The Express.
London, England, 1866-04-17 00:00:00

r
9 1I)3 I

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
sittinp in Bono.—(Before the Lord Chief
Justice; Blackburn, Shee, and Lull.)
KNOWLES r.
_ _

Mr. Manisty, Q.C., said this was an action tried
-
Leeds before Mr. Justice Resting, when a verdkt was
turned for the plaintiff for 30/., with leapl:
move to increase the verdict to 23ff. He.
It was an action upon a warnuaty hf
defendant, a cattle sler, that sui gduZi
which he sold to the plaintiff were free from the rualsgeek
whereas, in fact, they were suffering from the dt
although it at fret only manifested itselfitselfin two of t
Ultimately all six died of the disease, and there vases
disease before in the neighbourhood, nor had there bey
any mind!.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said it was portage that'll tie
castle might have been diseased at the time, skim* ay
two abowed. The question was whether subsequent
festation of the disease in the other four was tors HINK4eII.
entitle the plaintiff to recover.
Mr. Justice Mee said that if four were mike xOll n
the time of sale the warranty would hold good el ee
They must not serums that the whole were ansociad
Mr. Manisty said the diiesae developed itself anon ion
mediately after the purchase, and all sax died.
Rule granted.
HUGHES AND ANOTHER v. STRAKER AND ANOTHER
Mr. Temple, Q.C., said this was an adios icy
before Mr. Justice Mellor at the lad MUM in
the °minty of Northumberland, when the verdict en
for the plaintiffs. He now moved, by leays of lie
learned judge, for a rule to show cense .6.
the verdict should not be entered for the dafinaZ:
on the second plea, which was that the vessel in' ifew-Q
was in charge of a regularly appointed Tyne sSe
action was for a collision an the river .4
the second plea with the facts proved • des
question whether defendants were exonerated feu
their liability in consequence of their nod hic
at the time under the exclusive care and dire:hos el
licensed pilot. The question had been raised in this eft
in a mmilar action from the Tyne, and was sow mil.
decision in the Court of Error, and as that one
govern this one he asked for a rule to stand over utilise
cave was decided.

Rule granted.
!MAD V. Willi.
Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., said, this was an action MO
before the Lord Chief Justice, at the last after-tem Rif.
Mese: nisi prim sittings, when the jury rens:mil s
verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff wm WM*
in the City, and the defendant was an architect tat
builder, and the action wee brought to lam
compensation for injuries received by the *Mil II
Greville-road, Kilburn, in February, 1864, in coesimme
of the alleged negligence of the defendant in leaving*
footpath in front of some houses he was buildisi fa ga
imperfect state. The plaintiff moved to set mile tits
verdict, and for a new trial, on the ground of sawn&
Rule refused.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
(Sittings in Banco, before Lord Chief Justice Bit, n 1
Justices Byles, Keating, and Smith.)
TUI DUKE OP BZAIWORT r. CRAWSILIR.
. . . _ .

This was an action to try the fright to a WM, la
river Usk, which the Doke of Bandon claims elan
the manor of Crickhowel, in Breconshire. At the MI
before Mr. Justice Blackburn evidenee was gisa
that, from a period as early as 1444, thus an
a fishery attached to the manor, and that Os
lords of the manor had dealt with it by leasing end astir
ways down to a recent period. On the other band, As
was evidence of owners of land adjoining the stream km*
fished without interruption ; and the jury found far Va
defendant, who claimed as one of inch landowners.
Mr. Grove, Q.C., now moved for a rule for a new trid,
upon the ground that the judge had admitted ths
1 deposition of a witness for the defendant named HMIs
without having the evidence of a medical man thie le
was so ill that he was unable to attend. Mecums maims
that Mr. Hawkins was an old man, and that he mud
I very bad. There wan also the affidavit of a
1 medical man that Mr. Hawkins was unable to attend; MS
I it was submitted that this affidavit was not admissible, ui
that the medical man should himself have been praml
in court.
The court granted the rule upon this point, and refuel
, it as to some others.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Sittings in Banco—(Before the Lord Chid Baron arl
Barons Martin, Bramwell and Pigott.)
CASE OP CHAIthoTTE WINOOL
This morning the Solicitor-General applied to tied
lordship. individually, as members of the Coat
of Exchequer Chamber, to appoint an early die
for the case of Charlotte Winsor, which gow
to that court by way of appeal from de
decision of the Court of Queens Bench. The crown we
ready to proceed, and he was informed that the solicits
for the prisoner was also ready. If Monday nest wield
for bringing up the primmer for the purpose of meg*
errors, eight days after then would have to slam balm
the case could be argued.
Mr. Baron Bramwell—We will consult with the oder
members of the Court of Exchequer Chamber, who it
sit to hear the case, who are judges of the Court of Cat
mon Pleas.
After some discussion it was arranged that the Wein.
General should see the Chief Justice of the COMMON PIO
as to whether the day named would be convenient.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holro)L)
IN NZ HAHMI HALLE.
This dram an application for release from custody. lb
bankrupt, who petitioned in forme pauper's, vie &mild
as of Houndeditch, shirt dresser.
Mr. Dobie supported the application.
His Honour (referring to the prooeediage) ssid lis
bankrupt did not appear to have inserted his detail(
creditor in the " three day' statement," the Ode
could not be sustained where there was So palpible
omission.
The bankrupt, in explanation, said the Gaels yr
owing to inadvertence. He asked for leave to swot
The Commissioner said he could not siker sa yawl.
mint in such a case, and dismissed the petition.