The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-25 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.

tratea' clerk as weli. That the meeting was adjou
rnedrned till
the l'ith April, when Broughton attended fer
Whittingham, and Grantham for Williams, he also acting
as magistrates' clerk, and advising them in hen ho
That en order was drawn up by Grantham, in his capacity
of magistrates' clerk, and before it was signed he gave notice
of appeal against the order as bad, on the ground that
Whittingham was not re-sworn at the second hearing, and
that the magistrates were not the same. That Broughton,
the attorney for Whittinabans, was allowed to abandon the
order on payment of 30s. costa. That he then applied
to another magistrate, and obtained a fresh sum-.
mots against Williams, which was heard on the 12'-.May, when Grantham urged that the former order was
in existence, and persuaded the magistrates to line Aar_
ing the case, and that the order was refused.—Mr. ihite_
hunt and Mr. Iluddlestone now showed canoe upon stmt.
vits, which satisfactorily denied the allegations made., aomnee
Mr. Grantham ; and Mr. Pashley having been heard in
support of the rule,
Mr. Justice Patteson commented in strong t erms on the
oonduct of Broughton, at whose instance the rut A was moved,
and said that he ought to change places lei' ,h Grantham,
whose conduct had berm quite correct. Tb ma was no pre-
tence for this application, which was mos' s disgraceful to
Broughton, and if the whole facts had bee r before the court
in the first instance, no rule would have men granted. In
discharging the rule he only regretted t' at he could not dis-
charge it with costs as against Brought, m, but he should dis-
charge the rule with coats generally.

COURT OF COMM(/
' PLEAS.
Sittings in lie
GIBBS AND ANOTHER O. FLIO ALT AND ANOTHER.—THE
PARISH OF ST. STEPHEN'S, W ALBROOIi..—JUDOMENT OP
THE COURT.—This long-panda'sg case was argued in Easter
Term last, and a full report of the facts appeared in this
paper on the 2nd of May. ,
:lie court having taken time to
consider, Mr. Justice Coltr Asp' this morning, proceeded to
deliver the opinion of bin" .elf, Mr. Justice Maule, Mr. Jus-
tice Creswell, and Mr. Justice Erle the late Lord Chief
Justice not having intir masa any decision upon the subject.
It was en action of tro set, to recover from the defendants
certain books claimed by the plaintiffs (Alderman Gibbs and
Thomas Whittaker, gag.), as churchwardens of the parish of
St. Stephen's, \Val' .nook, and the question was whether the
said books were .n the possession of the defendants, and
whether the, ,stiff Alderman Gibbs was legally appointed
ethrthwarnew o ( the parish on the 12th of April, 1844, or, in
ether words whether the election of Alderman Gibbs, as
asedor churcn warden, on that day was void, he having been
eated to fill that office since the year 1825. The
courtwart foam', that, according to the custom of the parish, there
thee to b'l two churchwardens, to be chosen by the parish in
Other se' stry, composed of the clergyman for the time being,
mad of t aich of the parishioners as had already served the
elite' A' churchwarden, or had been fined for not doing se.
It was stated in the case submitted to the court,
that, the records of the parish began in the year
16 sB, and that from thence to the year 1734 one
e'aurchwarden was chosen annually from the parishioners at
large, and was elected to the office of junior churchwarden
and of senior churchwarden the next year. This course was
adopted during the whole of the time mentioned, with the
exception of a certain period between the years 1666 and
1672, which was immaterial, as that was occasioned by the
great fire of London; and there were also exceptions in four
other instances only. From the year 1734 to 1775 there
were no records; and from 1775 to 1824 the same course
was pursued. Upon this statement of facts a presumption
was raised that the course so generally adopted was the
course required by the custom, and the presumption was
sought to be strengthened, by the arguments that the union of
interests between the parishioners and the select vestry might
he retained by adhering to it, or destroyed by departing
from it, and that the parishioners would, in prudence, take
precautions before they would consent to establish a custom
for electing by select vestry. The succession to the office of
senior churchwarden would be legally stopped by continuing
the same person in the same office for many years. The same
rule would apply to the office of junior churchwarden and in-
deed it appeared that for 15 years, during which time Ali Gibbs
was senior churchwarden, a different person each year held
the office of junior churchwarden, and the consequence was,
that the number of select vestrymen had been inconveniently
reduced. The court, therefore, considered that the effect of
the evidence was that part of the custom was, that a new
person should be elected every year to the office of junior
churchwarden, and should succeed to the office of senior
churchwarden, to be elected next year. If such were the
custom, it followed that the repeated re-election of the same
person to the same office, without any necessity for such a
course, was contrary to that custom, and, therefore, the eke •
Lion of Alderman Gibbs on the 12th April, 1844, was not
valid, and a nonsuit ought to be entered.—Judgment of non-
gait.
Mr. Cowling reminded the court that leave had been
reserved at the trial of the cause to enter a special verdict for
the opinion of the Court of Error.—Mr. Justice Coltman said
it was of course still open to the parties to submit the ques-
tion to a Court of Error.
The court was occupied during the remainder of the day
in hearing arguments upon points of practice, and the only
case which involved any matter of interest was the following:
Es PARTE AARON PICK.—LITERARY COPYRIGHT.—in
this case Mr. Serjt:Talfourd had obtained a rule, during the
present term, calling upon Coloael Le Blanc to show cause
why the entry of his name in the registry at Stationers' Hall,
as the proprietor of a work entitled " The Bible Student's
Concordance," should not be expunged, and the name of the
applicant substituted for it. The facts of the case appeared
in this paper a few days ago. Mr. Cockburn (with whom
was Mr. James), now showed cause against the rule, and
the question was, whether Aaron Pick was the sole proprie-
tor of the work, or whether the copyright belonged to Col.
Le Blanc, he having, as he alleged, assisted in the compila-
tion of the work, and paid all the expenses of the publication,
and having in fact employed Pick, at a weekly salary, to
edit the work for him. Pick, on the other band, contended
that he was not only the author of the work, but also the
proprietor of the copyright, and that the money which he
had received from the colonel was advanced to him in charity,
and was to be repaid out of the profits arising from the work.
—Mr. Sejt. Talfourd (Mr. Barrett with him), was proceeding
to argue in support of the rule when the court interposed,
suggesting that the better mode of settling the question
would be to refer it to arbitration. This course was
assented to by both parties, and a rule was drawn
up to the effect that the name of Aaron Pick
should be substituted for that of Colonel Lo Blanc in the
register at Stationers'-Hall, on condition that Pick should
pay back to Colonel Le Blanc all the monies he luul advanced
during the progress of the work, and discharge all the
liabilities incurred by the publication. If the amount could
not be agreed upon by the parties themselves, and paid be-
fore the first day of next term, the question to be determined
`e an arbitration previous to the last day of the same term.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Sittings in Hanoo.

MEREDITH V. ITOLHAN.—PENALTIES TO WHICH COAL-
SELLERS ARE LIABLE FOR DELIVERING SACKS INSUFFI-
CIENT IN WEIGHT OR WITHOUT A PROPER TICKET..—This
was an action of debt for the recovery of penalties under the
1 and 2 Wm. IV., c. 76, which enacts that in delivering
coals they should (if desired by the buyer) be weighed
" in presence of a police constable or some other in-
different and credible person whose attendance the buyer
should procure," and if found not to contain 224 lb. in
each sack, the seller was liable to a penalty of dl. for every
deficient sack. The Ist and 2nd Vict. renders it necessary I
that tickets, with the proper names and addresses of the
sellers, should be given to purchasers upon the delivery of
coals, and inflicts similar penalties Tor neglecting to do so.
At the trial, it appeared, that after part of the coals had
been " shot," a dispute having arisen as to the payment, a
pima named Browne, who happened to be present, Bag-
rdad the sacks were insufficient in weight, and that
iplaintiff should insist upon seeing them weighed. The
airman consented to do so, and having weighed each sack
and its contents against the weights and an empty sack,
several were found to be deficient. It further appeared that
the delivery ticket bore the signature " E. Holman
and Co." • whereas the receipt was signed " Wil-
liam Holnian," who was the defendant, and it was
proved that the defendant, whose name was to the receipt,
was clerk to a person who carried on trade with defendant's
brother. A verdict having been found for the plaintiff, Mr.
M. Chambers now moved for a rule for a new trial or a non-
suit, or to arrest the judgment, upon the ground that the
*melee was against evidence, and that Mr. Baron Platt had
misdirected the jury, by telling them that the receipt pm-
domed at the trial was evidence that the defendant was the
saner of the coals. It was also objected, in support of the
seam it and arrest of judgment, that the plaintiff had not
observed the formalities of the statute by " procuring the
*Mende, ice" of an indifferent witness to be present at the
weighing of the coals, as Browne had volunteered his
services end suggestions. The court were of opinion
that the case had been properly left to the jury,.
and, having found their verdict that the defendant
was the seller, there was no reason whatever for disturbing
It. As to the ',node of weighing, the rule might be allosfa
to p, with this 'intimation, that the court were of opinion
that the plaintiff ,had complied with the requisition of the
statute, and that 13rowne was a sufficient and indifferent
wham within it. ..waning. It would be absurd to say that
a buyer of coals was .•osend expressly either for a constable
or some other witness; an arbitrator was all that was neces-
sary. The fact of his t *Mg casually present could form nO
objection to his compete.tcy as a witness, provided be acted
*dilly as an arbitrator bet ween the parties. The jury, it
appeared, saw no reason to doubt the witness in question,
and as he discharged the dut v of arbitrator the act of parlia-
ment was sufficiently complieel a vith.—With this intimation the
the rule 1113 i for a iionsuit aL'd arrest of judgment was

THE QUEEN OH OF THOMAS
WAXLEY V. HEALEY.—LIBEL.--CIIIMINAL INFORMATION.
—ln this case, in which the parties are Mr. Wakley. M.P.,
and the proprietor of the Medical Timm, Mr. Huddlestone
moved to enlarge the rule till next term, and the rule was
accordingly enlarged.
THE QUEEN r. JUSTICES OF CORNWALL.—CERTIORARI.
—STEALING FROM OYSTER BEDS.—Mr. Moody moved for
a certiorari to bring up an indictment for felony from the
Cornwall Sessions. The Fisonsrs were charged with steal-
ing oysters from oyster-be and it was stated on affidavit
that questions of difficulty, both in law and fact, would arise
on the trial, as it was not easy to obtain proof of the title to
oyster-beds in an arm of the sea—Mr. Justice Patteson : In
cases of felony the rule must be nisi, and let it be to show
cause at chambers. _

THE QUEEN v. EDWARD LVCILMAN:—QCO WARRANT°.
—ELECTION' OF COUNCILLORS FOR BATIL—PERSONATION
OF VOTERS. Mr. rhino moved for a rule in the
nature of a quo warranto, calling on Edward Luck-
man to show cause why he exercised the office
of town-councillor of the city of Bath. It appeared
that there two vacancies in one of the wards of the city, and
there were three candidates of the name of Archer, Luck-
man, and Crutwell, who polled respectively 212, 212, and
210 votes. It was sworn, that at the election, one J.
Granby Williams personated his father, and voted for
Crutwell and Lockman ; and if his vote were expunged, it
would reduce their votes to 211 and 209 respectively. Crut
well had no knowledge of the personation. One James
Fletcher also personated his father, and voted for Archer
end Luckman ; and if this vote was struck out, it would re-
duce .Luckman'a votes to 211. One John Cottle voted as
James Cottle, for Archer and Luckman,and that vote being
withdrawn, it would leave Luckman and Crutwell 200
each. alubsequently the real James Cottle tendered his vote
for Crntw ell, which was refused on the ground that there was
only one l'emes Cottle on the burgess list, and his vote bad
been ahem', given. If this vote was added to those for
Crutwell, it would give him a majority of one over Lock-
man. Rule loaned.
Ex PARTE WILKINSON QUANTHAX.—CONDUCT OF AN
Arronisey.—On • former day Mr. Pashley, on the appli-
cation of Mr. Broughton, aa attorney, obtained a rule call-
ing on Mr. Wilkinson Grantham, of Naistwich, in Cheshire,
an attorney of this court, to answer matters in affidavits
which stated the following facts:—That an application had
been made hy a woman of the name of Whittingham to Mr. '
Brooke, a magierate for Cheshire, calling_ on one Williams
for the maintenanoe a a bastard child. Williams was called
on to answer the complaint on the 14th April, when Gran-
tham attended as advomte for Williams, the woman having
no legal adviser. That the case was heard by Messrs.
Hnichcliffe and Brooke, when Grantham acted as magi*.

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 25, 1846.