The Express.
London, England, 1847-07-12 00:00:00

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—BI ca NOHAM.

The bu;kressoitl7;lio7foikeiMuii;;;lMiste;dat Buck-
ingham on Saturday. The calendar contains the names of
sixteen prisoners. The recent quarter sessions have contri-
buted to reduce the number of persons in custody for trial,
and to render the cases reserved for the assizes dispropor-
tionately serious. The list of offences contains one case of
arson and two of manslaughter; that of Fossey, the police-
man, to whom the late melancholy accident at Wolver-
ton is attributed, being one of the latter. Of the six-
teen prisoners, eight eau neither read nor write, four can
only read imperfectly, and four can read and write. hut
only imperfectly. The cause list contains three entries. By
the calendar, it appears that in the House of Correction,
and in the common gaol, there are fifty-three prisoners on
former orders ; of these, twenty-six can read and write bat
imperfectly ; eleven can read, but only imperfectly ; and
sixteen can neither read nor write.
Carrels Cover.—Before Mr. Baron Alderson.
ABDUCTION.--Joshua Biswell was indicted for having
taken one Sarah Stevens out of the possession of her father,
the prosecutor, she being then an unmarried girl under the
age of Mete= years. The defendant was the farm servant of
Mr. Stevens, and had opportunities of becoming acquainted
with his daughter, the subject of the present inquiry, then a
girl of fourteen years of age. An intimacy ensued, and the
girl at length became unwilling to face her parents, and told
the prisoner she should leave them. He determined on
accompanying her, and they left the father's house in June
last, and proceeded to -Walton-on-Thames, where the
prisoner was subsequently taken into custody on the present
charge. In cross-examination the girl admitted that it was
she who had sought the prisoner, and tkat the proposal to
quit her father's house had emanated from her.—Mr.Power,
for the defence, submitted to the jury that there was no evi-
dence of the defendant having taken the girl out of the pos-
sersion of her father ; he had been her companion merely,
and had neither used artifice nor solicitation to induce her to
take the step on which this charge was founded. The proper
course to have adopted would have been to have let these
young persons marry, as they desired.—Mr. Baron Alderson
said that if a man and a woman, the latter being under the
age of sixteen and unmarried, went away together, against
the will of her father, in whose possession she theretofore was,
one of the cases contemplated by the statute on which the
indictment was founded was made out, and the man took
away the woman, no matter from which of the two the
proposal to go away had emanated.—The jury returned a
verdict of Not Guilty.

NTH Pmts.—Before Mr. Jutke Patteson.
JOHNSTON v. STINONS, —LANDLORD AND TENANT.—
The plaintiff fought to recover for the defendant's breach of
his implied undertaking to occupy and cultivate a certain
meseuage and grounds ni a good and tenantable manner, and
according to the custom of the country. It appeared that the
plaintiff had let a small house with about seven acres et
ornamental grounds and orchards attached thereto to the de-
fendant, who was to have the option of continuing the occu-
pation for two years longer, on giving one quarter's notice.
At the end of the year, however, the defendant gave up his
occupation, and the plaintiff found that a Sr tree, some
holly bushes, and about 150 yards of hedge had been
cut down, half the meadow ploughed up and sown with oats,
the kitchen garden dug up and sown with canary seed, the
'manure heap utterly removed, and a greater part of the
house given up to poultry, the drawing-rooms being ocea.
sionally assigned to an old goose and her brood.—Mr. Pren-
dergut, for the defence, contended that the custom of the
country had nothing to do with an occupation of this kind ;
that the defendant had acted with the express sanction, or,
at all events, with the knowledge and without the disappro-
bation of the plaintiff, who, it was suggested, would not
have brought this action had he not taken offence at the de-
fendant not being at the house to receive him on the last Lay
of the tenancy, according to appointment, made eta previous
visit, when he had gone ever the premises, and had not ex-
pressed any dissatisfaction.—Mr. Justice Patteun told the
jury that the custom of the country did not apply, because
the tenancy of such property could not be subject to the
same rules as that of a farm. As to the acts complained of,
they were undoubtedly breaches of the defendant's implied
undertaking as occupant; and the jury would, therefore, say
whether the plaintiff had sanctioned what had been done
expressly, or by neglecting to express disapprobation when
it had come to his knowledge.—The jury, after long delibe-
ration, returned a verdict for the defendant.

POLICE.- SATURDAY.

MANSION-HOUSE.—ROBBERY OF JEWELLERY, &C.—
John Daniel, alias Johnson, and Marianne Smith were
charged with having stolen gold and silver watches, diamond
rings, &c., of the value of or about 1,0001., the property of
Meears. Brown and Walker, of Leadenhall•street.—Mr.
Charles Brown, one of the partners, said: The male
prisoner was shopman, and had all the property in
the shop in Loadenbalkstreet under his care. The articles
were very valuable, consisting of gold and silver witches,
gold chains, diamond rings and pine, and the rest of the
usual stock of a jeweller. It was the male prisoner's
duty to sleep on the premises every night. He brought the,
keys as usual last Sunday morning to our house in White-
chapel, but he did not return in the evening. I visited the
premises on Monday morning, at about eight o'clock, and
saw they were licked up according to custom. I found my
, lad at the door, and he mid that Mr. Daniel had not arrived.
' I opened the premises, and, as the Shop was dark, directed
that the shutters should be removed. I then perceived'
that a number of articles had disappeared, and the
tickets which had belonged to them were scattered
about the place. I can identify the gold watch found
by one of the officers upon Daniel as oar property, and
part of that which had been on the premises on Sa-
turday, and had not been accounted for by Daniel.
—Mr. J. Walker, the other partner, deposed to having
found the prisoner, who had assumed a false name,
concealed under a bed in a house in Limon-grove. On
being charged with the robbery, he said, " I see it's no
use; Its in that box." The trunk was then opened, and al-
most all the property which had been stolen was found in it,
in a carpet bag. done up in fourteen parcels. The whole of
the property produced isours.--A brooch and ring belonging
to the prosecutors were found in the possession of the female
prisoner.—Two policemen gave evidence corresponding with
that given by Mr. Walker. When Daniel acknowledgedthat
there wee no use in further attempts at concealment he
handed to one of the officers a key with which to open the