The Express.
London, England, 1855-06-02 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.-JUNE 1.

I. 70SRCs WIGHT.

lAT WI Tllllll AT
WAN MID COMMON
WHIRL= V. R. 111.111lIN'll WAGES.

-•- - ---
Mr. Lush and Mr. Shaw appeared for the plaintiff; and
Mr. Kills for the defendant.
This we. an action brought by the mate of the ship
Laurel against the captain of the same vessel, to recover the
value of certain articles which the defendant had wrongfully
detained, and which the plaintiff valued at 201. ; and alto to
recover the sum of ld/. 2e. 6d., alleged to be due to the
plaintiff for wages.
The defendant pleaded that the plaintiff had deserted
from the veuel, and therefore, under the statute, he would
not be entitled to recover the goods which he had left on
board the vessel, neither would be be entitled to recover the
amount of wages due to him at the time he left the vessel.
It appeared from the plaintiff's cue that he was first mate
on board the Laurel, and they sailed for San Francisco in
March, 1863. When they reached the Chinch& Islands the
captain took to drinking to such a degree, that the plaintiff
and the rest of the crew were alarmed for the safety of the
vessel. The plaintiff remonstrated with him, and the de-
fendant immediately stopped his two glasses of rum a day.
The neat day, however, the captain begged his pardon, and
he thought it was all over; but during the day the
captain told him to knock off work, and not to do any
more until he was ordered to do to. His rations
wen stopped, and he was put ashore, although he begged
the captain to allow him to work his passage home. The
vessel sailed without him, and he managed eventually to
get home. On his arrival be applied for his clothes, and
several articles which belonged to him on board the vowel,
bat he could not obtain either them or his wages.
The plaintiff was called and proved his case, and on
being eroweaantined denied having been drunk himself.
There being no evidence called on the part of the de-
.

Mutant, -
HU lordship said t►at it was an undefended cause, and
the verdict would therefore De for tba plaintiff.
It was agreed that a verdict should be entered for the
plaintiff for 421.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—JuNa I._

■L lIMTICI WILLIAMS

AMOY A! am PAID., N -
AND • =MON MT.
WALMIS V. ILIITLITT.
This was an action to rescuer 3761., which bad been paid
by the plaintiff for calls oo 600 shame in the Coin Gwyn
Mine, and which wills it wu alleged tt the defendant was
liable to pay. Tho trial occupied be w hahole of the day, and
was act iteaeltded when the curt rose.

ALMON!. PLAT. AID MAIMS.

COURT OF
SETTDIOII 111 1/1103.-BE

LAMONT C. MIZINSTINOLm.
Mr. hoe moved, on behalf of the defendant, for a rule
tallies ma the plaintiff to show cause why he should not
1111VIR aettain interrogatories in this owe. The declaration
wan bg tie endorsee of a bill of exchange, against th• as-
, eiThe defendant, it appeared, was discharged from
as between the drawer and historlf, end it Ins
that the plaintiff took the bill without consideration.
The intorrogalceiss proposed to be put were for the purpose
of extracting leas the plaintiff the arcumstaaose under
which he had snivel the bill.
The Court inlisestsd that the learned mum] had better
make his &mamba to Mr. Baron Parke at iambus.
The Coon um we
the reeseinder of the day is
buries arguammte fa • imeie of brush of charterparty,
which had est seaslaled at its rising.
BOSINISS 07 TUN COl7gT.
This wean will sit oa Thursday, thel4th day of Jae%
and ea tamp sueradlig day until and including Saturday,
the 23ad of Jana, &nag which sienna the court will pro
seed to dispose el an beanies then standing on the new
trial sad special papers. The court will also hold a sitting
on 'Thursday, the 6th day of July next, and will proceed to
give judgmest is an CAW then standing for judgment.
ITTITIOS AT $ VIM AT WIITITIMATTIA —MO= XL SAWA PATTI
AND 001005 Mil&
PAZIMM V. SaLUBSOLI BUD ANOTRZR.—WAAES.
Mr. Hawkins imputed for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ed win
James sad Mr. Maynard for the defeadants.
Mr. Hawkins, in opening the cue, said the defendaats
were linen•drapers, carrying on business at Kingston, and
his client had brought this action to recover the amount of
four months' salary, at 651• a year, due to him. The plait".
tiff had been in the sorties of the defendants for a ow
siderable time, end there was no dispute Deem** ISM
until June in last year, when the defendants charged Mk
sliest with usbenDog their moneys, and insisted es liC
leaving their employment. The plaintiff had felt that be I
had in so way &urged the imputation which had heat out
upon his character but on the defendants threetiSing his
ruin he soasented to leave, and had brought this action to
recover the amount of salary due to his up to the time of
-----"'RAL 4-;°uaTurza•—The Marquiseiblw igirgatettiraiztkaltrilarhaletrYkleCrsd the defendants' see.
\
clans Teasel, of Bologna, who hod bus arrested at Turin at viorconosinil::hisandsaiaribad relemaiarlyn.ediint itutillthe 3rdolpailams,
Me request of the Preach government, was escorted on the 165 t. It which tip" he wee dlootiood. ii• had,. defendants''
iailaff....of.
96th to the frontiers of Switaulaad with the whole of his 664, ~...a Yuri lad dafiallt 11l Hew,lroirgattl rnegt:-giit
family, alter uttletgoieg sit imprisnameat of seven days. "` "*`• "vid between 2001. and "'"" w generally dis
P0LN011.....4 latter frois ROO% in the Iliananprit, February is each veer, and was paid up to re ary, 1854.
of alulall. stabs that farther iaquiries made by the-Papal At the le IA the 3M of hum there was feat mouths'
i.......a155ia the mat who lately attempted the life of the u &se to ban. Oa his bang &wised he was told by
Itapoista thew that his real ease is Maui% .and the to leave the preWsa, sad was shamed with
aisesseL He bad ties boademaed to 12 yeeW inpvi- reseiviag Us. fume • cartoon foe which he had act ea.
meet he a murder at Stilleben% mad Ise aura semmitted weetifai.
armor*, hat succeeded la 'akin kb weeps haa the Ma lisallae—Wee it WO that you hod not accounted
tea say sow the you had meshed hos eesiemas 1
arils el Owvia

DUBLIN, Juan 1.
The Aveman gives the following particulars of a
strike among the men employed at the camp on the
Carregh :
The carpenters at the Curregh, in the employ of 11.
A. sad G. Helm., left their work ea Monday
of
without any provisos nosier, and demanded an iesme
worm, in oesemoence of the working hours being closed
from six in the morning to eight ia tbo 'riming. It appease
the men have ia4sW upon workbag from four WS. tO
half.pest eight p.m , sad for which they fromfor
half one-
half day's wages; bat Messrs. Holum having foiled that
it was impossible for the men to do justice either to them-
selves or their employers, gave notiee on Saturday dories/
the pay that in future the time worked should be as above
stated, from sin a.m. to eight p.m., and for which they
would be paid one and one (leaner day's wages. After aa
szplasation from Kr. Holm* on lloaday gangs&
work;abou
250 of themes, we are glad to my, ?startled to their ;
bat a small section, abase eleven in number, summoned
Mean. Bohm before the Lord Mayor, ior expenses back to
Liverpool, and also for the time lost aims 'Monday morning
until yesterday. After a patient iavestigation on the part
of his lordship, and hewing the evidence of Messrs. Moine
sad several of the workmen, he dismissed the ease, after
giving some very kiddies sad peeper advice to the work-
men. Messrs. Holm* ollotoil la the most liberal meow to
clew the ponies to Meta to their employment, but we are
rem to my they Waal, and *gelled their imeation of
promedieg against the Maim elms la Liverpool for lose
of time and menses.
Chief Baron Pigott has arrived in town; his
health hu been materially improved by a brief resi-
dence in a more genial climate.

Witnese—l &ells* to answer that quetice, and hem 4
right to de so.
Mr. Baron Puke—You are net obliged to answer it.
Mr. Hawkins—That is my ease, my lord.
Mr. Edwin James—Do you mean to say seriously that
yeu deals' to sneerer the question ?
Wiener—l do. I Late the judge's leave, and I will not
answer it.
Mr. Baron Parke—Can you nomad, Mr. Hawkins? It
was a yearly matfett; the plaintiff was always paid his
salary on the I.t of FAornary, and them nould be none doe
to him till the Ist of February, 1865.
Mr. Jmnsa—Mr. Parker, just read this letter (letter
banded to witnees), and thee you are at liberty to confer
with year counsel as to whether it would be advisable for
you to promed with your ease.
Mr. Bares Parke—The plaintiff cannot recover for •
fraction of a year, his salary having been hitherto paid
yearly. Hie last slimy was paid in February, 1864. and
eosseq•eatly there was sothing due tin February, 18.55, op
to which time he had not ben in the defendant's senior,
as be left in Jon., 1864.
Mr. James—l have handed Mr. Hawkins the letter, and
he eau nee his own discretion in the matter.
Mr.Hewkins—its the learned judge is ag shut mr,l won't
proceed farther with the case. I will consent to a nonsuit.
Fits plaintiff was then &onions!, i. being arranged that
no further proceedings wars to be taken by plaintiff in
this ease.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—Jums 1.
MOIR MIL COlMlll4loltil 001a/OW.
IN AS 010101 SELBY.

The bankrupt was described as an iron enameller, manu-
facturer, &c., of Ironmonger-lane, end :of Birmingham.
This wu the examination meeting. The accounts, which
extend ever five years, are extremely complicated, and die-
close a vast amount of liability, in connexion with some
half dons firms of which the bankrupt had been a mem-
ber. The total liabilities, secured and unsecured, us
about 180,0001. ; the amount of assets is at present un-
certain.

Mr. Lawrence appeared for the assignees, and Mr. Lamm
fm a creditor. - - - -

Hie Honour ultimately adjourned the hearing until after
the examination meeting to the ease of Selby and Norton.

IX RN WINDEX.

The hankrupt, wbo bad kept the Blue Poets Tavern, in
the Haymarket, applied for his certificate.
Mr. Begley opposed, on the ground of reckless trading
and bad book keeping.
A stoond class certificate was granted.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.—Juss 1.
amens MM. COMMILMONIM MUMMY.
IN 111 JOHN CHU/WHIR KIVILITS.
This insolvent was opposed by Mr. Sargood for a Mu.
Veitch ; wad by Mr. heed for two other creditor,.
The insolvent had been an oflicar of the Palace Court,
and claimed to be Deputy Drothonotsry. He was die-
charged under the act two yearn ago, and since then had, h•
said, "foolishly" renewed debt.. lie had ale. incurred
fresh debts. He had an allowance from the Treasury of
2594 • yes', se chief clerk of the abolished court. Of that
sum 04 a year was paid into ibis court and be had 401. left.
Tee remainder he had parted with to raise money. The
debt of Mrs. Veitch was for the board and lodging of a
female.
Mr

Murphy adjourned the case to serve a
and advised a settlement.
Ulf ZS BERM MOLSIZE.—BENACR Or PROMISE Or MER-
RIAM
This insolvent, a widow, was opposed by Mr. Sargood for
'young man named Dovid Holloway, and supported by
Mr. HAW.
The iasolvent had only two creditors, David Holloway
and her own attorney. She brought an action against Hot•
loway, a blacksmith at Basiogstoke, fur breach of pro-
mise of marriage, and just before the trial the record was
withdrawn, because the defendant's handwriting was not
admitted, and the plaintiff bad no witness in court to prove
it. By withdrawing the record the plaintiff became liable
to pay the defendant's costs, and they were taxed at 301.
For the costs so incurred she was taken to prison, and re-
mained in custody at the suit of Holloway until liberated by
the court on bail.
On her examination she stated that she was a widow, and
thought her age was 39. She had been a cook, and her last
situation was in the family of Lord Marcus Hill. She might
have told Holloway she bad saved money. That was her
business. Oa being pressed, she admitted she had saved
201., and of that sum 101. went to the attorney to bring the
action, and 3.01. she had spent since her arrest.
Mr. Sargood asked to dismiss the schedule, as the money
was secreted.
The Court refused to dimiss it.
Evidence was given to show that as the letters of the
defendant were not allowed to be read under en order of
inspection, they were not admitted, and the record was
• withdrawn. The action could be tried, and the letters

proved.
Ur. Commissioner Murphy said inspection did not mean
ruining, and as evidence in a case like the present was
excepted in the new Evidence Act, a wise discretion, he
thought, had been exercised on the put of the plaintiff.
Copies of the letters were heeded to the learned Com-
missioner, and some amusement afforded by reading extracts.
The defendant wanted the widow to wait until the death of
his mother, but she would not wait so long. It was alleged
by counsel that it was an attempt to fix herself on the
family of the young man.
Mr. Commissioner Murphy eventually adjourned the case
for a week, to see the original letters. He recommended an
adjustment, by Mrs. Holmes withdrawing the action, and
Holloway would then get rid of all future litigation on the
subject.
The case was adjourned for a week, and bail enlarged.

BLOOMSBURY COUNTY COURT.—JUNE 1.
ROO2lll V. TIERPOINT.—ACTION AGAINST • STAIN-
HOLDS&
Mr. Dod, in stating the plaintiff's case, said the plaintiff
was a timber merchant, end the defendant, Mr. William
Pierpoint, a licensed victualler, the proprietor of the Grapes
, public-house, Bennett street, Rathbone.placte. The action
was to recover 61., a stake deposited by the plaintiff with the
defendant, under the following circumstances :—On the Bth
of March last Mr. Rogers was at the defenda't's house, and
the conversation turned upon the payment made to grand
juries, the plaintiff affirming from his own knowledge that
some years ago they were paid for their services. A Mr.
Kelsey, whit was present, denied this statement, which Mr.
Rogers persisted en, and thereupon Mr. Kelsey offered to
make a bet upon the subject. Mr Rogers at first acceded, end
said be would bet 61. to 11. in support of his opinion. Rs
shortly after relented, and said be would not bet, upon
which Mr. Kelsey threw down a sovereign, and chelenged
Mr. Rogers to fulfil the original bet. Some strong language
thereupon ensued between the parties, and eventually the
stakes, 61. and 11., were deposited with the defend-
ant. Mr. Kelsey, on iii part, wrote to the
Dispatch, the Sundry Tines, and Beit's Life, who decided
la his favour. Mr. Rogers refused to be bound by their
decision, and took the defendant down to the Sessions
Rouse, Clerkenwell, and the official them decided in favour
of the plaintiff, juries having been paid down to the year
1828. From subsequent statements it appeared that the
defendant had used every possible means to get the parties
together to arrange, but without success. Re then proposed
to hand back each stake, upon which Mr. Kelsey gave him
(defendant) notice that he claimed the whole, sad
threatened to sue him for the amount if he paid over the
bf te Mr. Regers, and upon that the present action was
breaglet. The defendant stated that be had done •.r
his power to get the matter arnicalely arrangedv.titigne
a hard cue upon him, and would be a lesson for the Mare
not to act es stakeholder.
The learned judge (Reatk), in giving judgm eat, said that
a.
In ordinary cotes stakes were not recoverable. Bet by
recent decision in the Queen's Bench, it bad been held that
where the event had not e off, or there was a disputa
between the parties, each could recover his ovra dais.
That cant governed this, and the verdict woad be $g
the plaintiff.
Verdict accordingly.