The Express.
London, England, 1847-05-10 00:00:00

BETTING AT NANCIIESIT,I4.—Pirrtr.
DOOOT.—S to I apt Cowl (t II to t): 11 10 2 are
Coquet= (I i to 11; 9to I apt Van Tromp (t) ; I I to 1,94 liana
(t) ;it to I avt Er. Martin; 13 to I apt Gleatilt: 30 to I 9(4 No.
tOrmatlebta (t); 40 to I sot Nottitsksta ; 30 to I agrt Ithalsentber ;
SO tol 444 t Ulyetts ; 1,0(0 to 10 apt Crosier; 1,t410 to 10104 Mr.
Ilcat)n't Dotaioatioo .toning Derby, Mks, sod At. Lev, (I).
atas.-4 to I offered 09 the Mkt

lab) Pntelfgenct.

EQUITY COURTS.

HeCrethe Lard Chancellor. •
Ix THE MATTER OP A SoLICITOIL—PRITILELH.---Mr,
Korailly moved for the discharge of Mr. N. a solicitor, from
arrest. He had attended ehis court at the hearing of an ap-
peal last Wednesday, in " Jones o. Rose," being solicitor for
the plaintiff in the cause. As soon as the hearing was over,
he proceeded by stesm-boat from Westminster-bridge to
London-bridge, on his way to his offices in CeOiall-court,
Throgmorton-street, City, but after leaving the boat at Loa-
don-bridge, he turned off his way to the right, along
Thames-street, with the intention of having his dinner at
the Ship Tavern. He was arrested by an officer under an
attachment out of the RAU Court, before he reached the
tavern. The spot where be was arrested was 31,5 yards east
direct route from London-bridge to his offax. The tavern
was 400 yards distant. He told the effecter that
he was returning from Westminster to his offiors
in Copthall court, and turned out of his way to take
some refreshment at the said tavern, and he claimed his pri-
vilege redeem& from the court but the (Meer who had
watched him from court refused to listen to him. The
learned counsel, after reading the party'. affilierit of those
facts, said there were several cases in which the {'refection
of the court to pan is s, witnesses, and solicitors attending the
warts, was carried to a greater extent than he required. lathe
ease of " Lightfoot v. Cameron " (Sir W. Blacketone'-e Rep.
1,113), the defendent bad, after attending his cum in court
all day, cone to dine with his attorney and witnesses at an
inn in Palace-yard, and was arrested at dente;; and the
Court of King's Bench beld that such necessary refreshment
was not such a deviation as to cancel the defendant's privi-
lege reek-undo. In Pitt o. Coomes "(5 Baraew. and Adol.,
1,070), the plaintiff, after making a motion in his cause in
court, went direct to his cffice in the Adelphi, where he
ha:l some refreshment ; end sherwards, as he was going
home to his residence in the Polygon, he went into a tailor's
shop and was there arrested under an attachment, by an
officer who bad watched him. He was discharged by the
Court of King's Bench, Chief Justice Denman saying, " The
doctrine of deviation might become alarming if carried to
such an extent, that when an officer raw a party going one
yard out of his way brute he might arrest him. The officer
should not dodge too closely. A party on his return from a
court of justice ought substantially to receive its protection
till be reaches home." There was mill a stronger case in the
matter of Servercrop (2 Deacon and Chitty, 99). A.
wit,,, ss from Grave send,after attending the Court of Review
at Westminster, left in the evening to return home by steam-
boat from London-bridge, but was arrested by a creditor in
Pancras-lane, is the City, where he bad just gone while
waiting for the host. The ceurtdischargedhim, although it
was sworn that he had been seen in Catherine-street, in the
Strand, which war a greater deviation from his direct way
than the deviation in the present ease. The comets always
construed the privilege libeeally. There was awe (in Mr.
Cooper's Rep., p. I) of Winkles, a solicitor, who, after at-
tending an appeal in the House of Lords as an agent, was
on his way home, and went into a house in Dover-street,
Piccadilly, to take refreshment, when he was arrested. The
, Lend Chancellor ordered his discharge.
Mr. Raft opposed the application on an affidavit of the
officer who made the arrest. The question was, whether
the deviation was eactunble. The officer says he made the
arrest about a quarter of a mile distant from the direct way
to Mr. N.'s office, in Cepthall.court. The direct way would
be up King William.street ; but instead of going hose that
way, he was met in Thames-street, between 300 sod 400
yards distant. There were many taverns in the direct way
to afford refreshment. He says his intenti .n was to go to
dine at the Ship; but no one could judge of his intention
but himself. He did not say he was in the habit of dining
there ; and, upon inquiry, it was ascertained that he was not
known at the Ship tavern. The privilege ought not to be
extended indefinitely; there mast be some limits to it.
Nose of the cases cited went I. this length. There was no
deviation in Pitt's ease, or in Watkins' rue, but this party
WEB out of his route altogether. The privilege of protection
had been conferred to parties while coming to the cowt and
returning home in a direct route.
Mr. Hominy, in reply, said, if Mr. Chidley, another soli-
citor in the cause of " Jones e. Rowe," were examined viva
vox in court; which was sometimes done, he would state
that Mr. N. told lrin he intended to dine at the Ship. He
had accompanied him to London-bridge, sad left him to go
to that tavern, where he (Chidley) rays this solicitor was in
the habit of dieing. The deviation was not to great as ap-
peared, for the beat way to his offices was through Grace-
ehurch-street, which was a good deal to the east of King
William-street, sad nearer to the Ship tavern.
The Lord Chancellor: Still the deviation was without ex-

cuss, if he was not really going to the Ship tavern to take
refreshment.

Ur. ItomiSy . It is not denied that he told the officer, when
be wee arrested, that he was going to the Ship to dine. He
was arrested in three-quarters of an hour after he left the

The Lord Chancellor It appeared this party leaded from
the heat just by London-bridge, end though his direct way
home was up King Willisinstreet, be wes met by the officer
in Thames-street, ahoy* 300 yards out of his way. lie said
when arrested the re, that he intended to go to dine at the
Ship Tavern, about a quarter of • mile distant from his
direct way. There could be no doubt, if that fact was
proved, or if he was found dining at the Ship, that the
deviation would be c imitable, but there we, no satisfactory
proof of the alleged infention. The motion was refused,
with oats.

The court was occupied with other mot'orts, chiefly on
points of practice, all day, but as they were not decided, we
reserve the-report. It was understood that the Lord Chan-
cellor will not sit in court again until the first day of Trinity
Term.

Before the Meeker of the Rolls.
SUFFIELD V. BOND.—INJIINCTION TO 111 STRAIN AN
ACTION AT LAW DisSOLvED —lt appeared iu this case that
Joseph Bond, with Lis brothers, Ephraim and Robert, were
proprietors of a club-house in St. Jean's, of which many
noblemen and gentlemen were members, and swept other,
the plaintiff, Lord Suffield ; and in ei ruin gaming tranme-
does which took place there, Lord SUffietd gave bills to
Ephraim Bond. Messrs William and Jame* Morgan, who
were the stockbrokers of Ephraim Bond, brought an action
against the plaintiff on these bills. Thin was aubscquet tly
abandoned, end the defendant, Joseph Bond, afterwards
brought another action against the plaintiff; on the ground
that the bills had come to bins on Loud consideration. A
bill was filed by the plaintiff for an injunction to r, strain the
action at law. The injunction was obtained, and Meson.
Wilcock and Dickenson to-day, on behalf of the plaintiff,
showed cause on the merits against dimiliing it. Mr.
Turner appeared on the other aide ; but the Master of the
Rolle, without hearing him, said it had her n all. ged that the
defendant had not clearly made out his own case on his
answer, and that, therefore, the injunction ought to con-
tinue. That tenon was not *efficient. The plaintiff must
himself show circumstances from which the court might de-
lve an opinion that his cue would be established hereafter.
It had also been urged, that by amending this bill, plaintiff
would be able to obtain very important information from the
defendant. That again was no reason why an Injunction
should continue hanging over the head of the defendant,
sad he should, therefore, make absolute the order to dissolve
the injunction.
Before the Vice-Chancellor of EsglawL
CASTILLI V. HOARE.—ROBBERY 01' DIAMONDIL—Is-
CI:DICTION Drennan.—Mr. Stuart and Mr. Wright snored
to dissolve an injunction, obtained on the 2nd of February
last, to restrain the defendant from transferring or wiling
• sat of Me funds the cum of 6001., three-and-a quarter per
teat. Bank annuities, under the following circumstances : It •
will be recollected that a person named Robert Kerr who
was captain of the ship Levenaide, landed at Folk.-stone with
a box of diamond., consigned to the plaintiffs, Mrs-n.
Castelli, from Bahia, and proceeded with them to London ;
that he took op his abode at the Albion Tavern, which was
kept by a man named Forman; that Forman introduced
Kerr to the defendant Hoare who, with the adviseand
assistance of a person named Benjamin Benjamin, disposed o.
**diamonds to Mears. Blogg and Martin, diamond merchants
ia the city, for the cunt of 1,7.10. Kerr was afterwards
tried for the robbery of the denude, and was coevieted and
sentenced to be transported. It appeared that some of the
money
_given for the diamonds was paid in bank note*, which
Ace afterwards found to have been laid out in the purchase
d risk stock by the defendant, and this injaseties was
1111INIIquently granted to restrain the sale of that**. It
tat saw stated that the defendant bad been entirely
llgeelosht throughout the transaction of any fraud hang in-
Moiled • that he was introduced to Kerr fur the ramose of .
maimilaim some clothes ; that his advice was asked re-
egeering the sale of the diamonds ; that knowing seehig
who aver about the nature of diamonds, he had ap-
Idled to a friend named Benjamin, who *leo declared
that ho knew nothing of their value, but *poke to a
kited of his named Giddsoa, who recommended an
application to be made to Messrs. Blogg and Martin ;
that after the sale had been effected, Kerr made a present of
some of the diamonds to the defendant and Forman for their
trouble in the business; that some of the bank-notes paid by
Mean. Blogg and Martin had been handed ever es the de-
fendant in paymeutof clothe*, and in the purchase ifs watch
and chain ; that be had given Kerr change for several of the
notes, and that he had purchased the stock with these notes ;
that the defendant had given every information eancerning
the transaction, and it was through his evidence that Kerr
was convicted ; that the plaintiffs had now ree0•1111111 their
lost property, and that, coturequeutly, the injunction ought
to be dissolved. It was alro contended that the plaintiff
ought to hive stated in his bill fur the injunction, that the
diamonds had been returned. This had not been done;
the plaintiff had therefore been guilty of misrej retentatice,
by omitting this material fact in his bill.
Mr. Bethel! and Mr. Cairns, in support of the bill, ac-
counted fur the omission of any statement as to the fact that
the diamonds had been returned, by saying that there had not
been time to amend the bill before the application for all in-
junction was made. They also contended that the defendant
by his answer had set forth a fact which was calculated to
induce a belief that he had been aware that the diamonds
were not the property of Kerr, for he bad stated that For-
man represented them to belong to a cousin of his, and that
' ha believed cud; statement to be true, when it was evident
ha must bars been aware this was not the fact. •
The Vice-Chancellor said be should certainly diesol t
ledeemeion. it was a most material facto have boa ,-. ...i 44
Me the knowledge of the court, when the i
~,.; ..17:1•". -
was appii. LI for, that the diamonds had been el 'le .• - Oil
. r gear 1. N k v...n.
the bill had omitted that fact, and, therefor*, he • • 1,-...1. t-
the injunction ought not to be eontlaned • lr- ' .•! .4,,,,:,,,z. 4,6,
to the question or costs, his Bosons - . • . • ' ry vf
- . 9• ,
S. a t, •
dx ,:iii,
•vi

a •

Si