The Express.
London, England, 1847-06-29 00:00:00

SPORTING.

TAITEIIBALLS.-51o0esv.
In Se course of the afternoon a considerable number of
borer more Tucked for the mats of the current year, but not hair a-
dmen kir atone of enflicient magnitude to entitle them to epecial
nolka. Wesley select Stultr,Varapyre, Milliner, and Plover, A r the
Gramlinni Stakes, d The Hero
Ledger Dulcet for the Cup ; the teen:-
actinism the July Santalin and St. ere trifling in mom-. and
impartante. Of the favoured few we have mentioned, Stults and
Plow fecired most ompicumely in the betting en the Stakes, the
*gat
IeII le I
1,, and the Idler at various ;Aces, starting at 1000 to 30,
' and bile
_se le be I ; Dulcet waa also &gnat " pot," and the odds
iresied opt The Thee wtaken to about 3001.; they were after-
-1 murk current/3 offered. Mendicant wan scratched between one and
two o'clock. The test prim were me wader :
JULY STAKES (Tumolsy next).-2 to 1 apt Teetotum,
4 to 1 apt lodine, 10 to 1 apt Sister to SAcle.
GOODWOOD STAKE 6.-9 to 1 apt Stubs (t), 11 to 1 asst
Vumpyre (t), IS to 1 apt Milliner, 13 to 1 apt Plovor (t), 25 to 1 apt
Burgundy (t), 23 1 apt Martext, 23 to 1 apt Plach, 30 to 1 apt
Hydrangea, 33 tot apt "foamy Moore (t), 33 to 1 east Miss Elie (t),
1000 to 20 apt hfcepeth (t), 40 to 1 agat Glory (t). No price was
named opt The Qaestionable, and the only offer was to take 25 to 1.
GOODWOOD CUP.-2 to 1 agat The Hero, 9to 1 spot Eryx
(t), la to 1 apt Duket (t), 11 to I
apt Fitz-Emilius,l3 ta 1 apt
Weirdos (no friends), 19 to 1 ept Halo (t end aft. off.).
Sr. LEOER.-5 to 2 egat Cossack (3 to 1 t), 8 to 1 apt
Van Tromp, 12 to 1 apt Red Ha-t (t), 12 to 1 apt Foreclosure (t),
12 to 1 apt Mr. Martin (0, 18 to 1 opt Farmer's Daughter (t and aft
off), 20 to 1 apt Sleek Dwarf (t and aft olf).
HcauP.-25 to 1 apt Flateatcher (t), 3,000 to 90 eget
Surplice ft), 1.000 to 30 apt Samaria (t), 1,000 to 25 apt Corsican
(t), 2,000 to 50 apt Severlac (t), 2,500 to 50 apt The stinger Oh
2,000 to 3.5 apt The Sheriff (t), 10,100 to 100 apt The Fowler, bro.
to Woodpecker W. - I
INTELLIGENCE EXTRA.—LIVERPOOL JULY MEETING.
SECOND DAT:HANDICAP for the LIVERPOOL CUP Of •
2001., added to a Handicap of 25 son. each, IS It. and 5 only if declared
by Saturday next. —Atom, 94 21b; Mendicant, Mt 71b; Sir Tatum ,
Sykee, get 7)b; hp, Rat Sib; Lightning, Set Sib; Mentor, Set 51b;
Fancy Boy, Net Slb; Pantesa, Sat 5.b; Lady Wildair, Pat 510; Poynton,
Set Sib; Lotherio, Sat 41h; Chanticleer, 84 41h ; Bergundy, Bst 410;
Inheritress, Sat Sib; Sweetmeat, Set 21h; Doto, Pat 11b; Newoourt,
Bat 110; Broeaedo, 7st 1210; Hope, 74 1210; The Conjuror, 7st lab;
Red Robin, 74 10th; Annandale, Tat 10lb; Refraction, 74 91h; Yard-
ley, 7et Sib; Rowena, 7st Sib; Winchester, 74 filb; Collier, 7st 71h;
Cranebrook, 74 71b; Bordingmbool Mire, 74 71b; Prior of St- Mar-
games, Ist 610; Sir George. 7st 610; Inglewood, 74 31b;
iet Sib; Mickey .Free, at 31h; Dolefhl, 7st 5111; Intrepid, Tot ;
Quren of Tree, iat 316; Crim. Con., 74 31b; Gwatior, let Mb;
t 41b; Jonathan Wild, let 41h; Porn, 7et 41b; Jingepot. 7st CD;
Bent of Three, lelt.a; Tam Tulioch, 714 310 ; Pal, let 3lb ; Cawrouch,
-et 31b ; lit 21b ; The Druid, 7st 211:1; Whinntone, 744 Mb;
Fitinillm faitlibiArthur, let 21b; Crown Prince, 74 21b ; Lontli
bun, let r Palemeterui;
7, I.llllb ;3 Pilgrim, ,rilst. Ilb ; l
kSbe er:r. big
mintl/2ti..., Eryn, Sat et;
7et; I' A . 7 , Om&
hisll,Blll I Oast, fat 1210; Fitzwilliam, tat 121bn, Gat ;
Blackbird,
MIMI , let 111 h; Domed, 64 Illb ; Morocco, Get 1116;
W Olt Illbt is to PlEabeau, Est 101 b ; Cherteey, Out 101 b;
Ife, let 111. Set lelb; The Premier, fist 9th;
Useletvedlia; 111011; Maid or Lyme, get 71h; nohow.
Mk ea Mg ClhiZit_:,. et Mb; Blank, flat 010 ; ler
kbo BM ad WI Who Ilet 31b; Liberator, Oat
Mt MOM% IS IN Await Bet 41h, Erin go
bilk eat 414 Ili Illbi IL Leg eat 11b; Suftstone, Get;
NEM, Set ; MOM.
_I Wale NS lib; Farthing Candle, Set 1210 ;
OnlissOteem Se [Wart 1010; br e, ley Lanercost out of
ItlMatlet 101 b ; Satit.lresere, Set 101 b; Charge Barnwell,
EOM; bl e, Dueseme Set 1016; Christopher. Set 1010;
reßill, bet lb ;Hi , Set Mb ; Tbe Lamb, 5481 h ; Great-
-810; Wes Mile; Chartiet, Set 810; Projectile, 3st
Mb She Premier, teat g de Marie, Sot 816; fio-nice, Sst 710;
, Set 7D; gemnagt sst 711; Milkmaid, Sat 710; Ban-
I Bockburn, Jet 710 ; Challanbas. kt 410; Sir Martin, 3st Gib; Bedlam,
tat 610; tliommeet eft Om Mary, Sat Mb; Moonlight, sst 51b;
Rob Roy, Mit Si; Ude Ileavkllet Mb ; Mermaid, 54 41b; Helena, tat
I Mb ; by 1 eat ef Camp Follower, Set;enwhelt, Sat;
Kite, Set; bf, by Tad, est of Matrimony, 4.4 71b; Regalia, paid ;
I Brown Fly, mid.
DEEBT HANDICAP of 10 soya. each. 1 mile.—Traverser,
Sat 911:3; Lotharie eat 310; Dula, Set 41b; Lightning, 3st 316; God-
I trey, &It; Winchester, 7st 1210; Philip, 7st 1110 ; The Cue, 7st 111 h;
Pnor of St. Margarets, 74 10Ih ; Spithead, 7st 101 b; Pic-nic, 74716;
Refraction, 7st 71b; Manton, let filb; Lord Harry, 7st Mb; Tom
Tulloch, 7st Slb ; DroltePrt, let 511); Merman, 74 416; Juno, 75t 410;
Printers Alice, 7st 310 Pilgrim, Tat Sib; Best of Three, Tat 21b;
Vanish, 7st 21b; Sotades,74.; Osprey, let; Mise Nutting, list; Pleudit,
Int; Chertaey. Tall Jolly Beggar, fat 1310; Premier, Get 12Ib ; Cherry,
Gat 810; Ukraine, Est 810; The Bard, Cot Slb; 'Mackie, fat 71h; gr c
by Arthur, dam by Lugar, Get 71b; Sagacity, fat 71b; Smuggler um,
Gat 31b; Aliwal, Est; h c by Jereed out of Pantomime, Set 101 b ; Devil-
me-care, Sat 10th; Queen Mary, Set 71h; Brawn Fly, Set 716; Maid
of Athena, tot 710; Menne*, sst 31h; (nothing, sst Slb; b f by
Talley out of Matrimony, 4st 111 b.

CRICI

!KET.

- --- -
Km T. ENGLAND. —lbis meet
day, at Lord'e. When time wee re
Kr
Ati2Mll, e Box, b Lillywbite I 3
C. whittaker, Eaq., b Lilly-
white
b Dean
Dorrington, b Dean 3
Nth, b Betbunt l7
N. Fehr, Eaq , b Dean
A. Myna, Py., b Betbant
DWI
DMZ. iimeat
A. M. Beare, req., e Whit-
U
taker b Myna
Ben, . . ..3
Seoowell, b yer

- -
tam match was opened y ester-
the score was thus :

"14artInnell. 1 b ce, b Dean . . 17
L. IL Bayley, Eeq , c. King,
Lillywhite l6
Martin, b Dean
W. Pilctl/4 not out ........ 0
Bye 1, wide (Dean), 1

VT. ling, Fag., e Whit-
taker, b Myna 3
0. Parr, nut out
0. C. Pell, Pm., not out
Bye.

The match Ins resumed this

3Latu Ewe Marna.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Present—The Lord Chancellor, Lord Lyndhurst, and other rem, I
assisted bi several at the Common Lay Judges.
HARRISON V. STICITNEY AND OTHERS.—The arguments
in this case were concluded.—The Lord Chancellor said he
would frame a question for the opinion of the learned judges,
who would require time to consider their answer.—The con-
sideration of the case was adjourned.
LORD CANOES AND ANOTHER V. BLUNDELL AND
OTHERS.—WILL.—IIIISNOMER OF A DEVISEE.—Tbis was
an appeal against a decree of the Vice-Chancellor of Eng-
land, affirmed by Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst. The question
ereee on the will ef Charles Robert Blundell, dated Nov.,
1834, whereby he gave large freehold 'stet(' in Lancashire to
John Gladstone and others, upon trust to permit " the second
son of Edward Weld, of Lulworth, in the county of Dorset,
Esq., to occupy and enjoy the some, and to take to his own
use, the rents and profits thereof for and during his natural
life," and after his decease upon trust for the first and every
other son of the said second son of the said Edward
Weld severally, successively, and in remainder, &C.;
and for default of such issue upon trust for the
third and every other son and sons (except the eldest)
of the said Edward Wad, &c., with remainders to the
younger brothers of the said Edward Weld, and their issue,
with remainder for the second and every other son and eons
(except the eldest) of Lady Stourton, the wife of Lord Stour-
ton, and one of the tigers of the said Edward Weld, with
other limitationsnot necessary tobe hererecited. Thetestator
died in 1837, and neither then nor at the date of the will was
there any such person as "Edward Weld, of Lulworth." The
possessor of Lulworth Castle at both these dates was Joseph
'Weld, who had an elder brother named Thomas (Cardinal
Weld), who died some years before, and also another brother
named Edward, born between the said Joseph and 'f homes,
but who died a bachelor in 1796. But the said Joseph Weld
had three sons, the eldest of whom was baptised " Edward
Joseph," but was generally called " Edward" only ; the
second was "Thomas," and the third "Joseph." The bill was
filed by this last-named Thomas, second eon of Joseph,
praying a declaration that he was the deviate intended
by the testator, but that his name was mistaken or forgotten
by him, for that his father, Joseph, bad a sister, the wife of
Lord Stourton, and that the other parts of the description
applied to him only. The Vice-Chancellor decreed in his
favour, and that decree was affirmed by Lord Lyndhurst,
assisted by Mr. Justice Patteson, and Mr. Justice Haute.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly opened the appeal on behalf of Lord
Carney, and Mrs. Tempest, who are the heirs-at-law of the
testator, and who, as such, would take the estates, if they
were net well devised. The argument, so far as it proceeded,
was to, the effect that the description applied to Edward
(Joseph) Weld, the eldest eon of Joseph Weld, and not to
Thomas, the second son. At four o'clock the further hearing
was adjourned.
THE HON. HENRY TREVOR V. THE. HON. GEO. RICE
TREVOR.—CONSTRUCTION OP THE WORDS " ISSUE IN
TAIL MALE" IN A Witt.—This appeal against *decree of
the Vice-Chancellor of England on a devise, in the will of
' Viscount Hampden, of his Bedfordshire estates, in trust to
the use of George Rice, son of Lord Dynevor, for his life,
with remainder to " his issue in tail male iD strict settle-
ment," was argued before the learned judges of the common
law courts on the 10th and 11th of May last. The facts and
points of the arguments having been on that occasion
reported in this journal, it is not necessary now to
, state further than that George Rice. who took the name
of Trevor, had no issue at the date of the will, and that he
I has now no son, but has a dasahter. The question in the
appeal was, whether a daughter could take the estates atter
: the father's life estate, the Vice-Chancellor having decreed
• that she might. At the conclusion of the argument on the
1 lth of May, this question was put by the Lord Chancellor
to the judges, viz., supposing George Rice Trevor died, leav-
i ling no son, bat leaving one daughter, who had a son who
attained 21 )111111: the mother end son having agreed to it II
the estates, and to make a good title to a purchaser, brought

e• althea upon that agreement against the purchaser : could
they, with the concurrence of the trusties of the will, make
a good title to the estates ?—Lord Chief Justice Wilde now
de:leered the 111111.111Mullf opinion of the juJges in the affirms-
tire of the question. The further consideration of the case
was then adjourned.

EQUITY COURTS.
Bebre the Vice-Chtutoettor of England.
HIM/WM V. HAY.—CON4TILUCTION OP A WILL.—
PERIOD OP VESTING.—A question arose in this Cale upon
the construction of the will of George Hay, who gave all his
worldly substance and effects that be should die possessed of
to his loving and much-beloved wife, Jane Hay, who had
borne him fourteen children, for her own we doling her
widowhood, Laid after her decease the property to be equally
divided amongst his "immediate" aurvinng children. The
1 testator died, leaving seven children, one of whom died
afterwards in the lifetime of the widow. The bill was filed
by the representatives of the deceased child, who claimed to
be entitled to a share in the property, on the ground that,
by the words of the will, the testator meant those children
to take who were alive at his death, and that " immediate" re-
ferred to that period.—Mr. Stuart and Mr. Stevens appeared
for the plaintiff. Mr. J. Parker and Mr. Nalder, en the
other side, conteirled that the 'words " immediate surviving
children " meant the children alive at the death of the testa-
tor's widow, and that the deceased child was, then( fore, cz.
eluded.—The Vice-Chancellor said, he considered there was
no doubt respecting the intention of the testator, and that
the word " immydiate " referred to the death of the testator
himself, and not the death of his widow ; consequently, the
representative of the deceased child would be entitled to a
shwa of the property.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Before Mr. Justice Erie and a Special Jury.
WYLDE v. 'LW:MRS.—RAILWAY PLANS.--Sir F. Thesiger,
Q.C., Mr. Serj. Shoe, and Mr. Ball, appeared fur the plain.
tiff, who nought to recover the sum of 5131., as the price of
engraving for the defendant, who is an engineer, the plates
for the plans and sections of the London, Ascot, and Staines
Railway. For the plaintiff, witnesses were called, of whom
several were cross-examined, with a view to show that the
price charged wu exorbitant. It appeared, however, that at
the time when the work was done, there was a great demand
for persona capable of doing it, and that, in consequence,
large prices were paid to engravers and persons capable of
doing the work. The question of the defendant's liability
depended upon a letter which had been written by Mr.
Burnaby, the defendant's assistant, and admitted to be
his agent for the bw.iness for which this action wu brought,
after he had called on the plaintiff, and spoken to him about the
plans of the London and Ascot, and other railways, and in
compliance with the plaintiff's request that he would write
to him. The letter, which was dated October 17, 1815, was
in these words : " Sir, I hereby engage you to engrave for
Mr. Samuel Hughes, 130 plates for plans and same for sec-
tions ; each plate to be 2 ft. 3 in. in length, and 1 ft. 9 in. in
breadth. Trusting you will be able to arrange to the satis-
faction of Mr. Hughes, I remain, &e., E. BURNABY, assistant
to Mr. Hughes."—Mr. Crowder, Q.C., Mr. Butt, Q.C., and
Mr. Baldwin, for the defendant, contendtd, that the value of
the work did not exceed 2201., and called witnesses to show
that the letter above bet forth did not apply at all to the
Ascot and Staines Railway, but was confined to the Cork
and Waterford, Reat!ing and iteigate,Tring and Basingstoke,
awl Carlow and Wexford Railways.—Sir F. Thesiger having
replied, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, 3501.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Nm Palm—Before Sir F. Follett, C. 8., see &Special Jury.
POTEZ V. GLOSSOP.—FIIACDS IN BILL DISCOVNTING.—
This ease, which was part heard on Saturday, as apparel
in this journal yesterday, was resumed at the sitting of the
court. By the defendant's evidence, it appeared that the
bill of exchange for 2501., dated the 28th of August, 1846,
was en the hands of Mr. Lawrence Levi'm brother, an attor-
ney, who took proceedings against the Rev. Mr. Glossop, on
the Bth of January last, for the recovery of it ; but that pro-
ceeding was discontinued, as that bill was taken up by Gad-
delve. The other bill, also for 2501., dated the 29th August,
and consequently payable on the Ist of January last, passed,
on the 29th December, into the hinds of Mr. Alexander
Jones, father of the plaintiff's attorney, and was also handed
up to Gadderer, who paid it at Mr. Lawrence Levi's, in Fetters
lane, about a week after it became due. Gaddereron that occa-
sion stated that the bill was the property of /dies Potez, the
plaintiff, although her name did not appear upon it, and
that she hod given the money to pay it. Both the bills had,
it appeared, been taken to Cockburn bank by James Gardi-
ner after he got them from the defendant, but they were not
di:counted there, on the ground that at Cockburn 's they
were not in the habit of cashing bills at four months. Gar-
diner then took them to a Lill-broker named Thomas Hol-
brook Coyle, who undertook to get them discounted. Coyle,
whose acquaintance with Gardner commenced while both
were confined in the Queen's Bench prison, took
the bills to Gadderer, who was an inmate of the
plaintiff's lodging-house in Craven-street. Gardiner and
Gadderer were then unknown to each other, but some
arrangement was effected as to the bills, for, on the 12th of
September, Coyle paid Gardiner a hundred pound note as
part of the discount. That, according to Oardiner's state-
ment, was the only sum ever paid him on account of the
bills, and it was admitted on all bands that the unfortunate
defendant had never received one farthing of it. It was
suggested that the degree of intimacy which subsisted be-
tween the plaintiff and Gadderer, railed the presumption
that she had lent her name to the transaction, and that she
could not be supposed to be altogether ignorant of
its real character. 'to rebut the defence set up, it was proved
that the plaintiff, upon the 11th of September last, sold stock
to the amount of upwards of 3001., which she received at
Glins bank on that day. The money was paid in small
mist and two 1001. notes which were traced to Gardiner's
re, and one of which was identified as the very note
d°:ereived en
from Coyle on the 12th September.—Mr.
Oeekkarn, Q.C., who replied for the defendant, severely
aleinheitell arm the fact that Gadderer, who was in
coast, wan win abed by the plaintiff. He called upon the
j= ragnember that the persons connected with that trans-
a were old bands, trading, like Mr. Gardiner, under
falee names, such as Rutter and Co., conversant with
everything relating to the trade of bill stealing, and who
I took good care to get their victims into their meshes without
affording the possibility of escape. They well knew the
niceties of the laws respecting bills of exchange, and there-
fore they laid their plena, by which they could show, when-
ever it became necessary, that some consideration had passed
for those bills. The learned gentleman designated the whole
transaction • piece of perfect swindling, and hoped the jury,
by their verdict, would strike a fatal blow at such practices.
—Mr. Chambers, Q.C., having replied upon the whole case,
The Lard Chief Baron, in summing up, said it was
very mach to be regretted that a clergyman of the
Church of England should have been placed in
the unfortunate position in which the defendant was.
The questions for the consideration of the jury were, whether
the plaintiff was entitled to recover anything, and to what
extent, upon those two bills of exchange. The law upon the
abject, which was recently laid' down an the case of " Bailey
s.Bedwell," (13 Meet. and Welsby), was, that proof of fraud
in obtaining • bill of exchange threw upon the plaintiff the
necessity of showing what consideration he had really given
ter it. 'There was distinct evidence that 1001. had been paid
by So ylaintiff as discount for those bills, and that it had
eetdhed Gardiner's hands on account of them. For that sum
Iniplaintiff was =Wed to a verdict, but there was no evidence
In dhow that the d 1001. note had been paid by
line Potts to s stttsiieeation for those bills, although it ap-
p od to bays loos rewired by her as part of the proceed;
IMO orb of h sleek on the 11th of September, and to
how moot elteewards into Gardiner's hands.—The fore-
' man of the jury, after a short interval, inquired whether
they were bound to find for the plaintiff for 1001., if they
believed that sum was paid on account of the bills ?
The Lord Chief Baron replied in the affirmative, and inti-
mated that the defendant's pleas were not ‘iroved.—The
foreman, after the lapse of a few minutes, during which he
consulted with his brother jurors, said : We believe that the
1001. was paid as consideration for either of these bills,
and we further believe that Miss Votes, the plaintiff, never
was the holder of them.
The Lora Chief Baron—The verdict must be your's, not
mine, but you should determine according to the evidence
before you. I tell you, that if Gadderer himself had been
the plaintiff, and that he had paid Gardiner, as agent to the
defendant, 1001., as consideration for the bills, he would be
entitled to a verdict for that sum. The plaintiff is, in paint
of law, entitled to your verdict.
Associate—Well,: gentlemen, have you agreed on your
verdict ?—Foremen: We are obliged. We must find for the
plaintiff for 1001.
The verdict was accordingly entered.
With this case these sittings terminated. The court will
sit this morning at 10 o'clock, at Guildhall.

COURT. OF REVIEW.
Ex PASTE KRNRICK, RE LEWIS.—CONSTRUCTITE TRUST
NOT BARRED RI STATUTE OP LIMITATIONS.—This was
an appeal from the reject ion of a proof. The trustees of the
bankrupt's marriage settlement had advanced him part of
the trust monies on notes of band, dated more than twenty
years since. The surviving trustee tendered a proof on the
notes, which was objected to on the ground that the de-
mand was barred by the statute of limitations.—Mr. Swan-
ston and Mr. Eddie, in support of the appeal, contended
that, as the monies were trust monies, the statute did not
apply.—Mr. Bacon and Mr. Allnutt appeared for the as-
signees. The notes were produced in court, and described the
partial to whom they were given as trustees of the settle-
ment. It appeared that this point had not been taken
before the ommisaioner.—The Chief Judge said that, as
the husband took the money with notice of the •trost, he
became a trustee, and the statute of limitations did not
apply. His Honour did not consider himself as differing
from the learned commissioner, whose attention had not
been drawn to the circumstance on which the case turned.
It happened too often that cases came, by way of appeal,
before the Court of Review, either on new evitence, or on'
points not suggested before the commissioners.
"Ili PASTE TAOART RE hi ACKIE.—EQUITABLR MORT-
ason.—TENANTS' FIXTURES.—The bankrupt was lessee of
a house in Southampton•row, Bloomsbury, and borrowed
MI. of the petitioner on the security of a deposit of the this
deeds, with a written memorandum. The only question was,
whether the household and trade fixtures, which were in the
house at the time of the deposit, though not when the lease
was granted, were comprised in the security. The property
had been 'old, subject to the decision of the court on the
rights of the parties. The question, though often discussed
before the Court of Review as originally constituted, had never
been decided by the present Chiefjudge.—Mr. Hardy, in
support of the petition, cited "Ex parte Broadwood"
(1 Montague, Deacon, and De Oex. 631), and " EE parte
Bentley" (2 ibid. 591) ; and Mr. Bacon, milieus curie,
referred to Es parte Reyna!" (2 its. 443).—Mr. Russell, for
the assignees, contended that nothing could be comprised in
the security which was not comprised in the deposited deeds;
and that, consequently, the mortgage* had no claim upon
the proceeds of the (Worm The Chief Judge said he would
make the order aocording to the prayer of the petition, upon

the authority of the casts cited, without by any means say-
ing that if the point were new his honour would have ao
decided it.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
Wore Mr. Coeueirsioncr Phillips.
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE —IN RE Z.SMITH.—
This insolvent war °Hared by Mr. Cooke, for Maria Caine*,
for damages awarded in an action for breach of promise of
marriage. The action wee brought in March, IS4 5, at I
Taunton. The verdict was for 1001., and the costs were
1211. 173. 1001 had been paid in liquidation of the costa,
but the plaintiff bad received nothing. A great deal of
evidence was adduced on both sides, but the case was ulti-
mately adjourned, in an incomplete state, to a future day,
when other complaints will be urged against the insolvent.