The Express.
London, England, 1865-12-05 00:00:00

W INTELLIGENCE.
(THIS DAY.)
—4,--
LET OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
prim matins at Wartanimisre—(g4644
Chid Joelice eada Spada Jon.)

ial jury in T.
had bean snore, Mr
he had consulted with Mr. White, the
• defendant, and, aa au inquiry into the
would involve a painful unyan7 into family
from other canoes, be had advised his idiom ac,
per far the defendant by consent, and a
y taken foe the defendant.
TTINDANC2 OF COMM9X JUROWS.
then proceeded with common jury cores
Court. Eight 3nrymece only answered to
and the other four had to be made up from
cmmaa jury panel. The absentees were

r. LADY FOZSDS.
adieu to recover compensation in damages
injuries received through the in well.
defendant's se want.
t pleaded not guilty.
was annual for the plaintiff ; H. T.
&Inagua
• is a machine ruler and vellum binder in
t, OD the 27th July last the plaintiff
wade had been on a pleasure mennem
ltM
and were returning home along
aboutast 10 o'clock. When they got
imaircat, the defendant's= with oft
• tlg Slang in an opposite• at a rapid
wrong side of the way. The driver' who was
was on his knees in front of the box seat, with
banging over the dashboard. The front
the brougham struck the cart in whisk
t wee a severe blow, and get clear, bunt
lied also struck the calf and upset it, Remo.
who were in it on to the pavement and t
adeiree of the out. The brougham went on
pace, but was afterwards stopped by the poi*
found that the driver wu drunk, and be
custody. The plaintiff fell ce his left arm and
base of hie wrist. He was laid up for nine
he had not yet recovered the woe of his him:
the left land, it was stated, was of more came.
se ruling than the right.
on behalf of her ladyship, said there could be
that the driver was intoxicated, and that
t had happened. It appeared that the drive:
her ladyship from the Princess's Theatre, and
he got drunk and the bone ran away. ske
y compensated one individual, and the simple
the amount of damages. Her ladyship, who
w, had been advised that the best course for hen
• er the circumstances was to submit the dates
made against her to a court of justice. The
.6 cootendsd, had not shown any material lose el
the accident, but rather that he had snide
tad claim for compensation. Her ladyship wu
willing to pay, under the unfortunate einem.
• h a sum as was fair and reasonable.
returned avardict for the plaintiff —damage; 501.
HOLLOWAY I'. LADY FORMS.
• tiff, Emilie* kiolloway, baby-linen maker. was
persons thrown out of the cart, and had suffered
nmeson of the left elbow joint. The pain
ming was very great. Her DODD and
also cut, sail her clothes spoilt. She
ned to the house a forteight or three weeks
• bt or nine
s.ee, she was unable to work. She
12e. 13 par week, but since the accident
y gamed about half that sum. The medical man
the oontuaion se a very severe one, and that she
ed a shock to the system. She required his at-
for a month or five weeks.
ry returned a verdict for the plaintiff—dn.

rLANGFORD C. LADY FORBES.
&pother action of damages against bar lady-
oat of the same accident.
• tiff was the owner of the vehicle, which wag
y broken np. He received no personal injury.
re and coat ware destroyed, and his watch
The latter cart 30a. repairing. l'he cart oost in
Mao, and he sold it after the accident for 61.
returned a verdict for the plaintiff., damagee,lot.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
at Nisi Prius in Middlesex.—(Before Lord Chief
Justice Erie and • Special Jury).
WATLIFTELD V. RICEILID.
'stiff in this case claimed damages for injuries se&
him whilst in the service of the defendant.
. tissue, Q.C., and Mr. Hayman, appeared for the
• and Mr. J. Browne, Q.C., and Mr. Griffita. for
dant.
that in March, 1963, the plaintiff became
arehouseinao and porter to the defendant, a whole.
Meer io St. Martin's-lane, at a eatery of 1/. per
On the 70th May in that year, the plaintiff was
some paper from the ground floor to the fourth
means of a steam-lift. He himself went up with
parcel, io order to count and stow the paper &wily.
e got near the first door the rope broke, and the
was precipitated into the basement. In the fall be
a compound fracture of the left leg, and the right
ne was severely hurt. He was taken to the hospital,
be remained until the 22ad September, for two or
oaths longer he had two crutches, but for the lad
six months he had been able to get about with the
ce of a stick. During the time the plaintiff was in
pital the defendant allowed Mill full wages, foe
twelve months longer half waFes, and afterwards he
him employment to do boys work, but this offer
hoed.
the defendant with liability it was said that it
e custom of the men to go up with the lift ; that be
o the plaintiff go up in that way without saying that
wrong, sod it was contended that if he had machinod
purpose he was bound to see that it was in proper

rat men in the employ of the defendant were exa•
for the plaintiff, but in cross...rumination they stated
he rule was that men were not allowed to go op the
that the defendant had repeatedly found fault with
and also threatened them for having gone up in
:
•of them said that on one mouton he had told
'hintf that there wee a " terriffie row" in cone►
of men going up in the lift. The plaintiff bad in
Kleine denied that he had been told of thin. There
circular staircase for the men to go up.
lordship held that there wu no evidence to go to the
fix the defendant with knowledge that the instru•
used wu dangerous.
on this ruling a nonauit was entered.
. Keane rendered a bill of exceptions.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Liege in Banco.—(Before Mr. Baron BramwalL)
JOHNsON V. DAREETT.—JUDGYENT.
. Baron Bramwell delivered judgment in this case. The
ion was whether • deed of composition under the
ruptcy Act was a good defence to the action. The
tion taken to the deed by the plaintiff was, that
gh it assigned the defendant's effects to
yet by its terms the defendant wan
itted to continue in possession of the pro'
until he made default in the payment of
stipulated composition of Fn. in the pound. This wee
to be in direct violation of the conditions of the as*
h required that all the assigned property should be
nup to trustees. His lordship mid the court was of
iou that the deed wu a good oue, observing that it
t manifestly be so, because there was no need of
aignment of the defendant's property at all. The
ible meaning of the act was that where
property wan to be given up under the deed, it should
Oran up in order to make the deed binding on the non•
sting creditors.
odgeneut for the defendant.
is lordship intimated that the ra were some other cart'
er zonsideration involving questions as to the validity
• i ilrr deeds under the act, but they were of such!'
actin that judgment on them could cot Le given until
t term.
ingest Nisi Prius.—(B,fore Lord Chief Baron Pollock
and a Common Jury.)
~'LEART AND WIVE v. U'DERaI.
be declaration charged the defendant with having
ulted Harriet Julia O'Leary (the wife of the plainten
en her into the custody of a policeman, and caused her to
iinpinoned et • police station. The second coast charged
defendant with having falsely and maliciously, sod
bout reasonable and probable cause, preferred a chant
toot her of having detained certain goods belooguld
, and there was a third count fur falsely and caaliciouil,
Icing certain slanderous words.
he defendant pleaded not guilty.
"hes the case was called on an attempt wen mode bottreet
counsel to come to an arrangement, but it did not sea

Mr.Digby Set mour,Q.C., with whom wu r. Butler Itighro
the plaintiff, Mr. O'Leary, was the travelling neat of a
limy company. and hie wife wee in the habit of taking in
is work. The defendant, Mr. M'llerby. carried oa.
mesa as a lemmas in Minya, street, Oxforil•streeta opu
employed Mrs. O'Leary in working cuffs and other
Wei. In May last she became dissatisfied with the N.
uneration she received, and ceased to do any more work for
e defendant. Afterwards she entered into an arraogemout
•th another tradesman in Oxford•street, mimed Lookett,for
• ar employment, and on the god of October, ss she wan
viog his premises with a parcel of work, the defend:l4l
ho had been talking to Mr. Lockett at the door, follo
es and said. " Oh, Mr& O'Leary, this is the wo7 You
at getting employment from other people." lie ths•
argil her with stealing a quantity of lees, sad lad:
Where's my property ?" She protested her iooooenothba•
continued to follow her and called out that she wM •
ieL A large crowd collected to see what was the matter.
rs. Leary wild a cab and ordered the driver to take her
ome, but tie defendant had her removed from it,
t she had robbed him, and be wanted to give her into
study. In order to get away from the defendant and the
ub she bailed another csb, but the defendant bad hot
jetted from the vehicle in a similar way. Theo the defer.
sot gave her into the cuatody of a policeman, and on being
ken to the police station she was placed at tho
r, and the defendant preferred a charge spinet her
having stolen some embrodery. When, however, the
efendant was asked to put his same to the c