The Express.
London, England, 1849-11-17 00:00:00

vices performed after the lied November, 1846, whew the
°miry was dissolved. The eest4 cut paced a rule.

iIOdPIIII O. BLOIAN.-FICTITIOI7B SILK OP STOCK.

Tile motion for • new trial was made on the 7tn instant.
It was a q•i tun seas to recover penalties of the defendant
under the Stork Jobbing Act. The defendant had been enee
ployed to sell certain mock for • third party, which that
person bad never been poseemed of, end he employed •
.stock broker for the purpose. The querixi was, whether
this wee each • negotiating sad likedollag in the sale of
the stock as would bring him within the intention of the
statute.
The person who origln•lly employed the defendant wee
called, and admitted that he sever had say stork. It was
eonmaded that there was not sufficient evident,' to fit the

e7seraWtiTip;ail setion.
The e'en sow 'ranted a role.
STRUTS' IP. Warroorsa.—CKL%ol PO5 ADVSII,

This wee en action brought to recover the price of 'deer-
thaussits inserted ha the Bucks Herald newspaper. The
Mei Not was for the defendant, and the question tarried ow
whether 11. or 6,1 a line was toe charge made by that
*mud. At the trial it was shown that on the lint of prime
le the aloe the charge we. a shilling a line, but the jary
Muds verdict for the defendant. A motion for a new trial
was sheds en the 9th instant, and the court new granted I
Their Their lordships then proceeded with the special paper.
Howie! (EXECUTRIX) O. KNIGHT. RIORT Or 7101
EXECUTORS Or 1c ORDINARY TO SUE ON AN ADEINIII.
!NATION BOND.
Tale ease came before the court on a demurrer. It was
au action brought by the executrix of the late Archbishop
of Canterbury cn an adminiati Won bond. The question
wee whether it wu properly brought, or whether it should
not have been In the nun of his summate., as ordinary. •
Mr. Wititelturst and Mr. Atkinson appeared for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. Willis and Mr T. Tayl r for the defendant.
The Court were of opinion that there should be judgment
fir the plaintiff. It was admitted that it was the rule of law
that coorpustioas ale had no power to take penenal property
by succession, while as regarded corporations aggregate, it
did not go to individual muskets but to their successork
If this were so, the plaintiff in this eau was the proper per-
son to sae. Tree status under whisk the bond was given
only said that" the bond should be taken by the ordissay,"
sad it did not extend to his successors. The ecolesiastimd
inert could exercise the some power in these casts
whether the party to the bead was sued by the sueeessor of
the ordinary or his representative, and the plaintiff was In
fact merely a seminal one. It was a personal c' ninon made
with a corpora ion tele, sad theeeteee the right to sue was
in his repreeentatimm.

BAIL COURT-YEanDAT,

EXPARTI TROXBI.-COMMITTAL ET TMZ JUDGE RIP •

Cowirs Coos?.

Mr. Serjeant Chadwick Jones moved for • rule to
show eases why a hnheas corpus should not keno
to bring up Gorge Thomas, now a prisoner in
the county gaol of Cardiff. In June last an
order had been made by the judge of the county against the
defendant for the payment 01 a debt, and be haring failed
to pay the amount a judgment summons was served on him,
which stet, d that if he oil not appear he would be com-
mitted to the gaol of Swansea. The defendant did net ap-
pear, and in October he was arrested under en order which
committed him to Swansea gaol for 28 days, and he was
taken to that gaol. When there, he ascertained that the
Home Secretary bad declared that the gaol at Swansea was
not to be used for committals from the county court. The
clerk of the court was aint for, and when
teld of the mistake, said he would inquire in-
to it at the office. The defendant was kept
from four o'clock until eleven at night in the gaol, when the
clerk of the court brought another order for his committal to
Cardiff gaol. He wastaken from Swansea gaol to a public-
! house, and kept there that night. On the following day he
was taken to the police station, and detained until the day
after, when he was removed to Cardiff gaol; so that, in
point of feet, the term of his imprisonment was extended to
30 days, instead of being 28. It was now contended that
the judge of the county court had no power to commit the
present applicant to Swansea gaol, and the issue of the new
order did not prevent the first one being • nullity.
Mr. Justice Pennon—Hai not the applicant • remedy by
action ? It • person is in proper custody at the time a ha-
beas corpus is applied fur, ought the court to interfere ?
Mr. Serjesait JOINS urged that i was of great ooneequencie
that strict regularity should be observed in the recess of
the county courts. Tre costa in this case had been Increased
by • charge of mileage which had ban unnecessarily in-
curred in taking the defendant in the first instance to
Swansea.
Rule granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—YESTERDAY.
SITTINGS AT NISI Patin.—Baron Ma. Juno CISOTWSLL can A
Coaxes JUST.
FINNIS O. TYNTIL—A Zenon's BILL.
Mr. Ball appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cockburn fee
the defendant.
The action wan brought to recover payment of a bill of ex-
change for 1021. 10a., accepted by the defendant, dated 11th
of January last, drawn by Mr. Woods, furnishing tailor,
Conduit-street, and indorsed by him to the plaintiff: From
the evidence adduced it appeared tl at the defendant, who is
a colonel in the army, was a customer of Mr. Wood,, and in
the month of January last was indebted to that gentleman
in the sum of 3821. 9s. In the month of October
of !menu Mr. Woods wished for asettlement, but defendant
not having cash, rent him two fifty pound bills at two
mouths, in part payment, which bills were dishonoured, and
Winn of them, the bill for which the present action is
raised we. granted on the Ilth of Jesting, Mr. Woods on
the same day indorsing it to plaintiff, who gave him a cheque
for the amount, deducting lOs. Bd. of interest for the time
the bill had to run. In the month of March fallouts&
Mr. Moods being still anxious to have his claim aping the
defendant settled, and knowing that he world in the course
dooms time 000211 to be posamed of considerable property,
obtained a judge's order, by consent, for the amount of his
claim, which older was dated the 11th of March last.
On the part of the defendant it wan pleaded that as the
Judge's order incluifed the amount for which the pteunt
bill wan granted, it would, should a verdict be given for the
plaintiff, be, in effect, ranking him pay the sum twice over.
That the bill was indorsed by Woods to the plaintiff, after
the judge's order, for the amount of defendant's debt to
' the former gentleman was obtained, the conduct of Mr.
Woods giving defendant every reason to believe that he was
poisoned of the bill when he procured the order in
' question. It being, however, in evidence that Mr. Woods
parted with the bill on the 11th of January, the day it was
drawn ; that there was no mention of applying for a judge's
order at the time it was granted; and that Mr. Woods told
defendant's solicitor that such a bill existed previous to his
consenting, on the part of defendant, to the judge's order
being granted.
The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff, for the sum sued,
with interest.
The other causes were of no intent, being all undefended.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—YESTERDAY.
Itrrrotos in Banco.
Conserve (A PAUPRR) v. SIR O. 01/11T, BART., AND ANO-
TBRIS. —ALLIORD FALSE inrIIIaoNIERNT.
This was an action of trespass for false imprisonment al-
leered to ban been committed by Mr. Hudson, keeper of the
Queen's Bench prison, in removing the plaintiff from one di-
vision to another. which was set apart for misdemeanants of
the first class, and against the Secretary of State for the
Home Department, under whose orders the plaintiff's
removal and detention in the "fleet clam" were effected.
It appears Mr. Cobbett has been incarcerated for
many years. He was originally in the Fleet prison
under an attachment of the Court of Chancery, and.
on the amalgamation of that establishment with the Queen's
prison, he was transferred to the latter institution, where
he continued under certain rules and regulations issued by
the Home Secretary. Mr. Colebett was removed in DA.,
1847, to that part of the prison of which he complained,
on the ground that be was illegally subjected there to in-
creased restraints and privations. The defendants pleaded a
justification under an act of parliament passed in March last.
Mr. Hudson justified himself as having acted under the
orders oi the Home Secretary, who alleged as his justification
that the act requited the removal of fraudulent debtors, or
ponces who refuse/ to file schedules of their property, after
a vesting order had been obtained in the Insolvent Court.
That the plaintiff had neglected and refused to 810
his schedule after the necessary order had been
obtained in the Court for the Relief of Insolvent
Debtors, and that he was therefore properly removed to the
division of the prison complained of. To that plea the plain-
tiff demurred upon a variety of grounds, sad was now heard
at great length, en person, in support f the demurrer. He
submitted that the original commitment was illegal. andthat
Sir George Grey had no power to commit at all. That the
sat under which the defendants justified was not retrospec-
tive, and therefore did not apply to him as no vesting order
had been obtained since it paned. The order had been pre-
viously obtained. The Secretary of State had no power at
the time of the removal from one class to the other to order
the keeper so to lIMOVII the plaintiff, and it was submitted
upon these and other technical grounds that the justification
eluded was no answer to the action.
Mr. Welsh', who (with the Attorneyasneral and Mr.M.
D. Hill, Q.C.) appeared in support of the plea, was directed
by the oourt to confine his argument to some very technical
points which would be unintelligible to the general reader.
Atter a discussion on the subject, and hearing the plaintiff in
ILlCourt intimated their opinion that upon the merits of
the case the justification was maintainable and well founded.
But, as some of the other points urged were of a technical
nature, time should be taken to consider them. On Wed
needs morning judgment would be prcnounced.
Judgment deferred accordingly.
WARMS,. BILLIRS.—PLIADINO.—PRNALTISB POR BRIB-
ING ETA IIIONICIpAL ELECTION.
This was a demurrer to a declaration in an action for the
MuTnehi c are
dp aid
be yCe 1 sole t irren-
(cudgel to a certain burgess of Lys, and as such,
r lionseelciloteActot that a( certain
qualified to vote for the election of t 'ern councillors then to
naa
nsa
uidni
soowf penalties
m. 2
1 onlevyu aidieedr
Regt 16ei.
be held 0. before the mayor of that borough."
Hr. Penick appnrei in support of the demurrer, and
contended that the declaration mould have stited that the
burgess was enrolled on the burgess list, and was so entitled
to vote at the election for town councillne. Further, thee
whereas the act required the election to be held bskg• " tbe
444.
mayor and Isis assessors," the declarat4r ..e.......... al
election, and it was no violation of ,l-"orr'"':ft
bribe a person at an illegal election. . -,... "... t. 50
Mr. Scala appeared to support the d ~,L.„, A 'n
The Court expressed very lereat don. g. 4,, .
-• . ,
which the ehj ctions urged. wire en • , •f
-r nes
gave leave to amend, upon condition that ' ... .
costs upon either side.
The declaratitn amended accordingly. i;Z.:, -..:.... rei
•.:11,..1,, ..2 in
. "..,...,: •.31,--


A