The Express.
London, England, 1848-11-09 00:00:00

arskleshop. The master hil allowed tka To
It
p aprelaPy debt due irons the testatora estate. To this re-
port the ether specialty creiliton excepted, the meats left by
the Water l»i•g isealtieient for payment of the 2,000 i.. in
addition to the other specialty debts—We liesour was of
opinion that the question was property • tomtits& of law;
and gave liberty to the pert, slalom, wader tee bead to
sake such proceeding as he might be advised, far the pur-
pose( establialtiag his dales at law.

COURT OP QUERN'S
taßliNCß.—Ynaraatiar.
settees rns,
DANDINRiI C. SLADO.—CIIAZACTIZ OF • &INFANT.—
TIM wee as action tried at the last eitte kir Middlesex,
beers Mr. Justice Werner, for altered siander, by the
defendant's wife, of the character of the plaintiff, who had
lived in hoe service r • cook. The jury fond for the
damages 40s. It appeared that the plaintiff lett the
service of the defendant to take • similar situation
in the family of a Mrs. Malcolm, and on that r-
eseal the defendant gave her a character. Sure-
tartly, the defendant's wife, in • letter to Mrs.
hisivilm, inquiring the character of another servant, said she
loped she did not allow the other Unapt, to est out of"meal
times, " because she (hire. Slade) had lately been much
inapesed on in this respect. kin. Malcolm, upon the called
on Mrs. Slade, and asked if the observers was intended to
apply to the plaintiff: and she said it did. Mn. Malcolm
reamed, "Then you don't consider her breast?" " Horst!
no; I should say very dishonest," was the reply. This WM
the alleged define:ion. Mr. Crowder, Q,C., now moved for
a 'ionise, on the ground of there being no evidence of me
lice, and also that the statement of defendant's wife was not
disproved by the plaintiff, and must therefore he taken to be
true. He further moved in arrest of judt, on the inside.
leery of the statement as laid in the &demean. It was
mart important let the benefit of society that parr should
he protected in giving the character of • servant—Lard
Denman : No doubt ; take a rule generally.
Du en P. 8111TIL—LIAUILITT OP • ONNTLIPLAN /OS • '
IVONAN PASSIM) AN tars Wire.—Mr. R. James moved firs
a rule to outer • amine in this ere, whisk was tried at the
last sittings foe Middlesex, whine verdict was entered for
the pleiref. It appeared that the defendant, Capt. Smith,
resided is one of the Cando° cottage; neer the Ragout's
Fmk, end • perm peeing as Mrs. Smith lived ia Devon.
shire-terram. The plaintiff. an upholsterer. had
the lady with goods to the amour of 601., which
paid for bathe defendant, who was at her residence wham
they were brought home. Some time sisheequently, in 1846,
the phased supplied " Mrs. Smith" with other articles of
brought.fniture. to obtain payment for whisk the action was
wo he learned counsel contended that there was no-
thng so show the liability of the threader be did not re-
side with the lady, neither had be given her; antherity to I
pledge his name tor the goods ; moreover! If she NUMMI IN
wife, the goods supplied were fancy , and not. thee
fore, seceasenes.—The court thought the evidence wee solb
dant to show that the plaintiff gore Mrs. Smith " era
upon the faith of her being the wife tiCapt. Smith .—Rule
refund.
Soot r. Fasais.—BlLL Tartharrrions.—This was ea
Imo directed by Mr. Bares Alderney sad tried at the lest
Droste Awing, before Mr. Juries sridire, as to the vali-
dity of • warred of attorney gives by the plaintiff to the
defeadeat. when • verdict was folitel for the plaintiff. Mr.
Brit. C. Jones now moved for • ear for a new trial, on the
that certain letters had bees improperly read to the
irNI7 by the counsel for the plaintiff la his opening address;
,1:7•Ilso, that the verdict wispiest the we4htof evidence.
It appeared that the plaintiff, who was a lieut. in the army.
being quartered at Norwich, was error of borrow's' the
ane of 1,0001., aael having applied to • persin London.
who had sesnused the name of Moreton, hew ee lammed
that if he would send up two bills for 5001 each he would ad-
vance him the money. The bills were ace mlir.sly sent, but the
plaintiff did not receive any consideration fur them.
Some time after he received two letters tram a person tamed
Drell, stating that his bills had got into had hands, and
that, if he dlel not wish to be robbed, he had teeter obtain
posweseion of them again ; anon which the plaintiff came to
torn, and discovered that the bills, eller passing through
various hands. had come into the poeseesion of the defendant,
who is • builder in W. 'taunter, end who said he had ad-
mired Moreton 1001. in cash !mot thaw, and given an 1 0 U
for 200.. more. The ilaintaff brag meet desirous of r-
ealer, possession of the Wis. agreed to pay WO!. ie momor
aid girt • warrant of attorney for 3001., previded the bile
were given up to hen. Surequestly, however, be had
resin to repeat the the defendant had not given any con-
sidered...it for the bills, and a summons was taken out be.
fore Mr. Baron Alderson to set aside the warrant
of stoney, upon which his iordshi • directed as
issue to try the validity of the instrumeNt. The
learned counsel vow contended that the letters el'
Noxell, which had no doubt crested a prejudice in the
a uda of the jury, ought not ta have been read, as no proof
was offered to suostantiate them, and that the weight et,
evident* was in favour of its being • bosh fide transaction
as tur as WO defendant was canoerned.—The court, in grat-
ing the rule, observed that counsel should not read letters
unites they could prove them. In the present !AM if the
loathed counsel nisei the letters in question, and did noti give
them is 'rider* it was fair to infer that they might have
had some infloence on the jury.—Ruin granted.

COVET OF COMMON PLllAs.—Yasesans-v.
ittings. Sam.
'LITCHIS C. BMITH.-5511.11110 Spittle wITHOrT A I
licessz.—This was an action tried before Mr. Justice Wil-
liam, at the Middlesex timings atter lot term, whoa a ver-
dict was gives far the defendant cm the third ples, and for
the plaintiff oa the other issues.—Mr. /Left now moved for
a rule to met aside the verdict on the plea found
for the defendant, and to eater thereon a ver-
dict for the plaintiff for the rum of 1311. 17s. 31
or for a new trial or for judgment non °Minute undid°.
The action was in seumpsit upon an agreement, against the
defendant, as surety for ow Norman, to recover 1021. for
arms* of a weekly rent of 41. fot the tap forming part of
Pendell's Hotel, and abo kg Mt no. 34. for beer and spirits
tet:Tlial to the tap by a pewee mend Kempen. The plea
in question in substance alleged that the agreement declared
upon was entered into in order to enable Newman to supply
,pinta without being duly licensed. At the tri.l it appeared
that on the Bth of January, 18th, them was • written agree-
ment to the effect that Newman should lease the tap on the
south sista of Fendsll's Hotel, la Bridle. -street, of the plain-
Ulf, the proprietor of dm beta, and pay lim 41. per week
lent, sad alas buy his Ripon of Kempeos, paying for
teem every fortnight; an the diendant guaranteed
to the plaintiff the felfilme nt of the contract
by Newman. In support et the defendant's pled,
it was shown that Newman had no license, that the hotel
and tap in Btidgevtrest were quite separate, that the plait-
tiff alone having a Beanie, his sem appeared °or, the door
of the hotel and tap. That. was aleu evidence that the
wine and spirits delivered into the stock of Newman were
remitted to Ritchie. The learned counsel contended even
at the intention of the parties as found by the jury was
fn the pliratiffs license to carrycotouble, the plaintiff's
right to recover on the agesemn was not there( ire
defeated. The act relief lams by the defendant was the
Magistrate: Liceesing Act 9 Gm. IV., c. 61, a. IS, enact-
lug that every perion who shall sell note, g duly licensed,
stall, open conviction before • map be liable to •
penalty not eseeedins WA, nor Ism than M. He submitted
there Ins an importaut asthma°. between imposing a penalty
and forbidding an act; and It there were • prohibition, hut
only for the protecrion of the romme, yet the contrast in
question wee not void. "Smith e. thanwocd," (14 K. it
W. 452 j was an authority to show that between buyer end
seller, • party unlicensed may see for the pries. fitemlb,
the agreement stated in the plea left it in the option of tBl
reties, tut did not stipulate ter • positive infringement of
the statute. The court were of there was no foondetio•
for the present motion. The et • without • license against
vein
the provisions of the Magistrates' et was doing an set Lost
trey to public morals ar.d polio, and therefor, amerdieg to
ali emegnised principles, an agreement for that potpie was
illegal. Nor was there any real distinction between an
the do-
agree-
mat stipulating positively fa or merely faciitating
ingot an illegal act. Rule refused.

COURT 07 EXCIIEQUER —Yzerssittv.
illttWge la Ilmeo.
MARIUIS eLsZi) e. Lomas. PLIADINO. Mr.
Crowder, ~ moved, on have, for a rale calling on the
plaintiff to show muse why the veriiet is this ems should
set be set wide wad a mimic attend, or a new trial had,
spout the smug of the improper reeepticn of evident*. It
was an Mile by • elergymas against ti.e rrprese•tatives of
his peedemor, to mom damages for dilapidation*. By
the declaration it appeared that the deceased was the rester
of the wish. of Tregosy cam St. James, in Cornwall, and in
that amity wee inland of a rectery-house, appurtenants, sad
certain glebe lands (as the dWaration described them)
" lying sad being is the, to wit, mid pariah," which became
greatly dilapidated at his death. The defendant paid 1001.
onto mart, and denied dilapidattom ultra that sum. At the
trial before Kr. Jessica Williams at the last arises for Corn-
wall, it appeared the glebe lands respecting which the
action was brought were situate In an adjoining parish,
and it was eastanded that the plaintiff ought to
De sossuited, as the action was local, and he
could recover only is respect of dilapidation. de-
scribed ia the declaration. It was, however, left to the
jury to say whether the: plaintiff had proud dilapidation.
anywhere beyoasi theloo4., sad the result was the virdict for
bl. The learned etranarltted that the plaintiff should
his
have been limited in to the precise locality .pecified
In the deelaratias, even it was under a videlicet —A
rale she was granted.
Psi Paws at Weermismear.—Bafor• lir. Sena Platt and a Middle-

iiiessemew pry.
C•114111111T0111 V. B2II7.—CAVTION TO WITME•SIIII.—Tbis
am wen eons& ou at the sitting oaths mart ; but, in met.
questa Otte absence of • material witness, it was with-
draw* hem the record. &fon the tiring of the mutt a per-
son noised Payne addressed the learned baron, Mating that
he wet the absent whims, and explained that he was on the
outside of Vow Waft at ten o'clock, wbeu the ers was called
on. AMOWIMISIII stood ante tapelike paper,which he believed
would be tikes ant; hens* the cause of his nsC being in
court et tea o'clock. Cadet the cizeumstances he traded
the man would mew his absence.—ltr. Baron Plan said
it was du duty of the applicaat to be is court when the ease
was mind, and It mu say likely that the Cou hodthews would ardor him to pay thew co. Hedo
notbute in tar miens ktlia splimat mast apply to the at-
tornies-in tbe ense•—•Yr. Payne reasarkod that it win TUT
ander die that he &said saected
bathe eserm-14.1baras Platt said the applicanthe shmA have
boss la attonamos at ten o'clock.
ZALZIP.HOIVAIII).-71110111DISSUL—BOILDINO
into:Mi.—TM@ was en sense under the latortgewbor Asatk
to empire selethwt • goosaily of brkEs Nisei by tin skarit
ea the .IStk of haply Mewed pkbitiff.--Kr•
Ra
Mato Chanties dolsi Ile sm. plaiabg.
Usk fan sealer
_Meng a minima Dar !Minim. and m-
ini. Saie at Willeelligh WA sod 11147, a quantity of
beide wen awls by bin ea me 41 time Gelds, which wen
sateogially removed to isalhat pat el tba Mil by his