The Express.
London, England, 1862-01-16 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEA/3.-JAN. 15.

fittings in Bencra—(l3dese Lewd Chief Janda Zile, and
Justices Wrniams, Wilke, and Heating.)
VAIN TOLL 0. TKO BOOTH UMW !AMWAY COMPANT.—LOOS

OF FROMM DEPOSITED II TDB CLOAK-100W.
The plaintiff in Ibis cons had left a bag at the cloak-room
at Londombridge but when she went for it, it could not
be found, having bees gives out is mistake to another per-
son, though subsequently it was found and sent to her.
Acoording to her case, however, there were then missing
from the bag seven! articles of jewelle-y, and the value of
these things was now asked for. At the trial before the
Lord Chief Justice I. Middlesex, the jury found for the
plaintiff—damages 20/.
Mr. Lush sow moved for a rule fora sousuit, upon the
pound that it was stated upon the ticket received by the
plaintiff that the company would not be liable for any
pans! worth men than 101.
Bale grunted.
The court, after a lengthened diemesion, took time to cos.
eider the matter.

OOURT OP EXOSIQUER.—Its. lb.
fittings in Basea.--{Befere the LordOMst Barest, aad Llama
Marian, Cliaanell, sod Wilde.)
WEITZ V. NOMAITE—HOWABTH V. WIIITI—SLASDIM MR)

These were two mother, tried together at Liverpool, be-
fore Mr. Jostles Orouiptoe. Mr. White, • deatist, at
Manchester, bromilit hie action spinet Mr. Howarth, •
manufacturer in the same locality, for slander, in alleging
that the plaintiff bad had intercourse with the defendant's
daughter, who had in easirequence given birth to • child,
having administered chloroform to her when else had visited
him for the piirposs of having a tooth extracted. In the
other action, in which the position of the parties wee re-
versed, Mr. Howarth seed Mr. White for the seduction of
hie daughter, slam lady in her twenty.first year. In the
action for elder the jury found for the plaintiff for one
farthing damages, and in the action for seduction for 40a.
Mr. Jones, who appegged far Mr. White, the plaintiff in
the fret action, said thst Wen be moved in the see he
felt boned to inkent their lordships that he had that morn-
," moved, In the ether action for Eduction, for • saw
trial, and that the harmed judges of that court bed refused
his spplication ; and, further, he felt honed to my that the
learned judge who had triad slte actioes, Mr. Justice
Crompton, had reported that ha wee satisfied with the ver-
dict. His motion now, In the case of " White v. How.
mirth," for slander, was to increase the damages of one far-
thing.
Mr. Bares Martin—lca that reserved!
Mr. Jones=lio, my lord.
The Lord Chief Baron—Then how can we give mote thaw
the jury have given !
Mr. Jones—Then I will move for a new trial„ on the
ground that the damage§ are too small.
Mr. Baron Wilds—But there two actions were tried to.
'ether, sod the learned judge ia, you say, reheard with the
rerdke.

Jonee—lf your lordships think that the two actions
are so closely intermixed, as I have failed in the Queen's
BsDeh, I have no locus standi in this °mut,

Th;lJd Chad Baron—Well, it really comes to that.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Jones—l am aware 1 hare • very up-hill work to
fight.
The Lord Chief Baron—Quite • perpendicular, Mr.
Jones. (Laughter.) I think you must be contented with
your verdict. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. Jones—After that esprewion of your lordship's opi-
nion, having done my duty to my client, I feel I should not
further occupy the time el the court.
Rule refused.
SECOND COURT.

Bitting. at Nisi Priaa.—(Bdaa Kr. Bares Bramwell sad
•Ocaussa Jay.)
RUIN V. nest[.

This was an action to reoaver the sum of 401. for goods
supplied and delivered, and for money due an an account
meted. The defendant pleaded never indebted.
Mr. Matthew was counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. G. Den.
use Q.C., and Mr. Lantos' few the defendant.
The plaintiff was a tailor, midis; is Agar-street, Strand;
and the defendant was the propnetce of the "St. James's
Stares,*_ in Jermyn-street, St. James's.
Mr. Matthews, is opening
to the case to the jury, rid that the
aetion wee Inanight the plaintiff recover the suet se
401. for goods sappl' and expel:ices incurred in the 'main-
tenance of th• defendant's wife, who had left the former in
=7Pof his conduct, and after highly censuring the
ai conduct towards his wife, called the following
witnemse :

--11/71. Mara said—l am the wife of the defendant, and
em at the present time residua' at 10, AruNereek
plr Strand,
with the stiff and his wife. I was serried in 1847, and
ham three children by the defendant, cm of them being at
the present time rely nine months old. Is the latter part of
the n 18501 was very ill, and under the treatment of a
men, wloardered me not to Mee myself and to take
r meek Nei ea I mold. One day subsequently to that I
wee lyteg down au the sofa, my husband came to me,
med vary bed language, threatened to knock
asy braise eat and took my watch, chain, and
Wes. He would not allow me to sleep is my own bed-room,
bat mad* me go up stain in the attic. I was ill there
See days, and daring that time be never visited me, and
Mar my having what my medical man ordered. On my
?emery I salted him to allow me to go to my sister in
Hemming's-row, St. Martin's-lane, and I mat there on the
web of February lest. I had only been there a few days
when some fries& of my husband. cease sad took me is a
cab to Dr. Siockar's asylum for lunatics, Greve-hall, Bow.
Ime placed in a very dmagreeoble place, where trouble-
/Sri 100074.11 W 079 generally put, but the doctor,
Wilt me iet, ordered my removal to the
ram ward, wqu here I remained till the BM cif
April following. The defesdast's earlier visited
re whilst I was that., sad told me that my husband would
ewer lire with me spin. Blom I left a parer named
Orme cars to me mod said that my husband offered me
lb. per week to lire separate from but if I refused to
wept it I should be removed to soother asylum. Lapsed
to sompt it rather than go to soother asylum. Moo west
be Noe with ray dater, bat she would not keg an for se