The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-25 00:00:00

Rath *Mtilignut.

COURT PAPERS FOR TRIN/TT TERM, 1880.
FULL COURT FOB DIVWEETM INETORCE LND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES
12.
Cases to he heard on the Mb dsp a May, and following
ftiti-Bvsna v. pert heard-maws T. Prltohar
v. Jen* birth's' SAO V. Deft said Grover-Ittehes
v. liketen and Hall. paet heard-Sty:ft V. styli@ and
v. Deadw mor enham-04 v. Maycock allisje-r-
lon limps v. Dea-MiNan
lb v. Medan sad
Yeses Y. and Jenkten-Ibby v.
Ilitylr-i•Pabse Y. v. Pontein-letinnanKre
eon and Gamtar-Iffrber v. Asher and Beane-Dloarr v.
-Miaow v. leheleh-Saardaley v. Mawdelly-lbsditut ant Sot-
gig v, ibe AUClNater. rsl, and Pale* and Mehl =he
ess v. Btoate-Dag T. Deg and
Dwinernr= mg (1111.--fond V. Dosi-Delby v. Dina sal
11•=tray. IMl=Chtterra-Trate v.. Yeas sad
W V. Ito. v. Govire-
ekek v. qtlg sod Webb-lbsors v. .ftia v. Oak-
Tot y. Zama -Darns v. Nom sod larbsp-Sepias v.
%Vilimsdmisleaposa-Nolley v. Saes aril Mosoes
v. Gibes end , ,Ra-lniterf/r..2r.
43 Mimi v. lalked-Derses v. ael
ohs Y. Rena- M•18&-n. Ass& -lierlae-inVet
V. er Pometariase-Maier v. lam art Ildar--Haile.
v. Borten-Imb agnefinit illite-Clige g. Cline-Ortliglil Y.
Corbett sad lao-Porbeer V. leaser owl Prow-Olkeek v.
epos* sad ]amen-WIDEns e Wilk= and
_Okrio--Kry v.
Kep Pares-Oloss .v. Iliseida e Doak and M-
y. Y. elograo-latkuo
V. laliargraii v. red Onoortarr-la
sea e v. Peer v. aratrows
049.1 vOlaisrma y. lill-Pdman v. M-
ates end UntatistoseADort
v.
If sod Teeloor-Perm v. Peke led Dort v.
- v. Beldam sod Dattaril-Zivi . and Field
-Honiara V. Rerrboa-Xtight v.W and Bowen-Charlton
Y. Charlton and Balost v. --Johnson v. John-
son-Culliun v. Cullane-Wiedingtos v.Waddington and Barry-
am v. Gray-Tap v. Tap-Porter v. Porter-Moon v. Moon--
Brewerton v. Brewerton and Woodley-Pitidan v. Fithian and
Lockwood-Phillips v. Phillips and Fox-Blarkey v. Starkey and
Irwin-Stringer v. Stringer and Strinor -Pope v. Pope and
Blow-Foster v. Foster and Hale-RowUnd r. Rowland and
Peacock-Allan v. Allan and Mareovits-Narris v. Barris and
Bond-glen v. Sirr-Algoney v. Alp ..-.Wsterisouse v. Water-
house and Bennett-{fan v. Oox-Oarney v. Oorney3==
-Rebate:a v. Robertson-Worth v. Worth and
tote. Y. Colhavii-Tilling Y. Tillag-Grahani v. Grabens and
Ortlithe-Faunae v. Hare.-Newton v. Newton and Cook-
BevsnAtsballeallett KaMalion) v. Mellielen-Lautoor v. Loner
and wake-Miriam v. Winston@ rod Dyne-Malbon v.
Malbon-Jeass Y. lose and Niehelb-WeVyles:
and Orose-Robaris v. Roberts rod
V. Clobar-Watues v. Beam (DOM cared Mamas)
-NOW. v. Dopierps sod doidada-Dwors v. lagers
-now. ThoW!-Harts v• 1a...
___Pd - iglace-

Cabiari. WY iiiii--___.
.. Hase—i—iseq`iad oakali—
lea v. HWY v. maan—avelv v'. and
Y v Caolawbudi orl v.
H nl sal Ataahoi—Wiyara v Wayzta— v.
aid Dasmi—Agar v laneft v.
Ft .....,,,,....its. L..
V. .....m.l
... v. !adman aid v Maws
sad latadi—lids v. NM—Maw v. v. Ihrted
i1m....11
—lam v Drown sad Irian—Hallar v. Walksp—=titan v.
Hadkrapr
itati and Bonfa—lawls v. lawia—Davy v. Davis sad
v. French 11111 d Vlllongliby—Browa v. 1101111 awl
note—Hlichcack v. Ethesock—eadpoNstalpsold—Orms-
walthe v. Crosinathe and Dation—Hart v. Pa v. PHI—
Bradis v. Brodie. 46," '
00IIRT OF QIIIIEZN'S-BliN0)1.-31Ay 2&

antisp in Banoo.-(Before the Lord Chief Justin, Mr.
Jumbos Win, Mr. Juane Crompton, sad Mr.
Justin innbura.)

DI TSB KIM= OF MUM WHFITINOTOS.
Mr. Oesaphell /Wes appeared to ask fora
mandamus commanding the borough justices of =°73
grant a distress warrant against the pods d James Ellis,
assistant overseer of the parish of Sheffield. It would seem
that Whittington was summoned before the justices on the
27th of January last, on the information of Mc, Inderthis
Vagrant Act, for not supporting his wife. Upon that occa-
sion Whittington established that his wife had com-
mitted various acts of adultery, and the magistrates, satis-
fied with the defence, dismissed the summons. However,
relief having been subsequently given to the wife, Ellis,
not content with the former decision, summoned Whitting-
ton before two different magistrates, and these con-
victed him, and sentenced him to a short term of im -
meat. Ageinel tido conviction Whittington to the
as at Pomfret, when the magistrates not only quashed
bat ordered the seektant areVISOF to pay Whittington all
▪ eati• which amounted to 301. .

LoviChierJustice—Batinis not that order ultra
?but After all Ellis was but a mere servant, and only
es complainant on behalf of others.
air.grouter felt that the order was open to that objection,
still it was so made out.

The Lord 4;i:foe—You may take a rule nisi ; but
under the circumstances the court would not grant a
peremptory mandamus.

BAIL COURT.-MAy 24.

Sittings ad Nisi Prism at Weetminster.—(Before Mr. Justice
Hill and or. Common Jury.)

LE 0011111 •. yon.—VALLIZ.

This sr;; as btk fWaressatam false imprieonment.
The defendant pleaded not gnat?.
Mr. M. Chamber% Q. 0., and Mr. Lloyd were mussel for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., and Mr. Raymond were
counsel for the defendant. _

-111efirtieTrhearing of this extraordinary case was re-
sumed this morning. It was commenced the last day of
the last after term sittings at Westminster, the particulars
of which we published at the time. The plaintiff was a
governs. in the family of Mr. Peel, residing in Wales ; and
the defendant was partner in the firm of Swan and Edgar,
Regentstrest. plaintiff, a Frenchwoman, went in
company with Medea. Blaelanan, also a native of F
to the defendant's shop, and made some punhases. Am
other things, Lippets were shown to them, and y
sane me which could not be explained (ex.
nap that it occurred by accident) a pair of the
was enbesquatly found in Madame Blackman's bag.
protested that they were innocent of any feloniouslian!Cri
that they could not account how the lappets got into
the bag, and expresed their willtspiese to send for re.
spectable friends, notwithstanding which they were given
iato the custody of a policeman end conveyed through the
streets to the Vine-street policestation, where they were
stripped and searched, and locked op for the night. On
the following morning they were walked through the streets
to the police-court, and they were held to bail to 101Wer
any charge that might he preferred against them. A bill
was preferred at the Middlesex Sessions, bat the fury ig-
nored it.

This Morning witnesses were called for the defence.
Peter Calder, the ahopman who served them, said that
the ladies sat opposite each other before the counter.
Whilst showing the lappets he saw Madame Blackman pull
one down, and be distinctly sew it lying on her lap with
the yellow ticket very conspicuous. He afterwards
saw Madame Blackman wink to the plaintiff ; at
the same time she rose from her seat and shook
her clothes, put her hand in her pocket and turned it
inside out. The packet was empty, and she appeared to
be looking for something on the door. She opened her
bag, pot her handkerchief into it, "rummaged" it, and then
riemated herself. When he had served them with whet they
required be communicated what he had seen to the defend.
ant, who rams to them and politely asked them to walk
into his private room. They did so, and the defendant
then expressed hie suspicions to them. Madame Blackman
excited, shook her dress, and opened her bag,
appeared
out her handkerchief, and afterwards the pima
with the yellow ticket. Plaintiff said it was all e =date,
and it must have got in there by chance. The ladies were
mach *milted, and said it wee no me for the defendant to
send fora policemen. The plaintiff gave her address es a
governess residing in Wales. Madame Blackman's ad-
&we was not asked for. A policeman was sent for, and
they were taken to Vine-street police-station, when they
were charged,
In cross-examination the witness mid that was the gest
time he had said that he raw Madame Blackman pull
down the lappets. Madame Blackman gave the plaintiff a
shrewd wink with the right eye before she tuned out her
pocket. Madame Blackman did not may that the lappets
I might have fallen off the counter.
The defendant was called. He gave similar evidence to
the led witness with reference to the part lie took in the
transaction. He thought their &nevem vague with refer.
moo to their addresses. He had had unfortunately many
such ream, and behoving it was clear against the parties he
gave them into custody. He thought he should make no
distinction between persons so offending.
Charles Webb, inspector of police, took the charge. It
was toe late to take the ladies before the magistrate on that
day.
Other evident* having been called in support of the de-
fendant's ems,
The lamed judge lammed up ; and
The kerb having been locked up upwards of two hours,
returned a veedict for the plaintiff ; damages, 801.

001111,T OF COMMON PLEAS.-MAY 24.

Billings 1 Banco.—(Before Lord Chief Justice Erie and
Justices Williams, Willee, and Byles.)

Itool V. TOWZIVI..7IigAV

This w;•aa ;,tio;:gthieclikTieeTeeTi,ifieie of the
Victor. Theatre, to recover demapa kr false imprisue-
met. The plaiatiff led bees poverty master at the
thastre. sad Mr. Towns' soa, who wee IT ar 18 yews el
,esa, salad as tresswer at that eetsblihwrat. Shortly
attar Malmo Iset yams Mr. lowan pee the phdatil ha
Marie far embesitmeat. sad this wasll6olal s impieete-
swat comitillasi el. The atiewiesst was eau& to beam&
table upon the pound that he hod UMW what bie awe
Mi. mist the trial before Mr. Judie* Wiliam the jury
fond for the phiatiff—daawasa IW. Sabseipsaity a ride
was obleased be eater a acamit upon the pond Mat time

•

T eno evidence that the &Amami had adopted the set of
• ses, and this nate now ISM on for argonent.
Mr. Pearce appeared to show cause against the rule, and
Mr. Lewis to support it.
The Lord Justice said the son, in his evidence,
elated that he gave the plaintiff in charge. The plaintiff
wan remanded, and, Sher the remand, he told his father for
the Arat time what he had done. His father did not prohibit
him from proceeding, but said he would have nothing to do
with him in the cue. The father said, " I did not binder
ley *vs •
•ng on the remand. I left it to him to
appear." He (the Lord Chief Justice) warn of opinion that
it warn act necessary for him to say anything upqn the
qnatim whether the father coliznadeptink the
act of the son, for he was of that there was no
evidence that the father did adopt he set of the son'
Rule fora nonsuit absolute.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—MAT 24.
(Before Mr. donamissioner Evans.)
tat BORooau or itARTIZIKINI OAS CONIIIINIZie COPEPANT

(usuren).
Two politicos bad been presented for the winding up of
this company ; and thin was the day appointed for the
hr** One was that of Kr. James Hepburn, leather
seller,' of Camden-town, a contributory; the other was
presented on behalf of the directors of the company.
Brooksbank appeared in support of the first petition.
He etated that there were two grounds on which the peti-
tioners prayed for the whading-up of this annpany--that
the company was unable to pay its debts, mad that it hod
not saantaand Mama though eansidesably IMISII than
critultaispad cam Ms kessatica. Ths company was
alas 01111118,11 s Aiwa bsiay es stated in
the ereeerlame ..!Met*". ." the

and sale a[ pp~ tee tba Ot
and the doing d or isewbeeive to the
attainment d thattSlo4=6loll6lllhil 41A.Nal we
100,0001.,a 900,000 diem d geod e. lel w y atu. al the
capital had ewer boa eentd ts. Tie 0611.1playr=
Goaded in for r midi 11/11 toieuel hetrea ad
most, whiek.uftteeed ; tut that epphaation
failed, and given notice of an appli-
cation for til=mith bid bees withdrawn. Therefore,
substantially aotbhg winter* bad bees dome towards coop
mooring the business of the occomey. In the application
to parliament in the previold session they bad employed a
parliamentary agent, with'whom they had incurred a debt
of above 60/. ; and that they had been unable to pay. There
fore be submitted that the order ought to be made.
Mr. Phillips said be appeared on behalf of the company,
and is support of the pasitios that had been presented on
behalf at Me directors ; bat for the purport, of not incurring
expire they would agree to the order being made on the
ahardmadone Petition, as it was perhaps eoodncive to the
welter* of ell parties that no opposition should be made.
He only asked that the directors' coda should be allowed.
Mr. Brookehank did not object to that.
The Commissioner—l suppose that die facts you date,
about the company not carrying on business and not being
able to pay their debts, are a averred in the affidavit
Mr. bedobWr—They are.
Mr. Phillips—Besides that, they as. admitted in the
directon' petation.
2.. e order was then made in the soul form.