The Express.
London, England, 1865-11-30 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Aye. term Prins sittings at Westaiseter.--alefore
the Lord Chief Justin and special Jury.)
THI QUW24 COW ITT. RHIN ANDOLH.
Ofthat hearing of this we, which was a* indictment
sabot Captain Corbett for a breach of the Foreign Enlist.
wet Act, by inciting personate enpge into the Confederate
swim, was resumed this morning.
Solieitoloaseend, Mr. Gifford, Q.
end Mr,
swims, appeared on behalf of the Grown ; Me. Edward
Awes, Q.C., Mr. Milward, Q.C., Mr. Kempley, Mr. Sleigh,
and Mr. Witt appeared for the defendant.
The Solicitor General asked his lordship to amend the
554 h count in the indictment, which alleged the procuring
to enlist certain persons to the jurors unknown. His
lamed friend extracted yesterday in crosearamination of
p 0 of the wanness that the name of one of the men
(John Marti') who remained in the ship was known to him,
sad therefore he (the Solicitor•Generall asked his lordship
to *mead the count by inserting the name of John Martin
slid other persons to the jurors unknown. The names of
the men were unknown to the crown when the indictment

ess framed.
The Lord Chief Justice doubted if he had the power to

do sp.
Yr. James mid he thought not. The mown might have
known it if they had examined their witnemee on that

past. in
The Lad Chief Justice said the information came out
croaregrinination. But he did not know that the amend-
ment woe required. There were two of the men whose
names wen unknown, and so far an they were concerned
the count would stand good. It would be time to consider
the application when the case had proceeded further.
Kr. James then addressed the jury for the defame. He
said he fully ooacurred in the remarks of the Solicitor
Gassed of the impudence of thdiatmeet, and that the
laws of this country should be vindicated by the executive
government, both with regard to their violation by the
aflame amongst themselves, and more especially in smatter
which the laws provide for the peace and welfare of this
country with respect to foreign nations. And it was
a matter of the last importance to the defendant that he
should not by any sawamptioe, presumption, or fancy, be
made responsible for an sot unless the oirenmstances were
brought clearly and distinctly within the provisions of the
law, whether it was an offence against the statute or com-
mon law of the land. They had all heard very much within
the last four years of the Foreign Enlistment
Act, the provisions of which were for the pur-
pose of enabling the government of this country
faithfully to tidal all the duties of the neutral state with
mpg to any nation with which this country was at pews,
but who might, unfortunately, be at war between them-
selves. The act had reference to • variety of things, and
amongst other things it provided that no vessel of war
should be equipped by subjects of this country in order
that it might take part in warlike operations prevailing
between two foreign nation'. It provides likewise for the
prevention of the enlistment of the subjects of this country
(which was, indeed, its primary object) without the
license of the crown, into the service of either of the
belligerents. Now it was of the greatest importance that
their minds should be kept perfectly clear from confining
together these classes of offences which were of them-
selves entirely distinct. It was one thing to be engaged in
• ship like the Shenandoah, to prey on the merchant ser-
ves, and another and a distinct offence for a men to be
ingsged in endtavouriog to procure seamen for either of
the belligerents. He did not say that the Solicitor-General
knowingly or willingly mixed up the two cams, but •
gnat deal of the evidence that had been given
might be referred to possibly for the purpose of
eating a prejudice against the defendant and of asking
them to suppose that because the defendant might have
lases aware of nee circumstance it was therefore very likely
that he was guilty of another offence withie the act of
garliansent, and therefore they would see that he had good
reams for asking them to keep the two offences
.liatinct from each other. Here was the Sea King
which his learned friend had said was a reset
ratably drained by some one to leave the shores
of this country to enter into the Confederate service,
and that she ultimately did so was so clear that it would
be Additions in Itimfto attempt to &my it ; but who did it ?
Who ware the means of sending the vessel from this coun-
try for the purpose of entitling into the Confederate ser-
vice was a very different thing. The defendant was not
charged with doine that, and one thing must
be perfectly manifest to everyone, that it was
the duty of the executive government if the defendant had
been concerned in an illegal act with respect to the equip-
ment of this vessel for warlike purposes to have indicted
him for it, sod not for engaging at endeavouring to engage
men for the Confederate service. He used it for this
season. It mast have been manifest to those who had the
charge of this prosecution, that there °odd not be • pre-
tence for saying that the defendant, when he left this country
was enabled of the circumstances with reference to the
ship, or they would have indicted him for it as • partaker
in the illegality, Uit were an illegality. According to
the evidence this vessel had made a voyage under another
captain to China and the East, and returned to this coun-
try in September, 1864, when she changed hands, where-
upon the new owner appointed the defendant as her
commander. Now, he did not think he was asking
anythiog unreasonable when he asked them to suppose that
if the owner of the ship in October intended that the Sea
King should be handed over to any one on behalf of the '
Confederate States, in all probability he would have
kept it a secret from the penioxs he employed in the trans-
action. All that he required was to have • captain
sod crew for the purpose of taking the vessel away,
and studiously prevent their being acquainted with
the nature of the traosadica, lest the knowledge
which be wished to keep secret might be disclosed, and
thereby the end he had in view frustrated. The difficulty
on the part of the defendant was that he could not be called
to give his account of the transaction on oath, and to
side to them that he knew nothing before he left this
country as to what was to be the destination
of the reseal. And that being so, it was impos-
sible that be could call anyone else who could chow that
he was ignorant of all the circumstances. Was it not
therefore of the very last importance under the arum.
11111/0011 that they should not assume anything without the
armed grounds against a pump whose mouth was
closed like that of the defendant's?
(The case was proceeding when our report left.]

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
JOHNSON V. IMRE.
Dr. Spirits for the plaintiff ; Dr. Deane, Q.C., sad Mr.
Lomley Smith, for the defendant.
This was a suit to establish the validity of a will executed
m the 23rd a March, 1864, by Mr. Joseph Edward Prior,
late of Chesterton, near Cambridge, who died at the age of
60. Oa the 4th of the March following it was propounded
by the executrix, Ann Johnson, to whom be had been
engaged to be married, and in whale favour it was drawn.
It was opposed by a sister of the deceased. The property
was of but small amount.
The case was proceeding when we went to press.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Winslow.)
lB RE 01101 GINA AUGUSTA IMEDERICA MOIIILEETTA CAVIEN,
DISH BEETIECK.
The bankrupt was described as a spinster, of 5, Gruen-
street, OCOSIISSOT•SCIMIS. She Game to the court on her own
petition, ascribing her failure to "the loss of a sum of
money lent to the late Dowager Lady Rivers,
sad insufficiency of income to maintain my poiri
ties in life." The debts amount to 2,198/. ;
assets realised 1,2381.; bed debts, 3001. The expenditure is
stated at 5001. a year in the two years preceding the bank-
ruptcy. Thera a» upwards of 90 creditors for all kinds of
wearing apparel, jewellery, perfumery, millinery, wine, hire
of broughams, stationery, china, lie., in amount varying
hem a few shillings up to 3001.
This was the sitting for examination and discharge.
Mr. Sargood opposed.
[The ;we mu proceeding whoa we went to press.)