The Express.
London, England, 1849-06-23 00:00:00

'Lagoa intelitgence.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-YmnDAT.
SITTINGS IN BANCO.
Nsw TRIAL PAM.

HINGERION v. KELLY, KNT.-K LECTIONEEEINO AGINT.

-0 HATT: ITO US SERVICES.

Mr. Cockburn and Mr. liar-ton showed =um against the
rule which had been obtained in this case for a new trial on
the ground of misdirection, and that the verdict was lig cinst
the evidence. This was an action in which the pleiniff, who
is an attorney at Lyme Regis, sought to recover a sum of
money, the amount of his bill for professional and agency
services rendered to the defendant during his canvas and
contest at that town, at the last general election. At the
trial before Lard Denman, at the last =sites for the county
of D nest, it appeared on the pan of the pleintid, that I
be had rendered the =nil services of a paid agent
dur ng the period embraced by his claim, having taken a
very active part in promoting the interests of the learned
candidate, who was only defeats] by a very sang majority
iudeed. On the other baud, the defendant, who pleaded
con aseumpsit, insist d that the services so render -d wen
meant to be purely gratuitous, and that the plaintiff had ue.-
, dertaken to act on behalf of the " cause " under the xpress
understanding that he was not to receive any remuneration,
In support of this defence witnt saes were called, who proved
that cons centime had taken p'ace in which the plaintiff bad
been told, on behalf of Sir Fitzroy Kelly, that he was deter-
mined to have no paid agents ; that the learned gentleman
had himself stated, at a dinner in the presence of the plain-
tiff, and it was further shown, that the plaintiff had re-
corded
his vote for Sir Fitzroy Kelly. which, if he had
been acting as a paid agent, would have been an
illegal and worthless vote. At the close of the case Lnrd
Denman, in summing up the evidence to the jure , stated that
it required very clear testimony to support such a defence,
and as the plaintiff had certainly rendered servi-e which was
madly paid for, it was the Only of the de:endant to satisfy
the jury that an) contract exioed, such as that which had
been set up by the defendant but not expressly peeved. The
jury havirg :enact far the plaintiff for the full amentit of hit
clams lees the first item, which was a charge of 101. 10s. for
the retainer from Mr. Attwoed, that gentleman having dis-
proved it ; this rule was subsequently obtained.
Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Burson centehded that the lesnced
judge's direction was quite correct—that as the p aintiff had
made out a prima facie case the burthen of dispruviag it was
cast on the defendant. They further contended that there
was no pretence for saying that the verdict was not war-
ranted by the evidence, and as the noble judge had net re-
ported his dissatisfaction with the result of the case, the title
ought ta be discharged generally.
Mr Crowder and Mr. Stock, in support of the rule, sub.
mined that the direction of the learned judge was ease regally
bad in principle. That it was the duty of the plaintiff to
make out his case, and not that of the defendant to disprove
it, or to make out an answer, unless the case of the pl intiff
was express and direct. Dere it was but a prima facie cave,
and it was quite enough for the d fondant to meet it wi.h
similar testimony. But it was further contended that there
was direct and explicit evidence adduced by the defendant
to show that there had been au express contract fur gra-
tuitous servicee, and, at all events, there ought to be a new
trial on the second gronni.
The Curt was of opinion that the jury had been =ie.
direcled, and that there ought to be a new trial on the fiat
ground.
Bala absolute accordingly.

POLICE.-YESTERDAY.

THAMES,

THE CIIAROR AOAI#ST AN EMIGRATION BROILER.—
Wm. Sutton, a licensed passage broker, carrying on business
at King-street, Tower-hill, appeared to answer eight
sum-
mouses,issued at the instance of Lieutenant James Sedg-
wick Lean, emigration officer of the port of London, charg-
ing him with violating the 19th and 21st clauses of the Act
5 & 0 Viet., c. 109, for regulating the carriage of passengers
in merchant vessels. The case woe referred to this court
from the Mansion-house, and the main facts as they were
stated before Alderman Wilson by Lieutenant Lean appeared
in our publication of Thursday. A family named Long,
c-nsistiag of four persons, intending to emigrate to New
York, called on the defendant and paid him 181. to secure
them n passage by the Rose. He gave them a general re-
ceipt for the money, whereas he should have given the in a
particular form of receipt specified in the act, pointing out
the amount of bedding, culinary utensils, and other articles
necessary for their comfort and convenience during the voy-
age. Four of the summonses were for a violation of the pro-
visions of the 19th clause, whereby he had renderad
himself liable to a panaity of 101. in each case, and
the ether four summonses were for a violation of the 21st
clause of the act, which required that (though a licensed
broker) he should have a written authority to act as agent
in behalf of the contractor before receiving money for a pas-
sage to any port or place in North America. After bearing
some formal evidence,
Mr. Pelham, for the defence, put some questions tending
to show that the defendant acted not in tho character of it
contractor, but in that of a principal, and Mr. Ingham el e-
ine that the statute was a penal one, and not to be construed
strictly, admitted the objection, and four of the summonsei,
involving penalties to the amount of 401., were dismissed.
The cases arising out of the violation of the 19:h sec. were
then proceeded with, and it was ultimately arranged that
the summonses should be re'pited mai to-morrow (this doy),
to allow the parties to come to some arrangement with
respect to allowance for subsistence and the other losses and
expenses sustained by Long and his family.
UMARGE OF STABRINO AT SEA.—George Turnbull,
seaman, formerly belonging to the brig triumph, was
charged with feloniously wounding Mr. Robert Gibb, late
chief mate of the same vessel, with intent to murder or do
him grievous bodily harm.
It appeared from the evidence, that in Morch last, the
Triumi.h was in the Bay of Naples, and the prisoner was
directed by the mate to do some work aloft, when he began
grumbling, and was very insolent. The mate direved him
to go below and remain there till the captain came on board.
The prisoner said the mate °all wanted a pretext to stop
his wars, and he descended theriggiog *Phan iron marling-
spike in his hand, having at the sometimes knife in his she arh-
belt. He again used very violent language to the mite, who
endeavoured to remove him from the deck. The prisoner'
resisted, and a scuffle soak place, in the course of which the
prisoner struck the mate with the marlieg spike under the
breast and on the rib:. They both fell, the mote uppermost,
whereupon the prisoner drew his knife and tut the mate's
hand very severely. He was about to make further use of
the knife when other seamen came up and took it trnm him.
The mate, who was bleeding profusely from his wounds, be.
came very sick, and he was carried into the ratio. He was
subeequently removed to the hospital, where he rt mained fcr
28 claps, and he was in a precarious state for tome time
afterwards.
William Matthias, a seaman, teeed that he remonstrated
with the prisoner upon what he had done, and he replied
that he would serve any one else the same way whe knccktd
him down.
The prisoner made no defence, and he was remanded for a
week in order to complete the depositioas.