The Express.
London, England, 1852-12-20 00:00:00

--es
I
taro a loan of 2001. fur the purposes of the Bantry Silver
and Lead Minn.
It appeared that the defendant was one of the parties In.
tereeted in the mines above mentioned, and that, tether
more than a year ago, a rum of 2001. was required to enable
the defendant end some other gentlemen associated with
him to take up a lease of the mines. As arrangement was
therefore made with the plaintiff, who wail to endeavour to
obtain the necessary sum ; he did endeavour to do so, and
the present claim was for his charges in the matter. The
plaintiff wee called in support of this case.
On the part of the defendant, it wee alleged that an ar-
rangement was entered hits with the plaintiff, ender which
ho was to receive one thirty second part of the mine as •
remuneration for his trouble, and that he was accordingly
now in possession of that share.
The defendant, the engineer, and the solicitor to the
proprietors ut the mines, were called in support of the de-
fendaut's case.
Lord Campbell, in summing up, said it was a caoo which
depended entirely upon the credit which tho jury gave to
the parties. The atamements of the plaintiff and ut toe wit-
nesses on the other side were coutraeictory, nod it was for
the jury to say which gave the correct version of ti e affair.
Ile (Lori Campbell), howe err, could not but call :attrition
to the amount of the plaintiff's claim ; people were in the
habit of exclaiming against lawyers' bids, but the plaintiff's
demand was more excessive than any attorney's bill his
lordship had ever seen. He hod reel of a s dicitur's bill
containing a charge thus : " Dining with you, when your
cause was much discamed, CPC 81. ;" although time plaintiff's
bill did not contain a charge life this, Acid it contaleied
charges which were unequeilcil in any lawyer's bill that
bad over came under his observation. Ills lordship then
adverted to the principal points of the evidence on each
aide, and left the question of credibility to the jury.
The jury at once returned a verdict fur the defendant.

MILLIR V. GARDNEII.—ACTTfiN roll FAL6E 1)11.11.15.M-

MENT.

This was an action brought to recover damages for an
alleged false imprisonment.
Mr. Reid said that hie client, the plaintiff, wits a highly
respectable widow, who had ',tattled for many years, Oath
before and after her husband's death, in Bermuda. ..tree'.
The defendant was a checaerconseer melding a ~hurt dis-
tance from the plaintiff. The alleged false imprbonment
arose under the following circumstances. The defendant
had asserted that the plaintiff had peered a bud Os. piece at
his shop ; on her denying it, and refusing to pay to the de-
fendant ss. in exchange for the had crown piece, he had
given her into custody. The inspector at the police station
did not take any charge, but recommended the parties to
go to the County Court, as no felonious intent was im-
puted. The defendant accordingly did go to the County
Court, and the mutt of the app::cation was, that the plain-
tiff; Mrs. Miller, was exonerated front all liability, the de-
fendant not proving hie case. This action wan btought to
recover damages for what was felt to he the unjustifiable
rashness of the defendant in giving Mrs. Miller into cus-
tody, a proceeding of necessity highly detrimental to her
good character.
Mr. M. Clambers, Q C., on the part of the defendant,
contended that his cliff nt was jeeditied in taking the course
lie had, and that the plaintiff voluntatil accompanied the
police•constuble to the statien.heuse. No imputation was
cast by the defendant upon the plaintiff's character.
Lord Campbell, in summing up, said this was not one of
these frivolous and vexatious actions, which were some-
times got up by attorneys ; but there appeared to hi a bona
tide cause of complaint against the defendant. It was of
course fur the jury to decide between the statements of the
parties. The jury, after a rhurt consideration, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff; damages—.il.
Mr. Reid asked his lordship to certify that this WAS a
proper action to he brought in that court.
Lord Campbell said he was certainly of opinion that be
ought to Cart fy.