The Express.
London, England, 1865-04-24 00:00:00

ACCIDENT.

Mr. Buddlesion said this was an action tried at Worces-
ter, before Mr. Baron Pigott, when the jury returned a ver-
diet for the plaintiff, damages 6,0001. He moved for a rule
I for a new trial, on the ground that the damages were saes-
sive. It was an action for compeesation, in consequence
of injuries received is an accident that occurred at the
Krumliu Viaduct. The plaintiff was • married man, with
I three children. He was about 42 years of age, and carried
I on the business of • British wine merchant at Worcester.
On the Zird August last he was a third class passenger in
an excursion train from Worcester to the Brnmlio Viaduct
and brick for 2a. 6d., with others of the earns religious per-
suasion, which was ran into by another train. The plain-
tiff wee thrown violently forward, bat he did
sot appear then behave suffered more than • slight injury
to the foot, and he was able to render assistance to others.
He rpturned to Worcester and walked from the station to
his house. Subsequently he felt considerable inconvenience,
which was no doubt to be attributed to the accident. Three
or four days after the accident he was able to write a long
latter or account of the accident, which was published in the
local paper. and after thatbis illness came on, and be bad
to go into the country. When in the witness-box there
could be Do doubt his hysteria] appearance created an im-
pression in hie favour. The injury was thought to be •
leison of the spine or brain, manifesting half in failure of
memory, debility, ales in the head and back, and the anal
description of those mysterious injuries which persons re-
ceive from railway shocks. The plaintiff's medical witnesses
did not say it was impossible for him to recover, and the
medical wittier.% for the defence attributed his suffering
to hysteria, which they confidently anticipated would he
removed within three or four months by rest and absence
from business. The plaintiffs income was only between
3.40 f. and 4001. per annum, and as he was in partnership with
hie two brothers, his busineas had not suffered, nor had his
income dimiaisb;aL

The Court said they would consult the learned judge who
tried the ease, and if he thought the damages were snags,
they would grant the rule. The damage' had been eassweed
by i special jury of the county in which the plaintiff re.
ended.

Mr. Huddleston said the eourt often interfered to prevent
aria tram 'ivies outrageous damages.
Mr. Justice Blackburn mid the court could do no more
lan eoesult the learned judge who tried the case, and upon
is report pant or refuse the rule.
Judgment deferred.
Liter in the day,
The Lord Chief Justice said the court had commlted Mr.
iron Pigott, and there would be no rule.
Rule refused.

DR THIUXIT AID ♦IOTRRR T. LORD MINOT, LP., AND

Mr. Lush, Q. 0., with whoa was Mr. Garth, saki this
was an =non tried before the Lonl Chief Justice at Guild-
hall, when a verdict was taken for the plaintiffs for 20.0001.,
subject to certain points reserved. The lien= was to
recover the amount agreed upon between the par-
ties in obtaining • oormessioe foe the establishment of
joint stock bank in Austria under limited liability.
The Lord Chief Justice said he understood the points
ware to be disclosed oa e special case. The facts were =-
disputed, and as the we rested on the eowstrostion of nu-
merous documents, It would be better to take • rule, on
the tandentending that it should be Muted into a special
ease.
Mr. Lush said be thought that would be the best way of
mei= it.
Mule acoordingly.

Mobs* the kit of the Best four days of term s cumber
of otJusr motions wen disposed of, bat they were of so
goosed public Waist

qousT OF EXCHEQUER.—Arse. 22.
Sillily in Banco.—(Before Lord Chief Baron Poßock, and
Barons Martin, Bramwell, and Channel.)
Mr. Harding' Giffard having attained the dignity of
Queen's counsel, was this romans willed within the bat.
BOUILLON AND WDa v. VALIUTIM
This was an action to newer shares, coupon. sad piens
of paper entitling the bearer to aortae& shares in various
public companies in the empire of Feeney. 7t was tried as
an undefeoded cause before Mr. Baron Martin at the bet
dttlags atter term at Westminster, whoa ••verdict was
returned for the plaintiff.
Mr. fier}sent Simon now moved upon affidavits for •
✓ule to show comae why the Judgment should Dot beset
aide and a new trial greeted. Both parties were natives
el France. The defendant was • lady who had lived with
a person gamed Danflon In that country as his wife for a
period of thirty years. This relationship not being looked
upon so severely in France as io this country she was
received by Danfloo's family and by society, and treated
In all reepeets as his wife. Having lent Devotion the for-
tes* she powered he traded upon it, and, amassing con.
Megiddo wealth, retired from business shortly before his
death. He wished to marry the defendant and
plies her in the position of a respectable wows°,
and the banns were published twice in accordance
with the law of France. Unfortunately, being seised
with ilWale, be, died on the day appointed for the
marriage. Previously to his death he made two wills,
under which she claimed • port of the property in question.
He also presented her with coupons, certificates of shares,
and notes of the banks of Frame, amounting in value to
100,000 fraam. The defendant held also shares in various
coompaniss which she had purchased with her own money.
The female plaintiff was the enteral daughter of the de-
ceased, and she claimed by virtue of the law of France,
which entitled an illegitimate daughter to a portion of the
father's property. After considerable litigation In the
French courts, a settlement of all matters in difference was
arrived at by the parties, and according to it the defendant
remained In possession of • considerable sum. Having ex-
perienced much persecution from the demand't family, the
defendant left France openly, and came to London. The
plaintiffs punned her, and having instituted an action againet
her, procubed her arrest on the ground that she was about
to leave the enunto, although she intended to settle here.
After the arrest, the plaintiffs' attorney, In company with
another person, went to the house where eh* had been
lodging, and pretending to the landlady, who're' a foreigner,
that they had come to arrest her hushand, she, from fright
and tenor, allowed them to take possession of • bag be-
longing to the defeating, containing 40,000 frame, shares,
coupons, and French banknotes. The defendant, who
still remained in prison, employed an attorney to
ken release and defend the two actions the ntirscchuZ
brought, giving him 2801. of her own money forlai that pur-
pries. Instead of doing so, however, he allowed them to be
, entered as undefended action, and in each • verdict was
entered against her.
Mr. Baron Martin said the evidence at the trial went to
show • shocking cue of fraud on her part.
Mr. Berjeant Simon said that defendant bad no idea the
trial was coming on, and, if she had, she could not have at.
tended, es she was In Whitecroawstreet Prison; conse-
quently the plaintiffs had it all their own way.
Mr. Baron Bramwell—Do the affidavits show that if you
were let in to defend the action you have a reasonable
ground oHelefeen?
Mr. Serjeent Simon—She swears that she has • good de-
fence upon the merits.
Mr. Baron Martin said it pima through his mind at the
trial whether the defendant ought not to be charged with
felony.
Mr. Serjeant Simon said the attorney to whom the de-
fendant gave the 2801. had become a bankrupt, Lod pro-
bably there might be ulterior proceedings as regarded hiss.
The female plaintiff was the natural daughter of the de-
awed by another woman than the defendant, but he
entirely neglected her until the defendant interfered in her
behalf. The defendant not only induced the deceased to
allow her to live in his house and adopt her, but got her
married to the male plaintiff, which was considered an
eligible match. So that altogether she had received • very
bad return for her kindness. The leaned counsel said
another complaint of the defendant was that her solicitor
had played into the hands of the attorney for the plaintiff.
The Lord Chief Baron—Thatis a metaphorical expression.
Mr. Serjeaot Simon—That is the conclusion I arrive at
from reading the affidavits.
Bide granted.