The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-16 00:00:00

responsible for his own act only ; and for the four prisoners,
last named it was urged that the injuries they might have
inflicted were bruises and not wounds, and under this in-
dictment they ought not to be convicted. For Crossland it
was contei:ded that it was not satisfactorily proved that it
was Le who struck the blows which wounded the prosecutor.
His Lordship, having summed up, directed the jury that
if they thought a common purpose sprang up on the instant
to prevent the constable stopping the fight, as the prose—
cutor had unquestionably been wounded, they would be all
equally guilty; but if there was not a common purpose to
wound the prosecutor as he had been wounded, they might
find one guilty of the felony who had inflicted the wound,
and the rest guilty of unlawfully wounding, or they might
find all guilty of unlawfully wounding, if they thought they
had a common purpose, and had none of the intents laid in
the indictment. If they thought the prisoners had not n
common purpose to injure the prosecutor then each man
was answerable only for what he did, and a wounding by
each must be proved to convict each.
The jury tound all the prisoners guilty of unlawful

wounding.
His Lordship sentenced them each to nine calendar
months' imprisonment with hard labour.
In the civil court to-day two causes were tried of no kind
of interest to any one but the parties concerned, one cause
being whether certain piece goods were delivered according
to contract, and the other whether five per cent, or 7 per
cent, had been agreed upon as the amount of interest to be
invested in a mortgage deed, the plaintiff and his witnesses
swearing direcly contrary to the defendant and his wit-
nesses.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—NORTHAMPTON, July 14,
NISI PRIUS COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Williams and a Common Jury.)
BRAY V. THE HON. W. FITZWILLIAM AND ANOTHER.
This was an action for an illegal distress, and which,
from the number of points relating to the law of landlord
and tenant involved in it, was of considerable interest to
the legal profession.
Mr. Sergeant O'Brien and Mr. Beasley appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Boden, Q.C., and Mr. Field for the de-
fendant.
The plaintiff is a turner occupying a house and also a
shop, held by distinct agreements of the Hon. W. Fitzwil-
liam. At Lady-day, 1863, the defendant became indebted
to his landlord for half a year's rent of the house, amount-
ing to £5, and in a further sum of £3 15s. for half a year's
rent of the shop. Soon after the rent became due Mr. Fitz-
' William directed the other defendant to distrain upon the
premises in respect of the rent so due, and it was out
of the distress made upon that direction that this action
arose.

The plaintiff contended, as to the shop, that the defend-
ants had seized tools of .trade when there were other articles
unprivileged which were available and sufficient for the pur-
poses of the distress, and that they had also seized tools
which were in actual use at the time of seizure ; while, as
to both house and shop, it was suggested, though not very
strongly urged, that the landlord, having by notice in
writing appointed a day for the payment of the rent subse-
quent to that on which the rent actually fell due, and also
subsequent to that on which the distress was actually made,
had precluded himself from resorting to his remedy by
distress until after the expiration of the substituted day by

payment.
For the defendant it was alleged that the notice in writ-
ing to pay the rent on a subsequent day had not been given
to the plaintiff, and was not intended for him, but had been
left with a neighbour of his, Who held under the same land-
lord, from whom the plaintiff had obtained it. It was sub-
mitted that there was no sufficient distress upon the pre-
mises without seizing the tools of trade, because certain gas
fittings relied on by the plaintiff as available for distress
were fixtures, and so exempt from seizure. Lastly, it was
contended that the tools of trade alleged to have been
seized while in actual use were not protected, because they
were merely lying upon a lathe at which the plaintiff was
working, and were not actually in his hands at the time of
seizure.

His Lordships placed the different points of law distinctly
before the jury, who found, first, that the gas-fittings were
fixtures, and were not available for distress ; secondly, that,
excluding these gas-fittings, there was no sufficient distress
upon the premises without seizing the tools of trade not in
actual use ; and, thirdly, that the bailiff had seized other
tools of trade in actual use at the time of seizure ; and they
found a verdict for the plaintiff upon the last point, with
40s. damages.
Mr. Boden obtained leave to move the Court above on
behalf of the Hon. W. Fitzwilliam, on the ground that he
was not liable for the wrongful act of the bailiff in seizing
tools of trade in actual use, such seizure being wholly un-
authorised by him.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

b.-

LYNN—TUESDAY.
At to-day's corn market the show of wheat was small,
and there was a slow demand at scarcely so much money as

last week for all but the best sorts.
White 46s to 50s I Barley. ..... .....30s to 34s
Red .. ..43s to 47s Grinding ..288 to 29s
I Beans .36s to 40s Oats .2os to 24s
New .. —s to —s I Peas —s to —s