The Express.
London, England, 1851-04-17 00:00:00

C

This was an action of trover for certain goods alleged to
have been lett by the plaintiff at the Caudill station of the
NortliWeetera Railway, and delivered by the company Wale
nrens party nadir • tweed elder. the defence set up was
that the whole ease wee a freed en the port of the plaintiff,
and that the delivery was by his contrivance and that the
shim nay atm so he paression. It app.:nal that the
plaintiff 1111111 ler view years tarried on business in Oxford-
street se a burin mechanist, sad had rose out to Americo
in Kay Ire, Pities w ith him ale picksses of goods upon
aposelstiss. The voyage did net answer hie espectatious,
sad Ile hew* aterwartis rebelled, bangles bask with
kiss the seine Sai=. He landed at Liverpool and awe
up to Leaden sad left his goods the Camden-
tows Maim, w • ticket wee given for therm. lis wee
gb afterwards Is very eabanneed an imalism, and
w:delt the Queen's Bench Prism. While there a pawn
besbatit
Listless be the station. pusgortisg to he signed by
t►erunnestion hat the -gads be might delivered
• In Oadh.stesse, Oshn&steese, which wee hard-
- ass his shah fah prima the pisistiff sp.
wallhe Ids psdijcosil prabsed deka
woes withentwkisk, be sew
oh bah shen thi • heed
evldenneizestat st tehl te
itiff ins In tits mead el the
**Wiwi was is &had hi midi-
we • amilia Ott /*sag
ell webasogrisady sibialsesil • a& •
alidavita Odin that ire the tria h
diSOMPOL

Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C.. was now heard in oprosition to
the rule, and contended that the affidavits were w•utticieot,
that they did not show what the evidence since discovered
was, nor that it due diligence had been wed before the last
trial it might tea have been then forthcoming; that the
only evidence to connect the plai.ititf with the house in
Castle-street was the affidavit of a man of the name of Day,
who stated that he hail seen the plaintiff's father in the
neighbourhood of that house; and that he should now
produce &Massa., to show that Day was unworthy of
credit.
Mr. Henderson was proceeding to address the court on
the same side, when the case was adjourned to this day.
In the course of the clay Lord Campbell complained of
the way in which the eourt was delayed by counsel not
being instructed to move for new trials in proper time.

BAIL COURT.—YESTERDAY.
R1T11.0.1 to lasts, 111110611 V.. !vles Coususse.
Tuft Qvfors r. Jous ISAACS.-11A1ILAS COILI.U..
Mr. Johnson moved for a writ of habeas corpus to be di-
rected to the gaoler of Lewes, calling upon him to bring up
the body of John Isaacs, now in his custody, before the
magistrates at Horsham, on Saturday next, to answer to a
charge of burglary. It was a matter of notoriety that a
number of prisoners had been tried at the last assixes for
the county of Sussex for a burglary committed at Kirdford,
and a bill of indictment had also been found against the de-
fendant, who hail within the last few days been apprehended
at }Tome, in Somerutshire, and, in accordance with the
directions of the warrant of the Chief Justice, hail been
conveyed to his present place of mitotic. There woe ma-
sortable evidence for ,upposing that the defendant had been
concerned with Samuel Harwood in a burglary, committed
on the 3rd of June last at Kirdford, and Harwood being
reraandi.d until Saturday neat, it was desirable that the
d fondant should be present at the same time. The only
question upon his (the learned counsel's) mind was whither
this applicatioa ought not to be made to a judge at cham-
bers but as it was of some moment that there should not
be any delay, he thought it better to apply to hie lordship
in court in the first instance.
Mr. Justice Colerideii.—You hail better pursue the
usual course, and apply tome at chambers this afternoon.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—YESTERDAY.
Simms sy 11100,—B.toas Lran t rcu. JuFrick hallo, Ma.
JCPTIM Cus.ww., Ma, JLerr:cs Mc. 1/1:6TICI:

Fan an.
SlLValtlasen C. TEM:M-111E LITFMARY GaZETTV.."
This was an action which wan tried 'rehire the Lord Chief
Justice at the last sittings at nisi grins at liuildhall, when
the verdict wan entered for the defendant, leave being re-
served to the plaintiff to move to cuter a verdict for
3r.11. 4s. 441. The action was brought by a printer against
Mr. Thomas Irving as one of the proprietors of a publication
called the Literary Gazette for printing it after the month
of Decensher, 184 e. The ceefeniLint denied his liability ex-
to the sum of MIL Ss. :id., allielk hail been paid into
mart. It appeared that in the month of August, 1141,a Mr.
Jenlan, Mr. Thonme Ircing, the defendant, and Mr. Wm.
Ilrvinglweame the lona proprietors of the Literary Gavite.
Mr. Jerclan was to hare threc-litths of the profits of
the sale of the publication, and the other two
gentlemen one-filth. In the month of November, 1817,
there was due to the plaintiff a bill for printing
the Literary tia:ctte. Upon application being made to the
defendant for payment of the account he stated that by a
deed of dissolution. dated the lot of December, 1847, he had
as from the 2flrd of the previous November ceased to be a
partner. 'Elie defendant, however, had paid the amount of
that bill into court, and the plaintiff continued tin print the
Literary tThzcltc. Ili, defendant. however. hail r. fused to
pay the subsequent bill on the grouud that he was not a
partner when it was contratt. d.
Mr. Serjo ant Ryles now moved to enter a verdict for the
plaintiff tor 319 f. 44. on the ground that hi• client had
'revised 00 proper notice of the dissolution of the partner-
ship between Mr. Jirdan and the two Mr. Irving+. The
statement made the deft utlant to the clerk (dad plaintiff
could not he considensl as a notite of the dissolution of the
partnership, but was men•ly a denial of his liability for a
hat which lead been contracted during the time when he
was undoubtedly a partner.
he court thought the plaintiff had had ample notice of
the dissolution of the partre rsliip, and that the jury hail
correctly found that the defendant was not liable fur any
printing done in respect of the Literary Gazt-tte.
Hutt• reload.
r. K ItrsBAND Is LIAULE To
ItltllitiVit-c, ANY al) PAUTY woo MAY I,lt Von His
FUSAtItAI..
This Ira.* at ae • which had been tried before Mr.
Boron Parke, at the last assizes, held at Chelmsford, flir the
county of Esmit, alien a verdict was found for the plaintiff,
damages, 121. Its. The action was brought by a Mr.
Ambrose against 3 Mr. Kerriam to recover the amount
which he bad paid for the funeral expenses of Mrs. Kerri-
San, the fletelolant's Wire. It appeared that Mr. and Mrs.
Kerrison were married in the y..ir 18211; and, after living
together Mr bottle tinkle, they separated. Mr.. Kerri.lll had
a separate allowance, which vie received. She went at first
to reside at Kelton, in Esse*. but afterwanlc removed In
Camberwell, where she dial. Mr. Ambrose, who had
known Mrs. Kerrimn when she lived at Kelton, and hind
married a dictaut cousin of the deceased lady, voluntarily
came forward and paid the funeral expenses. Mrs. Kern-
son was removed to Kelton (.1 he buried, it laird her wish
to be interred in that plate. The &feud:int had paid the
eXim•11101, connected with the burial before the body had
been removed from I.undmi, but deeming it unnecessary
that his wife should have been taken to Kelton, he had re-
fused to pay the owed..., emanated with that proceeding,
aud, consequently, the present action had been brought
against kiln.
Mr. M. Q.C., now moved on behalf of the
dell-nilaut bur u rule nisi to at a-ide the verdict, and fur a
ties,' trial On the ground of misdirection. The misdirection
complained of was, that Mr. Larsen Parke had doh', the jury
that the plaintief, although a comparative stranger to the
path:. was entitled to recover the amount which he hail
soluutarily paid for Mrs. Kerrison's funeral, if the funeral
I. re conducted in a manner corresponding with the station
in life mid positiou of that ;Atty.
The Chief Justice said that if an undertaker, without
Any order, were to bury a iierson, the executor would be
liable to him if he had assets with which to pay the bill.
11,- thought that Cie present case Cattle Under that rule, and
that Mr. Baron Parke had rightly directed the jury in
telling them that Mr. Kerrison was liable to reimburse the
plaintiff the amount which he had paid for Mrs. licrrison's
funeral.

Rule refused.
WHITE e. GARDNER.—TutovEn.
This was an action in tamer to recover possession of WHIM
The Caw` W:l4 tried at the last sittings at nisi prius in
London before the Lora Chief Justice, when a verdict was
found for the plaintiff.
Mr. Ilumfrey, Q.C., now moved for a rule fur a new trial
upon the ground sit misdirection. It appeared that an in-
dividual named Parker bought the iron of the defendant,
and 'moronic/ upon him to take bills, representing that the
acceptors were well able to pay the bills. This state-
ment, however, turned out to be untrue, one of
the parties whose name was on the bills having
not existence at all, and the other being a per-
son of no property. The iron was dellvt real to the
plaintiff by the order of Parker, hut the defendant think-
ing he had liven defrauded by Parker sent persuivi to take
the iron away from the plaintiff, and the present action of
tremor was thenoupnn brought. The jury round that
Parker hot obtained the iron by fraud; and Mr. Ilumfrey
now contended, under these circumstances, no action fur
trove? ought to he maintained.
The court granted a rule nisi for a new trial.

ii.--iiCii-Cl•street
ta lib *AZ Ira
11is vasa the psi
OM Ow anal
4•41 abomaribi owl
ohm Am di piamill'sy
Val Sat lb oder
arime4=eijery
====