The Express.
London, England, 1849-06-08 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY E‘'ENIvG. JUNE 8, 1849.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HOUSE OF LOItDS.—YZSTERDAT.
The house met in committee for privileges at II o'clock.
resold : Lord Shaftesbury (in the chair), Laid Brougham,
Lord Campbell, Lord Buckley, Lord Strangford, and other
peers.
Tztooturr MOKCIVO CLAIM.
The dela of en Irish peer to vote at the election of r, -
ve pure for Ireisad wee male out on the 18th
sy last (see Express of the 19 hl, except that it was
w t satisfactorily shown that two, the may sons of the Z
of Rathelowne, lest Viscouot MonA, the wide of the plot„ n t
viwount, bad died in their infancy, as was alleged. Wet-
mesas Were now examined to supply that defect, end they
proved the deaths of b Alt the children; whereupon the
if /amities resolved that the claim was made out.

Mr. Betjetint C. Jones, in support of the rule, cob- I
t-ndid that, with ',vein to th- merits of the ease, it had
been prey. d on the trial by a witnees of the name of Rogers,
who was a dark of the defendant, that he bat seen his em-
ployer t and *v. r to a Mr. Morton the money for the bills
accepted by Lieut. axet, and the defeadant bad also himself
made en affidavit to that eft'. et. With regard to the respett-
abi ity of the defendant, which had been attacked by the
counsel for the plaintiff, it hat been proved by Rogers that
he carried on a very reeneetable be einem se a carpenter, and
that his bills at last Chat- mu quarter amounted to $OOl.
Tee letters of Hazed had been improperly read by Mr.
Cockburn to the juty, and that learned counsel had
pledged himself to call Heiall to prove them,
which he however had failed t 3 dn. The eject
of Mr. Cockburn in referring to those liters
ass to show that Ferris was concerned in a conspiracy to de-
fraud Lieut. Scott out of the bids, and the effect that had
been produced by r. ediog the letters was such as to induce
them to give a virdict for the plaintiff. Under these circum
stances he (Mr. Serjcant Jones) eubmitted that the rule for
a new trial must he made absolute.

Mr. Piston followed on the saute side, and brit fly con-
tended that the reading of Hush's letters to Lieut. Scott by
Mr. Cockburn bed prejudiced the case, and induced the jury
to believe the witness Rosen, who swore that Ferris had
given consideration foe the bills.
Mr. Cede, who was with Mr. Sediant Jones and Mr.
Phinn, very shortly addressed the court in support of the
rule.

rd Denman said that, il the facts of the cue were 1,0
exceediegly clear as it now appeared they were, it was to be
ripened that the learned Jude. before whom the applies,
•ion was mad* at chambers to set aside the warrant of attor-
ney had not then decided the question, instead of directing
a feigned issue to try the question offs validity. Tt was
also a mutter of regret that, at the trial of the cue at Bristol,
the learned counsel for the plaintiff should have read to the
jury levers which I e did not afterwards prove by calliog
end which turned out to be immaterial, because it
war not dr sitable to do anything by which a doubt as :o the
propriety of the proceedings at nisi Arius could he raised.
The court could Lot, if in its conscience it
was satisfied that Lieutenant B,tott had been dc-
treaded out of the bills, set aside the verdict by which the
warrant of attorney war declared null and void, upon the
obj mien taken by the kernel serjeant who Reran d for the
deteudine Upon the evidence in the Cafe which he (Lord
Daman) bed heard read he was of opinion that the verdict
of the jury was a proper verdict. According to the facts of
the case he bud no doubt that theleerned judge before whom
the moue was first heard at ch-mben would have been
jut ified in setting aside the warrant of attorney without
sending tee question to a jury. The rale must there-
fore be disinarged.—Mr. Justice Patteson raid he
was of a daunt opinion, but it certainly was
to be regretted that any letters should have been
read at the trial to the jury which were not afterwards
proved; but, by calling Haxall, the letters had been struck
oat of the learned judge's notes of the evidence, and was no
longer before the jury, although it was very difficult to eradi.
care from the mind of any Jury the impres.ion which mei-
(nos improperly brought before them may have produced.
l'he jury in this case had been distinctly toad to regard the
letters of Hazall as if they had never been read ; and, as all
the facts in the case were consistent with the verdict, the
objection of 'he learned serjeant who represented the defend-
ant was not a sufficient ground for granting a new
trial. Mr. Juitce Coleridge said he was of the
sem- opinion, although he did not mean to say that reading
'he latent of Hazall had not produced some prejudice
'mini the defendant in the minds of the jury. Taking,
however, the whole fact, of the case into conside ration, he
thought that the rule ought to be discharged, and that the
vermet of the jury was a correct one. It a new trial were
hid, and the same evidence brought forward again, and the
jury were to give a different verdict, he thought that such a
decision would be an erroneous one.
Mr. Justice Erle said he cincurred with the rest of their
lordships.

BAIL COURT.-YESTERDAY.
&micas m BANoo.—Beroae ML 'mica WwirrmAx.
EXPARTS THE Ray. DR. ?dooms (CLEax.

Mr. Whitehurst applied for a criminal information against
the proptiesor, editor printer, end publisher of the Lincoln.
Aire, Boston, and Spalding Free l'ress. and Eastern Coon-
tits Advertiser, for having published a Jibs! concerning the
Rev. Dr. Moore, the chairman of Quarter Sessions, held for
the hundred of Spalding, in Lincolnshire.
A p non of the name of Savage had made use of
threatening language to a relation of Dr. Moore, and had
find a gun at him, by which his life was endangered,
and for this outrage he had b. en bound over to
her p the peace. Oa the 15th of May, in the
present year Savage was brought up before the magistrates
at Spalding for having assaulted one of his fang' senantr,
named Rest, when he pleaded guilty. Savage had also
tt reatened to do grievous bodily harm to a men of the name
of Turnbull, who was one of his servants, and the parties
went before the magistrates, when an attorney of the name
of Perceval appeared for Savage, and was allowed to call
Kim- nos on behalf of his client. One of the witnesses ex-
amined was a party of the name of Palmer, who stated that
Savage had been playing at cards with himself and Tutu
butt when the threatening language was used, and
w.s at that time slightly intoxicated. Palmer also stated
be.ore the magistrates that he did not think Turnbull had
anything to fear from Savage when he was sober. The
magistrates gave it as their opinion that Turnbull ought,
when Savage was drunk, to avoid coming near him, hut
that he had nothing to fear from him when he was not in•
tog:awed. The Rev. Dr. Moore, who was chairman of
session., acquiesced in the opinion of his brother magi-testes.
A report of the proceedings before the magistrates appeared
in the journal, against the proprietor of which the motion was
now made, of the 23rd of May last, and it was the observations
upon those proceedings that constituted the libel now
comylained of. The substance of the remarks which
appeared in the paper, was that the manner in which the
cue had been treated was a disgrace to any court of justice
in England ; that the Rsv. Dr. Moore bed twisted the evi-
dence e f the witness Palmer from its proper meaning, and
that it was the second time the paper had had occasion to
notice the conduct of the Rev. Dr. Moore as a mngietrate.
The libel went on to say that the writer of the article had no
hesititi-u is expressing hie opinion that poisons who
behaved in the way the Rev. Dr. Moore lied done, ought to
be removed trout the bench, and that if he were allowed
to twist evidence as he pleased, it would be dis-
graceful in the extreme. The libel went on to say
that if they (the editor of the paper) held the office
of Lord-Lieutenant of the county, the Rev. Dr.
Moore should be removed from the bench of magistrates.
The libel also said that such tae's might come to light as
weuld render the interference of the Lord Chancellor and
the reconstruction of the bench of magistrates indispensably
necessary. The learned counsel stated that he had the
affidavit of the Rev. Dr. Moore, in which he stated that he
had no ill-will toe ards Savage which c have induced
him to attempt to alter the meaning of l'almer's evidence
so as to make the case worse against that person.
Rule nisi granted.