The Express.
London, England, 1859-11-03 00:00:00

IMPORTANT TO RAILWAY OOMP•NIid.

This was ea action brought by lb. plaintiff, • fish dealer
at Hitchin, is Hertfordshire, spirt the k astern Counties
Railway Company, for not dill • quedity of fish, con-
signed to the plaintiff by a person at Yarmouth, in time for
the market at Hitchin. It would mesas that for come time
the plaintiff had been in the habit of receiving by the de-
Indents' railway fish from Yarmouth is time for the usual
market at Hitch's'. The flab, although all but invariably
forwarded by the =vamp' 'servants in • " pa/meager train,"
was only paid for as "gouda," and u such wee only entitled
to the slow transmission. of • "goods train." However,
upon ose ocesaios, the company in derogation of their usual
practice as regarded the plaintiff, forwarded the
fish from Cambridge to Hitthin bT. • "good.
train," instead of a " pamenger train. The con-
meta: was the flab was late for market, and the plaintiff
to acoept it, the defendants mold the fish and tendered
toth7r3alntiff the proceeds lee the amount of the company's
charges, which, however, the plaintiff was unwilling to
acteept. The OWLS!, thani brought an action against the
company, first, for not delivering the fish in • reasonable
time; and secondly, for the improper conversion of the fish.
The cause MIRO on to be tried before Mr. Justice Bleckours
at Croydon, when the jury showing strong sympathy for
the plaintiff, • verdict for 131. on both counts was taken for
the plaintiff —that la to say, whether one or both wont* of
the declension should be upheld, the verdict was still to
be 131.

-11fr.11dirin Jamie now moved to eater the verdict for the
cialeadeate, ea the ground that there was so evidence to
show that they had been guilty of unrearusable delay in
act delivering the goods 110012sr. It MO admitted the BA
was paid for simply se goods—no eastact,
_therefore, tub-
slemi brewer the genies that they should Is forwiurded
otherwise than a goods. On the other head, if the flak had
best neuelly forwarded by a "pasmager train," that wee to
the advantage of tha plaintiff, and be could sot tars round
=dt the
erred att terthat m ".1. Pet "it
• ;mu I a r.
re Tot °a
'e
they
count d ta.
stover, it was quits plain the company were justified by theta
bye-laws in selling the fish zed alt such other perishable
articles what the coseigotte refused to accept them.
The wart were anenienously of opinion that as regarded
the first twat the verdict ought to wind. The right view
of the matted between the parties was not that the cum-
play asisrawk to envoy this • ular parcel of fish as
goods," bat that Ihoy tot err; that according to
duds twabilolad warm of bestows with the plaintiff, Un-
doubtedly that Ilan wool Nurse was to convey the deb by
peseesest alba A. regarded, however, the count is trover,
a was email be pasted, so ea Important general question
woe at Whs.

ilrAlanate arid be would tabu a rule upon that ground, aa
ewe wen several action. far teem peadiag against the

"Cllctiart row at a quaster before en.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Nov. 2.
Sittings in Bane.—(Bsiore the Lord aid Baron, and
llama Bramwell, Waimea, aad Chan=ll.)
0111111 A-0 REIN 111 ANAUCII.

WATT, V.

Mr. Mallifity moved in this most which watt tried before
Mr. Justice Hill, at Carlisle, when a verdict wee found for
the dadanclunt, to set the verdict aside or for • new trial, on
the ground that certain documentary evidence had been im-
properly received ; and on thin point the learned judge him-
self eatertafned some doubt, and had reserved Mere to move.
It was an action of ejectment brought in respect to some
copyhoid at Denton, in Cumberland; end the questicn Mime
was the legitimacy of the plaintiff. Both pasties agreed
that the pleasure fattier and mother had been mended at
Gretna-green, but the question was whether the marrisge
had provided his birth or took place subsequently. For the
plaintiff it was shown that the birth look place two days
before the marriage, the plaintiff alleging that he was borate
the 18th of March, 1824 five dsys after the marriemitth
took place on the 13th of the same month. For the
it was untended that the muds', took place oh the Bth,
sad the birth on the lUth, and in support of tbie the registry
wee produced by the widow of the person who bad ce-
lel:nand the marriage. It was an entry of mar-
hap on the 13th of March, 1824. The plaintiff called amongst
his whammies two persons who had accompanied him to
Oretata-greatt, and the landlord of a publialeotme there, and evi-
donee was given to peeve that the piaintlir s mother wee in
the family way at the time of the marriage. At the trial the
mother of the plaintiff was inked if shs had affiliated the
obild, which she simmered in the negative, sad then an order
wee produced, signed by two justices, both of whom ore
deed, and this was the evidence objected to, its effect being
that the plaintiff's father was the putative father of the
child.

Mr. Baron Channel' asked if thia order Lad bees acted oa.
Mr. biestisty replied that in toe part there wee en entry
by the overseer that 3L lie. had boa paid, bat is another
pert this was corrected, and 11.9 e. was entered, and to another
place there was sat ashy that nothing bad been received, bat
that the father had paid a small fee for the name.
Their kedahips granted a rule nisi.