The Express.
London, England, 1853-02-25 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 25, 1853.

Wan iinteiligence.

HOUSE OF LOADS-YESTERDAY.
Amass

GAXX/MLL O. Tall

Or WORKS AND 1111

LO*D-ADTOCATI OT SCOTIAN°. ---
In this sue, which involves an important claim made by
the crown to the salmon fisheries on the coast of Scotland,
and the Lams and arguments in which were very fully re-
ported in the Daily New of Wednesday, the homing was
concluded.

'Wait lordships reserved thsis judgment.
Emma■ Tin Maws co Tsui ZOLIA
IS AB HINLAND.—TAT TAVISTIT ACT.

This was an application for the appointment of •
new trusts*, under the following circumstances :—Mrs.
Henliuld, on her marriage with Mr. Henland, executed a
settlement, by which she conveyed her freehold property
to trustees for certain uses. In this settlement there was a
power to appoint new trustees. Another settlement was
also executed, by which she assigned her personal property
to trustees, and covenanted to convey the proceeds of her
former husband's property to the trustees as the trusts of
the settlement. She also conveyed the dower to which she
was entitled on the estate of her first husband. In this
second settlement there was power to appoint new trustees ;
ender which a new trustee had been appointed; and the
application now was for the appointment of • new trustee
as to both settlements. . .

llis Honour said, either the parties had the power of ap-
pointing a trustee or they had not. If they bad the power,
they need not apply to the court; but if they had not the
power, and did apply to the court, they must produce an
affidavit as to the fitness of the person to be appointed, and
the written consent of the proposed trustee. Hs was of
opinion the court had power to grant the application, and
upon production of the necessary affidavits to the registrar
the trustee might be appointed.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—YESTERDAY.
Verrucas AT Nua Puts w Luwo!.—lftroas Law CuisuLL

Coausow loam.
PARSONS v. MILIWILN.—CONTRACT.

This wee an action for wore done and materials provided.
The defendant pleaded not indebted and a set-off ; upon
these pleas issues were joined.
The plaintiff was en engineer, and the defendant an
iron-master. The amount sought to be recovered was
921. 16e. The defendant, whose factory is in the country,
was employed to make iron roofs for a sugar factory,
erected by the order of Messrs. Owen and Co., and be
made an agreement with the plaintiff to test the roofs at
21. 10s. a ton. When the roofs came up to London, it was
found they did not fit the building ; the defendant there-
upon came to London, desired the plaintiff to do all that
was necessary to set the mistake right, and to charge
" time work all round." The plaintiff had done so, and
hence the present claim. The sot-off pleaded wet a bill of
exchange, which Mr. Milburn had discounted for Pomona,
and which had been dishonoured. As, however, Mr. Mil-
burn had never given Mr. Parsons any notice of the dis-
honour of this bill, he bad made the loss of the bill his own.
The defence to the action was, first, that a great part of
the work was done for the builder of the factory, who had
since that time become bankrupt; secondly, that the agree-
, ment to do the work, not by um*, but per ton, hrd sever
been abrogated; thirdly, that portions of the plaintiff's
demand were overcharges. These grounds of defence, if
established, would reduce the claim to less than the 4W.
which the defendant had paid for the bill of exchange dis-
counted for the plaintiff, which had sines been dishonoured.
Mr. Bramwell, in reply, offered to waive the point of law
in respect of the bill of exchange, and, if the defendant
would hand over the bill, to allow him 401. for it. The
plaintiff, however, only made this offer upon this condition,
that the fall amount of his charges should be admitted.
Mr. Gray, for the plaintiff, &mentor!.
Lord Campbell thought the evidence showed the plaintiff
was entitled to charge as he had done. The proposed set-
tlement would therefore he thought be perfectly just.
Verdict for the plaintiff accordingly.
This was the last day of the sittings is Leadmi.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-YESTERDAY.
Smarm AT Nor Pans no LORDON.—Bayosa W. Janus TA L.

FOORD 4WD • 61111,11T1IST.
B 0/111112118 OP TIEN COURT,

Mr. Instil* Talfourd said be understood it would be ex-
tremely inconvenient if the court sat on Saturday, as busi-
ness es several of the circuits would require the attention
of counsel on that day. This being so, he would not take
any fresh case on Saturday, but if any case should be un-
finished on Friday, he would then sit on Saturday to
Web it.

FURNIWIML IP.

Mr. Dowdeswell, on behalf of the defendant, said that
this erica was brought to mover damages, in cooseqaence
of en Maoism having published a statement imputing an
asses to time plaintiff, for which it now appeared there
was so hmeadation whatever, and this being so, the defend-
ant was prepared to apologise, and to consent to a verdict
for the plaintiff for 601.—Verdict accordingly.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—YznaRDAy.
Omani .4.? Net Passer—Bsrasi smi LOAD Call, Bum am
firma. luams.
01.11/1 P. LIIIIII.—ACTION UPON • FIR. POLICY.

fitiaWilaaa action toreco---Te; tie;atet Vied:;por • a
polity of insurance effected with the West of England In-
musses Company by the plaintiff, a eabiaebniaker, at
Hull.

It appeared that the plaintiff insured his workshops and
stock for 8001., tend the timber and stock in an adjoinng
yard at 2001. There wen two stoves on the premises, which
consisted of two doors. On the second floor, which was used
as a turning room, there was also a fire-plate. On the 26th
April last the plaintiff had a small engine, about this sin of
a model, put into the Are-place of this room for the purpose
of ascertaining whether it would work a lathe which he used
for turning bedposts. An Imperilment was made with this
machine on the 28th of April, and again on the 3rd
of May, when it was found that it was not of enMcient
power to two the lathe, and the plaintiff (who had bargained
to return it if it did not answer) was about to send it back
to the person of whom he bad obtained it. The ilue from
a small furnace Stied up for the occasion, was the chimney
which had existed before, and there was awned escape pipe
for the steam, made of iron, and passing oat through a
wall nine inches thick. The fire for the purpose of the ex-
periment was lighted about half-past 7 o'clock on the 3rd of
May last, and was entirely extinguished about half-past one
o'clock on that day, one of the witnesses stating that the
firs was " dead out " at that time. On the night of the
3rd May a fire broke out on the premises. and destroyed a
considerable portion of the workshop and the stock, amount-
ing in value to about 1,4001. The insurance•offlee did not
dispute the amount of damage, but the defence was that
the plaintiff had no right to place the apparatus
in question on his premises without giving no-
tice to the agent of the in/arena-odic. and
that the tire was caused by it. That the risk was
greatly increased, and the insurance rendered doubly ha-
miaow. This issue being on the defendants, they cow•
mewed by proving their Cale, endeavouring to make out
' that the baud was increased, and that the fire was caused
by the machine which had been used on the premises on
the 3rd May.
Mr. Watson then addressed the jury for the plaintiff,
and ridiculed the idea of the little apparatus which was in
court before the jury beiag called a steam engine by the
defendants to suit their purposes ; it had scarcely the power
of a donkey—and had merely been introduced on the
plaintiff's premises for the purpose of experiment. He had
a perfect right to use it without forfeiting his policy; and
if he had determined to retain it on his premises and to
have used it permanently, he would have given notice to
defendants' agent as he would have been bound to do. He
should clearly show that it had had nothing to do with
the Are, and that the part of the premium least burnt was
that in which the apparatus had been placed. It had not
been is any way fixed, but merely put upon some brick
work for the purposes of the experiment, and it was a most
shabby proceeding on the part of the defendants to resist
such a claim honestly and fairly made. They might in
future confine their operations to the' West of Eogland"—
the people in the north would have nothing to do with
them.

Several witnesses were then called to prove the plaintiff's
ease.

Sir F. Thesifer, in reply, contended that the defendants
were fully jusufled in the course they had adopted. They
would not have done their duty either to themselves or the
public if they had not resisted the claim.
The learned judge, in leaving the cue to the jury, said
the only question was whether the plaintiff had a eight to
place the little machine on his premises, without risking his
policy, for the purpose of experiment and temporary use,
and not whether the use of it had caused the fire. He could
not sco anything in the policy, the conditions of which,
however, were somewhat unusuul, which would prevent his
trying that or any other experiment not attended with un-
usual risk.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount
claimed and 301. for interest ; and, id reply to a question
from the learned judge, said they were of opinion that the
apparatus was used by the plaintiff merely fur the purpose
of experiment.
Leave was given to the defendants to move to enter a
' nousuit if the court above should be of opinion that upon
the latter finding of the jury the policy was vitiated.
Mr. Watson then tendered a bill of exceptions on the part
of the plaintiff.

SHERIFFS' COURT.—YESTERDAT.
13crou iii. W. BVCCIICLL. WPM UND111441111.1117.
UTDI V. Bmccows.—BusAca or Pawns' OP

M►aauoa.

This was a writ of inquiry to assess the damages in an
action brought in the Court of Exchequer, to recover for
breach of promise of marriage. The defendant had suf-
fered judgment to go by default, admitting thereby the
making and the breach of the promise. The damages were
laid in the declaration at 2,0001.
Mr. Atkinson said the plaintiff wu Bertha Clara Hyde,
and the defendant was William Bleneowe, and the present
proceeding was a writ of inquiry for the assessment of the
damages in an action for the breach of a promise of marriage
made by the latter to the former. The plaintiff was the
daughter of a respectable tradesman at Brackley, in North-
amptonshire, a builder and mason, and the defendant wu
the son of a highly respectable brewer of the same place.
They went to school together, end were brought up in early
life in habits of friendship, which eventually ripened into
love. After the plaintiff left school her father thought it
his duty to have her taught some trade, and so seat her to
Luton, in Bedfordshim, there to learn the straw bonnet
business. She remained there some time, leading an indus-
trious, honest, virtuous life, but returned home to her
father when she had learnt the business. After her return
hoses the defendant paid her some attentions, and the

forma friendship was renewed with the approval and sanc-
tion of the girls father. In 1847 she left Brickley for
London, whither the defendant followed her. She
was at that time seventeen years of age. The
defendant was, perhaps, a little older, and she
yielded to his persuasions and surrendered herself to
him, the result of which was a miscarriage some four or
fin months afterwards. The defendant admitted, and
never denied, that this result was attributable to him ; and
nothing was ever imputed with regard to other men. The
' defendant admitted the injury he had done to the plaintiff,
and then gave as solemn a promise of marriage in writing to
the father as any man possibly could. Believing in what
he said, and that reparation would be made for what had
taken place, in the fulfilment of the promise, the father
allowed the visits to go on as before, but refused to permit
midnight visits ; and from that time, what had been
ardour turned to coolness ; and, in the summer
of the last year, he was married to another person.
The learned counsel then called upon the jury as tradesmen
themselves, and as fathers and brothers' to give ample
damages to the injured and much wronged daughter of a
respectable men, and then read the following among other
'letters, which bore no data, but the postmarks :
Dearest, loveliest, and most beloved Clara,—l embrace
the opportunity of communicating with you. I hope you
have not thought me long in writing to you, as I have been
very much engaged, and, dearest, you remember that you
promised to write twice to my once, but, however, dearest
Clan, I have not forgotten, for far be it from me, to forget
the musical tones of your voice, the sparkling radiancy of
your eyes, and if I am not deceived the devotion
of your heart. Forget you Clan? No! never,
while memory holds a seat in my mind. Never a day
passes but I think of my beautiful Clara. What would I
give for one endearing kiss from your sweet lips, or one
affectionate smile front your darling countenance ? When
are you coming ? Come, come dearest, come quickly. I
cannot get away, or I would come and see you. Send
I me word in your next how you are looking; whether you
have any more colour, or not so much; whether you are
stout or thin—everything connected with you. I feel, of
course, a deep interest in you. Do you ever think of me ?
Clara, what are you going to do with yourself on Good
Friday ? Are you going out with some young man ? Think
of me in the afternoon. I shall be playing at cricket in the
old spot; you know where. But I must say farewell, and
continue to be your devoted and affectionate, though dis-
tant. WILLIAM —. Brackley, Monday evening. Miss
Hyde, 41, Dempsey-street, Commercial-road. London."'
The date of this was Nov.lB, 1846.

The next letter, the learned counsel observed, wee very
different in its tone, but in some parts there was a deep
significance of meaning. It was this:
" Braeltley, July.
" Mime Clara Hyde,—Madam,—l was rather surprised
after your behaviour on Friday last, and your expressions
at parting from me, to receive your note this morning. You
ask me to est you, in order to have a friendly parting—that
would be ridiculous. If we are to part, let us never have
another interview. You know the cause of our quarrel ; is
that cause to be removed ? Will you grant me my request
—the only request I ever asked of you ? Consider of it,
if you will. Though I have been trifled with and insulted,
I will see you again, and confidence will be restored be-
tween us. But now I shall y—no, not the
least madden" till then. If you have made up your mind
to refuse, tell me so plainly, and then I say adieu. I have
explained my reasons for all this before—think of them.
My intentions are pure, virtuous, and honourable. Please
send me a straightforward answer to-day or to-morrow
morning, and you shall hear from me again.—I am, madam,
yours respectfully, tt B.
" Mime Hyde."
It was soon after this letter was written that the grievous
wrong was done which resulted in the plaintiff's miscar-
riage. The next letter he would road was as follows:

" Brickley, Sunday.
" My ever dearest Clara,—Thank you a thousand times
for your kind note. I waited some time in the road expect-
ing you would come to the front window and throw it up.
Bless you, my love, I should have loved to have had half-
an-hour's chat with you my first and only love. I brought
a light ladder with me for you to pt out of the window
with, and then we could have had a sweet walk, for if we
cannot see each other by fair means it is nothing but fair that
we should resort to stratagem. The very sight of you, my
blessed Clara, has revived those happy feelings in
my heart which we need to feel in each other's
society. Clara, dearest, loveliest Clara, I love you
still. I have some things that an to forgive in you, you
have some to forgive in me. Then let us forgive and forget,
for it is not a little that can quench my love. I hope, I
think, it is the same with you, dearest. Yes, I'll love thee
ever dearly ; and Clara, you may believe me when 1 tell
you I love no one else in the world. Will you try and as*
me to-morrow morning, just as the clock strikes eleven, at
Gee's gates, that look into the back way ? You can just
walk up your garden and turn to the right, and you are
there. Come if you can, and I will be therejust at 11.
' Clara, love, I would give the world to spend this afternoon
with you. You must continue to see me in some way, even
if you get out of window. I will come to-morrow evening,
soon after 10, and if you can get out the heat way do,
dearest. Wishing you every blessing, and offering you
my heart's best love, I am, my dearest and lovliest Clara
your devoted and affectionate WILLIAIL—PIeue burn thii
scribble."

After the reeding of these letters witnesses were heard,
who bore out the opening statement of counsel. Mr. tier-
jeant Wilkins then addressed the jury, who, after a few
minutes consultation, 'messed the damages at 1001.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.-VEVMDAY.

Ilsroaa Ms.

IN TOO MATTER e 1 JOHN LLOYD, TOO ELDNII..
JUDOMINT.
This ease, before reported, was concluded. The insolvent,
who had been a bill discounter, was opposed by Mr. Parr►,
for the Bristol Infirmary, and Mr.T.Chitty, for Mr.Thoreas
Bisgood, an attorney, and Mr. Macrae represented a Mr.
But For the insolvent, Mr. Cooke, Mr. Dowse, and Mr.
Sargood appeared.
The present occasion was confined to the arguments of
counsel and the judgment of the court.
Mr. Parry contended that the insolvent had acted in au im-
proper manner towards the Bristol infirmary,in getting money
from Rees, which ought to have ton* to the directors of the
charity. He had declined to call Hem, as It was intended to
indict the parties. He also contended that there bad been
a fraudulent disposition of property, by assignment and
otherwise, to his wife and daughter, which called upon
the court to pronounce a lengthened judgment.
I Mr. Thompson Chitty submitted that he bad established
a clear case of a vexatious defence at the instance of Mr.
Bisgood, and farther, that the assignments of property men-
tioned were in fraud of the creditors.

his olMrleat. . Meru declined to prom • judgment on the pert of

Kr. Clemisimieser Phillips intimated that a vexatious de-
fame en timp pin of Kr. Biagood had been proved.
Kr. Cock oeeeesded to address the court at some length,
eassuiding that no case had been established against the in-
solvent, who had already been three months in prison. As
to the complaint of Mr. Bisgood, who had been the insol-
vent's attorney, there wu no vexatious defence, as his bill
of costs had not been taxed.

Commissioner Phillips gave judgment. He said
three points of opposition had been sought to be made
against the insolvent. In his opinion, the case of fraud
alleged oa the part of the Bristol Infirmary had not been
made out. The only witness (Rees) had not been called,
end the parties had no doubt acted prudently, if it was in-
tended to prefer an indictment. As to the vexatious de-
fence on the complaint of Mr. Bisgood, be thought that the
remark of Mr. Cooke got rid of that, as the bill has not been
taxed. With regard to the assignments made to the in-
solvent's family, there was one circumstance which showed
that they were not fraudulent, namely, that they were not
made in contemplation of insolvency. Under all the cir-
cumstances, he thought the insolvent was entitled to de dis-
charged.
Mr. Chitty claimed to be heard, as he had been stopped
by the court, which was allowed, and he showed that the
insolvent having taken out a summons to tax the bill ought
to have gone on with it.
Mr. Commissioner Phillips was of opinion that the cir-
cumstance altered the can. It was thought a vexatious
defence. As the insolvent had been three months in cus-
tody, a judgment of four calendar months from the vesting
order at the suit of Mr. Bisgood, which would keep him a
month longer, would answer the justice of the case.
Judgment accordingly.
IN RI JOHN G2oltol CH4DDOCK.--JVDOMENT.

This insolvent, a printeeller in liollyweLletreet, appeared
for judgment.
Mr. Sturgeon appoint! for Mr. Noble, a pianoforte
maker, from whom the insolvent had hired a piano and
sold it.

Mr. Commissioner Phillips held it to be a frond, and pro-
nounesd a judgment of six months from the vesting order
at the suit of Mr. Noble.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.-Ni
CZOWII COURT.-El,Ollll CPU, JUNICS ISITIII.
CHARON OP MCILDIR AT DAVINTMT.

r, FED. 24.

Mary Ann GsbUna, aged 28, was charged with the wilful
murder of her illegitimate son, about 10 years of age.
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Burton appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr. O'Brien for the defence.

The ease, though it occupied a considerable time, may be
shortly described. The parties lived is a court at Daven-
try, and the boy appears to have been of a somewhat per-
verse disposition. Oa the 3rd of September, at Sin the
evening, the mother and her sister gave an alarm in the
court, and neighbours went in. One of them was asked
to go ups...les to see to the boy. Ile went, and found him
in bed, deed, a ragged silk handkerchief being tied tightly
round his neck. 'The boy was described by his mother
to have misbehaved himself that day, and to have
been sent to bed at five o'clock as a punishment. She had
also threatened him that if he were not a better boy he
should "go to gaol again." Ile replied, " I'll kill myself
asst." A post mortem examination was made by two me-
dical gentlemen of Daventry. The brain and membranes
were congested, the lungs slightly so, the heart healthy,
and the stomach aad small intestines considerably inflamed
as though some irritant poison had been taken. No direct
evidence of the presence of poison could be obtained, and
the evidence of the medical gentlemen differing materially
as to the cause of death, whether violent or natural,
The learned judge stopped the case, and directed an
acquittal.
POACHING AY CORNY.

Samuel Langky, 58, Thomas Langky, 24, John Langley,
28, Thomas Taylor, 34, Edward Miller, 32, Edmund Snow-
den, 22, Thomas Monks's, 27, William Meadows, 37, and
Joseph Longhorn, 47, were charged wi;h being oat armed

on the night of the 11th of December, in pursuit of game,
on land in the pariah of Corby.
Mr. Mellor and Mr. Maunsell appeared for the proem-
Don and Mr. O'Brien for the defence, _ _ _

Jamie Sanders, gamekeeper to the Earl of Cardigan, was
on duty on the night in question. About eight o'clock pm
from 25 to 30 men to West Svuth Wood. They had
bludgeon, nets, and net-sticks. All the prisoners were of
the party. Went up to them, and said, " You are pretty
fellows to come robbing and plundering here every night."
Tried to get a light, but could not, and they cried out,
"ll—n him, smash him." Said, "The first man that
strikes a blow, I'll drop him." They then made off, and
witness followed them out of the wood.

James Mills, an assistant, corroborated the keeper's evi-
dence.

The defence wu an alibi, but it entirely failed.
The prisoner's were all found Gesiky, , nod were sen-
tenced to twelve months' imprisonment each, with hard
labour.

THE POLICE COURTS.
BOW-STREET.
Catherine Lewis was charged before Mr. Hall with
stealing two 101. and one 61. Bank of England notes, and
two 11. notes of the Bank of Ireland, the property of Mr.
Michael Edwards, an Irish gentleman, residing at the Ta-
vistock Hotel. Covent-garden.
The prosecutor met defendant in the street on the pre-
vious night, and accompanied her to a house in Hanover-
court. While there she contrived to take the notes from
his trowsers pocket. He immediately detected the rob-
bery, but thought it prudent not to mention a word about
it to prisoner, but after they left the house walked with
her as far sa Bow-street, and on arriving opposite the
police-station, he called a constable and gave bet in
charge. The notes were subsequently found upon her.
Prosecutor said he did not wish to press the charge fur-
ther ; he was obliged to leave London that night for Ireland,
and it would be a serious inconvenience to him if the pri-
soner was sent for trial. He had got the whole of his pro-
perty back, and was perfectly neighed.
Mr. Hall at once discharged the prisoner.
William Almon, a sturdy vagrant, was charged with as-
saulting Mr. Osmond, of the Exeter Coffee-house, Strand.
About 12 o'clock the previous night, prisoner went into
complainant's house, and offered something for lisle, and
on being told by prosecutor that nothing was wanting, and
that he never made it a practice of buying of people in the
streets, requested prisoner to leave the place ; the latter, in•
steed of doing so, became very abusive; and on Mr. Os-
mond going to the door for the purpose of putting hint
oat, the prisoner broke a large square of glass, and su►se-
qucntll struck complainant a heavy blow on the nose.
Prosecutor at length got him into the street, and gave him
in charge to a police-constable. Complainant added that
the value of the square of glass was Gs.
Mr. Hall considered the charge proved, and fined priso-
ner 405., or 21 days, for the assault, and es., or 8 days, for
the damage done.

....
Eliza Noels was placed at the bar, for final examination,
charged with wounding her husband with intent to murder
him. The wheaten of the cue were detailed last
Monday.
The house surgeon of the Royal Free Hospital said the
prosecutor was now out of danger.
Mr. Tyrwhitt, after the usual caution, asked the prison*
if she wished to say anything in her defence.
She said that the prosecutor had deserted her for upwards
of four months, and he was hying with another woman.
She did not deny the charge. She was fully committed to
Newgate for trial.
It was stated that the prisoner had before stabbed the
prosecutor, with intent to murder him.