The Express.
London, England, 1847-04-21 00:00:00

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH.

NEWTON V. BILCHRIL—LIARILITT 01 PROVISIONAL
Connwrzanan.—kilr. Crowder, Q C., moved for a rule to
show came why the plaintiff's verdict in this ease, which was
tried in London at the sittings after lest term, should not be
altered, by incoming the dentures from 8671. to 3.889 t., or
such other sum u the court might think proper. The court
granted the application.
CVELINO e. YOUNG AND OTHZIA.—Acviom •OAINST
COMMISSIONERS UNDER • Local. Acv.—Mr. Humfrey.
Q.C., moved for a rule to Mow cause why the defendant's
verdict in this case should not he set aside end a new trial
had. Th- action wu brought against certain couimisaioners
under a local act for regulating a distric• of the parish of
Bermondsey, f r the amount of an a•turney'a bill. At the
trial, lawd Denman wet of opinion that it could not he sus-
tained videos for something done by the eoramissiocem
under the provisio^s of the act. The evidence did not show
this, and a verdict paid egainet the plaintiff. ile now
submitted that the ruling of the learned judge was a wrong
one. The court granted the application.

COURT OF COMMON FLEAS.
nittlage In Bone.
Davison v. BRETitill.—A DISPUTA]) WlLL.—This was
an germs of ejectment, bought to recover a large amount of
property, which the plaintiff claim• d ee devisee under a will
dated Sept., 184.5, and which the defendant alleged that be
was entitled to under a subsequent will. The important
question was whether or not the around will was • forgery.
The case was tred before Mr. Serjeant Gazette, at the last
anises at Shrewihury, when a verdict was entered for the
defendant.—Mr. Serjeant Talfourd now moved for rule to
show cause why that verdict should not be set aside, and a
new trial -ad, on the ground of iniedireceion, and that the
jury had leaded against the weight of evidence. The mitt-
dtrection complained of was that the leerned judge told the
jury that they were not to consider the probabilities upon
which the plaintiff's case rested until they disbelieved the
positive and dirt et testimony of the defendant's wiraftwee,
whose characters for honesty and integrity had been im-
peached. The learned serjeant contended that, though this
was nut a misdirection in point of law, it was eel-
eulated to mislead the jury. Th. re wee soother
question which the learned counsel urged ougot also to
be submitted to the consideration of the cou-t—viz.' so
to whether the learned judge was right in deciding that the
defendant was entitled to begin tbe case. Upon this subject a
preliminary discussion took place, and the effect"( his Icrd-
ship's decision was, that Sir Fitzroy Kt lly (who was spe-
cially retained for the defendant) had an opportunity of re-
plying upon the whole of the ease. The plaintiff was thus
flfin • most disadvantageous position, and he (Mr.
r.i Talfourd) trusted that the court would elltr a que•-
tUn of such vest importance to he fully and Lirly discussed.
—Rule nisi granted.
DOWD!. O. BTANDISH.—ALLEGED NEOLIOENCII IN
Maccu rum A WILIT •GAINIST PllOrlseOlt" KELLER.—
This was an action Wiwi.' against the sheriff of Livt rp"ol,
for neglig. one in not adapting the neoruary means to effect
the arrest of " Prufeuor" Keller, the exhibitor of the poses
plasliguss. The ease was tried before MI. Baron Rolle, at
the last Liverpool assizes, when • verdict was entered for the
plaintiff. Mr. Martin now moved for a rule to show cause
why that verdict should not be set aside, and a new trial
had, on the grounds of misdirection, anti of the verdict
being against the weight of evidence.—Ruli nisi granted.