The Express.
London, England, 1863-03-02 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-Dm 28.

Al ter Term Sittings at Nisi Prins at Guildhall.—(Before
Lerd Chief Justice Cockburn and a Special Jury.)

ALM( r. IMAGE AND ANOTNIN.

This was an action for assault, falae imprisonment, and a
malicious prosecution. The defendants pleaded not guilty,
and further that they had reason to believe he had em-
bezzled and stolen the sum of 21. Oa. 6d., their property.
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Prentice were counsel for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Serjeant &Hemline and Mr. Metcalfe for
the defendants.
. . . .

The plaintiff was in the employ of the defendants, the
Loudon Stereoscopic Company, aod the case arcs. oat of the
sale of some slides to a lady. It appeared that the slides were
to be paid for on delivery. The plaintiff got the cashier to
make out the invoice for the goods, which amounted to
24 Oa. 6d., but did sot enter it into the temporary credit
book, but it was done without his knowledge by another
person in the defendants' employment. The porter brought
back the money and gave it to the plaintiff, but its receipt
was not entered in the books. When called on to account for
it the defendanta alleged that he was onside satisfactorily
to do so when questioned of the following morning. He
admitted that he had received it, and when he wen *eked
what be had done with it, maid he bad paid it in when be re-
ceived it, or that be mart have done so. When he was told
it bad not been paid over be then said he supposed he must
have paid it over with other moneys, but that was shown
had not been done. The cashier denied that he bad received
the money, and, as a last excuse, he said he must
have left it on the counter. He came the following day,
but on the second day he remained for a abort
time, and then absented himself altogether. It
wee urged by the defendants that they bad reasonable and
probable MUM for proosediog against the plaintiff, end it
was not denied by his counsel but he contended that they
bad acted illegally by having him apprehended without the
intervention of a magistrate by the issue of a warrant.
When it got before the magistrate he thought it was a case
for a jwy, and committed him, but on his trial at the
Middlesex Sessions be was acquitted. The oount as to the
malicious prosecution was withdrawn.
The Lord Chic* Justice, in summing up, said that the de-
fendants' auspicious were aroused from the plaintiff's own
conduct, and expressed his surprise that it should have
been put forth as au aggravation that the plaintiff was
arrested as 9 o'clock at night when he was in bed, and that
he was torn from a lady for whom he was supposed to have
a predilection. When the police went to his house he was
at first denied.

The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages
IN.—and acquitted him of the charge of embezzlement.

TRZ BTATZ OF TEI CAVIIII LIST.

The remaining one in the day's list was not taken on ac-
count of its length, and the Lord Chief Justice announced
that the general cause list was in a satisfactory state. All
the common jury cases had been disposed of, and only a few
special juries remained. As the common jurors were all
gone, his lordship intimatedthat be would bake special juries
during the after Ester sittings.
This terminated these sittings.