The Express.
London, England, 1868-08-13 00:00:00

CRICKET.

SURREY T. KENT (Rams).
Two hours' play yesterday morning sufficed to finish
this match at the Oral. The following is the score :

OVENTY.

Pint Innings'. Plasma Innings.
77mnpluey, c Cooper, b Lipscomb... IS let Cooper, b Bunuett 96
Jurp, b Lipwomb ......... . .. ... 17 c t'onper, b Lipscomb 24
Tenlcy, b Willsher
Strpti mon, c Rodger, b bilmeomb... 9 e Cooper, b Lipscomb 6
Otitlith, b Willaher 4 b Will her 13
11r. C. Calvert, e Troughton, b Will-
ther
Tristow, Ibw, b Bennett
Mr. C. Noble, b Willaher l4 c Cnope7, b Lipscomb 10
Sewell. run out ..... . ... ..
Trott, t, Willeher
Street, not out . . • • . 16 not out 0
b6,lb 3

Total

. 136 Total
[LIFT.

Scaled ',mining.

Pint Inning,.
Mr. W. W.Rocliu 7, C Pratt,b Griffith 20
Ittmnant, b Street
P; r.nett, b Street 2O e Culvert., b Arb‘tow 24
Mi. I;. It. Cooper, b Street
Mr. M. A. Troughton, c Pratt, b
9 b Street
Stn, t
Mr. 0. M. Kelaon, not out
Mr. P. Bilton, b Street 2 c (Advert, b Itrettrie 7
Mr. C. I. Thornton, b Uritlith B6 e Griffith, b Brietow 10
Willaher, MD tout
Canon, 13 Bristow
91z. R. Lip/womb, b Street
b 6, 1-b 2,w 1

Total 49

Total

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—LEEDS, AUGUST 12.
(Before Baron Bramwell.)
♦ "CAREFUL AND DISCREET VERDICT."

- -
late last evening en action brought by Mr. Grauhen
chief constable of Bradford, against Mr. Myers, a manu-
facturer, for slandering him, was concluded. The case
has created a good deal of local interest, not only on ac-
count of the position of the plaintiff, but also because an
unusual number of witnesses were concerned in proving
or disproving his sobriety on a particular occasion.
The plaintiff's case, as represented by Mr. Overend,
Q.C., was that the charge made generally by the defend-
ant against Mr. Grauhan was that, at a fire in Thornton-
road, when in the discharge of his duty, he was drunk.
Up to that time Mr. Orauhsn had borne a very
high character. On the 11th of February he
was in London, and he returned to Bradford
that evening at 7.46. On his arrival he was so cold mud
exhausted that he went into an inn, and called for a glass
of cold whisky and water, he having had nothing to
drink that day but a gins; of sherry before he left Lon-
don. A gentleman who was at the bar said to him,
" Have you heard that there is a fire in Thornton-road,'
and on hearing that, instead of drinking his whisky, he
went direct to the police-office and gave directions, and
then went forward to the fire, and took an active part in
effecting its extinction. When he arrived at the fire the de-
fendant was there, and he found him interfering a good
deal. He told Mr. Myers that he must not give orders, be-
cause his was not the correct_
_judgment as to what things
he:doue. " Oh," said Mr. Myers, " I have been di-
recting the whole thing." Mr. Orauban replied, " I have ar-
rived now I have the whole thing in my charge., and I pro-
hibit you from interfering at all. By 10 at night the fire
was subdued, and Mr. Grauhan went home. On the 22nd
of February the watch committee received a letter from
the defendant, in which he alleged that at the fire in
Thornton-road the chief constable was the worse for
liquor, and that his conduct on that occasion was such as
to all for remarks not at all creditable to Mr. Gmuhan or
conducive to the sobriety and good order of the town. He
requested that the committee would investigate the
matter, and that was done, the result being that a resolu-
tion was passed declaring that in the opinion of the com-
mittee the charge made by Mr. Myers was without foun-
dation. Defendant subsequently demanded a further
inquiry. The inquiry therefore was re-opened, and
witnesses was 'plied on both sides. The committee
finally reported that the evidence was so very various
and conflicting that it was scarcely possible to come to a
satisfactory decision. This left the decision nowhere,
and knowing that he was perfectly sober, Mr. Orauhan
felt bound to have the matter investigated by a jury.
Evidence was given by merchants, tradesmen, and
police officers that the plaintiff was perfectly sober on the
night in question.
Mr. Seymour, Q.C., addressed the jury on the other
side, and witnesses in support of the defendant's case
were examined.
The evidence of the two sides was of the most conflicting
character. . _

The trial having lasted two days, after a deliberation
of two hours and a quarter, the jury found a verdict
which was one for the plaintiff, with 4615. damages. They
found that though the plaintiff was not drunk he wee not
entirely free from the influence of liquor, but was com-
petent to discharge hie duties.
The judge said it was a very careful and discreet ver-
dict, and the case a proper one to be tried by a special
jury.

(Before Mr. Justice Lush.)
AN 17NWORTIPT PROSECUTION.

In the Crown Court, Ann Gran/dwell,
a person of re-
spectable appearance, was indicted for making a false
entry in the registration of the birth of her child at Wake-
field on the 21st of May. The prisoner wan indicted under
the 36th section of the 24th and 2dth Vic., chapter 98,
which enacted that, "Whosoever shall knowingly and un-
lawfully insert or cause, or permit to be inserted in any
such register any false entry of any matter relating to
any birth shall be guilty of felony." The fact, of the cane
were peculiar. The real prosecutor in the case was the wife
of Inspector Fisher, of the West Riding constabulary. They
were married about 19 years ago, but a few weeks after
the marriage, separated. About four years ago, however,
Mr. Fisher allowed his wife some maintenance, and com-
menced to cohabit with prisoner. In the month of April,
1864, the prisoner, whose name really was Ann Ground-
well, had a child, of which Fisher was the father. The
registrar attended allemande at the house where the
pnsoner and Fisher lived, in order to have the birth
registered. He saw the prisoner, who gave him the
information necessary to fill up the book, and signed the
aocoment, and in that declaration she stated that the
name of the child was Jane Elizabeth, the name of its
father James Fisher, and the name of the mother Ann
Fisher, formerly Ann Groundwell. Before the entry was
made, the registrar asked the prisoner what her name
was before mamage, and she said Ann Groundwell, when
that actually was her name at that time, as she could not
be Fisher's wife, since his real wife was living. In that
register she stated, in the place provided for the name of
the informer, that the name was Ann Fisher, and upon
these entries the charge was made.
It was contended that the section under which the
charge was brought really applied to the registrar him-
self, and not to other people. Some discussion ensued
upon the point, and
Mr. Justice Lush, having consulted Mr. Baron Bram-
well upon the point, said—l am of opinion, and
my brother Bramwell agrees with use, that this
is not a case within the 36th section. This is not a
case in which the prisoner inserted, or caused to be in-
serted in the register, any false entry of any matter re-
lating to a birth. She did not cause it to be inserted;
she did not go to the registrar, in order to induce him to
make this insertion • but she gave the information to
him, as she was obliged to do, and upon that he made
those entries relating to the birth. All that she does
is to sign her name in that column which requires the
informant—the person who gives the information—tosign
the name. 'The statute does, therefore, clearly
distinguish between giving information and insert-
ing it in the register. I therefore think that
this is not a case within the 31st section, but that
it is one within the 41st section, which is peculiarly
adapted to this particular case, and which says, " giying
information to a register of matter relating to a birth,
and which information is not true." I think, therefore,
upon the indictment for felony the jury must find the
prisoner not guilty.
Such a verdict was returned and the case was immedi-
ately proceeded with an a misdemeanour.
3h. James Fisher deposed that he had lately resigned,
in consequence of this prosecution ; and that the pro-
ceedings had been brought really to throw him out of his
situation, and not to punish the woman. The cause of
the proceeding was, that he had been obliged to report two
officers, Hockaday and Wetherill, for grog' misconduct.
His Lordship—Has this proceeding cost you your situa-
tion I'

Mr. Fiaher--It has, my lord. Colonel Cobbe, the chief
constable of the riding, was aware of my relations with
the defendant, as was almost every member of the force.
About six or seven years ago I compi tined about the con-
duct of these officers, and in Consequence they brought
my wife over, and took her before the chief constable,