The Express.
London, England, 1857-06-01 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGES
THIS I)AT.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BE
(Bitting, ta Banco, before Lord Campbell
Colanky, Erle, and Crompton
THE (WEIN W. It lITIC IA OF 3LO V CESTEIUM t

In this case Sir Frederick Thesiger had
calling upon the Justices of Gloucestershire
why • mandamus should not issue the
pay Mr. William Gelatin], one of the c
county, certain fees, to which he claimed tc
respect of two inquests which he had hold
upon the body of Mary Bryant, aged sixty,
dead on the floor of her room, and the jury
had died by the visitation of Gm
was upon • child named Charles Ball, aged
who scalded itself and died in i•onsequenc
returned a verdict to that effect. In each I
coroner had received notice of the death frees
*table; but the coroner did not suggest in
the death had been attended with suapicion
Under the 25th George 11., c. 29, • coroner
tee of 20s. for every inquest daly taken,
Ein the present reign gave him an
ffikl . The justices at quarter sessions
Gaisfird those fees in respect of the two biq
an order for the payment of hie mileage •
Fames, which be was out of pocket.
Mr. Seteent Bytes, with whom was M
appeand to show muse against the ride.
:Er F. Thesiger expressed • hope that
order a return to be made to the mandamus,
of SO much importers c might be solemni;
the return. It wee a question which had
tercet and attention in the country..

—Lord Campbell, as at present *advised, w
gement to that course. In his opinion, it w
to consider whether the coroner was emit
and the case did not min a point of law,
received cotter of a death, he was ho
~gnest
ltr. Sajeant /tyke said the usual prod
was to Infer the coroner's claim to a comm
report 'upon it, and the coronee..was pawl
that report, and the justices du
vh
titled to receive. The jumble stated
that Mr. Gaisford alleged no groom
as a rdason for holding the two inquests,
minion they were both useless and thexpe
fisted that the number of imparts in the co
In a greater portion than the increase of tt
that many complaints had been made to t
amount which the allowance to thecoronen
bathed gentleman now submitted that it w
Judith, to say whether an inquest had bee
whether the 2oruner was entitled to the fee
ha reaped of it.
Mr. Skinner followed on the same side.
Sir F. Thesiger and Mr Payne were h
the rule.

"—LOre Campbell, in delivering judge
aeon& had been raised u to the coroner's
Ise to 'warrant the court in allowing the
upon that point, but in his opinion there
uspoct to the 2Os. fee, The 23th Geo.
where inquests were duly taken, and he the
bearded° the justices at sessions thejudge
bad been duly taken. They had not ;
whether en inquest had been taken scam
law, hut whether the coroner had acted
dirge of his duty in bolding the inqui
not sot in the proper discharge of his
without any reasonable ground for su
bad arisen from other than natural cal
point the justices, and not the constable
the coroner, were the judges ; and this o
view Ilse decision of the justices where d
and honestly in discharge of the in
upon, them. They were not e
duly recompense the coroner for the is
properly held, but to see that he had E
beyond his duty and institute inquisition
no ground to suspect that the person h
threl• causes. It wee solemnly deck
that this wee the right construe)
and go opinion then expreued by the c
to he law of the land. If that was not
It be altered by the legislature, but it au
the judicial decision of this court.
The other judges expressed a similar of
Rule absolute fora mandamus with n

COURT OF COMMON
(BtEtihge In Banen—Before Chief Jus
Justices Creswell, Williams,
SZADLE V. THE EASTERN COUNTIIIII