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

SAW 3Entelltgence.

COURT OF XXI
011131118 AT WM PIM •T

UERe.4CINE
.- IWO= ML lIMMI PM=

AND 00101011 1011711.

These were the sewed sittiep at aid prior for the trial of
Loads easess to the preset term. The• Hat eentaised 16
emma, two ambled were reatasets.

WATLING v. In
Seejeant Thomas and Mr. Worsley were for the plaintiff,
sod Mr. E. James appeared for the defendant.
This was en action to recover damages for the alleged
false iraprisoament of the plaintiff. It appeared that on
the evening of the 16th of March last the plaintiff went to
hear a lecture delivered by the Rev. Spencer Edwards, at
Craven Chapel, Marshall-street, Oolden-square. The ten
ton having ooesladed, the auditory were in the act of
ilenbg the chapel, when these was an outcry
On a puree had been lost, and instantly &-
Oakes were given to *lose the doom, so that no
the theald leave the place. At this time the plaintiff
nos matey inquiries as to whether a Sunday school was
elth attached to the chapel, remarking be was anxious to
knew, as be in his early days had attended the school.
Shortly after the iatlmetioa that a robbery bad been eons-
mined he bosuns an object of attention from the fact of
his being a stranger there. A search was made for the
parses on the premise., but as it was not to be found, • police-
man was celled in, into whose custody, notwithstanding his
proteetations of innocence, the plaintiff was gives by the
defendant. He was led through the streets tie the
street station, station, where he was placed in the desk sand sub-
mitted to an examination. Re accounted fee the money
which was felted oa him, stating it was the predate of the
sole of books which he had effected that day, sail gave his
own address and the names of persons who would answer
for his respectability. The inspector ordered inquiries to be
made of tee parties named, and they proved satisfactory,
whereupon the plaintiff was di.cbarged, about one o'clock
in the morning, and the present action was brought to re-
cover compensation for this imprisonment.
At the termination of the plaintiff's case,
Mr. James rose to address the jury for the defence, when
The jury intimated that they considered the charge
proved, and that the defendant had given the plaintiff idle
custody.
Mr. Baron Parke—Yee; that win so.
Mr. James could not deny but that the case win prowl{
but he was anxious to address the jury on the question of
deluges.
Mr. Serjeaat Thome said that if his housed friend goto
Wilted in addressing the jury, he must them issistoo WHIPS
tastier up the evidence, as he understood lieleothed thine
did not intend to call witnesses.
The Jury said they did not wish to hear anything farther
hum counsel.
Mr. Baron Parke—Brother Thomas, the jury say they
don't wish to hear &wider; more from you.
Mr. [irritant Thomas was not anxious to weary the jury,
and therefore he had proposed to his learned friend, that it
he would not address the jury for the defendant, but let the
opinion of those gentlemen be taken on the cue as it then
stood, he would waive his right to sum up the evidence.
Mr. James repeated it was merely on the quails d
damages he wished to address the jury.
The jury said it was their wish not to hear anything MN
from counsel.
Mr. James—Only • few words on the goodie* d
damps.
Mr. &quilt Thomas—As his learned friend pereisted.les
meat say something.
The jury—But we don't want to hear you.
Mr. Baron Parke said the counsel had the power of em e.
cling their discretion u to addressing the jury.
Mr. Serjeaat Thomas then summed up the evident* tia
the plaintiff.
Mr. James, in addressing the jury for the defendant.
complained that an offer which had been made by the
attorneys for hie client immediately after the writ had been
issued to pay 61. as damages, and the then costs, had not been
accopted.
Mr. Baron Parke, at the conclusion of the learned coun-
sel's speech, arid he thought the jury would have very little
difficulty in telling him what would be a fair compensatie•
for the Injury the plaintiff had sustained by mesas of
the mistake the defendant had made in giving his tale
custody.
The jury, after a brief consultation, gave a verdict for the
plaintiff—damages 101.