophia Catherine Frankland, spinster,
aged twenty-three, at the church of Sitters, in the presi-
dency of Bombay, according to the rites and ceremonies of
the church of England. The parties lived and cohabited
together as man and wife at Poona and Mahableshewar hem
the date of their marriage till April, 1851, when they left
India, and came together to England. Colonel Munbee re-
turned to India at the end of 1852, leaving his wife behind
on account of ill health, but she rejoined him at Bombay,
in the spring of 1854. In 1857 she again came to England
from ill health, her husband's military duties detaining
him in India, and she returned in Marsh, 1859,
and then oohabitetion continued till January, 1860,
when Colonel Musts* was obliged to go on •
tour of military inspection which involved • separation
of a few months from his wife, whom he left with her
sister, the wife of a brother officer, at Poona, and rubs.-
queenly at Mahableahewar. A legacy having been left is
Mrs. Munbee, she entered into • correspondence with her
husband, and induced him to settle the money upon her
to her separate nee. On 19th May, 1860, Mrs.
Munbee left Mahableshowar, and proceeded under
an assumed name by way of Bombay to Surat,
where she was joined by Charles Payne Barran, • lieuten
in the 29th Native Infantry with whom she eloped fer
Dohua on the 22nd of May, 1860 ; wince which time she has
been living in open adultery with him. On the 26th May,
1860, /dia. Munbee addressed the following letter to her
husband " May 26, 1860.
_ .

" I have at last taken a step which will enable you to
release yourself and me from a tie which has become each
year more irksome to both. I cannot hope that at first even
therecollection of the miserable terms on which we have long
lived will reconcile you to my having sought the protection
el Captain BUTS& ; but if you take the only proper course
open to you under the circumsteues, you will in the end
ooligratulste yourself on my having done so. What I have
DOW done is done after long and mature consideration, and I
have well weighed all the disadvantages attending such •
step, and prefer setting every consideration at defiance to
continuing to lead • hopeless, shalom, and miserable life.
Circumstances so far favour you that the usual talk and
scandal attending such • cue may be entirely avoided. I
have made no confidante, and am going to such an isolated
plans that if you choose to apply immediately for • divorce
nothing need ke known until you are thereby rid of me.
You may choose not to afford me the release which I dr
sire. If so, you will regret it hereafter, and the disgrace el
my position will be reflected upon you. Nor eau you canary
yourself by • beetle meeting with Captain Barran ; for my
sake be cannot and will not give you such satisfaction •
duelling too is out of fashion, and redress by law within;
your reach. If you seek ' damages' only you will oblige
me to bring forward evidence of a disagreeable nature, to
prove that no happy home has been destroyed, and you
must fail in gaining them ; therefore tor your own sake, if
not for mine, refraingrom such • course.
Au action for criminal conversation wan brought by Colonel
Minden in the Supreme Court at Bombay against Lieu-
tenant Bum, in which judgment went by default, and
3,000 rupees damages awarded, which, with the costs, were
duly paid. A separation " • mend et thoro" was also ob-
tained in the ecclesiastical side of the Supreme Court ; and
de present bill was introduced for the purpose of dissolving
the marriage.
Mr. Lush, with whom was Mr. Macqueen, appeared for
the petitioner, and stated the cue.
The printed evidence as to criminal intercourse and sub•
sequent elopement and cohabitation, which was bikes and
verified in India, was put in ; and witnesses having bees
examined to give additional proof of the marriage,
The bill was read a second time.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—Met 20.
Sittings in Nisi Prius.—(Sefore Mr. Justice Wightmaa
and a Common Jou.)

This was en action boreght by the plaintiff, •
against the defendant, • gentleman well known on tet'asYri,
to recover the sum of M. 19e. for services rendered as •
jockey. The defendant pleaded., first, never indebted; and,
seormdly, payment.
Mr. Murphy was counsel for the plaintiff ; and Mr.
,lawkina, Q.C., and Mr. Beet for the defendant.
Mr. Murphy, having opened the plaintiff's owe, called the
'owing witnesses.
The plaintiff said—l am a jockey, and have had gnat ex-
perience in hones. In the Liverpool Spring races of 1856
I met the defendant upon the inceoourse. Priest, who was
one of the defendant's jockeys, introduced me to him. The
defendant asked me what weight I rode. I told him, and
wethen agreed that I should go into his service as • *key,
at • salary of 401. per annum. I was never to ride any
other gentleman's hone in the same mos. I was to have
guineas for • winning mount, and 3 guineas for a losing
one. I had leave to ride other gentlemen's horsed for other
noes. I was in the defendant's service until
the middle of the year 1857, when I was turned
off by the defendant, with several other jockeys.
During the time that I was in defendant's employ I rode
Lady Florence at Ascot, but did not win. At the same
meeting I rode South Western and won the 50/. stakes. I
_ _

rode Lily Florence again at the same meeting, but did not
win. I rode Weathercock at Hampton-court, Yorshireman
at Goodwood, Yorkshireman at Doncaster, Eagle at Man-
chester, and Yorkshireman again at Lichfield. I did not
win on either of three ocouiona The defendant never paid
me • shilling for my services. Since I left the defendant's
employ I have been living with Colonel Cockburn (Lord
Seaton's son) and Lord Stamford.
Cron-examined—At the time I made the agreement with
t the defendant I was about 18 ears old. I was not engaged
as • stable-boy. Mr. Burl)* wee the trainer at the
defendant's establishment at .ford. He did not poky me
5 guineas for my services. I • not engage at • salary of
ss. per week. I hued at Edgeford, and my board and
lodging was found me. I used sometimes to take the
bones out for exercise.
Priest was called, and corroborated the plaintiff as to the
defendant having engaged the latter in his (the witness's)
place as a jockey. Witness was obliged to summon the
defendant in the Brampton County Court before he
would pay him his salary. The defendant afterwards took
out • summons against witness for perjury, but had aban-
doned it.
Cros.examined—He did not know that the reason why
defendant did not appear to answer the summons in the
county court was in consequence of the funeral of hie
mother taking place on the same day. He was discharged
in consequence of being too heavy to ride. He was paid
20i. per annum and five guineas for pinning mount. and
three guineas for losing ones.
Re-examined—The plaintiff's services were more valuable
than his were, because the' plaintiff was much lighter.
This was the plaintiff's case.
For the defence Edward Rawson Clark wad called, and
said—l am the defendant. I reside in Thistle-grove,
Brompton. I have a racing establishment at Edgeford,
in Staffordshire. The plaintiff was engaged by me as •
stable boy at se. • week. I was at the Liverpool Spring
Races in 1856. Priest never introduced ine to the plaintiff.
I did not ask the plaintiff what his weight was. I never
spoke to him at Liverpool in my life. I did not engage him
all a jockey. I gave hint five guineas o 0 one occasion. That
was or winning the race at Lichfield with South Western.
It is customary in establishment. like mine to engage boys
as stable boys. If they turn out wall we put
them upon a hone for the purpose of giving them
an insight to the business. The plaintiff left
my service in the middle of 1857. He never applied
to me for any money when he left me, and I never heard
anything of this claim until the beginning of this year. I
was summoned by Priest at the Brompton County Court.
I could not appear to the summons on account of my
mother's funeral. I subsequently took out a summons
against him for perjury. I did not appear to it through •
mistake on the part of my attorney, and consequently tbst
was dismissed.
In cross-examination the defendant Spring
denied that he
had seen the plaintiff at the Liverpool Spring Meeting, and
also that he had engaged him as a jockey. He was only
.aged as • stable boy. He fed with the other stable boys,
and was paid sa. • week by the defendant's trainer.
Barbridge, the defendant's trainer, was then called, and
said—l went with the defendant in 1866, and continued'
with him until July or August, 1857. There were about
eight or nine stable boys at the time at the establishment
at Edgeford, and the plaintiff was one of then.. I paid him
his wages. I never heard that be was engaged at 40L per
annum. I gave the plaintiff 5/. for winning the race at
Lichfield with South Western. A stable boy is bound to
ride when his master pats him up.
The learned counsel having addressed the jury on behalf
of their respective clients,
The learned judge summed up, and the jury returned a
verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

THE POLICE COURTS.

A respectable-looking young man, named James Ocorge
Itaasi describinc himself u a commission agent, sou placed
at ta; bar before Mr. Alderman Bose, who was MO* for
the Lord Ma) or, charged with uttering a forpd ebeque for
11/., drawn on Sir CCAries Price, Bart., and Co., bankers,
King William-street.
• The prisoner, who said he would reserve his defence, was
f fuusedlly .
committed for trial, an application for tall being re-

MARLBOROIT 11• STREET.
Mr. Tyrwhitt gave his final decision in the case of Janice
Norton, cabdriver, who was summoned for taking more
than his legal fare—he having charged W. extra for an
infant in arms. A recent decision at Westminster was in
favour of the interpretation of the clause in the Hackney
Carriage Act which made it lawful to charge for an infant
as a person when more than two persona were carried. Mx.
Tyrwhitt, however, differed from this reading of the clause,
which was brought forward by Mr. Beard on behalf of the
cabdriver, and said as the question was one of importance
to the publics well as to the cab interest, be would take
time to consider his judgment.
Yesterday Mr. Tyrwhitt told the cabdriver that he ad-
hered to his view of the law, that an infant was not to be
considered as • " person," and therefore he should inflict a
nominal fine, and order the overcharge to be refunded.
The defendant said he should convey this decision to Mr.
Beard, who would no doubt be instructed to tarry the
question to another court.
Mr. Tyrwhitt had not the least objection to grant a case,
in order that his decision might be tested in the Court of
eon's Bench. But if a case were demanded, it must be
within a few days.
The Gamma said he would make his representation in
the proper 9uarke. He hoped his lioeoae would not be
marked, as it would operate to his prejudice at Somerset.
house.

Mr. Tyrwhitt said he was obliged to endorse the license,
but he felt satisfied, under the circumstances, that the de-
fendant would sustain no injury, as the matter was one in
which the cabman was perfectly justified in holding a dif-
ferent opinion of the law from that which a magistrate did.