The Express.
London, England, 1862-05-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
(THIS DAY.)

00IIRT 01/ OOMMON PLIAS.
Sittiags at NiSi Pries in Londes.—(Bsforst Lord Chief
Justice Brie sad a Common JurY-)
Bevan v. 11111:110118. —MOOTING 0008.
The plaintiff claimed damages in oresequence of the
defendant having shot two dogs belonging to him : one a
greyhound and the other • terrier.
Mr. Joyee and Mr. T. Salter appeared for the plaintiff ;
and Mr. Members for the defendant.
Henry Bryant, the plaintiff, said that he was • brick-
maker, living at South Norwood, and the defendant wee a
farmer at Norbary Manor Farm, near Croydon.
On the 14th of November last within, was going
along Leather Bottle-lane, Norwood, having the
twodogs with him. The defendant was in a meadow ad-
joining the lane, and the greyhound got into the meadow,
and ran towards the defendant. The defendant shot the
dog, and he rolled over and cried out, and the tinier,
hearing this, got into the meadow, and they both
ran towards • wood. The defendant followed the
dogs into the wood, and witness heard another
shot, when both dogs cried out ; and afterwards, when the'
greyhound came out of the wood, the defendant spin shot
it. The defendant summoned witness for trespass sad the
summons was dismissed ; and witness then summoned the
defendant for cruelty to animals, and be was amid 40a.
The greyhound was worth 201.

Cnies:examtned—The greyhound ran by "scant,' and
was quick at anything. The father was rather a craw
bred dog, red he should call it a lumber. He had never
offered to sell the greyhonad for 10s. He followed brick-
making in the season, &ad at other times he followed the
Cr. (A laugh.) He never took out a certificate, and he
been fined several times for going in pursuit of game.
and sometimes he had not paid the fine but had gone to
prison.
John Robinson (a man of 60), said he was in the Nerrioo of
Mr. Allen, of Shirley, and he was considered to be the cow-
boy. (Laughter.) He proved the parentage of the grey-
hound, and said that be 'relieved it the beet in all thew'
country.
For the defence Mr. Tummons himself was called. His
evidence was that the dogs were hunting rabbits in the
wood, and as they were following a rabbit he shot and hit
the terrier in the leg, and be might have touched the big dog.
The only other shot he fired at either of the dogs was at the
greyhound, when it was7l yards away, and the shots were No. '
six or seven. The dog went away over a fence and •
ditch, and did not seem to be seriously hurt. The dogs had
been in the wood before hunting.
A witaew named IdrEstated the bitch which was said
to have hem killed to him. It was given to him
when • puppy, but sat not turn out as he
he took o are of it, and it followed anybody shoat,lla
waver pve it away. He saw it four or five days after it
was said to have been shot, and it was perfectly well, and
there was no appears's*, of its having' been shot.
Several other wit:Lewes win lIMAMIId, and among other
thiagedeposed to was that the plaintiff before the magistrate
had denied the ownership of the big dog, and that on another
occasion he had offered to sell it foe 10e.

His Lordship directed the jury _that it wet for them to
consider whether the big deg helmeted to the plaintiff, and
whether it had died of Its wounds ; but, at all events,
the plaintiff was entitled to coax&nage, in respect of the
terrier being shot
The jury found for the plaintiff—dammed one farthing.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Wore the hide Oadiaary.)
WADDELL V. WADIALL.
_ _ _ _ _ _

Dr. Deane, Q.C., and Itr. D, Bans appeared for the pe-
titioner, a wife who payed for a dissolution on the ground
of cruelty and adultery.
The parties were married at a registrar's ogee in 1842,
but they did not live together till 1844, sod they were then
roamed again at church. They resided at Wslworth
and Clepham till May, 1861, when the petitioser left her hus-
band, iu consequence of detecting him in an intrigue with
another woman. The act* of cruelty charged were of
the mai character, but they were not of any particular
atrocity.
Sir C. Cresswell had grave doubts whether the plea of
cruelty was made out, and reserved his judgment.

STOTLZIS V. DTOTLIE AND BOTCHES,

Mr. Stavel.;y Hill appeared for the petitioner, John
Stoyles, the steward of • merchant vessel. He made the
acquaintance of the respondent on board his ship, by which
the was going to Montreal. He brought he home again,
and they were married by • minister at the Ayrshire
Anna, in Glasgow. The petitioner sailed for Australia
in 1852 ; and on his return, in 1855, he found
the respondent with • baby three months old. He con-
tinued, however, to live with her again, but in the same
year he sailed again for Australia, and did not return
till 1857. In the interim the respondent was charged
with having committed adultery with the co-respondent.
The court made a decree nin, without costs.

MATHEWS V. MATHEWS, AND LEWIS, AND DIEING.
The petitioner, • carver, married the respondent in 1844.
They lived in London till 1862, when she eloped sad went to
live with Lewis. She then robbed her lodgers and rewired six
months' imprisonment for the offenoe. afterwards she
became an inmate in two different reformatories; but she
left them sad began to lead a profligate life.
Dr. Waddilove appeared for the petitioner.
The court made a decree nisi.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
(THIS DAY.)

(Won tlu &cad4r.)

John Jatris, a carrier, was indicted for hating sea to
market, for the purpose of sale, a quanta), of meat which
wee unfit for human food.

Mr. Sleigh and Mr. Beeley prosecuted ; and Mr. Cooper
defended the prisoner.
The prisoner is a carrier and • dealer in meat, and is in
the habit of bringing up meat from the country on his
own account, and also on account of other persona, to Mr.
Barreiro,. • meat salesman in Newgate-market. On the 6th
of March lest, at about six o'clock in the morning, Inspector
Fisher taw the defendant's waggon in Warwick-lane, and fol-
lowed it into Newpte-market. When there he saw the
defendant unloading the waggon, and saw a package eon-
Mining the carcase of • sheep, which he examined, and
found to be totally unfit for human food. He also saw
• second package, which he asked the defendant to allow
him to see ; but he hesitated, and said he had no
more sheep like the one seized, but Mr. Fisher
insisted upon seeing it, and upon its being opened it
was found to contain the carouses of two sheep and a calf,
which were also unlit for human food. The prisoner said
they were not for the market, but for the kusicker's, to be
boiled for dogs' meat. There were also four queries; of •
now In the cart ; but that, though very inferior meat, was
by Mr. Fisher. At about 10 o'clock on the same day
pied
Fisher was in the shop of Mr. Burrows, when he
saw the defendant take • package into that gentle-
man's shop, which contained four quarters of a cow, which,
upon examining, Mr. Fisher found also to be nifit for
food, being from animals that had died, and in • yeti I
wet date. The defendant mid the four quartets
of the cow were the same that Mr. Fisher maned at
seven o'clock in the morning. The meat was condemned
by Sir R. Carden, and was destroyed. Rumen, a detective
officer went down to Remoter and saw the primmer, and
told him he was charged with sending meat to market which
was unfit for human food, and he said that with respect to
the four quarters of the cow, be saw it hanging up in tbe
shop of • man, and he bought it for?,. 7s. 6d., and be was
told that the now had beeu tossed into • ditch by the other
cows, and its throat had been cut immediately.
Mr. Cooper addressed the jury co behalf of the prisoner,
and said that the prisoner was by badness • carrier, and not
• regular dealer in meat, and therefore had not much ex-
perience. With respect to the carcasses of the sheep
and the calf he was in • condition to prove that the
prisoner had gone to the agent to a knacker on the
previous day, and told him he was going to take him
some caresses of sheep for boiling, and he should like.
wise convince the jury that the four quarters of • cow
which the prisoner took to Mr. Burrows were the same
which Mr. Fisher peened in the morning ; and be con-
tended that if the defendant bad known that it was bad, he
would not have taken it to Mr. Burrows, whom he knew
would have had it condemned. .

A witness was then called who stated that the prisoner
had called on him, and told him he had some meat which
IMO unfit for market which he would let him have if be
met him the next morning, as it was at the bottom of the
waggon and he could not get at it.
%in jury toned the prisoner (;silty, and he was sentenced
to six months' imprisonment.

(Before the Common Serieant.)
The kW of Jo Am Morrie, the ex-policeman, for perjury,
alleged to have been committed in the Divorce Court. took
place this morning.
Mr. Metcalfe addressed the jury at considerable Maga
on behalf of the defendant, and contended that he hat
been merely al innocent agent in the matter, and that If
there had been any conspiracy it bad been got up by the
husband and his friends.
The jury found the prisoner Not guilty.

THE POLICE COURTS.
(THIS DAY.)