The Express.
London, England, 1850-06-20 00:00:00

AGAINST •

Ms case was part heardoTt; loaner day, and concluded
this morning. It was an action nominally against the late
Sheriff of Surrr• fur a him return. . .

Mr. Martin, and Mr. Creasy, ware counsel for the
plaintiff Mr. Watson, Q.C., and Mr. B. Browne repre-
sented the defendant.

It appeared a judgment by default was obtained some
months ago by the plaintiff for 5001. against one Uttiag and
two others. The warrant was placed in the defendant's
hands for execution, on the goods of Lifting, who then
lived with his aunt, Mrs. Sands, at Pavilion Lodge, Batter.
sea fields. The rill:en failed to effect an entry into the
premise., and the defendants returned nulls bona. It ap-
peared, however, that Utting then had in his possession
within the defendant's bailwick, goods to the
amount of 1431. or 1501., and the question was whether
the sheriff's (Ants bed used due vigilance to levy the
amount of the plaiatiffs claim. After some conflicting evi-
dence as to the bazicaded state of Pavilion Lodge, and the
possibility of enterieg it to levy the amount of the warrant,
if the officers had been sufficiently active,
The Lord Chief Baron observed that there was something
about the case which he could not understand. He thought
the officers had n it been vigilant enough, and he could
net discover that they had made any inquiries whatever with
reference to the habits of Utting fairly to enable them to
execute the warrant. If the jury thought the officers had
not done their duty, the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict
for suck damagi s as they were of °patina be had sustained.
One of the jury asked his lordship if they were at liberty to
consider whether there was any collusion between the plain-
tid and Mr. lifting.
Mr. Creaey objected to the consideration of that question.
There woo no evidence of any thing of the kind, and no
issue bad been relied upon it. The only beim was whether
the officers had been guilty of negligence, and whether
the sheriff's return was false.

The L rd Chtet Buon mud he would take the opinion of
the jury upon that point. A verdict might be taken for the
plaintiff, with such (Images as they thought proper to
award, with liberty to the plaintiff to move the court above
toincream them to 1401.

The jury, after consulting together for • few minutes, re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages one farthing.
!Kr. Creasy then applied for • certificate that it was a
proper action to be tried in • superior court, but the leaned
Judge acid he should take • note of the application lad rt.
serve it for the consideration of the court.
TYRITHITT AND ANOTHER C iIAIATRD. GITTLIIO VP

CLvus.

This was an interpleaderiuneci to try the right to certain
furniture seized under an execution at the dettadant's suit
against one Murton.
Mr. E. Jaws, Q.C., and Mr. Daunt, were counsel for the
plaintiffs; Mr. Martin, Q.C., and Mr. Henderson, repre-
sented the defendant.

It appeared a prefect was promoted by two persons,
named Collins and Winton, last October, for getting up a
Freemason's club, to which the latter was appointed secre-
tary pro. tem. The plaintiffs, the Rev. Mr. Tyrwhitt, of
Lice°!Debi's, and Mr. Rising, a barrister, were appointed
trustees, and in that character they obtained a lease, for 21
years, from the 25th of March last, of the late Mr. Vermin's
house, in Pall.mall. It was coos completely furnished, and,
after various convivial meetings of the gentlemen who pi o-
posed to become members of the club, promised the most
satisfactory results, until some objections wore made to
Blurton, and he was discontinued as temporary secretary.
On the second of May, however, an execution against hint
for 5001., money lent, was issued, at the suit of the present
defecdant, a hatter, carrying on business at Primrose-street,
Bishopegstastreet, and all the furniture purchased by the
trustees for the use of the club was seized. Several other
executions to the amount of 4,0001. or 5,0001 , at the suit of
Blurton's creditors, and for debts alleged to have been con-
tracted by him before his connexion with this club were
likewise pending, but none of them thought proper to run
the risk of an issue. The result of the course pursued by
the defendant was that the club was broken up. After a
long discussion, and the examination of several witnesses,
Mr. Martin called the son of Blurton to prove that Lee,
Collins, and Mr. Rising had got up the club together, as co-
promoters, and that there bad been an agreement between
Blurton and Rising for a division of the profits.
The witness was cross examined with great effect by Mr.
James, and having broken down, two tradesmen were called
to prove the alleged admissions by Mr. Rising. They also
failed, and the learned counsel gave up the case.
A verdict was then taken for the plaintiffs by consent.

Out of the keepers mid that the prisoner bad been sue•
for more trait two years, and there were good reasons
or stating this was not the nun olferny of the kind he had
committed. lie had frigurotly off. rrd to supply pubes with
&tons, and them parties could attend if tit:Aired.
fliateseed to throe seethe hard labour.