The Express.
London, England, 1851-06-05 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 5, 1851.

Saba intelligence.
EQUITY COURTS.—YFATERDAT.
&rasa WscaCessessuss [assn Bares.
Joao' e. Patcs.—Caxaceer Heroism.
The Vice-Chancellor, on taking his scat, addressed Mr.
Jas. Parker, as a member of the C naneery Commission, for
the purple of bringing under the attention of the commis-
Mown a Welch ease of Jones e. Price, which was partly
opened yesterday, and in which the proceedings were of an
enormous length. His Honour said he had also mentioned
the case to the Solicitor-Ocneral. The document, miscalled
" a brief," placed in the hands of one of the principal counsel,
' his Honour had observed, extended to 500 sheets.
Ex JOUNION, as CIIMIII.—LIABILIST OF OFFICIAL

AMIONESSI.
Mr. Rowell awl Kr. Wilford supported the petition of
Mr. Petrick Jeinsea, the official assignee, praying for pro-
nodes swine prowegings and demands on the pest of a
Kr. Aserror,_ la_retworwy, 1848, a petition was presented
by's/IMM nalfoil to be acting in concert with Mr. Ardor
to love die seatikod. Upon the hearing of that peti-
tion, the asset limenal it to stand over, for the petitioners
is being an as of Stover against the assignees, for the
purpose of tells( the validity of the fiat. On the trial the
plaintiffs, instead of merely contesting the validity of the
fiat, set up a prior title to the goods in respect of
which the action was brought. The Vice-Chancellor
then d rested a second action to be brought against
the creditors' assignee only. The second action was tried
accordingly,.and a verdict found for the plaintiff, ;here-
upon the N'ice-Chancellor stayed all further proceedings
under the bankruptcy, and gave the plaintiff in the action
leave to sue out executions against the creditors' assignee
only. Afterwards Mr. Archer brought actions against the
assignees, including the official assignee, and in those
actions the juries also found against the validity of the fiat.
In one of these actions a verdict was taken, subject to a
reference, on which 1,173 i. was awarded for damages. In
December, 1819, the creditors assignee took the benefit of
the Insolvent Act. Mr. Archer was about to sue out exe-
cution against the official assignee for 910 f. 2s 6.1. in respect
of costs incurred in the above proceedings. It was now
watended that it was contrary to the scope of the bankrupt
laws, and of the general principles on which the officers of I
warts of justice were protected in the discharge of their duty
to allow those proceedings to be taken. The actions to
which the costs had been incurred had been defended
without the official assignee being in any way consulted.
It wan further contended that it would be most unjust that
the official assignee, who, under the bankrupt laws, had no
voice in the appointment of the solicitor to the fist, and who
could not, except at the peril of costs, be advised by a sepa-
-1 rate orlieitor, or sever his case from that of the creditors'
=should be personally liable to the costs of pro.
against him. " Frown v. Lawrence" Jacob and
Walker, 665) was cited.
Mr. Taylor appeared for the creditors' assignee ; but Mr.
Archer did not appear.
The Vice-Chancellor, after referring to "En parte Van
Sondem" (1 Dc flex, 66), said that, as Mr. Archer did not
appear, and the case was not to be argued, he must act upon
his own view of the law, and direct all the proceedings
against Mr. Johnson to be stayed.

Berns Lose CRANWORTIR (VICFCMCILLOS).
KENNETT AND AVON CANAL COMPANY V. WITHIN-
INGTON.—RIGHT OP A CANAL COMPANY TO MAINTAIN
• DAY ACROSS THE WATEIL
The contest in this ease was whether a particular dam
across the River Kennett ought to be kept up to such a
height as to SWIM, sufficient water (or the navigation of the
canal, or whether the defendant, who was the owner of a
mill near Thettham, in Berkshire, was to be at liberty to
break down or interfere with the dam so as to secure suffi-
cient water for his mill, to the injury of the navigation of
the canal.
Mr. Bethel! and Mr. Speed, on behalf of the canal com-
pany, applied for an injunction to restrain' the defendant
from altering or interfering with the dam, but stated that
it was admitted by both sides that the question as to the
right in respect of the dam must be tried by a court of law,
and the only point now in dispute was what interim order
ought to be made. It was urged that the injunction ought
to be granted until the question could be tried at law, be-
cause, if the injunction were not granted, and the plaintiffs
were successful, the navigation might be stopped, and great
injury might be done which could never be ecospeasated.
On the other hand, if the defendant were aneensful, and
any damage should have been elected by meet et the in-
junction, compensation might easily be made foe any loss
the defendant should have sustained.
Mr. Bolt and Mr. Follett appeased Ow the defendant, and
contended that justice could only be done by leaving the
dam as it at present stood, and the defendant would under-
take not to interfere with it until the action was tried.
Lord Cranworth said the order he should make would be
to direct the plaintiffs to bring their action to try the right
in respect of the dam, and to grant the injunction in the
meantime ; but the plaintiffs must undertake not to make
any alteration in the dam whereby the water should be
raised above the top water mark, or further than was ne-
cessary fur the purposes of the navigation; and if the
plaintiffs should not sustain their action, then they must
make compensation to the defendant for the damage that
might have been dune to his mill, the compensation to be
settled in such manner as the court should direct.

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH—YenERDAT.
&WPM IN num.—Burma LOAD CASIII2I4 2. MT= Pam.
WS. Ms. JLUTWD C 21.2211221. 212211 x. JOTTIC2 PIMA.
COST O. THE A3IIItROATII, NOTTINGHAM, BOSTON, AND
RUMEN COUNTIES JUNCTION RAILWAY COMEA.NY.—

JUDOXEMT.
In this cue the plaintiff had entered into a contract to
supply to the defendants "chairs," to be used in the con-
struction of the railway, at the rate of 300 tons per month,
to be delivered at such places as the engineer of the com-
pany should direct. }or some time the deliveries were
made and paid for, according to the contract, until the
company getting into difficulties in money matters, the en-
gineer told the plaintiff to go on delivering as slowly as pos-
sible, and at last told him that the company would receive
no more. The plaintiff then ceased to make the chairs, and
brought the prevent action against the company, alleging, in
bis declaration, that he was ready and willing to deliver the
goods, according to the contract, but that the company re-
fused to receive them, and prevented and discharged him
from delivering the same. The company pleaded that he
WIN not ready and willing, and that they did not refuse to
receive, and did not prevent and discharge him from de-
livering. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with
damages 1,8001.
A rale nisi was granted for a new trial, upon the ground
that the**. hod misdirected the jury, and that the facts
did not moppet the verdict.
Lord Or apbell now delivered judgment, and said that
the cant was of opinion that the verdict ought not to be
diotarbst. As to the misdirection complained of, the
lemed
_bed not directed the jury that the facts did
seMennt Witiedsarge by the company from the delivery by
the pleirdiff of the chairs, but he left the question to them,
soh* hid them that he thought the evidence very
mere r that effect—that was not a misdirection. The
nest seintion was whether the plaintiff was ready and will-
ing to dam, and whether the defendants did refuse to
receive red did prevent end dissharge the plaintiff from
deliveries. It won sit holed list If the dellasdants had
been prepared to Pi. fa wadi line been willing
to go on making. The wes that *wash anxious
to go on making, be emsed Is do so when the company
awed to take the earl" method the reside which the plain-
tiff said that the imiegew mffesed to take was in fact never
MAO at all. The dellisinals esassied that, as the plain-
t/it did not tender, he esuld set be said to be wady and
to deliver, whhic ameasted to this, that be was
lsamdto buy the aseesserp ~its of iron, of the pertku.
hi description, sad ads al ticeitairs of the podenlar
1 taw, with the sem if the es= %VIM eed Wiz
theta to the
ales* eseassdeletir=ll;skillf he did. Th;TsseivOtt
the*, were jaellimi is Smiles aekacmes these
sleesesolle wae ready eel ledelleer. That
lbw k 1118111161.1111110 the _ eseemens Nese it the

do nandags in that pariah, and that the rest of the ex-
penses, which were of a general nature, should be deducted
equally over the whole line. That if this was dose it would
be shown (as the fart was.) that the branch did not pay at
all, except so far as it contributed to greater earn ins on
other parts of the line; but that as the parish would have
a right to rate them at something, though they chose to use
the land in an unremunerating meaner, they were willing
to consent to a rate of 301. per mile, that being the highest
value of arable land in the parish.
The court took time to consider its judgment.

BAIL COURT.—YEBTERDAY.
Immo* Ix BANCo.—B.rolis Ma. Jcnirs wiorrnax.
Ex
Mr. Cleasby said that in this cue in which he had
moved yesterday for leave to exhibit articles of the peace
against Mr. Tolmache, he bad now an affidavit stating that
Rube had met 'folmache on the 13th of May, when the
latter called out to him in a threatening tone Remember
what I have said to you." He submitted that this, coupled
with the former conduct of Mr. Tolmache, was a sufficient
ground for the application which he had made.
Mr. Justice Wightman said he would look at the
affidavit.

COURT OF EXCITERUER.—YESTERDAY.
&wises is S.W.
HUDSON T. RO•ERTS.—JUDGMENT.
The Lord Chief Baron said that in this ease, which had
been recently argued, the court was opinion, after conside-
ration, that the rule to enter • nonsuit ought to be dis-
charged. The action was upon the case for keeping • bull,
which, to the defendant's knowledge, was of a ferocious
disposition—accustomed to gore and attack mankind, and
the question raised by the rule was, whether there was any
evidence to go to the jury in support of the scienter. That
was a material and very necessary ingredient in an action
of this sort. It appeared at the trial, that after the plain
tiff had met with the accident, the defendant went to visit
him, and observing a bundle in a red handkerchief, which
the plaintiff had in hie hand when he met the bull,
the defendant said, " Aye, that (meaning the red handker-
chief), is the whole cause of the mischief ; the bull will run
at anything red." And on another occasion, speaking of
the said transaction, be said, that " a ball will always run
lat anything red." It was contended that these expressions
indicated a knowledge on the part of the defendant that the
bull would run at any one clothed in red, or carrying any-
thing red about him. It also appeared that the bull had,
in fact, run on two former occasions at persons partly
clothed in red. The expressions of the defendant, although
he was not proved to have any personal knowledge of the
misconduct of the bull, were properly left to the jury by the
learned judge, as evidence of the seienter. The degree of
weight to be given to thatevidence was not,of course, for the
court to decide. That was the province of the jury who
adopted it and gave very temperate damages on it. The
court was nut therefore prepared to interfere with or dis-
turb the verdict ; more especially as the learned judge re-
ported that he was not dissatisfied with it. It certainly was
lawful for any one to go abroad in red clothes, if they
pleased. It was therefore the duty of the defendant to use
precautions for the restraining of his bull, when suffered to
go through the public thoroughfares, it he knew its habits,
of which there was some evidence to go to the jury. The
rule to eider a nosamit must therefore be discharged.
Rule discharged sceordingly.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—YESTERDAY.
BOOM Ma. SLIMAXTIia. AIbISTAXT JllllOll.
Roamenv.
Sarah Jones, a savage-looking woman, aged 22, was in-
dicted for having stolen from the person of Richard Jutaum
St. and upwards in gold and silver moneys.
The prosecutor, a clerk, residing at 61, Aldgate High-
street, deposed that between one and two o'clock on the
morning of the 22nd of May he met the prisoner in Union-
street, Spite'fields, and after a short conversation he pro-
ceeded with her to a house of ill fame in Thrall-street.
Though he had been drinking he knew perfectly well what
he was about, and he knew that when he entered the house
he hail upwards of 31. in money about him. He went with
her into a room ou the ground floor, and very soon after-
wards he found her band at his fob, in which a bag, con-
taining the money, was placed. Having put his own hand
into the fob he found that the bag was gone, and he imme-
diately accused her of taking it. She denied that she had
taken it, and ran towards the door, but he prevented her
getting away, upon which she threatened to beat his brains
oat with the poker, and no sooner had she made this
threat than she ran to the fire-place and took
up a piece of iron [a fire-shovel handle], with
which she struck him severely across the mouth and hands.
He had again laid held of her, but he was compelled to let
go, and she took him by the hair of his head, and, after
pulling it violently, she released her hold, and ran to the
window. She threw up the sub and called for help, and
immediately afterwards two women got into the room
through the window. They both laid hold of him, one by
the hair ; and whilst ho was so held the prisoner jumped
out of the window and got away. As soon as she was gone
the two women got off too through the window, and left
him alone iu the room. The window looked into a back
yard, and, on going to it, he saw the prisoner, the two
women, and three other women standing in the yard tone-
, thee. lie got into the street with as little delay as possible,
and told a police-officer who was on duty there what had
aseurred. The same morning he found the prisoner in the
esstody of the officer. Whilst he was struggling with the
prisoner in the room before the two women got through the
window, she dropped on the floor four half-crowns, one
shilling, and two fuurpenny-pieces, which he picked up and
gave to the officer. They were, he believed, a purges of
&o money of which he hail been robbed.
Police-constable Samuel Damercl, 140 11, stated thet en
the morning in question he saw the prosecutor SID
prisoner into the house in Thrall-street, of whiel the gee.
.escutor had now spoken. About an beef allerwasis
be again saw the prosecutor in the street, and Mai a Mir
munication made by him, witness afterwards leek the
prisoner lute custody. When the prosecutor spite to him
he was bleeding from the mouth and from the left hand.
The prosecutor gave him the piece of iron produced. The
prisoner denied having ever seen the prosecutor. She
was searched, but no money was found upon her. The pri-
weer lived in the house. lie received the money produced
Qom the prosecutor.
The prosecutor identified the iron handle produced as
that with which he was assaulted. He positively identified
the prisoner.
The prisoner, in her defence, said the prosecutor was
wrong. It was not her, and the house was an open one,
sad full Olr WON&
The leereeljelge having summed up, the jury found the
gainer
lerseed judge said it was a very bad ease, and sen-
tinel the gdesser to be transported for seven years.
On the peed jury coming into court to be discharged,
the for said they were anxious to express their appro-
bation of the conduct of the police in the cases that had
been brought before them for investigation.
The learned judge said he fully concurred in the opinion
so expressed by the grand jury.
Having received the usual orders to inspect the prisons,
the grand jury was discharged.