The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-26 00:00:00

with regard to the meeting of Higley and Mrs. Cutbill in
Moorgate-street.
The letter of Mr.. Cutbill mentioned in the opening of
the cue, wee identified by Mr. Imrie u in her handwriting,
and was read.

Mn.s Bell was recalled and said—Mr. Higley lived at
Providence row.

The proceedingsin Dactors' Commons and at common law
were then put in.
Mr. James said Mr. Cutbill was in attendant* to give any
information with regard to the circumstances which had
caused the delay in the proceedings for • divorce. Mr.
Higley was outlawed in the action for damages.
Mr. Cutbill was then examined, and stated that at the
time this matter occurred he instantly instituted proceedings
in the Ecclesiastical Court. The circumstances in which
he wu then placed, being without property, prevented his
taking proceedings for the divorce. Besides, the injury the
bank might have received, also induced him to pause. He
had not the means to go on till now. He had had no com-
munication with his wife since May 1843. His mother had
since then kept his house. He brought an action some
eight to ten months ago, but he had received no damages.
The date of the birth of the fourth child on 26th January,
1834 wu then admitted.
_ _

3lr. Hiogston, land agent, was acquainted with Mr.
Cutbill. His attention was drawn to the alleged misconduct
of Mrs. Cutbill, 30th April, 1843. He told her that unless
she communicated it to Mr. Cutbill, he should. She ad-
mitted that there had been some flirtation with Higley, but
it was untrue that there was any criminality. He after-
wards heard of her confession to Mr. Imne. Witness's
object was to make up a reconciliation in the first instance.
Mr. James intimatedthat nu steps would be taken by Mr.
Cutbill with regard to the bastardising of the fourth child.
The Lord Chancellor said it was the usual practice in
these cases to have the evidence printed before moving the
second reading of the bill, but this case was se clear that he
should move their lordships at once to read the bill a second
time.

The bill was then read a second time, and the evidence
ordered to be printed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—YzerzaDAy.
thymus xi BA•a.—Baroaa Ours kenos Mavis. Ma. 'verso
Casss*w., MIL JUITICI ILLIANA AND ML JUIT/CIIITAILZOOAD.
Putty V. Tai MONMOUTHSHIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.

- --- - - - ---- --.
RAILWAY ACCIDENT.

This was an action is; recevWdansages for injuries sus-
tained by the plaintiff; whilst a passenger on the defendants'
line, and it was tried before Mr. Justice Williams, at the
lastlialifel at Gloucester. The defendants paid into court
261, and pleaded that that sum was suMeient compensation
fur the plaintiff's injuries; but the jury gave • verdict for
261. above that amount. The facts were these. In August
last the plaintiff was • passenger on the defendants' line,
and on that occasion the train ran off the rails, end
the caniage in which the plaintiff was, was thrown'
against • atone wall and be was injured. The
train was going at the moderate rate of 14 or 16 miles an
hour, and the plaintiff gave no positive evidence of negli-
, hence on the part of the defendants. Unless there was
negligence, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover; and,
therefore, at the conclusion of the plaintiff's ease, it was
submitted to the judge that there was no evidence of negli-
gence to go to the jury ; but his lordship thought it best to
leave the case to the jury ; and he raised the question of
law for the consideration of the full court. In the course
of the present term, a rule was obtained to enter a nonsuit ;
and this rule now came on upon cause being shown against I
it being made absolute.
The counsel for the plaintiff contended that the accident
itself was evidence to go to the jury for negligence, and
that therefore the case was properly left to them. Another
point submitted to the court was, that the defendants
having paid money Into court, had admitted negligence,
and could not sow take advantage of the fact of the plain-1
tiff having omitted to give positive evidence upon that point.
The court intimated that the question raised was one of
considerable importance, and they must take time to con-
sider it.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—YssnanAT.
errimius SAPOO.

PSITORIOVEI 9. STlEEl.—Catty. CON.
This was an action for criminal conversation, the plaintiff
being a merchant at Vienna, and the defendant an English
baronet.

Mr. Willes moved for a role to vary and modify the
order made by Mr. Baron Allinson with reference to the se-
curity for casts. The facts would not be disputed, u the
plaintiff had letters from the defendant to his wife, speaking
of the child which she wu about to bear as his, and dis-
closing other circumstances which could leave no doubt as
to the guilt of the parties. The muter had taxed the hypo-
thecated costa at 4001., and called on the plaintiff to find
two securities, but not being a British subject, and being a
stranger is England, he could only get one security, namely
Mr. Bola, the well-known professor of music. Re now
submitted, that if the order was not so varied as to give a
discretion to the Muter to accept one security, justice
would not be done between the parties.—Rule nisi. •

THE POLICE COURTS.
MANSION-HOUSE. _

The person who was brought hears the Lord Mayor on
the 18th instant on the charge of having attempted to de-
fraud Mews. °reread, Gurney, and Co., money dealers,
Lombard-street by means of forged acceptances, and who
refused to give his name, was brought up for re-examina-
tion. The public curiosity having been excited by the cir-
cumstances of the first day's inquiry, the justice room was
crowded.

Mr. Benson's., instructed by Mr. Tallings, appeared for
the prosecution; Mr. Parry, instructed by Mr. Humphreys
as the agent for Mr. Howard, for the defence.
Formal proof of the forgery was offered, after which it
became necessary to examine witnesses to ascertain the pri-
soner's name. Mr. Howard, his solicitor, was then placed
in the box and sworn, but having deposed that he only
knew the prisoner profe;sionally, he claimed the privilege
of a confidential adviser, and refused to disclose the name
of his client. AU the attempts of the Beach to shake the
resolution of this witness having failed, the prisoner was
again remanded.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
Williaiw Heather, a footman in the service of his Grace
the Duke of Norfolk, was charged with having obstructed
and assaulted the police.
From the evidence of police-constable Barber, C 69, it
appeared there was a party at Lord Ashburton's on Satur-
day night, at which several of the police, himself among
the number, were stationed for the porpoise of regulating
the carriages. A carriage, to which the defendant be-
longed, attempted to break the rank. Witness remonstrated
with the coachman, and told him it could not be permitted
SI it was against the regulations. The defendant told the
inachtnan to drive on, and the coachman did try to break
the rank, but we. stopped. The defendant told the
coachman to drive over the constables if they would not get
out of the way, and, addressing complainant, said if it were
not for the law he would give him something
for himself. In a minute or two after this .omplainant
received a sharp kick from some one behind him. He
turned round and saw the defendant we. the only one suffi-
ciently close to commit the assault, and he immediately
charged defendant with having kicked him, and then took
him into custody. He did not see who gave him the kick,
but he believed the °ander was the defendant.

Several other constables gave evidence to the effect that
the defendant urged the coachman to break the rank, and
threatened to give complainant a good hiding.
The defendant denied having committed the assault.
The reason why he told his coachman to drive on was be-
cause the Duchess of Norfolk, his mistress, had the privi-
lege of placing her carriage in the fore-court, there to wait
till ready to take np.
Two witnesses were called, who said they did not see the
defendant kick the constable ; and another of the Duke of
Norfolk's footmen said it was a person in livery, bat not
the defendant who assaulted the constable.

Mr. Bingham said there wu a link wanting in the chain
of evidence connecting the defendant with the assault on
the constable ; and, u there was a doubt, he should give
the defendant the benefit of it. With regard to the al-
leged privilege of standing in the fore-court he would take
that to be so, and there could not be any objection to it that
be could see • but no one wasjustified in breaking the rank
and d' regulations regulations guide for the benefit of all, and
as this h been doss in the preempt use he should inflict a
fine of 40s.
The money was paid.

Mr. Beadon delivered ajudgment ins case of importance
to omnibus passengers. A gentleman named Marston,
ODllo4lCted with a firm in the City, and residing in Bromp-
ton, was in the habit of riding outside an omnibus which
Oasts from Putney-bridge at a certain hour in the morning,
and to ensure a place had engaged a certain seat, for which
he had always paid in advance. The complainant, Mr.
Yemeni, took possession of the seat on the morning of the
20th inst., and Mr. Marston, the defendant, admitted
having laid bands upon him for the purpose of removing
him from that seat, as he had previously engaged it. This
was the assault complained of. Mr. Baglon now stated
that he bad consulted with his colleague (Mr. Paynter)
upon the subject, and they were both of opinion that
no person could engage a particular seat upon an omnibus,
and that therefore his decision would be against the defend.
ant, who would have to pay a nominal fine of la. for the
assault, and 2s. oasts.

SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY.—Traffio receipts for
the weak ending April 23,18.53 :—£12,651 38. 2d.; ditto,
week ending April 24, 1852, £12,5491. 88. 2d. Inezemi in
1863, £lOl 158. Od.
[Advertisement.]— FIITY THOUSAND COUR
WMIOVT KIDKIPIN by litany's BWILLIIXTA AW3CII ricar—
Cogs 0,1122 Aft pane ladgronalio Rana drams=
11•1721.211°686114b111111 UNE fenitelir
angallant Icag iery,7"cethne, Lim woo 11751.
Ora.:o. 71, of berm tan 11. Ham tha Lod eta de
Dcalle—. I byre d angaldgrabio =melt trom yewn rand, nd
authoring the publication of thane Rasa."—Stgart de Dogleg. Bold la
wide= 5 lb., at 11s. ; 11 lb., et 22e. Super-raft= quality, 10 lb.,
at 535. ; S lb„ at 42a; the 10 lb. and 12 lb. canisters Inc of =many,
be Beale e•aat and Ct... 77, Reernt=reet. Inaba.

[Advertisement.}—HoLLower's ru.i.a AN int
mune Sumo sea Laves COMPLAINTS .ea Isioeirro..-David
Owlet. ire, peogeteler of the .. Bellyehasues Maid,, pobliebed I
die pew of the Ha of January, le ;3 the Moab* estraonlttary
eisattiog 11•111. of
eme Mew
fromAd=o of the
homy of bed eolstre • _ , ite-
=.e.61.166161 6 watatilLMB 6,:d 11"1.:".1°'eaea "a 1",
A.,4:l,l3l.ll.4.omillstesimedi Ma rolb‘ by
eeifoilleisosh. yermilhahr bin *oft eery
relli
dup. Moe eistiastei site*n a link link thy Aetna a
are 0 liorethady, and mimed Ws II gisi bidl6-11.111W2
=ii. NA etiraksist IMMO OINISSImf. 11116 Mem%