The Express.
London, England, 1853-01-14 00:00:00

TO TIIII EDITOR. OF THE DAILY 242118.

Sin,—" Coalitions" are severely commented upon
by the party who have, to use the late Premier's own ex-
pression, been lately expelled from office. Being a plain,
unread man, I take the liberty of asking you in what light
I am to consider the present opposition to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer at Oxford University ? In glancing at
the poll I observe, amongst Mr. Perceval's supporters, the
Ven. Archdeacon Denison and the Rev. Hugh Stowell, the
Rev. Daniel Wilson, of Islington; the notorious Mr. Ben-
nett, of From*. Would there be anything out of place in
calling this " a Coalition ?" and a very extraordinary ono,
too.—l ma, &c~

TELEGRAM EXTENSION ON THE CONTINENT.—
The entire Swiss territory is now opened by telegraph, and
the following stations are placed in connexion with the
Submarine Telegraph Company's Offices at Cernhill : Aar-
bourg, Baden, Bale, Berne, Soleure, Altorf, Freibourg,
Geneva, Glans, Lausanne, Lucerne, Neufchatel, Siiut
Croix, Saint Gall, Schaffhausen, Schwsz Zug, Zurich,
Aarau, Berthond, Bienne, Brogg, Chau: de fond kle) Del.-
mont,Hersogenbechsee, Laogeuthal, Lenrbourg, Liestall,
Stint Inner, Soneeboy, Zoffeague, Alstattan, Airslto, An-
dcrmstt, Sallensona, Brigg, Battler, Coire, Flawyl, Fleu-
rier, Franemfeld, Ilerisau. Horgen, Lichtenstcig, Locarno,
Locle (lc), Mugadino, Misocco. Morat, Morges, Motiers,
Newerwinen, Nyon, Raga:, Rappersehwyl, Rkenteek,
Richterschwyl, Rocselach, Sion, Spleigen, Tafen, Thnsis,
Trogen, Usuach, Vevey, Wadeuschwyl, Wattwyl, Winter-
their Wyl, Yverdun, Claims°, and Lugano-72 in ~11.
MORE GAROTTING IN NOTTINGHAM.—WC are
sorry to state that this cowardly system of ant ick is on the
increase in Nottingham. A robbery of this kind toidk
place early in the evening of Tuesday last. It ap-
pears that a workman of the name of Taylor, in
the employ of Mr. Gibney, carrier, was passing down
Beck-lane (in the heart of the town) as early as six o'clock,
when ho was suddenly attacked by two men, one of whom
strangled him whilst the other rifled his pockets; not oil-
ing anything of value, they stole his hat and decamped. So
violent was the attack, that Taylor was insensible for me
time afterwards.

FEMALE EMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA.—Mr. Lind-
say, the well-keown shipowner, has j4,-t atm,,,Aiced As
intention of starting his monster Australian oni4rant s: fp,
the Caroline *Chisholm, from Southampton. This ship w,!I
(Convey out 900 young women of good iliaia,,rt as nit-
grants. The benevolent Mrs. Chisholm is goh.g out to
Australia with thew yang women.

SLAW

itelitgence.

EQUITY COURTS.-YEBTICIDAT.
yiev-01.16CILLos ft. Ms. null %en.

I)LA''ILLI C. DiIIVILL.III-=:EIAIIINA/110/1 us WIT:Mir-II

111 CUISKT.

This ease being the tint instance of the ex MI nation in
the Court of Cheater; of witnesses ira op. n court, created
considerable interest.
It was a claim to establish a debt due to the plaintiff from
her deceased brother. The cat., had been before Sir Geo.
Turner, and the defence relied upon was that the
debt was barred by the statute of limitations, and
that the document relied upon to Übe the case out of the
statute was inaihniasible for weal of a stamp, end, if ad-
missible, that there was an erasure in the date which
raised the suspicion of fraud, and was unexplained. Ma-
der these circumstances Sir George Turner had directed
that the witnesses should be examined in open court. And
the case now came on Sir the production of the witnesses.
Mr. Pullen end Mr. Dickenson appeared fur the plaintiff,
and Mr. Morris for the defendant.
William Grant, examined by Mr. Pullen, stated that he
was a silk manufacturer, residing at Leek, and had em-
ployed the deceased fir ten years • that he knew his head-
writing, aad that the document produced was wholly in his
handwriting ; that the date 1810 was an erasure, bat
was wholly in the handwriting of demised. So far as be
scald see, the figures before the erasure had been 1849,
aad the 9 was in deceased's handwriting. Tbe book pro-
dueed is also in the deceased's handwriting—every part of it.
On CTlllt rl'lMiliAtiOo by Mr. Morris,
Witness said he !ASS the deceased write every day • be
bad no means of knowing what the figures had been before
erasure, except by inspection.
The witness here, at the request of the judge, examined
the erasure with • microscope, and still adhered to his
opinion that the last figure had been • " 9," and in de-
fendant's writing.
Louisa Neville, examined by Mr. Pullen, stated she was
plaintiff in the cause. She and her sister, who was dead,
had lived together and rented a house which belonged to
their deceased brother, and then he boarded with them at
10s. per week. tier sister had died and witness was her
ozeentrix. At her death there was • debt due to her for
money lent, and the account in the book produced showed
it. On her death it was transferred to the name of witness.
There was also a debt due front the deceased to herself,
which was shown by the same book. On the 12th of Janu-
ary, 1850, the two debts together amounted to 1921. Bs.
It was an account current between herself and brother.
Soon afterwards she got uneasy, and her brother's health
being bad she pressed for some proper security; and about
two months before her brother died (that was in June,lBs2),
be gave her the memorandum now produced,which was dated
12th of Jan., 1850 , that being the date of the balance as
struck in the book. The document was in the words "Re-
ceived of, 1921., at 4f per cent.," and was signed by
her brother She did not see it written, but the date was
the same, when it was first brought to her, as it was then.
The deceased at the same time paid witness the Bs. odd

money.
W. Beeville, a surviving brother of the deceased and of
the plaintiff, corrobor ited this evidence.
Mr. Morris then radii ssed the cum upon the inadmis-
sible nature of the &icemen!, snit upon the effect of the
evidence.
Mr. Pullen was heard in reply.
Ris 'Lenora said that after the examination of the wit-
nesses, this was a very elear case. The document had •
suspicious erasure, and even if the examination had de-
pended merely on parol evidence he might have been dis-
satisfied, but the other documents now produced put the
matter beyond doubt. Looking at the erasure, he should
have said the erased date was 1844, but the witness who
was well acquainted with the handwriting of the deceased
said it was 1849, and the explanation given was
that the document being written earl) in the year
1650, 1849 had been written by mistake, but what he (the
♦ice-Chancellor) relied on was that in 1844 there was no
such account between the parties, and nu puwiible reason for
its having been written at that time. Then as to the stamp,
the document was clearly in the nature of an 10 U ; not a
receipt, but an acknowledgment of a debt, and did not re-
quire a stamp. But beyond all this there was the payment
of 81., which would of itself be sufficient to take the case
eat of the statute, and of this fact there was nut only the
evidence of the plaintiff but the admission in the deceased's
account book.