The Press.
London, England, 1853-12-10 00:00:00

Sabo anti Vo

A CAse or Coxtunravete IsTenrsT ltvu.wvy
Comexstus was brought to a conclusion in the
Dublin Court of Common Pleas on Saturday even-
ing ; Mr. Henry Anderson, a well-known horse-
dealer of that city, being the plaintiff. and the
Chester and Holyhead Railway impany 41efendants,
and the action being one for an alleged breach of
contract, by which the plaintiff stated that. lie had
sustained considerable damage through injury to
fifteen horses which the defendants bad contracted
to convey for hint in horse-boxes on their hue within
a specified tune. (In Mr. Anderson's arrival in
Holyhead with the horses he found that there were
no boxes ready for him to go on with his horses, nor
were there any to be had until a late train, the re-
sult of which was that he aid not. reach Shrewsbury
(his destination) until four o'clock on the morning of
the fair, when it was found that the horses, which
were very Valuable, and varied in price from 949. to
OM., were all more or less deteriorated from fatigue,
fie., and were consequently not in good saleable tinier.
The alleged deterioration in the value of the horses
was considerable, and the loss sustained by the
plaintiff was from 290 f. to 4(M)!., at the lowest calcula-
tion. On the part of the defendants it was contended
that the railway company never undertook to convey
those horses except on the usual terms they conveyed
everything which was carried, " subject to unavoid•
able accidents and delays." They no doubt were
paid for carrying Mr. Anderson's horses, and weld('
have sent them on by the nine o'clock a.m. train on
the' 9th of February if they could, but they had not
the means. A special contract was relied on to eon •
vey them by that particular train ; but it was con-
tended that no such contract was ever entered into,
and the receipt given to the plaintiff fir the money
he pain stated on the back of it the condition—
namely, that they conveyed them subject to nevi
dental delays. The case occupied the court during
two days, and at a late hour on Saturday evening
the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for 2301.
damages and fld. costs.
IN THIN VU.E.CRANCFLI.OIes IroVIIT on Tuesday a
motion was made, on behalf of Mr. I'crey Boling-
broke St. .John, for an injunction to restrain a printer
named Alexandrines from selling the type employed
in printing the Eastern Star, a weekly paper, pub-
lished in London, for the purpose of advocating the
cause of Greek independence, and from intvrtering
with the publication of the paper. The defendant
had been served, but did not appear. Ills honour
made the order.

Mn. WENN, A " GENTLEMAN OF EN Forrt.st,"
as ho was described at the police court, was driven up
to (71erkenwell Office on Monday in a cab, with two
ladies anti a policeman. The gentleman appeared
excited and intoxicated, anti had his coat torn. The
young ladies were his wife and sister, whom it was
stated that. he often indulged in the gentlemanly
amusement of ill-using
Sarah Wel,h, the wife, a haii.lotume pfrsoo, of aupetior
manners+, appeared with her unit leunel up, and suffering usiolt
rain. She .rid that the pri.oner wit% her hiuthatid, RIO he 1144
been in the habit of ill-treating her. She hall pntaeiette.l him
take befure at Use Worship-street Court fur assaults upon her.
on that afternr.ou he returned to his toddenee the in•
Ilucuct vi liquor, awl t;ladausucvti a quarrtl nit 4 lar wd Loa

753 •

dater, ,at which occasion he metre,' a re,l•hot poker, with witleh
lie ittmeke.l them and threatened that he would kill them. Ile
•truek her .at the arm with the weapon, and her ann WllOl nearly
I,n.ken. She was wo nittelt Injured that she was tinder modteal
Mll einiattee.

Mr. colttr: Pray. what Is the vrisoner?
Mr.. Webb: Ile la a gentleman as far as property uoea—he I•
a now of forttute. We went in tear of our Ines through hl•
threats Audi tll-treatmeitt.

'rlie defendant, nut seeming sober enough to under-
stand his position properly, was liwketl up, and the
ease remanded to the nest day, when 31r. Pelham,
the counsel, after some consultation between thu
parties, suggested that--
1111.1er sit the eirettnrAmieer, %lewina the poo+ill..ll in life of ibe
partie,.—the pri+otter being a gentleman of etaniblei.mlo aealtlk
she eil.e 8114.111.1 be adjourned for * week. Mr*. ehh hwl put sip
with the prisoner's 111•In.age for a length of UlllO I.llld. They howl
been married some years, and haul thre children ; anal in 11.0
terint of the onijoininuent Itio) *oat make out a deed of twpault•
tion.

AIL 4.ol{ltly Pahl ho would eoligent to adjourn the ram. maks'
the h.q... that 00111 r alulrablr arrangement utight hs atin ea at.
It a a %rev violent ease---.uoe 41,4•11...1 the V."
nail) of the taw. The prisoner aRI 111 lioiller st the Cho
assatilt, and his must he freiti lila tetopeiary itiail•
Helot. lle ordered the prisoner 1.0 Mid WO lot 401 a., and to gi%•
his own reeiiiptisativer for ta,q.
NI r. Pelham urged that, as the prisoner Was It Mall
111 1111ll1e Wealth, the alinntlit 11r the boil ought I.'
be larger. .11 Ir. ferric then inhered the bail to Io
put in for tot NIL, and the prisoner Vatf., to appear at
(Is.‘ eiiiirt on that day Week.
TIII: Atsr‘lits of Itrlt M %.tr,4 Tili:ATltr were
discussed in the V ire-ehalleellin's Court ou Wtshies-
day, before it Vt. I'. Wood. Moon Knit, ill
which Alessrs. Lumley and Might's were respectitely
plaintiffs and defendants. 1 )11 behalf of the latter an
injunction was moved flir 111 restrain Mr. Lumley from
sitirendering the lease of her Majesty's Theatre, or
from doing any act whereby the said lease might I.
surrendered, or rendered will. Alr. Lumley, on the
other side, filed his bill to be I.lllslk Ihr setit
rities which he had given to Hughes, mid this was
Diet by it motion by Mr. II tigh„.„.„ eullllxelthat hr
might give security for costa, Upon the ground that
his only description was " of her Majesty's Theatre,"
where he had no residence. In support of the thst
ease, the motion for the itkjuitetion, the facts stated
were these :

Hughey, WA,' 11 rrdllur (..$r motivy lent 1., Mr. Lumley, nn billy
of exchange to the antoottli of !,,!,0011/., then. being jndgtneut•
agaiwit Mr. i. ley, at the llistntice of other persona, to the rt•
tent of 115,111110. 'l•ha defendant I. 1.1 Marl been one., bl IMMI 1.7
11 agile* att.l other errattor.., and % er.lictm recoserr.l, h ut ax It war
*1101..,0/1 that hlr ,011111. or th.• 1111111 iiiii lent to kir. Littaley a tram•
non+ ingonnt of internal had been allpnlxtrd fee (it Wool ltoitt
thnt tit i •of the itittllem hitti rlifirgeti 1:1111 per I'l4ll ), point* were
littr the citsittitieratittli 1.1 Ike I'ollll, 101 111 010 ttiValitilly
of the olee.l on the gn .1 01 norm. It way atatl.ll that 1111
la.\l•M AIM 401014 Rn had been let bt• kW !minim' to Illttgliea. The
Lill t.r.9...1 10 ,1110 1,11.1 pit):tient out of the I.r.wordo, areonling to
In•iorules. A eat eit•glt Imol trutieti at lite i 11.411114.0 1f 1111$01ra
111.011 hia Jlllll4lllolli, hut, NlOOlllOl 51111 alscriff hail fi.rutally taken
Ploosepini..n. NI,. Lumley appear...l to he Initially In p..•a••aalon at
the Klll4'lll luolaeut. Anens.t.st other Judgment elstAllttlt was
Mftriella Imrd.
Counsel fur Iliwites lullluocd 114 chief ground of
the nwtion for an injunction that. Mr. Lumley, or hie
legal advisers, had threatened, if the verdict in a for•
titer action went enforced, it would not be effective, its
the lease would be surrendered. This allegation
was altogether denied by the defendant :

Upon the bill by Mr. Lumley agaitint Mr. II avher, it ego a.ked
by Mr. Freeling, on behalf of lltittlien. that Mr. Landry ►uight
neeurity for coma, the affidavit. 111..14..111g Llist usual apply
ration at her Ntalesty'a Thoittre Mr. hooky ea. not there, hat,
that a 101 W called there UUCP IL fortought, or ta'etvalottallY, my
papern that might belt* there. Nr.1.11,1111.) laelsigile4l n hosts.
i•iaitivoiiiim to the theatre, .•ahle•i N... 1, hail atoll, 5.4 to slush
the AnidiliVil.leOndictril, it beitia %tate.' by Mr. Lumley 000, 10
Nut, 0 firm.•! part of the op.•sM.lu.u.e, owl a beilig alleg.•d ou
the part of Mr. Illittliets that it ea. b.•ldun n %roamu h...., suit
it being mao.rted that Mr. Lumley had not I.•ro there at ill, of
%cry 'widow, the cloying of thoi opera h► 1054.
His honour said his only doubt WRY upon the quo..
tion of egrets, the statements in the affidavits being
very vague. He felt satished that Mr. Lumley bail
not expressed, by himself or by any atithoriaed agent,
any such intention as that imputed to him. Upon
the motion for security for costs ins should follow the
declaim' of Lord Cott►•nl►am in Hurst v. l'adwiek,
and refuso the motion, without costa.

THE ILLF.4IALITY OF 1/ITTERIEM, and the preCki
definition of that prohibited species of gaming,
underwent a protracted discussion before the Bristol
magistrates on Tuesday. A prosecution had heen
instituted by order of the Secretary of State (Lord
Palmerston) against Mr. 11. H. King, a stationer,
carrying on a largo business in that city, for having
held what was termed a " distnbution on the plan of
the line arts distxibution.- Thu case excited ‘ely
great interest, as the prosecution was understood to
have been instituted at the instigation of the Trades
Protection Association, with a VicW to put a stop to
the prosecution of such lottery sebemes, which had
been extensively resorted to in Ilristi•l and the neigh.
bearing city of Bath

Mr. King hail hail live pre+ lima and blot
aeheine hail heels for Nome ilia.. promulgated, when lie irreiviot
• r.•into unlvh tow from the liaW ofheera of the I rows, rnlllog atteti•
tem to its illegality, and reiodring hits 14) abandon it. Mr. Kling
replied that. a+ he had mold a large number of tickets, and In.
%rated a eoliatilenthie a lit article+ for the prlres, he einthl
toot avow the drawitig of the prevent, although he would mider•
take no future lottery; atad. despite a further rorwinutiteation,
warning barn that if he porpo-%ored to What ab 144.: flit wtibt.itivU4:o*
Lc uLt Lim thlavisau vu Wa VW vflktobci.