The Express.
London, England, 1868-06-25 00:00:00

ILISSORD V. TILE MOUTH WI:IMMIX RAILWAY 0011:PAIIT.

This WAR an action to recover damages for injuries suf-
iced in Um railway accident that happened at the War-
rington junction on the 29th June fast year. The train
was an express, and in consequence of some blunder at
the points it went on to a wrong line of rails, and nut
into some coal trucks. The defendants admitted their
liability, and the only question, therefore, was the
amount of damages to which the plaintiff was entitled.
Mr. J. J. Powell, Q.C., and Mr. Grantham appeared for
the plaintiff ; and Mr. Giffurd, Q.C., and Mr. Fletcher for
the defendants.
The plaintiff was a young man 23 years of age. Ho
had served his time in Wigmore-street as apprentice to
a cabinetmaker, and after his time was out be procured an
engagemcht as pantomimist, and devoted himself to that
way of getting his living. At the time of the accident,
the plaintiff was on his way to fulfil an engagement at
31. 10e. per week, besides benefits. The carriage in which
the plaintiff was was smashed by the collision, and when
he recovered his senses be found himself with his head
downward, and his heels in the air, and he was surrounded
by the fragments of the carriage. Hewes, of course, very
seriously brained, and his collar-bone was broken. The
fracture was set, but in such a way that the ends of the
bone overlapped ; and the elbow joint, having been long
out of use, had become stiff, so that the plaintiff could
not straighten his arm to the full extent, and was unable
to do any serious muscular work with it.
Sir William Fergunsim and Mr. Skey were called to give
I evidence as to the plaintiff's hurt, and the effect of it was
that the plaintiff must not act as a pantomimist again, be-
Ca KC his t o doing might cause the overlapping bone to
pierce a blood-vessel, and produce death within ton
minutes. . . "

ii;:liiffard called no witnesses, but addrewd the jury

in mitigation of damages.
The jury found for the plaintiff—damages 5001.

COIJIIT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
Jums 24.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
OSBOT/NE O. antrrou.--writamos CASE.
(Continued from yesterday's Erpress.)
The plaintiff, on being ex:,m'mNl, maid -My nle is
now 45. I went into the .crvice of James
.Britton 23

)11/18 ago. At first he gave me 1.51. a year, but 16 or 17
years ago be raised my wages to 201. On the lit of
January, 1667, he owed me about :115/. The Gibson
kept a public lime.e. After Gamin's death, ther2 wa. a
d;eussaei between the intestate and myself about Mr.i.
C lon. the had given out that he had offered lex
marriage. I raid "if you will give me my wages I will
go away end trouble you no more." He said, "Oh, no.
I never raid anything to the woman, and I'll marry
you." This was in January, 1867. lie sent Mrs. King-
dom, my sister, to Birmingham with .5.. to put
in the banns. He would not be married at Stourbridge.
because lie did not want his brother (who ill-used me) to
know of the wedding. He was on had terms with his
brother. Birmingham was eleven or twelve miles distant.
On the duy of the wedding, we left home at about eight
o'clock, and drove over in our pony trap to the church.
We got there at about ten, and met my sister and my ore-
sent husband, Osborne, there. Britton had had a touch of
rheumatism, but it only affected his hand at that time.
Mr. Hill married us. Mr. Hill, in asking Briton his trade,
said, "You're all nailers 1' Britton was a nailer but
latterly he had only sold them. He told Mr. Hill that his
father's name was Samuel. Britton signed the register with
a cross, for when rheumatic he could not write. I used often
to make memoranda for him, and when his hand got better
he would enter them in his books. The witneiees to the
marriage were my sister and Fisher, an official of the
church. After the marriage we went to lunch at a tin-
man's in Bismingham named Siviter. Britton bought
somelgoods of Siviter, paid for them, and took them away.
Then we went to a publican's, named Owen, in Broad-
street; then to Mr. Talbot's, a gold refiner ; and after
making other calls we returned home. We did not men-
tion our marriage to anyone. In March I went over
to a trial at Worcester. I was a witness. I gave my
name as " Mary Ann Shaw," for my name had been
entered before we were married. Mr. Price, our
attorney, did not then know of the wedding.
Britton used to make journeys three times a year.
He went on one of these just before his death. On the
7th of October he wrote to mu to drive over and meet him
at Birmingham. The letter was put in. It contained
no express recognition of the plaintiff as wife.] As we
were driving home a wheel came off, but we were not
thrown out. Britton was very ill, for he had caught a
violent cold. On the day ho died he got up, washed him-
self, shaved himself ; then he was taken worse and died.
I sent for my sister, and also for Mr. Price. Samuel
Britton came the same day, and accused me of murdering
my husband. The fact of my marriage was mentioned. I
had fetched young Mr. Price because the Britton were ill-
using me. I told him that I was married, and he told
them that some of the property would belong to me as
widow. I was married early in November to Osborne. I
did that for protection ; for I dared not go through the
streets. The defendant hrew brickbats at me, and I have
bruises on me now from the effects of his violence.
- .

Croes-examined--My husband was buried on the 3rd of
November, and I was married to Osborne on the 10th. I
have; nothing to show for the money Britton owed me
when I was married to him. He was an old man. Had
often known him to sign his name by a cross when his
band was rheumatic. The book produced is in his hand-
writing. There are entries on the day of the wedding,
but he used to copy my memoranda when he was able.
That might be in an hour or two afterwards. I used
to bathe his hand with cold water, and that would some-
times take down the swelling at once. Osborne was a
brick maker. Britton had told him that he meant to
marry me. We had met him at the church door, and
Britton told him what he was going to do. Britton had
told me that somebody would be there. He held the
pony's head while we were in the church ; and when we
came out, my husband gave him, I think, half a crown.
Never offered Fisher money to identify the decee•ed.
Merely went to ask Fisher why her husband's father's
name had been entered in the register as "William."
The plaintiff's husband, Osborne, was also examined,
and he kept the court in a roar by the oddity of his beha-
viour in the box. _ _

Samuel gi;iter was next put into the box, and, after a
great many apologies for hie bad bookkeeping, introduced
his journal, in which, amongst a number of business en-
tries, he had written, " Britton told me he was married
to-day." Britton told vritnem that he had been giving a
fortune away, and then be said he had married the plain-
tiff. Thought at first it was a joke, and entered it because
he had always been under the impression that the plain-
tiff was Britton's wife.

The Foreman having examined the book, pointed out
that the witness's habit was to leavo a couple of blank
lines between each entry, and that this note was written
on one of such lines.

Joseph Talbot also deposed that on the wedding day the
parties came and had tea at his house. The intestate was
much excited, and said he had been married.

Cross-exam'ined—Met him at the Crown. He treated
witness, and then witness took him home and gave him
some tea.
Two witnesses, a father and a son, named Bill's'. gliam,
stated that, having accidentally met him at a public-
house in Birmingham, he bad told them that the plaintiff
was his wife; that she had been a good servant, and that
he had felt it his duty to marry her. They had come for-
ward because they had read of her committal by the Bir-
mingham magistrates for a conspiracy.
The case was adjourned.

ANOTHER BATHER DROWNED ni THE SERPER-
TINE.—Lsat evening, Mr. Bedford, the Westminster
coroner, presided over a jury in St. George's Vestry-room,
Mount-street, Grosvenor-square, for the purpose of in-
quiring into the circumstances relative to the finding of
the dead body of a man in the Serpentine, Hyde-p•rk, on
Saturday morning last. John Green, a boatman in the
service of the Royal Humane Society, said that, on Satur-
day morning last, he was poising along the south bank of
the Serpentine when his attention was called to some
clothes which were on the grass, apparently having no
owner. The bathers at that time had all left the water,
and were dressing. The drags were immediately used;
and in about a quarter of an hour the body of the deceased
was recovered, about ten yards from the shore, in about
five feet of water, and exactly opposite to where the clothes
were found. Mrs. Elisabeth Feat identified the body as
that of her husband, and also the clothes as belonging
to him. His name was William Peat, and he was 32 years
of me. He was • maltster and brewer, in business at
Ifidhurst, Sussex, and he left home, on Tuesday week, in
the course of business; but she was unaware that he was
coming to London. He had no friends in London, and
had not been here for seven or eight years. She had no
reason to think he intended to commit suicide. He was
very fond of bathing, and was an excellent swimmer.
She could not account for his coming-to London, unless
while in a state of intoxication, to which he was addicted.
The jury briefly returned a verdict of "Found dead."

For 30 years Horniman and Co. have co-operated
thloggit.= 11=7 tea on more advergeuus Wrnei(tet
thew
by the their tee reeehe.
Nolo pure &tato 3 lurAim ILu Pgw4a• INfrak."