The Express.
London, England, 1864-11-03 00:00:00

SHROBNOIX V. SCHNEDZI.

This ease, which relates to a 10,0001. prise, drawn by •
farmer, at Qiierushormagh, in a German lottery, has been
1 times before the court. The defendant acted as the
pluintitTe agent abroad, uod the dispute was as to the pro.
portion which should be received by the defendant. Sever•l
months ago au issue was tried in this court, and the matter
now came on, on the motion of Mr. Glasse, that a day
should be fixed for an arguruvut as to the effect of the air.
diet on the bills before the court.

The Vice-Chaoceller suggested that the came should be
argued by use counsel coo each side.
Mr. Glasse acceded.

The Vic.-Chancellor—Theo let it be taken neat Wednes-
day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—Nov. 2.

Sittings in Banco.—(Before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn,
Justices Crompton, Mellor, and Slum.)

ALDAY C. Till GREAT NESTER:I RAILWAY COMPANY.

Mr. Field, Q.C., said this was au action tried before Mr.
Justice Keatiog, at Warwick, when the jury returned •
verdict for the plaintiff, damages as agreed upon, 15/., with
leave reserved by the learned judge to move the court to
enter the verdict for the defendants. The action was brought
to recover damages for not delivering certain beasts within
• remonable time. The cattle were conveyed at reduced
rates under a special contract signed by to. plaintiff, one of
the conditions being that the cow psoy should not be liable
for any loss or damage received from overcamage, delay,
or detention. So long back as November, 1861, the plain-
tiff purchased some cattle at Oxford market. which he
delivered to the defendants to be forwarded to the Birming-
ham market. The defendants had then, as they have now,
two stations applicable to the conveyance of cattle to the
Birmingham market; one, Boordsley station, betweenOeford
and Birmingham, and the other Ockley station, beyond
Birmingham. The catUe were consigned to Boordsley sta-
tion, where • person was sent to meet them, but they were
sent on by mistake of the clerk to Ockley. The learned
counsel contended that the statute only provided for injury
done to cattle through the neglect of the company,
which did not apply in this case. the overcarriage being
provided for in the conditions. The Injury complained of
was loss of condition of the cattle in transit, from the
want of food and water. _

Mr. Justice Crompton asked to what extent starvation
must go to make the company liable. To keep cattle with-
out food and water was the first step towards it.
The Lord Chief Justice said the injury was the immediate
consequence of the neglect of the company, from their
having no one to take care of the cattle.
Mr. Field contended that the special contract protected
the company from the consequential damage sustained;
but that still, if the court held that the condition was un-
reasonable, the company were protected by their act from
the injury alleged to have been sustained.
Mr. Justice Mellor said the cattle were forwarded to Ock-
ley by a train that did not stop at Boorduley, sod was not
intended to stop there. It was impossible, therefore, to say
this was an accidental overcaniage.
Mr. Field again urged that the company were protected
by the conditions for the overcarriage.
The Lord Chief Justice said it was not a reasonable con-
dition to give them immunity with regard to any distance
they might overturn cattle.
The court ultimately unanimously refused the rule.
Rule refused.