The Express.
London, England, 1861-11-11 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.—Noy. 9.

Sittings at Nisi Priva.—(Before Mr. Justiea Crompton and a
Common Jury.)
SHARPE V. LODGL -TRANSFER OF A PUBLIC•HOUNE.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a commission
agent, against the defendant, the proprietor of the Brous-
bury Anna public•house, St. John's-wood, to recover the
sum of 421. 10s. for work and labour.
The defendant pleaded never indebted.
Mr. Pearce and Mr. Parke were counsel forth° plaintiff;
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Charles Pollock fur the de-
fendant.

It appeared front the evidence of the plaintiff that
during the last sprang he was engaged by the
defendant, who was at that time a butcher, to
procure for him the lease and goodwill of a pub-
lic-house. A short time afterwards he received • com-
munication that the Knights of St. John wu to be parted
with ; but after • great deal of trouble, and when the trans-
fer was just about to take place, the owner refused to part
with his house, and the plaintiff was told by the defendant
to look out for another. Two months elapsed, and at the
expiration of that time the plaintiff procured a transfer of
the house of which the defendant is landlord at the present
time for the sum of 2,6001., fur which the plaintiff claimed
the sum of 42!. 10s. as commission, which the defendant
now refused to pay.
The case bad not concluded when the court rose.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—Nov. 9.

Sittinp in Deara.—(Bsiore Lord Chief Justice Erie and
Jungian Byte. and Keating.)
111 COBBITT.-JIIOOIII3IT.

The Lord Chief Justice said be had looked at the kid&
meat and the espies ; the judgment was of the 14th May
and the aphis in June following, all perfectly regular, and
therefore the imprisonment was quite lawful. In the copy of
causes delivered to Mr. Cobbett there was a =Wake in
claiming interest from the 26th April instead of from the
14th May, but that mistake did not render the imprisonment
under a valid espies unlawful.
Writ of habeas corpus refused.
BABBIDOE V. •DIT.--11•LICIOUS PROSECUTION.

The plaintiff had been is the employment of the defen-
dant, Lieutenant Adey, at Leamington, is groom. Mr.
Apia, Assistant-Surgeon in the Blues, came on a visit, and
the plaintiff was sent to Mr. Marriott, a livery stable-keeper, to
borrow • horse for Mr.Ageis to hunt with. Thorley. however,
was frosty, and the horse was returned without having been
used. Mr. Agnia gave the plaintiff M. to pa for the horse,
aid Ilk. for himself ; but there was cos evidence
as to the terms upon which the plaudit received the
money, mid whether ho hod or not offered to pay Mr. Mar-
riott. When, however, Mr. Maniott lent in his 'MD
against the defendant he charged him 6e. for the horse.
The plaintiff had before this left his eituation, and the de-
fendant had him arrested in London upon • charge of em-
bezzlememt, sod takes to Leamington, when the magis-
trates committed him and he was tried and acquitted. He
then brought this action for damages for malicious pressen-
tioe, and upon the trial before the Lord Chief Justice the
jury awarded him 250/. Subsequently a rule was obtained
for • new trial upon the grounds that there was no evidence
of malice ; sad that the circumstances were such as
would afford reasonable and probable came to • lay-
man for believing the plaintiff guilty of embezzlement,
although a lawyer would am at once that the defendant
could not support the charge, inasmuch as the 1/. was not
his, bet belonged to Mr. Agois. Another point was that
the damages were excessive. To-day muse was shown
against the role being made absolute.
Mr. Digby Seymour and Mr. Gibbons appeared to show
emus ; end Mr. Serjeant Petendorff and Mr. Prentice to
sawed the role.
The mut, alter hearing the matter at some length, sug-
ginted an armagement, and it was agreed that the verdict
ehooLl be reduced to 1501., and that the rule should drop.