The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-12 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.

Quo WARRANTO.—Mr:Weir.binu;;ed for a quo warranto
directed to James Russell, calling on him to show cause why
he exercised the office of a councillor for the borough of
St. Alban's. The application was founded on the affidavits of
a Mr. Gibson, an unsuccessful candidate, and several others,
and the grounds were stated to be that the numb rs
on the poll were inaccurately taken, and that Russell had
not a majority, and that a deputy assessor had acted for one
of the assessors, when there was no incapacity on his part,
and that the appointment of such deputy assessor was not
signified to the council, as directed by the statute.—The rule
was granted.
The court rose at a very early hour.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Sittings in Banco.
ROBINSON v. PURDAY.—RIORT TO FItS A BILL Pelt
THE RECOVERY Os' TITHES UNDER 101.—This We: a special
case directed by Vice-ChancePor Wigram to ascertain the
opinions of the Barons of this Court, upon two questions
depending upon the construction of the tithe acts, from the
7th and Bth William 111. to the sth and 6th William IV.,
c. 74, which is the most recent general statute relating to
tithes. The first question was, whether the plaintiff, to whom,
as rector of St. Andrew's, Holborn, an arrear of more than
two years' tithes was due, such arrear not exceeding, in the
ate, 101., was entitled, under the tithe acts, to file a
:2713. equity for the recovery of it, he having already gone
Ltefore a justice for the recovery of his claim, and having been
in,:tt there by a denial of the defendant's liability. The
second question was, whether, when more than two yeses'
tithes were due, the plaintiff could file a bill in equity to
recover the arrear claimed, without any referenca to his
being met with a denial of his title. The Court during the
course of the argument (which was continued for upwards
of four hours) intimated their opinion, that the rector
having been met before the justice with a denial of the
liability of the defendant's premises to tithes, was left pre-
cisely in the same state as before the enactment of the sth
and 6th Wm. IV., and was entitled to go before any court
of competent jurisdiction to assert his claim, confining it to
six years. And 111 to the second question, that where the
tithes did not amount to 1.-tore than 101. yearly, the circum-
stance of the rector allowing an arrear of two years to accrue
did not give him a right to go a new jurisdiction. Where ,
there was no dispute regarding title, the rector was bound
to go berore a justice of the peate to recover his demand.
Mr. Martin argued the case for the plaintiff. The Attorney-
General (with whom was Mr. Lush) for the defendant.

POLICE. v
_Et3TERDAT.
MANSION-HOUSE.—WHO HAS A RIOHT TO THE
WALL?-31r. Ellis Bowden Weare, gentleman who was
dressed
roughly
g style,f
o warbochaargmedtad hav-
ing
hed against him without the least provocation ; and, upon
w:SalrinttedkveinrygMoldrn:ollagBMheit:nlitallilneapSide the defendant
he
nthinstotnitchkehcaim".
ofT haevelelifeeenmdaannt,ahpoolwo:
gibed, and the apology wan considered eufficiens atonement.
In his defence Mr. Weare said that whilst walking quietly
down Cheapside he was pushed and hustled about in a meet
beinggiwvei
being remonstrated
pon
unceremonious manner, although he strictly kept to his side
of the pavement. Irritated by such treatment he had behaved
rudely to the gentleman who complained, under the erroneous
impresaion that he was amongst thole who had elbowed him
about.—The Lord Mayor : Which do you consider to be
your side?—Mr. Weare : I consider that upon my left
side is uext to the wall, I am entitled to the wall. Well
I moved on and reduced myself into as small a compass as
possible to get through the crowd, but it was all useless. I
was knocked about from one to the other.—The Lord Mayor :
You were wrong in your opinion of the generally
understood practice for the public accommodation ;
which is, that those whose right hand is next
to the wall are entitled to the wall.—Mr. Weare
Indeed ! I bad nu notion of such a thing. I
come from the country, and there the left hands always go to
the wall. (A laugh.)—The Lord Mayor: If you had taken
the trouble to observe the stream of people, you could not
have mistaken the fact. Such i 3 the necessity in this
crowded city for a regulation of the kind, that even ladies
are not sanctioned in violating it.—Mr. Sbilliogford said the
gentleman appeared to be very much excited, and that the
assault, as an assault, was not worth speaking about.—The
Lord Mayor: If Mr. Shillingford is satisfied with your apo-
logy, I see no reason why 1 should disapprove of it.—The
defendant then left the bar.
GUILDHALL.—ROFIREnT HERING THE LORD MAYOR'S
PROCESSION.—Robert IV.odyale was brought up for final
examination, on the charge of stealing a gold watch, chain,
and seal, value fifty guineas. The ease was adjourned, for
the attendance of the prosecuter's friend, Mr. RohertSutton,
stockbroker, of the Royal Exchange, who corroborated Mr.
Medley's statement, which appeared in yesterday's publica-
tion, adding that he distinctly saw the prisoner hold the
watch up when it was passed over the heads of several people
from hand to hand. When a call for the police was made,
a great uproar was created, to drown their cries, and
attempts made to rescue the primner.--The constable who
took the prisoner in charge stated that while conveying him
to the station-house one of the mob cut off the tail of his
coat and decamped.—The prisoner re asserted his innocence ;
but he was fully committed ti Newgate to take his
BOW-STREET.—Toe WATERLOO-RRIDOE TOLL-COL-
LECTOR.—Christophcr Walker, who was remanded on a
charge of absconding with money, the property of that com-
pany in whose employ he was as a collector, was brought
before Mr. Henry. He had been on duty at the foot.ga e
on the Surrey side, from 1 o'clock on Friday, October 30,
till the same hour next day, and had received 6,280 half-
pence or 131. Is. Bd., with which he had absconded, and on
the evening of November the sth, gave himself up to Mr.
John May, Superintendent of the Essex County constabulary
at Chelmsford. and was brought to town. The prisoner in
his defence said that he had drunk to excess, acd was not
aware of what he had done—the money had since been paid
to the company.—Mr. Henry said the money having been
paid did nut exonerate him from the criminal charge, and
he should therefore commit him to Newgate to take his
trial.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET. —AN ASSAI:LT AND •
Love AFFAlR.—Edicard John Kinnersky Baker, Esq., of
52, Park.street, Grosvenor-square, was summoned before
Mr. Hardwick for having unlawfully assaulted • young
medical gentleman, named William Fenton.—The com-
plainant Raid he was walking in Burlington-street, on Satur-
day last, when the defendant crossed over the street on per-
ceiving him, and on coming up to him he immediately struck
him on the face, and grappled with him. Complainant strug-
gled with the defendant, and both fell on the pavement
together. The defendant left him uttering threats of future
violence. Complainant had more than once been attacked
by the defendant in a similar way, and FO persevering was
the defendant in his violence, be went about the streets in
constant fear. The quarrel had its origin in some family
matters, which if necessary he was willing should be explained.
Mr. Hardwick asked the defendant to explain his conduct.
—Defendant This is only an ipse dirit statement, and
therefore it appears to me there is no necessity for making
any defence to it.--Mr. Hardwick: I totally differ from
you, and I call on you for your defence.—Defendant: Oh,
then, I shall state the reason why I assaulted the defendant.
The defendant persists in carrying on a clandestine corre-
spondence with my sister, and, although all the family are
averse to any acquaintance with him, he will persevere in
his clandestine meetings. I wish first to ask him who was
in his company when I assaulted him on Saturday ?—Com-
plainant: Your sister. But I deny that I keep up a clan-
destine correspondence with the lady. I have the sanction
of her father to my attentions, although 1 admit other
branches of the family are not so favourably disposed.—
Defendant: I deny that the complainant has the sanction of
any part of my family for his clandestine correspondence
with my sister. My father is here to prove he never sanc-
tioned his addresses. So far from that bring the case, he
told me, as the complainant continued to persevere in his
pretensions to my sister, to take any steps I thought most
likely to rid the family of his annoyance.—Mr. Hardwick:
You may entertain objections to the complainant's acquaint-
ance with your sister, and your family may join with you in
your opinion, but you must not attempt to put your views
in force by violence, whenever you happen to meet him in
the public street. You must find bail ; two sureties in 251.
each, and yourself in 501.—Defendant: Will not my solemn
promise to abstain from violence satisfy the court ?—Mr.
Hardwick : It will not satisfy the complainant, and there-
fore you must find bail.
TH AM ES.—John Middleton, a combmakcr by trade, and
who resides at 22, Philip-street, St. George's-in-the-East,
was charged with assaulting his wife, Mary Middleton, iu
the following brutal and unmanly manner:—The complain-
ant, who appeared in an extremely delicate state of health,
and whose head, neck, fact, and jaws were all over dis-
coloured with marks, as if from recent violence, stated that
on the night of Tuesday the ad inst. she returned home with
her husband, after haying been out for a night's amusement.
She knocked at the door a little more loudly than usual,
upon which he said, " What is that for? " and instantly
struck her to the ground. When she got up they went
into their own apartment, and her husband having locked
the door, renewed the attack upon her. lie first dealt her a
heavy blow on the face which stretched her on the floor
dorm senseless, and whilst dawn he seized her by the hair
and dashed her head against the ground several tiniest. Not
satisfied with this, he fell to kicking her on the head, face,
and arm, while she screamed out " Murder " as loudly as she
could. She perceived that she had four wounds upon the
head, from which the blood flowed profusely. The police,
hearing her cries, came to her assistance, when a surgeon
was Pent for, and after that s' e remembered nothing more
until she found herself in her bed. A student of the London
Hospital, named Lilly, saw the prosecutrix about three
o'clock in the morning of the 4th instant. On examining
her he found three severe wounds on her head, and a fourth
on her forehead. She seemed to have been severely injured,
and terribly bruised and beaten about the head, arms, and
neck. She was for aco siderahic time in • dangerous state.
The prisoner, in his defence, endeavoured to throw the whole
blame upon his wife, who, he said, was a woman of very
violent temper, and that, being in liquor at the time, she
struck him several blows. He was committed to Newgate.