The Express.
London, England, 1853-05-13 00:00:00

RAW ilittelitamce.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-YESTERDAY.
Cosnarrts nix Pawn-ton.

The Lords present were, Lord Redesdale (chairman),
the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, the Earl of Ellen-
borough, Lord hionteagle, Viscount Ihwarden, and the
Bishop of Llandaff.
LORD GARVAOIeII
.1,1113 t TO TOTS TOR R/ORESENTA-

TITI PREYS FOR IRELAND.

Mr. Alexander, with wTroWwiisl4;.feter Burke, ap-
peared in support of the claim, and stated that Charles
Henry Spencer George, Baron Ganagh, of Garvagb, in
the county of Londonderry, who was the father of the
petitioner, married, on the 13th July, 1803, Lady Georgianai
Stewart, daughter of Robert, first Marquis of London-
deny, who died, on 17th November, 1804, without issue.
The petitioner's father was again married on 19th July,
1824, Relabel!' Charlotte Isabella, the daughter of Henry
Bonham, Esq. The claimant was bora on 28th May,
11826. His father died on 20th August, 1840.
The usual documentary evidence having been put in,
The Marquis of Londonderry stated that the father of
the petitioner married his late sister, Lady Georgian&
Stewart, who died without issue.
Lieut.-Col. Henry Frederick Bonham, stated tbst he
was present at the marriage of lord Garvagh and Miss
Bonham, his sister. The petitioner was always treated as
the eldest son of the marriage.
On the motion of Lord Redeadale, the claim WAS ad-
mitted.

Tule EARL OP DONOTOIIMORE'S CLAIM TO TOTE FOR

REPRESENTATIVE PERILS POE IRELAND.

Mr. Messiter Mated that the petitioner was Richard John
Hely, Earl of D4noughinore in Ireland, and Viscount
Hutchinson in the peerage of Great Britain. The late earl
had established his claim to vote for representative peers for
Ireland, on 30th July, 1848. The claimant's father mar-
ried on 18th June, 1822, the lion. Margaret Gardiner,
daughter of Luke Viscount Mountjoy, and died on sth Feb-
rury, 1851 ; and the claimant was his eldest son. Some
documentary evidence having been put in, the further
hearing of the case was adjourned for the production of
further evidence.

THE BAHL OP CHARLITILLE'S CLAIM TO TOTE POR
RIPPMXTATIVZ PLEBS POH IZZLAND.

Mr. W. C. Rowe, Q.C., stated that the petitioner was
Charles William George Bury, Earl of Charlevillc. The
claimant's father at the British embassy at Florence, on
20th February, 1821, married Harriett Charlotte Beaujo-
lois, and the claimant was born Bth March, 1822. His
father died on 14th March, 1831. After the usual docu-
mentary evidence,
Mrs. Catherine Louisa Morley proved that she was pre-
sent at the marriage between the claimant's father and
Harriett Charlotte lleaukdois, and that the petitioner was
always treated as the eldest son of the marriage.
The claim was admitted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-YESTERDAY.

BITIIKOS AT 141113 PAW& BUCIAT Ma. BARON Purr API

Common Juluis.

BLISS V. SNOW: HORSE WARSANTT.-EXTRAOP.DINARY

C

mill was an action upon a written wamnty, alleged to
have been given by the defendant to the plaintiff on the
sale of s hone. The plaintiff, Mr. Henry Bliss, is s gentle-
man residing at Berkeley House, near Hyde-park•square,
formerly an attorney, but now an officer an the army, and
the defendant is a butcher.

It appeared, that in January 1851, the plaintiff was
struck with the appearance of a bay horse which the defen-
dant's boy rode about to obtain orders, and convey the
same in a basket, sad the plaintiff applied to the defen-
dant to purchase the animal. After some negotiation it
was arranged that the plaintiff should give 701., and a chest-
nut horse which he had, and which was " a little touched
in the wind," in exchange for the defendant's bay horse.
The plaintiff wrote a receipt for the money, on the back
of one brought to him by the defendant, foe the purpose of
introducing into it a statement as to the exchange of the
chemist horse. The receipt then run thus :
Received, February 21, 1851, of H. Bliss, Esq.,
du sum of 701. and a eheenut horse for a bay horse which
I warrant sound." About a month after the plaintiff
found that the horse had been " nerved " in both legs, but
he had untianed to use him up to the present time. The
plaintiff was called to prove his own case, and swore that
the above receipt was signed by the defendant. For the
defence the defendant was put into the box, and stated
that he distinctly told the plaintiff that he would not war-
rant the horse when he sold him, end the plaintiff said he
would take him with all his faults, as he (defendant) must
take his chesnut horse. When defendant produced a re-
eeipt which had been written by his wife, for the 701.,
plaintiff complained that it contained nothing about the
exchange of the chestnut horse. Defendant said he had no
objection to the chestnut horse being Introduced, and plain-
tiff had better write another receipt on the back. Plaintiff
then wrote "Received February 21st, 18-51, of H. Bliss,
▪ the sum of 701. and a chesnut horse fur a bay horse."
Defendant read it and signed the receipt. He would
swear positively that the words " which I war-
rant mind " were not • there when be signed
the receipt. If the horse had not been " nerved,"
le would have been worth 200 guinea. The chestnut
horse turned out such a " roarer " that he sent him to Tat-
tersall's and sold him for 26 guineas and a half. It appeared
that there was a full stop on the receipt after the words " •
be, horse," and it was said, by the learned counsel for the
tiefeace, that the ink in which the words " which I war-
sant sound" were written was somewhat paler than that
Med in the body of the receipt. The defendant stated
that the plaintiff had called on him several times, and as
late as July last, to praise the horse, which he said was
worth 200 guineas, and 600 would not buy him. In No-
vember last plaintiff called on him and asked how he could
eo have deceived him as notto tell him thatthe horse had: been
" nerved "in both legs. Defendant said be had not war-
ranted the horse when he sold him ; and asked it he was
lame. Plaintiff said no, and that he was, in reality, worth
more than when he bought him ; bat if defendant did
not give him back 701., and let him keep the
horse, a jury anould settle it. Defendant's wife was pre-
sent. Plantiff then took out of his pocket a plain piece of
paper, from which he read the words, " Received of H. Bliss,
Roc., the sum of 701. and a chesnut horse for • bay horse,
which I warrant sound in every respect." lie would swear
that those were the precise words plaintiff toad. It was
signed "J. P. Snow." Witness always signed his name
" James P. Snow." The plaintiff would not let it go out
of his hand, but witness's signature was so well imitated
that his wife at first said it was his (defendant's) writing.
He, however, denied it, and would swear positively that he
bad never signed such a receipt. It was on a plain piece of
paper, with nothing written on the back. It was not the
receipt now produced. Plaintiff called on witness a short
time ago, and wanted him to buy the horse, to settle their
differences. He said the horse was not at all lame, aid
witness could sell him better than he !could. On that occa-
sion he again referred to the receipt which be bad pro-
duced, and told defendant's wife that he had taken it off
his file and brought it direct. Defendant's wife told him
she was positive that the receipt he had shown had never
been on • file.

Several witnesses were then called to prove the condition
of the horse and to corroborate the defendant's evidence.
The case for the defence having closed,
The foreman of the jury said they would not trouble Mr.
Serjeant Shee to reply, as they had made up their minds as
to their verdict.
Mr. Serjeant Shee said he was not satisfied, and claimed
his right to address the jury.
Mr. Baron Platt—You have that right, brother.
Mr. Serjeant Shee then addressed the jury at great length
in reply.
In leaving the case to the jury,
Mr. Baron Platt said that, in the turn which the ease had
taken, questions of the utmost importence had arisen, with
reference to the conduct of the plaintiff, to whom the de-
fendant imputed not only perjury but forgery.
The jury having consulted for a few minutes, found a
verdict for the defendant; and expressed an opinion that
no warranty had been given by the defendant; and that
the plaintiff had imposed upon the defendant, with reterence
to the insertion of the words, " which I warrant sound" in
the receipt.
Mr. Baron Platt said that the latter part of the finding
would render it unnecessary, that he should order the re•
ceipt to be impounded, a course which he should have felt
bound to have taken, had the verdict been couched in dif-
ferent terms, with a view to ulterior proceedings against the
plaintiff, of the nature of which that gentleman's counsel
must be fully aware.

BIRMINGHAM BANKRUPTCY COURT.
YPSTERDAY.
BRTOILII Ma. COMNIIMIONER DANIII„
IN SE JOHNNY BROOME'S BANKRUPTCY.
This notorious "champion of the fisty ring" came opt his
morning on his "last examined As." No balance-sheet had
been filed, neither have the attempts made to supersede the
bankruptcy been successful.
Mr. Powell appeared for the assignees and Mr. John
Smith for the bankrupt. By the lattt ran application was
made to the court to postyone the final exami mtion for a
month, in order (as was stated) to enable the bankrupt to
make arrangements for the payment of the petitioning cre-
ditor's debt is full.
His Honour acceded to the application, the bankrupt pay-
ing the costs of the day.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.-YESTERDAT.
Bayou Loam Cam Awnric hum.

Thomas Rolls, 45, labourer, was indicted for cutting and
wounding Charlotte Carter, with inteat to murder her.
Charlotte Carter deposed that she was a single woman,
and resided in Union-place, Stratford. Before the 2Sth
March she had lived with the prisoner as his wife for four
years, but at that time they had been separated for a fort-
night, and witness went to live with another man. On the
morning in question she went to the shop of a person
named Barker, and found the prisoner there, and he came
to her and asked her to go into the bock kitchen, to read a
letter he had received from her uncle. The prisoner gave
1 her the letter, and she took it into the kitchen, as he re-
quested, and ho followed her. While she was engaged in
reading the letter, the prisoner came up to her and put hi*
left arm round her neck, and said, " Are you unhappy ? "
She said she was net ; and the prisoner then said, " I am,"
and at the same moment he cut her in th . throat 'with a
razor which he had iu his right band. He made a very
deep wound, and witness struggled with him, and called
" !larder," and in the struggle with the prisoner her hands