The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-19 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCISE.
_ _

Wore Admiral the Hon.ir.ll.Perey,ll7 r. fiephessoe, rag., and
C. J. Harries, Ibit.
A " DIALEIt tv FOILEIGN WINIA."—JONSOS Grier*, of
51, Lime-street, City, wholesale wine-merchant, was charged
with having over his door the words, " James Grieve,
licensed dealer in foreign wises," having no license what-
ever, by which he had incurred a penalty of 1001. When
the case was called on, the defendant did not appear, either
personally or by solicitor.—Two excise officers proved that
the defendant possessed no license whatever.—The court
immediately gave judgment against the defendant in the
full penalty.

CITY OF LONDON SMALL DEBTS COURT.
Before Mr. Cokusisoloner Bullock. _

Roira F. PZAIUSON, M.P.—Tms LETS ELECTION.—
In this ease the plaintiff sought to recover the sum of
three guineas, for three days' work, from Mr. Charles
Pearson, the City solicitor, and one of the members of par-
liament for the borough of Lambeth.—The plaintiff, upon
being sworn, deposed that he had been engaged by the
defendant as one of the canvassers. when the hon. gentleman
was a cendidate to represent the borough of Lambeth; that
be bad canvassed the electors, and had made repeated
demands for the money, without avail.—Witnesses having
been called, who spoke to having seen the plaintiff engaged
during the contest on behalf of the defendant, and that he
appeared to exert himself very much in favour of the hon.
member, Mr. Pearson, in reply, said that he never had
employed the plaintiff in the capacity of a canvasser ; that
he never did, nor ever would, employ a paid canvasser.
The plaintiff had been employed as ore of the messengers
to one of his committee., and, for his three days' attend-
ance, a sovereign had been offered him, being the
same amount paid to the other messengers. This
amount the plaintiff had refused, and because he (Mr.
Pearson) had not submitted to the imposition, the plaintiff
I had written him some lettere, in which he threatened to use
his influence at the next general election to oust him from
the future representation of Lambeth.—Mr. Martin, one of
the clerks in the City solicitor's office, deposed that the hon.
member had no paid canvassers. They were all the hon.
member's private friends.—The plaintiff said he was en-
gaged by Mr. Martin, which was the same as having been
engaged by the hon. member.—Mr. Martin denied this
statement. He believed that the plaintiff had been engaged
as a messenger, and he had repeatedly offered him the same
rate of payment as the other messengers had received. He
could have that amount now if he thought proper.—The
learned judge advised the plaintiff to submit to a nonsuit,
and take the amount offered, which offer the plaintiff
acceded to.

COUNTY COURT.

BEIGHTON O. HETHIIINGTON.-1.014D JED.921r13 ILLU-
MINATION.—In this cue the plaintiff summoned the de-
fondant for 101., (or the hire of lamps and work and labour
done in illuminating the mansion of the Earl of Jersey on
the occasion of her Majesty's birthday.—The plaintiff stated
that the defendant formerly carried on business in Regent-
street with a gentleman named Docker, but subsequently be-
came a bankrupt. He (plaintiff) did business for both. At
the time of the bankruptcy the defendant applied to him to
do the illumination at the Earl of Inlay's ; but as he did not
think it would be legal to do so, said he had no objection to
open an account with the Earl of Jersey, and allow Heth-
nngton to take the money. He accordingly entered the earl
as his creditor, and Hethrington received the money.—The
learned judge said that under the present form of action he
could not recover. It should be for money had and received
by Hethrington for his use, and not for work and labour
done and lamps supplied. He would ask plaintiff if it was
usual to open accounts with gentlemen without any authority?
—The plaintiff said he had the authority of Mr. Hethrington,
who told him that he had authority from the Earl of Jersey
to open the account.—The learned Judge ; If he gave Mr.
Hethrington an authority to open en account for the illu-
mination at his mansion, he could never have given him an
authority to order " the trimming of lamps at Miss Kelly's
theatre" to be placed to his account. You ought, at all
events, to have ascertained before crediting Lord Jersey at
all In your books that ho had given Hethrington an autho-
rity.—Mr. Philp, who appeared for the defendant, said he
had an answer to the case on the merits, if the judge would
go into it—The learned Judge said he was bound by the
act of parliament. The law required the nature of the
demand to be stated on the summons, and he was precluded
from receiving any evidence which had no connexion with
it. It was imposaible to bring an action for one thing and
give evideace In support of another. He must, therefore,
noasuit the plaintiff, whom he would advise to consult an
attorney before he came there again.—The plaintiff was
then nonsuited, the judge ordering him to have a new sum-
mons free of expense.