The Express.
London, England, 1868-12-03 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

Sittings at Nil Prim, in Middiewm.—(Befere Mr. Inetios
&Mak sad a Comma Jury.)
NSOONE O. mass.—INNOON 01 MONO= ON MAINUANS.
This was an action t. recover denea for a kook of
peonies of 'persists, and it was jpartly heard yesterday.
Ur. ThalitiOsoo4.o., sod Xr. mpiered foe
the =sod Xr. D. Keane, Q. 0., and Xr. Day for
the
Joseph D. Patti* a oa esid—l was by
the deteadant as three or foursmooths, from to
drive him. The plaintiff was with him daffy. I used
gesorally drive where I thought bed. I some.
times drove him to his solicitor and somethass to hie
stockbroker's in °option-end. He spoke about the
pkintaff in a jocular way. He said she was • very nice
woman and he was going tomarry her.
Mr. Judie. Smath—ls that what you ma speaking is
a pottier trey ? (A laugh.)
Witnem—l drove the defendant to Doctor'*.commons
to get the marriage Romeo and I afterwards maw him give
it to the plaintiff, when we bad driven to her house. The
defendant looks very different now from what he did
when he got the license. He used to be particularly neat
and dean, and wore jewellery.
Mr. liaddleeton—Then you do not recognisebim now in
his old attire and unkempt looks?
Witness—Oh yes, I recognise him, and dour shall.
Croms-mamined—The defendant was not Monk when
he got the license. I never sew him the worse for drink,
not even when he was at the music halls. I heard the
defendant order a brass plate bearing his own name to be
knt on the plaintiff's door. I ako heard him order • new
ocker.

Mr. Robert William Scott—l am a shirt manufacturer.
I have known the plaintiff live or six years. She worked
Mr me, and earned 16e. or 16s. a week, and soinetnnes 11.
In Apnl last she gave the work up, and said she was
going to get marred. I have given her no work since.
Mr. Henry William May—l am a surveyor, in Park-
street, Grosvenor-equare. I have known the plaintiff
25 years. Her husband died about seven years ago. In
Apnl last, in consequence of a communication from the
plaintiff, I made arrangements in reference to a lease of
the plaintiff's house. 1 was to sell it. Afterwards I saw the
plaintiff with the defendant, whom she introduced
as an old friend of her father and mother.
In the course of conversation the defendant said
he was shortly going to marry the plaintiff. From
the dress and appearance of the defendant,
1 thought that he had been in the navy, and he said, "Oh,
no, 1 pun a money lender." He said he thought it best to
be maimed, as ho wanted some one to take care of him. He
said that he had settled SOK upon the plaintiff, and 4001.
upon his adopted daughter. I said to hue., nave you
got trustees r" He said, " That *all right' I said that
I thought the plaintiff's; step-father should be • third
trustee, I asked plaintiff how much money she owed,
and she said half-a-year's rent and about 81.
Mr. Land hub-1 am the plaintiff's ground landlord.
The first week in May the detendaat came to my house.
1 was not at home and he called • week atter and left a
manage that he should like me to make an account of
what the plaintiff owed me. He first left word that he
was married to the plaintiff, and when I saw him I asked
him if he was really married and he said "No, but shall
be shortly." Ile asked me if I would sell the is... of the
plaintiff's house and I said "Yes," and I afterwards had
a umnrinication from Mr. Finch, the plaintiff's solicitor,
on the subject. W hen I again saw the defendant he
would scarcely speak to me.
Cross-examined—ln all his communications with me
defendant was a very sensible men.
This was the plaintiff's case, and no witnesses were
called for the defence.
Mr. Ream, in addressing the jury for the defendant,
said that he perfectly agreed with his learned friend that
the real question was what the plaintiff had lode by the mar-
riage not having been celebrated. But it was • marriage
with a paralytic old man who could not dress or undress
himself ; and to whom the plaintiff, who was mid to be
"fat, fair, and forty," was to have been tied for his life
under the mockery of holy matrimony. He submitted that
this was me of those came which landed to make the very
form of action of breach of promise of marriage an ab-
surdity, for that form of action wee never intended to
reward speculators in the follies and frailties of old men.
The jury, however' must say whet damages ought to be
_ven, became 40 in rade health had not married 76, who
bad been for thirty years paralysed.
Mr. Jambes Smith directed the jury that the only ques-
tion for them was one of damages, and they, taking ail the
circumstances into consideration, must say what sum they
would award to the plaintiff.
The jury found for the plaintiff for 2001.
reran-Why, the damages are only laid at 2001.
Mr. Haddleeton—They are laid at 6004
Mr. Justice Smith—Yee, 6001. is right.
Mr. Haase—The amount is stated at 2001. in my brief.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
(Sittings in Error.)
ono= o. wirrown.

The Lord Chief Justice and Lord Chief Baron Kelly
came into court about 11 o'clock this morning, end
delivered judgment in this • rtant case Maim to the
usage of the Stock The action was
brought to recover 8001. and intone, the amount of a
call of 101. per share upon 80 shares in Overand, Gurney,
and Co. (Limited), made after the sale of the shares by
the plaintiff to the defendant& was
a amtleman residing at Norbury-park, The plaintiff and the
dedendaste were Mook4olibsee sad membere of
the Stook I:change, and this was an make founded on
an implied agreement by the defendants that on the sale
by the plaintiff to them, or such other parson or purer= as
they should name, of certain shares ra the incorporated
joint stock company of, Ovezend, Gurney, and Co.
(Limited), and to. transfer of such shares to them or
their nominees, they would accept the ruse, and cense
them to be iiitered in the names of the de-
fendants, or of such nominees as the owner or
owners of the shares. The shares having been tram-
fezred to the arena sus of the defendants, bet se* semi-
nese haying emitted to execute the emaeless, or
to cense Ciseemdme to be registered as the emery,
the plaintiff thus remaining the regirisred balder
of the shares bad been compelled to pay a sell
since made. The plaintiff now lweeght kis adios
against the delsa sto be indemetied retreat al the
permed§ es undo. The OM_ they
ever entered
in
may math implied agnement, sad axes
their liability in raga* of it.
The cam turned upon the usage of the Stock Exchange
in reference to these tranesetime. The fasts were tamed
into a special can and argued be tbe Court of COMM
Pleas, when the majority of the learned =
gave judgment for the laktiff. Age Met that a
the defendants appealed-to this mart, and after hearieg
the arguments the court took time M amidst Me judg-
ment. To-day his lordship delivered judgment, re-
versing the decision of the Court of Common Pima, end
directing the verdict to be entered for the defendants.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before 3b. Ccaunboiaaor Hobart.)
IN 1.11 JAMB OVITIII.

The bankrupt, described u a picture home maker, car-
rying on busmen at 416, Hackney-read, asked to be re-
leased from custody. The debts were of small amount.
Yr. Beard opposed, and X. Banks supported the appli-
cation.
The detaining creditor was Mrs. Uirs*ws Jeweller,
who bad supplied the bankrupt milli ary Os
amoun of 4W. The bankrupt tined la =dos
end wast arrested under a writ el ma Mri:
that he was about to depart tee await & bamberi