The Express.
London, England, 1848-11-08 00:00:00

victual capacities, we cannot do it tingle-handed, bat we ran do it by
means of a moiety like thle. And, gentlemen, I think we most and
will do It, for it is my intention, and I ask any one to Join who is
willing to do so, to present a =merit' to the Lad Chancellor—the
man who sits apes the woolsack—embodying in that memorial the
conduit of our Cheltenham magistrates. (Paptutosie applause.)
Now let was tell you that I consider that a man who
congeals to a bad thing is as guilty as the man who him-
self camas it; end I far one, will not stand It. I will
not allow any Aloe, if I koow it, to be prostituted, as I before
said, to political purport ; and until we really do get lonise indiffe-
rently adesisinered, I gay that we an not free men, but we are
titres. ("Meer, hear," and applaute.) That is one thing which I wish
to see amended through the instrumentality of this areociatinn. When
I speak of the bench of magistrates, I also speak of the Mikes subor-
dinate to it. lam sorry to my that It has some to my knowledge that
par men have come and complained to me of the hardships that they
have matained. I will put inform you of one Maumee, became I
think it equally doe to you and to our poor neighbour', as well es to
ourselves, tome them righted in this matter. 1 have had a poor man
come to me and say, "what am I to do under these cir-
cumstances I I am summoned adore the magistrate;because
I hare not paid my rates =di em poor and cannot. pay hat am
I to dot because here is my neighbour summoned under similar cir-
cumstances, be I keep has money, but I have wawa; and Moose he
happens to bee yellow his rates are excused—loner, best.)--r.butbe-
muse I happen to ho a conservative I am made to pty"—(Yes hear,
and applause.) Gentlemen, if I thought, if I believed that woo
not the truth, I think you know sufficient of me that I would not state
it hex; but 'know it to be the truth, and lam never ashamed to
date the truth. Well, that is not all, we are now laming to the man
important partof the business, the man who was ezeuscd Ms rates was
put on the pest register of voters, and the maw who paid them was
put off. (Cries of " Shame.")
lie Atha Attorney-General) thought his lordship would
consider that this was a most scandalous attack. He
had en affidavit of the eight rig Antes, and they
said it was utterly untrue the.: hay
ar had ever
wasp like-
rosti-
tuted their office for party purposes; id it
wise false that they had excused persona from paying
their rates on account of their politics. He had clue the
affidavit of the moistest overseer, which proved the state-
ment of Mr. Lingwood to lie untrue.
Mr. Justice Petition : la this motion against the person
who spoke ?
The Attorney-General—No, my lord, it is against the pro-
prietor and printer. He had said enough to entitle him to a
rule under ordinary circumstances. Ou the 7th of August
another number of this paper appeared, in which reference
was made to the present matter. Mr. Lisawood wrote a
letter to the editor, which appeared in that number of the
paper. It was to the following effect :
ftir,—ln consequence of several inaoeur idea in the report of the
speech made by me a' it fleeting of the Chelterisam Conservative
Aareciation, on the 24th of last m inth, which ap .eared in your paper
of last Mon ay. and re the mean rig of my obsee,tion, as applicable
W the benched magistrates, has been much misunderstood end per-
verted, I bare therefore addressed the following totter to the chair-
man of the bench of magistrates, which I will thank you to intert in
your next paper.—lt. S. 1 inueotio.
Then came the letter Mull :
Sir,—liaving read the speech which was report.' In the Clirl:ean
barn Journal of last Monday as haring been mule by me at a meeting
of the Comerrative Aerociation, held on Monday, the 24th, I find Se-
vers' great inaccuricies in thatreport, and I do rot consider urisicll
bound by what is therein re ted to have lalkn from me, but I
feel that I ought not to tie ay in assuring the bench of magistrates
thatif at that meeting I mid anything derogatory to them, my intea-
tam le notunly to withdraw it, but to apologise lee it.—it. h. Lisa-
woof.
He did not in that letter condescend to say what part of the
report was incorrect. The bench of magistrates /aurae&
through their clerk a letter. iu which it was stated that the
magistrates could not tell whether or nut he meant to state
that the report regarding the znalversation and prostitution
of the magisterial office was substiatislly correct or not.
Suberquently a statement had appeared in the paper alleging
that the report was corrci.t, which was evil, oily a planned
thing ; and it was under three eircumstemom that the magis-
trates were desirous that a court of justice should inquire
into the matter.
His lordship granted the application.

COURT OF CO MM ON
in PLEAS.—YESITEIWA Y.
Sittings NUE°.
DATIDeON V. Boll'S.—Mt:elCAL COFTRIGHT.—This ac-
tion, tried before Mr. Justice Williams, lost Guildhall sit-
tings after term, was brought for the infringement of a
copyright claimed by the plaintiff In three ••onge, which
songs, he complained, had been newly given to the
world by the defendant, in a publication called the Musical
Gen. The first of the three songs, " Said a smile to a tear,"
the music by &ahem, was originally published in the opera,
" False Alarms," in 1807 ; the second, the well known air,
" Home, sweet hcme " in the opera of " Cluj, or the Maid
of Milan ;" sod the third, "Fill, 11:1 the glass," in " Der
Freischuts ;" but the words of the songs in which, and not
in the music of them, the plaintiff claimed copyright, were
respectively written by Kelly, Howard Payne, and Some.
At the trial the plaintiff showed a prim& facie title to the
copyright in the words, by producing a registered assign-
ment of the copyright of the songs, in " Cumberland's
British Theatre,' from Cumberland to himself, that collec-
tion comprising the songs in question. But by evidence
offered for the defendant, it appeared that there was no
assignment by deed, or in writing (although there was
a sale), of the words of the first two songs, from the writers
of them to Cumberland; but as to the third song, " Fill, fill
tho glass," an assignment, attested by one witness only,
from Some to Cumberland, was proved. A verdict passed
for the defendant, leave being reserved to the plaintiff to
move to enter it for him in case (amongst other points) the
court thought there was sufficient evidence of title. Mr.
Serjeant Cnannell now moved accordingly for a new trial.
The publication complained of was before the recent copy-
right act, and thcrefcre tho question tutee" noon the
etruction of 8 Anne, c. 19, s, I, and he contended that an
author could, before the recent statute, assign his copyright
in his works without deed or writing. The court were of
opinion the plaintiff had not shown a good title as to any of
the three songs. The statute of Anne did not give copyright
In terms, but secured egsiust publication, except by the con-
sent of the proprietor. attested by two witnesses. The proper
eonstraction of that statute led irresistibly to the conclusion
that no exclusive right of publication could pass by the law
alit then stood, except by an instrument so attested.—gale
refused.
BKITH O. PRITCHAUD AND OTHEUS.—LIABILIIY OP
HIGH BAILIFF OF COUNTY COGILT.—This was an action
for trespass and false imprisonment, tried last Middlesex sit-
tings after term, before Mr. Justice Williams, brought
against William . Pritchard, high bailiff of Lambeth, and
Rosner, his under-bailiff, and William Pritchard, high bailiff
of Southwark, and Jones, his under-bailiff, when a verdict
was given—damages, 101., for the trespass, and 601. for the
against the two under-bailiffs, leave being reserved for
iu plaintiff to move to enter a verdict 'against one or either of
the Pritchards for the whole or the smeller amount. Mr.
Sergeant Byles now moved, iii pursuance or such leave re-
served. It appeared that a warrant against Thomas Smith,
the son of plaintiff, was issued by William S. Pritchard, the
high bailiff of Lambeth, to take him into custody, but he
being in the Southwark district, the warrant wee backed b
the high bailiff of Lambeth to the officer of the Southwark
County Court, according to the provisions of the County
Court Act, the two under-bailiffs taking with them this war-
rant, which was previously stomped, as required under the
provisions of the act, by the Southwark County Court officer,
and went to the plaintiff's premises in Southwark in search of
the son. There they commenced to pull down some
railings, and finally took the plaintiff himself into custody,
and before a magistrate, upon pretence of en assault upon
them in the execution of their duty. The learned counsel
now contended the high bailiff for Southwark, where these
acts were committed, was clearly liable, and also that the
high bailiff of Lambeth, whose warrant was in course of exe-
cution, although not within his own district, was also liable.
In support of this twofold proposition he relied upon the
33rd section of the County Court Act, which puts the re-
sponsibility of a high bailiff upon the same footing as that of
sheriffs with regard to the acts and default, of his officers.
But in case only one of the two high bailiffs was held re-
sponsible under that rection, he submitted such high bailiff
was likewise liable for the false imprisonment of plaintiff,
the officers acting at the time under colour of executing the
warrant, and being under the 114th section entitled to arrest
any one committing an assault upon them in the execution
of their duty.—The court was of opinion there was
no pretence for charging the high bailiff of Lam-
beth, who could not be identified with the un-
der-bailiff of Southwark, the person having charge of
executing the warrant in the Southwark district, and there-
fore refused the rule as to bins, but granted the rule applied
for spinet William Pritchard, the Southwark high bailiff.—
Rule nisi accordingly.
The days fixed by the court to hear registration appeal eases
are Monday, 13th; Thursday, 10eh; and Monday, 20th inst.
MELVILLE AND ANOTHER V. DOITCH.—ACTION AGAINST
• BERETV.—This was an action against a surety, upon
his covenant to indemnify, tried before Mr. Justice Williams
last Guildhall sittings, steer term, when a verdict was given
for the plaintiffs, damages 4471. The covenant by the defen-
dant was made with the plaintiffs, as trustees of the National
Provincial Bonk et Bideford,to indemnify that bank against
loss through the negligence or misbehaviour of Charles
Deitch Cheadley, upon their taking that young man into
their employment as clerk. It appeared that Cheadley was
sent on horseback a distance of some miles, to receive the
amount of his audit from a Mr. Vinton, a cue-
tomer of the bank, who had written requesting
some one should ha sent over for that purpose. He left
Mr. Damon's to return home at seven in the evening, with
the money in a bag, which he put into his outside greatcoat
pocket. In about half an hour he returned back to Mr.
Demoa's with his pocket torn out, and the bag of money
gone, which he could only account for by the weight of the
money having torn away the coat pocket in riding. The
jury found the money was lost by the negligence of Cbeadlcy,
and a verdict was entered in consequence for the plaintiffs.
Mr. Ccekburn, Q.C., now moved to set aside the verdict, and
for a new trial on the ground of misdirection and es against
evidence. Be submitted the young man wee not acting
within the scope of a clerk's duties in fetching this money,
end, secondly, that the money received by him never be-
came the money of the bank, it never having reached their
coffers ; thus on these two grounds there had been no in-
fringement of the terms of tke covenant. And, likewise, he
submitted the verdict was contrary to the weight of the evi-
dence in the cause.—The court were of opinion as to all the
grounds that there was no reason for disturbing the verdict
of the jury.—Rule refined.

- (
7 II

,

COURT OF EXCEIRQUER.—YUTIRDLY.
Blaine In Banco.
Outworn v. BOSSILL.—The decision upon the motion in
this cue (reported in this paper yesterday) was postponed to
enable the leaned barons to communicate with Mr. Justice
Mettle, before whom it was tried. the lordship having en.
pressed his satisfaction at the verdict, the rule moved for by
Yr. O'Malley was reflood.
ILORRRTB (CLERK) O. Tcceca (CLIIRI).—CONTRACT
BiTWEIX TWO CCILATE6.-13TATETE or FRAUDS.—MT.
Serjeant Shee moved fora rule calling on the defendant to
show cause why the nonsuit entered in this case should not
be set aside, and a new trial had, upon the ground of mis-
direction. The action, which was on • , was tried at
the tut usizes of Colchester before Mr. Justice Coltman.
The plaintiff was curate to the defendant, who was N tre,
curate of the parish of St. Botolph, Colchester. The
ration stated that before the making of the probe*, so!
thereinafter mentioned, there was and still is IV' p
t. • •