The Express.
London, England, 1866-04-19 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Beneo.Before the Lord Chief Justin, and
Eits4l. —Justices Blackburn, Shea, and Lush.)
Mon tr. HOWARD.
Q.C., said this was an action tried at the
Mr.;,..-Leicester before Mr. Baron Martin, when
last o•74orsed a verdict for the defendant. The action
the tows aniati4 • lit of way over certain
was of the • . The learned counsel
-Mid for a new trial on the ground of mil-
morvi* el I
&WO iid.
Rake*
n fr. THI MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY.
QC., said this was an action tried at
ajar, Mr. . Justice Lush, when the jury returned
ThrtTorthe defendant. He moved for a rule nisi to
,• inet why the verdict should not be set aside and a
••••(,.ai had, on the ground principally of the discovery
new trial of very important evidence. The
the
time. was an engineer of South Shields, and
wooed of serious injuries sustained by him
on the defendants' line from
1•1111„,..inal Plaretouth Shields. The accident occurred near
14"..."--- war MalbOTOllich. The train was at
Wiese,sd, and the plsintiff was in an old Pics.lirciagleir when
:et °armed. Evidence only was given sufficient to
siU
~a d wee an the defendants to enterold on their case, when
itr carriage which
Oaf ""'-"iricrot.:d from the London and North
they
Railway Company j but they admitted
it•••"'weie haw it could be shown that any
Shay
nae weld he attributed to them. The accident they
yid
oiiinid through • latent defect in the welding of the
weep of the tire of the wheeL A broken wheel was brought
*to Derby bat so evidence was given to show that it wee the
vied in questm, but engineers were called by the com-
Aro dated ghat the defect might have existed without
OR the part of the maker. Upon that the
•'"tirg: said he did not think the defend-
or sere liable, and the jury returned a ver-
;LA, the defendant. Since the trial and its
Mt:Tawas in the newspapers, Mrs. Sharpe, widow
same, who was travelling in the same car-
„aaa etch a Mr. Bowman, bad communicated to the
;Val list in London she complained of the state of
enrisges. At Trent station the wheel was
in het ea fire, land water was thrown on it,
old,* produced an enormous quantity of smoke and fire,
g Os train almost immediately after again started with
io Nara carriage, and at a very high rate of speed, be-
mega as Ammo informed. the defendanta were competing
enithe Great Northern Railway. It appeared that Mr.
3se brought an action against the defendants, which
weird st Liverpool, and on Mrs. Sharpc's evidence the
di/state settled the action by paying Mr. Bow.
• I,OOOL Up to the trial of the plaintiff's action
lr ess induced to believe, from the negotia-
no that puled between him and the company,
that only pouit in dispute was the amount of the da-
mp& The learned counsel also moved en the point that
ohm', carriage started on its journey there was an im-
Db.a warranty that it was roadworthy, and that • latent
defect in any port of it was no answer for any injuries that
eight result from it.
Ths Cowl entertained considerable doubt with reference
to the second point, but granted a rule generally.
Bak granted aocordingly.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN RS 3. PERCIVAL WAITE.
The bankrupt was a merchant of Mincing-lane. The
darn amount to 73,5421. At the last sitting, a resolution
was pawed for winding-up the estate under a deed, and an
adjournment was taken for that purpose. The sitting was
now farther adjourned to the 25th of May, to give time for
the registration of the deed.
IN RE CAPTAIN CPR/MIMS/.
The bankrupt had been a captain in the Military Train,
at Weibrich. He came before the court with debts of
5,107/ At the last sitting a proposal was made for annul-
big the bankruptcy on the payment of a composition of
3a in the pound ; but this not having been carried out, a
father adjournment was ordered.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulbtun.)
IN RE HENRY DRESSER.
The bankrupt was a merchant, of Great St. Helen's,
trading as Henry Dresser and Co. The bankruptcy oc-
curred nearly two years ago, in June, 1862. The accounts
filed at different periods since show an aggregate liability
of 157,H11., with assets and property held of about 99,425 f.
The 'soignee' made certain requisitions to the bankrupt,
the sewed to which were only tiled about a week ago.
Mr. Bagley, for the assignees, said that the bankrupt's
answers were not satisfactory.
Mr. Reed, on behalf of a creditor for upwards of 20,0001.,
required further explanation of an item in the accounts of
53,157 f., and which was said to represent acceptances for
the firm of Lawrence and Fry beyond the amount for
which value had been received. If this were so, there were
accommodation acceptances to that amount, although it
was alleged thattimberhad heen bought to the full amount,
and that a large portion of the bills had never been put in
circulation. If the bankrupt's statement were correct as
to the timber being actually purchased, the assignees
were entitled to have it delivered for the benefit of the
estate.
Mr. Linklater, for the bankrupt, contended that the
assignees being satisfied, no further adjournment was
necessary, but the bankrupt himself was quite willing that
another adjournment should take place if there was any
prospect of the assets being thereby increased.
Hu Honour said he thought it was a case for further in-
quiry, and suggested that the facts should be investigated
at a pirate sitting.
Adjourned for a month.

SHERIFF'S' COURT, RED-LION-SQUARE.
PSOCUDINGS IN A WRIT OF " RLEGIT" AGAINST A RAILWAY
COMPANY.

Thu day an unusual proceeding against a railway com-
pany was heard before Mr. Under-Sheriff Burchell and a
lacy at the Sheriffs' Court, Red-lion-square. A writ of
slept was issued by the Court of Common Pleas in the
case of "Scott v. the Uxbridge and Rickmansworth Rail-
way," to ascertain what goods, chattels, and lands were
held by the company in the county of Middlesex.
Mr. C. W. Wood appeared as counsel on the part of the
plaintiff. He stated that Mr. Scott was the registered
public officer of the Union Bank of London, and last
Marsh a judgment was obtained against the Uxbridge and
Riekmansworth Railway Company for 1,1152/. 14s. M.
The object of the inquisition was to ascertain the pro-
Piny possessed in the county of Middlesex. He should
all before the jury the secretary of the company as well
as the engineer, and they would state whether there was
any property in the county.
Mr. 1 °rhea stated that he was secretary of the company
sad they had some office furniture at No. 5, Westminster
Chambers. It was worth from WI. to 100/. The cora-
Puy had no land in Middlesex.
Mr. Pearce, the engineer of the company, said they had
to had in Middlesex. The office furniture was not within
his knowledge.
Mr. Under-Sheriff Burchell told the jury that they would
fad the value of the office furniture acco • to the evi.
!knee ; they would also find that the company had no land
is the county of Middlesex.
The jury asked whether they were to find the value of
the furniture?
Mr. Under-Sheriff {Burchell said they were bound to
do so.
The jury gave a verdict in accordance with the evidence.