The Express.
London, England, 1866-12-10 00:00:00

lain NuttMama.

918111.0POLUAN COUNTY COURTS.
(=Um days appointed tor the present week.)
BIAIOII4/11VIIT. Porthusd read.—Tuaelay, Dec. 11 ; Wednesday,
1!; Thunday, 1a: Friday, 14.
liaourtvs, Waltlaorra-vove.—Tusaday, Dec. 11 ; Wedses-
.
day. IL
—Friday. Doc. 14.
88011101ITC13, Oidetreet-rosd.—lloaday, Dec. 10; Tuesday, 11:
Thursday, 13.
Bow, Bow-road.—Friday, Dec. 14.
Wetracscret, (heat Preacototavet.—Tssaday, Dec. 11 ; Wed-
nesday, 13 ; Thursday,Friday, 14.
SOUTBWLIIL Swan-street.—Tuesday, Dec. 11; Thursday. 19
Friday. 14.
01111KNW1C11.—Friclay,Rt...14.

.—Monday, Dec. 10

e-rir- or Loroor. Guar
Wednesday, ; Friday, 14.

EQUITY COURTS.—DSc. 8.
(Before VieesChanoellor Sir J. Stuart.)
IN RE TIM ALBION BANN.
Mr. Bacon, Q.C., asked that this petition might again
stand over, the petitioner being in the country. He had
not been able to answer the affidavit filed by the bank, or
to appear here and be examined.
His Honour said it was stated that the affairs of the
bank were in a satisfactory condition, and delay would
be stetrimentaL
Mr. Roxburgh said notice ad been riven four days since
to the petitioner to appear be examined.
After some discussion his Honour said he did not ap-
prove of delay in such a ease as this.
The matter then 'toed over till later in the day, when,
his Honour having again refused to postpone the hearing,
Mr. Boron opened the petition, and was followed by Mr.
Higri ns. At the close of their argument,
His Honour, without calling on the other side, delivered
judgment. He said—This petition has been presented
ins to
obtain an order to wind up this company. It conta
allegations which if well-founded might be ground for an
order. The petitioner's affidavit is the ordinary one, and
this case is met by an affidavit of the bank, which is clear,
and refers to documents, Ac., as to the character of which
there is no room for doubt. This affidavit establishes that
it is altogether untrue that the condition of the bank is
such as will not enable it to carry on its business. The
facts tell their own story. Dividends it is proved have
been regplarly paid for some time, but not for the last half
year, although a large profit was then realised. It was con-
sidered by the authorities better that in place of paying •
dividend the money which might have been appropriated
thereto should be employed for the benefit of the con-
cern, and that was a proper step in the interest of the
beak. One item in the directors' report has been
fixed upon. It was said to have been falsely entered, and
that it showed the bank ought not to be allowed to go on.
If the said item had been improperly introduced it would
give no ground for a winding up but it had been explained
at the last meeting of shareholders, when the item was
removed from the account. The bank had means notwith-
standing to carry on its business. The directors' affidavit
states that the bank has always been able to meet all de-
mands made upon it, that no proceedings at law have ever
been taken against it, and that there is no reason to call
for the winding up, which would of course entail heavy
lees on the shareholders. It has been urge/ that time
ought to be given to answer this affidavit, hut a petition
of this kind requires immediate consideration with a view
to the large interests affected by it. It seems that the
affidavit on the part of the bank which the petitioner says
he has had no time to answer, was filed on AVedneaday.
is short, and there has been time enough to answer it.
The court, therefore, oould not grant further time, and so
keep the petition on the file of the court, and the com-
pany in doubt. The petitioner before presenting this
petition ought to have made himself acquainted with the
facts; of the case. This he did not do, and the petition
must therefore be dismissed, and with oosta.
Mr. Dickinson, Q.C., who appeared for shareholders to
the extent of 1T.3,560/., and Mr. Cottrell and Mr. G. Hast-
ings, who were for other shareholders to a large amount,
asked that their costs might be paid by the petitioners.
After some discussion on this his Honour said the proper
course was to consider thecircumstances of each particular
case, and in such a case as this the petitioner who has been
the means of bringing these shareholders here where they
have a right to appear, must pay all their costs.
Mr. Bacon submitted there was no proof that these per.
sons were shareholders.
Sir R. Palmer—The register of the company is here, and
can be inspected. It should be observed that the copy of
the petition served on the bank was in blank, where the
name of the petitioner was to be inserted, so that it could
not be known who the petitioner was or might be.
Mr. Bacon, Q.C., and Mr. J. N. Higgius were for the
petitioner ; Sir It. Palmer and Mr. Roxburgh for the hank ;
and Mr. Dickinson; Q C., and Mr. G. Hastings and 31r.
Cottrell for the shareholders.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—DEC. 8.
Sittings at Nisi Prius in Middlesex.—(Before Lord Chief
Justice David and a Special Jury.)

SHEANE r.
The plaintiff in this case was formerly cook in the service
of the defendant, a lady who was the widow of a clergy-
man, and twitted at 24, Sunderland-terrace, Weetbourne.-
park. She now sued to recover damages for an assault.
Mr. Cough and Mr. Stratton appeared for the plaintiff ;
and Mr. C, Denman, Q.C., for the defendant.
The plaintiff's statement was that in the summer of last
year she entered the defendant's service, and remained
there three months, and then gave notice to quit. A
week after thiathe defendant said she should goat once,and
witness went to look for lodgings. She afterwards went
to pack up her things, and Mrs. Twins came into the room
intoxicated, and put her hand to the boxes, which stood
one upon the other, and heaved them onto the fluor. She
broke two entail boxes by heaving them into the fireplace.. I
Witness of terwards went for a eto, to take her things away .and
told the defendant that she wanted to take her boxes away
in the cab. The defendant would not let the cabman into
the house, saying " Don't put your foot inside my door, or
you will have to pay fifty hob. (Laughter.)
The Lord Chief Justice—Fifty what!
Mr. Stratton—lt means shillinbgs,ut
the m lorfendantd. Witnesass
asked for her three weeks' wages,deid
that witness should pay her the three weeks' wages before
she left. She used viuleut language, which witness could

not repeat.
Mr. Stratton--But you must atate ik
The witness then repeated the language, which was of a
foul and abusive character. The defendant again used
this language when witness said she would not pay the
wage', but would stay and do her work, told; said, " I will
lock you in my cellar and give you fish bones to eat."
Witness rushed sip stairs while the defendant was pouring
some port wine into a tea-cup, and again fetched a cal..
This was half-past six o'clock, but the defendant would
not let the cabman in nor witness out of the house, but
kept her until nearly nine, striking her all the time on the
head and the shoulders, and hurting her very much. She
also used very bad language. A policeman came to
the top of the area steps and said, " You had better
pay this cabman." She ash', " They will not let
me out, they will kill me." Mre. Kitchener
left about seven. The defendant said to the policeman,
" Come in, sergeant, and have some drink," and she
poured out some port wine into a teacup. He said he did
not drink. The policeman saw the defendant strike her,
and heard the defendant abuse her in most violent
terms. Witness got away at 9 o'clock, hut the defendant
kept hack her largest box. She would not allow anybody
to waist her with her boxes, so she had to drag them along
the floor. She afterwards took out a summons for her
box. The day after the assault she went to a doctor.
Cross-examined—She went to her lawyers the same day.
She was sober at the time. She did not go down on her
knees and call upon all the saints. The defendant knocked
her down ; and her son, who was twenty years of age,
kicked witness, and the defendant's daughter saw what
was done. The defendant also, in very foul language, told
the witness to go to the Pope. Witness had nothing
to drink that day hut one glass of ale. She never told her
mistress that she would let her know what an Irish row
was. The defendant seized her by the throat frequently,
anti witness did nothing but cry. There was a hon,entaiti,
who was n niece of the defendant. Miss Twiss
" Don't strike her, for you know she will he glad of it
but the son said, "Lay into Irish. mother, for they can do
nothing to you fur striking her in your own house."
(Laughter.)
Edward Power, a police constable, said that on the 17th
October last he was on duty in Sutherland-terrace. At
No. 24 the cabman made a statement to me, and I told
him to ring the hell. No one came, and witness went down
the area steps. The door was then opened, anti Mrs. Twiss
said, " Come in, sergeant," but he was not yet a sergeant.
He observed Mrs. Twiss well. She mine to the door in a
drunken attitude, anti said, " Come in, sergeant. I will
tell you all about it." She made use of moat foul language
in reference to the Pope. This was addressed to the plain-
tiff. There were two young ladies and a young gentleman
in the kitchen. Mrs. Twiss poured port wine into a tea-
cup and offered it to him. He refused it. She put her
hand round the plaintiff's neck and said, " I will punch
your face." The plaintiff, who was crying, slipped from
under her arm. The plaintiff was sober ; the defendant
was drunk. Shortly afterwards he left the house.
Mr. Gough—Why did you not assist the plaintiff ?
They were in their own place and no complaint was
made to him. He simply went down to get an address for
the cabman. Ile heard the defendant's son abuse the
plaintiff. Witness went back with another constable. The
plaintiff was getting into a cab, and she was crying.
Cross-examined—Witness was an Irishman himself.
The witness denied in detail various things which it was
suggested he had done with a view to getting the defend-
ant to allow the plaintiff some compensation.
Re.examin al—He saw the plaintiff at the request of the
defendant, to know what she wanted ; whether it was
money, or what.
Geo. M. Matthews, the cabman, said that the plaintiff
was sober. He was kept waiting half or three-quarters of
an hour, and then be went down the steps. The defen-
dant put her hand against him, and told him to keep out.
She said she would have his ticket or his number, or she
would Sue him forty bob. (A laugh.) The defendant was
drunk, and could not stand straight. He waited there
from half-past six until nearly nine. He saw the defendant
push the p'aintiff backwards into the corner three or four
times, when she tried to give witness her luggage. He
was called down into the area three or four times to fetch
the luggage. He heard the defendant make uas el very