The Express.
London, England, 1861-04-30 00:00:00

(Stamped, ld. AdditionaL)

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OP LORDS.—Aran. 29.
APPEALS.
CLAW V. Mile ASD ANOTNEL

Their lordships were oesupied in hearing the imamate
ia an appeal from a decree of the Court a/ Chancery. The
question in the cause is whether the appellants are, or one
of the respondents, Hannah Colas, is, entitled to a suss al
4,0001., with the interest which has acersed thereon sines
the death of Thorn's Cooper Coles, an the 117th June, 1849,
under the trusts of a settlement made en his marring' with
Mary rouldsham, and dated 28th Deeenahar, 18111. The
, matter ia of interest only to the parties, and tame on the
eesstriatios d the deed

EQUITY 00IIRTEL—Arin. 29.
(fklere the Lord@ Justices d AppeeL).

rs ma ma Juanita 1111117ING swot norrairr (warm).
This woes& application, by way of appeal from an order of
Mr. Commissioner Goulburn, dire tin that a petition to wind
up the ammo( the abovernentioned company should stead
ors for a month. The petition in quintiles bad been pre-
vented on the alleged ground that the company bad loon
more than three-fourths of its capital, and the order ap'
palsied irate had bean made in order to enable the petitioner
to
_wreak his widows as to that foot.
Ilr. Bases, Q.C., and Mr. Roxburgh appeared for the
company in support of the appealSelwyn, Q.C., and
Kr. Mosley east* wove not called epos.
Their lordships dismissed the petition of appeal, holding
that the evidence did not authorise interference with the
oommlericsier's diservtien in the ostler.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—Aran. 29.
Sittings in Banco in Easter Term.—(Before Lord Chid Jus-
tice
`Cockburn, and Justices* Oresuptou, Hill. and Black-
-47113W as.unimme oomr•irr.
In this ems Mr. Lush had obtained • rule on the part d
John Barlow Burton for a =edema', upon the
Saddlers' Company to proceed immediately to the election
ei four assistants, to make up the required number of 10, as
specified by the charter of the company.
Mirka, who appeared on behalf of the company
to show muds against the rule, said they had elected t&e•
aselliants bat not the fourth, • pinion named Mirada°,
wipe &limed to be elected, inasmuch as the decision of *is
court in his favour had been reversed by the Court of Error.
and the came was now taken to the Boum of Lords, where it
remained for decision. under them circumstances the
learned counsel asked the court to discharge the role with
costs.

Mr. Lush rid he did not aoraplala of the wey in which
the ersupway had obeyed the rule, but he hoped the court
would past code to his client.
The court discharged the rule without wale.

00IIRT OF COMMON PLlAB.—Aran, 29.
Slaw ia &DO& ---Wor• Lard Ctdet Junes Erie and
Justices iss, Bylas, tad beaten.)
The mart was eceapled all da with oases of demurrer,
Involving only vodkas of a to character and of no
Interest to Obi general maim

Ikttisp at ' Nid Plus is Loam. (Befell Mr. Justice
Wintwes sad • Osnme• July.)
The say tree before the mart to-day rewriasd Whistled
whin the caul rows

COURT OP ZXOBEQIIkR.—Arsiz. 29.

&Wogs in Baseo—(Bdon the Lard Odd Baron, and
Barons Martin, Benaawail. awl Wilds)
nu iall=l Ir. MULL —WOSINIOr AID minim

This was an appeal from the decision of two justices in
the borough of Elks Odd, under the folionieg eireemelsoms.
du Wormed= was preferred on the 12th of September,
1860. by Memo. Edward sod Joseph Clatten Marvin, Om
well known cutlers of Sholield, igabirk the ilefirliat, be-
came be did enter MU a cent:ad with them to nerve them I
se a owing knife ostler for three yam, and that he had be- I
fore Me determioation of the centred absented himself
from his serriee without leave or lawftd axiom, and bad'
segleated to foal his duties. After the hearing of
the parties, the *Sees, Mr. Timms Dem and
Mr. How Wilkins" adjudged the thlembut to
be guilty m esatrevintim of the Act tGimp lIL for
UMW emplaikg opproutian ead perms waking under
canionst, sad seiMeneed him to Writ in the Home
of Osereetiou at Wakeleid ter the wiled of sae mesa It
was easteaded by the defininore afillossey that the title of
the statute shoed base bore Mt teeth In the infonnaMon--
Ikea the deteudeul.=Wl4%.4ol,oilol =-
wed fen haute
Levliersolltiluilbuniseigar
tors 2
eouvieted for sit ww
Mimes whisk bed hem q Ike eft-
ekteraMma cd the emit me whether Ma 4simanbrition ef
i the Milan erresding the isigeksasiiiig lOC
Menlik_ smolt la lishat e alb=
hut ; Mr. wawa vereams.mi ramolople.

. . .
The Lard Chief Bares delivered Ida jorgisii—ttio oda
he weed amnion that the sadjedgment and the commit-
ment were bed. It *owed to billl that the defendant had
' anted with ported liana ides, sad was sot aware
that he was breaking hie ealitnet, which he
easessived was at as end on his edgiest departure When
a men left hie serviee unlawfully the
_magisiestes could
deal with the ease, and having ogee dean with it there
wee ea end of the matter. But whatever might be the
=t e( the :magistrates to punish a man for absenting
from his business, he could net imagine that the
Xmbever intended that wiles • man absented him-
ealind Teas punished for it, and Weight that by that kb-
/Sating he was freed from his contract, he should be again
liable to punishment. He considered that the commitment
was bed, and that Robert Youle must be discharged from
aaatad
Mr. Lies Martha ocinenrred in the opinion expremed by
the Lord Chief Berm. The justices were confined to the
act of O.orge IV., and had no right to fall bank on the old
statute el damp 111. If a man left his 'orrice stating his
deteemisalios sever to return, hie master could panne two
eemses—he could bring an action against him far breach of
°attract, or he could act on the statute law. If the master
brought his action it might be mid that the servant would
not be able to pay say &maga, but all men should be
be equal, asd a man had no right to speculate
rali to
amount of damages which he might recover. When
the master proceeded according to the statute, then there
wee an sad of the ratter.
Mr. Baron Breanwell said he should be may sorry to my
that .he original statute had been repealed ; but he owned
he did not think there could be a second conviction. He
should be very sorry if the law was not sit was laid
down in " Ryder v. Wood," because, if it were not so, it
would harsh and unreasonable. Accoedi to the reason
al the thing, and according to authority, the~astiom should
not have convicted the defendant, who had anted is the
advice of his 'egal advisers, and believed that basing been
woe convicted for leaving his service, lie was out bound to
return to it. The Justices bad not found the essential in-
gredient which constituted the offence, and the conviction
was bad.
Mr. Mellish—Will your lordships say anything as to
oats ?
Mr. Baron Bramwell—l think you are better without
them. (Laughter.)
Judgment amordingly.
Battings at Nisi Prin. at Westminster.—(Belore Mr. Hama
Channell and Common Juries.)

THISTLITOM e. reewse.--osevernenro.
Mr. Huckileston, Mr. Sbaw. and Mr. Young appeared as
mussel for the plaintiff ; Mr. Digby Seymour and Mr. Gib-
bons represented the defendant.
The plaintiff in this - ctioo in a galvanist, who resides at
No. 1. Quebec street, Ozfordstreet, and, according to hie
MOD.y he had been in the habit of attending the defendant, a
and his wife, receiving as his fee 11. le. per week. In
October, 1858, the defendant introduced to the plain-
tiff, as a patient, a young woman named Clegg, stating that
kis wi's wra rof expected to five, and that he purposed to
marry Miss C'egg. The plaintiff attended the defendant and
Mims Clegg, the former for Zi, and the latter for 30 weeks,
and be now claimed MC Be. for his services.
Mr. Digbv Seymour submitted that under the recent act
of parliament the plaintiff, not being registered as a medical
man, could not recover.
The learned judge said he would leave it to the jury
whether the p,aintiff was a medical practitioner under the
act, sad would reserve the point for the consideration of
the court above.
deeedent did not dispute hie liability for the attend-
ances on himself, but he denied his responsibility as to
Miss Oleo. He had told the plaintiff that if be cured her
he would et bim 10/. for his trouble from her father, but
the plaintiff bad totally failed to effect a cure.
His lordship having summed up,
The jury were of opinion that the contract wu not to nue
Miss Clegg for 101., and founds verdict for the plaintiff for
the amount claimed.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
Aram 29.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
LOGAN V. 11111711.
Thu was • testamentary suit relating to the will and
codicil of the late Mn. Margaret Boyd: who died on the 19th
of Minh, DM, at the age of 75. The instruments were pro-
pounded by the executor, but the codicil will oppmed by the
Dean of kin on the usual grounds—undue execution, want col
4641 trler l'aiti!trawpiPeared for the plaintiff • Dr.
rbiatmorni QC., aod.Mr. Sharps for the defendant.
The tastelor sod the defendant Smith were both in the
service of a lady named Flood, at Leamington. OS the

[TWOPENCE.

death of her undress 111111 received • 5401.--;
besides her wardrobe and certain altklea 01 Imp
cure. In 1858 she proposed to the ciefeOdabt- that
he should take a house and let lodging", proems-
log to o=o/17 apartments in it, and to leave hhn her
money at her decease. He accordingly took No.
Manchester-street, Mancheeter-equare ; and the teetatrt:
died there. Three days before that event she executed A
will ender which the defendant would have taken 3201. ;
and the rest of her proy, *boat I,OOOL, would have gene
to her niece, Barbara pin, and to other relatives ; after-
wards bsooming aware at this remit, she said it was not
what she had intended, and insisted on immediately execut-
rost.a codiell. By this latter instrument she left Smith
exf a, kid dkeetag the other lab-acne to be paid out of
money said to Indus to her under her a'ster's
The evidence of the due execution of !he codicil and the
perfect sanity of the deceased being very positive,
The jury found for the defendant, and the coma decreed
probate of the villain' codicil.