The Express.
London, England, 1860-08-13 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOLE CI:B(1171T. ..4:III7ILDIPORD, A.uotrer 10.
(Ware Laid °bird Joplin Ooekburn and a Special Jury.)
TOWARDS V. THE LONDON A 1 NORTH WD3TER3 RAILWAY.

This was an action to recover damages for injuries an.
tabled by the plaintiff through an accident.
Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q. 0., upd Mr.Honevman were
for the plaintiff ; Mr. Bovill, qc., and Mr. O. Denman
were for the defendant.
The plaintiff in this case is one of the travelling clerks
employed by the Poet-ofece, and his duty wee to attend the
mail train between Preston and London, and he received
altogether about 1501. • for his services. The accident
that was the subject of Mu took place on the morning
of the 19th of February t, near Wigan upon the up
journey, and the plaintiff received considerable injury. The
only question in the cause was as to the extent of that
injury, it being contended on behalf of the plaintiff that he
had received permanent injury to the spine, which would
for ever prevent him from following any occupation re-
quiring bodily exertion, while, on the part of the company
it was contended that the injury was not so serious as had
been represented. Several surgeons were examined on both
sides in reference to this state of facts.

dame jerglitintately returned a verdict for the plaintiff ;
(Before Yr. Justice Blackburn and Special Juries.)

AUGUST 11.

GOTT T. THI GILT NOSTHIBB ILLELWAY COMPANT.

This was an action for false imprisonment. Mr. Montagu
Chambers, QM., sad Mr. Lefevre were for the plaintiff ;
Mr. Humphreys, Q. 0., sad Mr. Leech were for the de-
fendants.

The plaintiff in this action, it appeared, was a balkier carry.
ing ou a small business at Wood-green, a short distance from
Homey, and he brought his action aphid the defendant.
for having been given to custody by one of their servants
for having trevelled upon the railway without having a pro-
per ticket, with intent to defraud them. It appeared that
sae the 12th of March the plaintiff had to go to London to
do a job, and lie had a return ticket, and oddly enough, on
the previous Thursday a mister of his wife had gone down to
Wood.rresu to visit them from London, and she had plead
her return ticket on the obirnsey *we where the plaintiff
had placed his, and be secidentakv toOk up her ticket in-
Used of his own, she not having returned on the same day
as she intended. When be presented this ticket in Loudon
it was of wens Immedietely discovered that it was an old
ticket, and when the *fetal was told that it was ono that
had base tinned on the previous Thursday, he at ono
imagined how the mistake had occurred, and told
the ticket collector that he hail brought his
sister's ticket by mistake, and that if they would
and sonic mu to his house or despatch a telegraphic mes-
sage, they would find that he was a respectable person, and
that the fact was as he had rspreeented it, and that he had
no intention to &druid the co . Notwithstanding
this explanation, it appeared tha e, a detective
olßoer employed by the company, took the plaintiff to the
()eaden-town police station, where be was formally charged
with intending to defraud the company, and he was then
convoyed before Mr. Tyrwbitt at the Clerkenwell police-
court. Ile was detained there until the afternoon, whim he
was allowed to go, upon his entering into his recognisance to
aron the following morning, and he then produced the
t half of the ticket, and warn discharged.
le jury were of opinion that the company was liable for
what had been dune, and they awarded the plaintiff UM.
Itdemagog-
ill expected that the Lord Chief Justice will be well
sough to sit on Monday, and should he be so, special jury
curse will be tried in both courts. In Mr. Justice Black-
burn's court the oar of "Hooper v. the Midland Railway^
is peat heard, and it will be resumed the first thing on
Monday.