The Express.
London, England, 1860-02-06 00:00:00

Kato Inttlligaut.

1111119POLITAIII 00IIIITT 001:7111b.
lofts lew IWOOM boo Mb Proms boot
104•Fubblea. Wk. liogilwbbso. —bawdy, lob. , odoooloo, I;
Tbaroktoo, D.
Portiaboood. Wodardms, rob. ; Ibutobig, $ ;
rtWar.lo.
baourtoo, Wlibilistrgroob—Wodbobtoo. MAI; itandoko, 9.
,Olrbooposoeorl.—lloaboo. rob. I; Tbitiodog,
Ter. Foirbibrosar-Twasks.
rde rob. 7'
WiliTsC
q, lAFSI. 08198 liteaseitines.--froooloy. rob. 7 ; Tborobj, ;
:NuOTOIFLIC. 9wBo.9999l.—Tenday. Feb. 7: Tbundoe, 9:
"LAIO;99E. Orablev•lFEmeaid.—Teaday. Feb. 7.
Oassowson.-144N0000. rob S.
nb• 9.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—F4B. 4.
Sittiop s* NW Prim, after term, for Middiespez.—(Before
Lard Chief Justice Cookbura and a Special Jury.)

BUMS 11. 1001 E.

This ease occupied the whole day.
The plaintiff described himself es formerly a firmer in the
sister country, than as a negotiator of leans in London, and
now not only am • negotiator of loans, but likewise as a
British merchant. Tile defendant is an attorney, carrying
ea business in Dublin, and is, besides the owner of • consi-
tfas:ableestatis situated in two at.three:lrish counties.

Mr. Lush, Q.C., and Kr. Field appeared for the plaintiff ;
Mr. Collier, Q.C., end Mr. H. Jose for the defendant,
The declaration was for money Paid on work, journeys,
end attendances bp the plaintiff for the defendant, and ale 'for
• commission on the negotiation of a loan.
The defendant pleaded never indebted.
It appears thus some time early in last year Mr. Rothe
became anxious to Moe • sum of 60,00 W. on mortgage
of his estates, and in order to pay of family charges.
Happening to mention the matter to a Mr. Knight whilst
ever is Dahlia, the letter, on returning to London, made
known Mr. Rieke' s wants to the plaintiff. Shortly after,
that is la the month of June, Burns put himself in °omit:tuni-
c with Mr. Rook*, and in reference to the knowledge
Isparta to Mushy Knight undercook to gad a person will-
ing to advance the money required on condition of the plain-
tiff being pad a emsmision of 2i per cent. on the 60,0(.01..
Burns at the roe time giving • very glowing description of
his position over her,, sad of the high esteem in which he
was held by all his amputintanoes. However, all this In-
formation was bossed in but very indifferent English,
ohowfag pia my that when the plc eiN wrote of his being
held is h esteem he could not fetes/ to refer to him sato-
thine attainments. Nevertheless, the defendant appears to
have accepted the offer of Mr. Bams's services, and agreed
to pay the A per rest, on being Informed that the 60,0004
wee lodged to his credit in the beak.
In order to obtain the loan the plaintiff, in the first in-
stance, addressed himself to Mr. Calibers, the solicitor to
the Booleriastiall Commission, representing Mr. Rooke's
property se freehold end copyhold, and the rental at 4,2601.
per annum. Mr. Calibers promised that the money should
to fortlicomisg if the rental turned out of sufficient value.
The defendant thee, at the plaintiff's suggestion, pat himself
In communication with Mr. Calthorpe, end sent over, as
directed, • detailed statement as to the rental and descrip-
tion of the property. And it appearing therefrom that the
property wee in reality not worth more than 3,0001. a-
and a large proportion of it leasehold instead of f
Mr. Caithorpe declined the negotiation. The plaintiff
alleged that he then put himself to communication with
several insurance offices the Guardian, amongst others
—and that the money would have been forthcoming had
the defendant sent over proper particulars of the estate. How
ever, this efforts meeting with no better success in this
quarter, Mr. Burns next approached the firm of klerere.
Palmer, Palmer, and Bull, of Bedford-row, and he wee soon
able to write that at lest he had discovered • lender. Mr.
Bull, • man full of gold," regarded the proposals most
favourably, and wee preemeed forthwith to embark some aft
in the speculation. At one time Mr. Ball's client wee • mys-
terious country equire—at another, a great Liverpool mesa.
chant. Nevertheless, in this instates also names was eat
of the question, so much so that when Mr. Rookie, scar
paned by the plaintiff, paid a visit to Messrs. Palmer, in
August last, he was unable to obmin an interview with say
one of the firm. Nothing but failure, therefore, awaiting all
Mr. Burn's attempted negotiations., the defendant, in the
month of October, appears to have come to the conclusion
that be had better rescind his contract with the gentleman,
and hecoeforwerd only to deal with mob proposals coming
through him se amounted to • diatinot offer of the money.
Failing, therefore, in his own efforts to get the
Yom,
the plaintiff addressed himself to a Mr.
Young, • solicitor in the Sneed, and asked his
seistenee. In company, therefore, with the pbeetts Mr.
Young waited upon the firm of Hooper end Whately. Lie-
ain't-inn-field., they having some knowledge of Mr. Young
through their conveyancing clerk. Mr. Whetely told them
be had no doubt he should be able to find the money if
things were put in a proper shape, but insisted as a prelimi-
nary that the property should be valued by his own valuator,
whose expenses would have to be paid by the borrower in
advisee. After a time, however, Mr. Whately, finding
Burns was constantly collier at the office, and not exactly
hking the transaction from the first, gave that gentlemen
the cold shoulder, and refused to entertain the proposal any
more ; and when under aroireinuninatton Mr. Whately de-
dared that Se rases for ultimately brooking off with the
proposal wee his dislike to the channel through which it
mem, thus referring to the plaintiff. Finally, its the month
of December, Mr. Hooke, believing he woe being led • wild-
goom chase by the plaintiff, declined any further dealings
with him, paying him, however, en the application of tee
plaintiff, a sum of 21. by way of gratuity.
Mr. Leah admitted that ea the loss had never been nego-
tiated the plaintiff could not recover the commission; still hs
had rendered services to the defendant, and therefore he was
entitled on the quantum strait. This was • case of a
principal intercepting between the agent and the completion
of the contract. Had the defendant forwarded a proper
mansion and ascription of the estates, for which be had
been repeatedly naked by the plaintiff, the money would have
been forthcoming. Mr. Whately would have stamen' the
money If all thins requisite were done on the pert 41 the
defeedaat, sad therefore the plaintiff had fulfilled the snai-
-1 non precedent to his being remunerated.
The Lord Chief Justice having gone through the evidence
with the greaten care, left it Ora of all to the jury to say
whether anyone had been found willing to advance a he money,
and animadverted poistedly on the absence of all the wit-
ness except Mr. Whately, who might, if the plaintiff's story
was true, had been called In support of it; secondly, bed the
plaintiff, after having dons ell that was fairly incumbent
upon him to do, been intercepted in accompliebieg hie object
by the default of the defeedst—were Mr. Burns's (mordents
and swathes book fide, or was they all moonshine.
The jury, after • minute's cassaltatten, (mad for the dr
fondant, and that the messy wee net tertheoming.

COURT OF COMMON PLEA/.—Fan. 4.

Sittings in Biroo.—(l3efois Jostle. William, Willis,
awl Xining.)

MOIROIN V. POlTlti.—ThatarAssuie Df ?lIILBOIT OF GANZ.
Tide wee an aeppppeeol egret • theirs of the justices before
wheat the reepr.deet bad bra orrameed upon an informa-
tion Mid by the apart. under the 1 and 2 William IV.,
esp. 32, sea 90, where said that if emy porn should commit
• temper in the day Wes In sear arms, he should forfeit
• ern not exceeding 4k.. and erne; sad that any peen
reared with snob • tlllipiall should beat liberty to prove any
Err width would have bees • drama to ea action of tort.
The ow art up by the magistrates stated that the Worme-
✓s
wee laid by the gereerseepor of Lady Pell, the
load qamliss brag copy hold land bold by
Mr, but 4 the promeics of Mr. Everett. The
respondent admitted kering been on the laud in rank of
roe bat he pleaded leave and Lane of the owner End
occupier, and deeded the right of the informer to lay the in-
formation. The respondent or the son of a fosses and
brewer, and woe duly certificated. Be went out with •
farmer named &Bei for a day's shooting, Bray hirer not
carrying a gr. Lowing that Lady Pell would not allow
aaybody to nue ea her had, be truer et Bailey whether
they were allowed to go es the land in question, and Bailey
mewed Ida that he bad liberty to do ea. Mr. Everett de-
posed that be lad ar, previously to the alispd other given
th• responder perriesios to sheet es this lead, bat the
eight previous to the rung he told the resporleat that
he might go over the land la loome, for be
wished that all the tame in the
abedlellsk wee
killed ; and that if the respondent ledpreviously,
permission would have been granted. It was also proved
that Bailey and Everett wire in the habit of going iodised-
innately over one mambo?' land. The regietrres, under
there remarries*, were of orialoa that the appellant bed
no rob Intermit is the loose In quo me would support a pro-
, mention for trainee ; and if ha had ork Intereet then that
he responder had red under the fail hoprodon of as
, implied horn hone the owner asd occupier of the land
given to him through Mr. Bailey, mad ea those grounds they
cliaralred the irorturies.
Mr. Creech eurnittad that the decision wee roam Ia
rehires to the prat thr the Informant bad no buret la
the lead, then wee en supers Arra of the Quo's'.
Beach la Middleton v. Ora" (8 Ad. sad 80, that no
ewe War wee . As to the other point, it was
submittal thr It woe that then re no permissive
previous to the ka
itygar, or no sabsequer ponalsoka could
weir the seces el it.
Mr. Phew aeressi err the r--'—t.
Mr. here Mulls. we. of *era that the are la the
Queen's Beach wee is peled ma to the Int quarks ; and se
to the eseoad, that the. we. se eviler of Mr sad
llower The evidence wee that Kr. Ewer would ban
given have If he MA been asked, width wee r mute se to
slay that he had act given it. It wee dela said that the re-
sponder woe net err that be wee sommthin • briewa,
nod that he be net treed that be wee la &leg
what he did; or therehr the element of • orimbsel edam
woe absent la this ere. This queries re sot
Weed bad brae the ern by the megiere es,
bed still Its thought it right to express his
spires apes it. The eakelare of the set of parliament
re that • peer should be gully el • lerpre under it wise
word have Ism MOM to as arks of keeper. To make
W et here, knowledge that ha woe drag wrong woe net
areerry, end thin the lost that the reapeader had no
to aa goes the lead wee enough
w le
ftroar be the
rat Mr Sable. rlariet WM@ thoeght that tha
market gala et the rear oil Mr the appeal shoull
elimead, bet without ere
Appel allowed, without ere.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Fan. 4.
/Ergs et EMI Pres at Weeemirger.--(Berre Mr. Beer
• Mane end Orem Jeri...)

MAZTIN 111P/1/0:011INT.
Ms was as PAW for amosis led ales impasomws, the