The Express.
London, England, 1855-11-06 00:00:00

aallpaed by soused that it was pat, and then the
lletamaa mid that the set* bad bee. taken bosh Ade.
AS te the aMdavits, tbsy bad bora obtained under the fol-
lowing aiseamstances:—One of the Jurymen, fullest dissa-
tisfied with the verdict, had oosuanalsated with the deputy
alderman of his ward, who had gone to the Bank
solicitor, and the result was. that the juryman had made so
aMdsvit to Via fo!lowiog effect:—He stated that when the
jury returned into court to asewer the three questions which
had been put to them, he and several other jimmies under-
stood that the vein tot woe M be the subject of further
aeasi-
derati and that be and a midealty of the jurymen did not
'incur in finding small ban plifttiff. That he audibly
impressed his distent Is the liely hew, sad his eoleictiou
sad :bat of al other fargmsa weer that the oesdnet of
Victor Bt. Peel and Co. bad see Meson* se te endale then
to property in the note, and that if be bed less were that,
the foreman was 'eying that there amid be a mallet ho
the plaintiff, be would not, nee weal& meow of the other
jam., have concurred Is it.
The Chief Justin—The gentleman could scarcely have
coasidered what he was swearing. He said be agreed that
value bad bees given by V. St. Paid, that sissies had bees
left at his house, and that at the time be gave value he did
sot recolieet the notice ; and tilos the juryman said, "
won't find it was boil fide." The gentleman was utterly
math for a juryman if bs would act like that.
Mr. Swill contended that giving money was not the tat
of bona fides.
The Cilia( Justice—No, bus the jury went farther, and
said teat he did not know of the robbery.
Mr. B Ain also pro‘oed other 'Merits to the same
effect from five more of the Wynne, and submitted that
under tee circumstances the verdict was unsatisfactory and
imperfect, and that there should be a new trial.
Mr. Justice Creswell was of opinion that there should
be no rule. As he understood the law, it was that a Pawn_
taking a negotiable instranteal i good faith end for. Ns
value must be held to be entitled to recover It, and Ns
title could not be affected by any infirmity in the title of the
perm from whom he bad taken it. The jury had found In
substance that this note had bees 'aft= far eels", and hem&
fide, and without notice ; sad Weed it could net nave bees
taken book fide if it had ben takes lab& notice of the hie n.
As to the affidavits, he apprehended that • juryman could not
at any time make aa affidavit of what Pseud his own
mind different to that which wan stated fa his hearing, and
to which he did not then sad there objeet. It appeared that
the jurymen beard the question as ter goes faith end the
aaawer,and it did potent«, that he °Wood its she mower ;
but he said that if be had supposed that by ea meting the
question in the affirmative he would be Again for the
plaintiff, he would have disseated from the ewe let- If so
be would have been acting in Maass of the law .and of his
duty, tor there was no doubt that, ander thweirest 'Maw"
he would have been bound to find for the plebe&
Rule refused.

COURT OF

rov. S.
as ma. auk 'II

VIITOM4 AT MU YAM AT
MOMS MID 00101011 Jour.
This was the first day of the satirise at Nisi Prise is We
pretest term. The amber of °asses narked dews rot
trial were but few, the liet (*Millais' only 26, tlifie of
which wins ressalltil. i

I 10110• ea e. LORD CLINTON—MI 0047.300 Z M.MUS.&
Mr. E James. Q.C., and Mr. Brewer appeared for the
plaintiff ; and Mr. Bramwell, Q.C., and Mr. Housman not
presented the defendant.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who wee
employed in a mine called the Court Orange Mine, near
Aberystwitb, and which was conducted on the " oost-book
principle," to recover from the defendint, who was a share-
bolder in the mine, U. Is. for work and labour dose in
the montha of November and December, 1864, and Juni-
ray, 1855, in the said mine. It appeared that the oseSpany
was promoted is 1819, with throe diseetors, who were to
meet fortnightly for the porpoise of onstactiag the affein
of the mine and receiving the coat sheet, which was for-
warded at stated times from the mine. Things went on
very well until the month of April, 1862, about a moathafter
the time at which it was alleged the defendant bad become
shareholder, whet, in order to give the concern fresh life
and vigour, it was proposed to raise a sum of money. To
effect this two of the directors Major Tyadal and Mr.
Sedgwicke. met and inued circulars to the varietal Aare-
holders soliciting their authority to raise 3,0001., to carry ore
the affairs of the company. To • document authorising the
raising the amount in question, the defendant bad appended
hie signature, and it was contended that the fact of his
, being a shareholder as well as the circumstance of his having
I authorised the roister of the 3,0001., rendered bin respon•
sib's for the debts of the concern.
For the defence evidence was adduced, with the object of
showier that the company bad ceased to exist at the time at
which the defendant's signature had been obtained for the'
purpose of raising the money—that the affairs of the non-
party were not conducted according to the eon. book prin.
! ci ple —mod that Mr. Sedgwicks bad eeriest on the company
for bis own bent fit and advantage and not for that of the

sbareholden.
The Unsaid Judge, in leaving the ease to the jury, said
it was a question more of law than of feet, bat there wu one
point lir their consideration, whether they believed that at
the time the work was performed by the plaintiff, Mr.
Sedgwicke had taken upon himself the management of the
mine, and had worked it for his own benefit and advantage
and not for that of the shareholders. If they believed that Mr.
Sedgwieke bad worked the mine en his own Granata, the
plaintiff could not recover. but if on the contrary they were
of opinion that he bad carried on the business for the
shareholders, the plaintiff would be entitled to their verdict.
Whatever dtelliall they arrived at he would give either
party leave to move.
The jury retired at one o'clock, and after an absence of
tour hours returned into court with a verdict for the plain-1
1 tiff for the amount claimed—nentely,6l. Is.

71ELDZa V. An DRZWB.—/aLlIn
Mr. Moraine, Q C., end Mr. J. 0. Grifits, appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Hawkins, and Mr. J. Brown, repro-
seated the defendant.
Tbie was an action to reedier compensation in damages
from the defendant for the
tolealged false imprionment of
the plaintiff, who is a clerk his father, carrying on the
business • f a Custom-house agent, at 34, Liras-street, in the
City. It appeared that, in the evening of the 23rd of
Fsbruvy lest, the plaintiff called at the defendant's publio•
how*, the White Horne, at the corner of Church•creet,
Shoredi•ch, and had a glees of porter, for which, basing
paid, Le requested the man at the bar to give him change
ci &sovereign. This request was complied with, but the
plaintiff, on examining the change, detected a bad shilling,
whereupon he hailed the barman's attention to that fact.
The herman denied that be had given the plaintiff say
counterfeit money, and accused him of "ringing the
changes" upon him. Thu plaintiff having persisted in his
statement that he bad received the bad coin among the
change given fur the lovers ign, the barman west for the
defendant, who eventually gave the plaintiff into the custody
fel a policeman, and be was taken to the station-home, where
tfre sergeant on duty, having limed the circumstances of the
intimated that he thought the charge could not be
wastained ; hut, notwithstanding this, the defendant per.
dated to press ng it, and the plaintiff was locked up, and
'stile following morning was taken before the magistrate
at Worship-street Poli.e-court, who at once ordered hi
dtszharge. It wee for this imprisonment that the plaintiff
now sought contscnsation at the bandit of the jury.
Mr. Hawkins, for toe defence, submitted that his client
was justified in the course which he had taken, ea it be did
not keep a vigilant look out utter ruin 'foetid be entailed
upon him, as his hours was situated in the immediate
neighbourhood of many of the cheap theatres, vilaisb were
frequented by some of the lowest charamen, • ho sees is
, the sonatent habit of pawing spurious coin.
Mr. Baron Martin, in summing up, told the jars that OM
was entitled to their verdict, as the d deadest had
Imes' visually failed in supporting the defence whist he bad
net sp—that of justification and sot guilty. The only
question which they had to decide was as Ix the amount of
damages, which, in his opinion, ought not t 3 be earo•sive, as
the defendant had not been actuated by untie, is the course
which be bad unwisely taken.
The jury, after a short abeence.returrad into court with a
verdict for the plaintiff, damages 101.