The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-03 00:00:00

THOAS . THOMAS.
In this case, whichM wasV
tried before Mr. Baron Rolfe
at the last assiges for the county of Hereford, and a
verdict taken for the plaintiff for 701, subject to a mo-
tion to enter a nonsuit,
Mr. KEATING, Q.C., now moved to enter such non-
suit accordingly. It was an action, he said, for money
had and received, brought by the plaintiff against the
defendant as executrix and widow of a person named
Benjamin Thomas, deceased; and the declaration only
contained a count for money had and received by the
testator for the use of the plaintiff. The short point in
the case was whether one tenant in common can main-
tain an action for money had and received, against
another tenant in common, there being no evidence of
his being the bailiff of the tenant in any way. There
was no evidence of the deceased having been in any way
the bailiff of the plaintiff; nor that the parties knew
their proper legal situations before the death of Benjamin
Thomas. lle (Mr. Keating) submitted that an action
for money had and received under those circumstances
would not lie.
The COURT granted a rule to show cause.
GRIEVE, ADMINISTRATRIX, V. MILTON.
Mr. TEMPLE said this was an action tried befere Mr.
Justice Wigb tman at the last assizes at Carlisle, in which
the plaintiff was nonsuited, but with liberty to move to
sot aside the nonsuit and enter a verdict for 300/. On
the part of the plaintiff, he (Mr. Templc)jmoved for that
rule, the case being ono in which the plaintiff com-
plained, as widow of Thomas Grieve, against the defend-
ant, who is the bridge surveyor of the county of Cum-
berland, in respect of an accident which had deprived
her of her husband, and the action was brought under
Lord Campbell's Act. The deceased Thomas Grieve
Was a mail-guard residing at Ayr. On the Bth of
August, 1848, ho had come to Carlisle in order
to give evidence on a trial there. He subsequently
went from Carlisle to Wigton by rail in the
eompany of one Joseph Peel, whence they went in a
gig, to a place in the vicinity called the Abbey
J-Lelate. On returning to Wigton, late at night,
they had to cross a country bridge over the Wiser.
re on a portion of the road, within the 300 yards for the
ePairs of which the county was liable, a heap of stones
Was laid in a most dangerous position. Tho gig in
Which Grieve and Peel were travelling came in contact
With this heap of stones, and was overturned, and
Grieve received such serious injury that he shortly
afterwards died. There was no evidence as to who was
the person who laid tho stones there ; and tho real
question now was, whether evidence was given on the
trial to connect Milton (the defendant) with the act of
the Person—whosoever it was—who laid the stones in
question on the road. Ile (Mr. Temple) submitted that
there
was evidence to show that it was the duty jof
Milton (the defendant) to have the obstruction removed,
Provided there was reasonable time. The defendant is
eborunty bridge surveyor, and it was his duty, as such
titular id surveyor, to superintend the repairs of this par-
part f the read. Previous to the accident a
aotadueit 9n the bridge was being repaired, and the stones
eqtit won were placed there for that purpose, and at
rut instance of the defendant, in performance of his
as bridge surveyor.
-i2he COURT granted a rule generally.

COMMON PLEAS—(TITIS DAY.)
NEWNHAN V. BEAVER AND ANOTHER.
Sergeant BYLES applied on the part of the de-
dan is for a rule to show cause why the Master
,L_'ould not relax his costs in this case. The simple
Vestion was whether when the owner of a tithe rent-
e4„arge clistrained for arrears and succeeded, the tithe
Ts't-PetyQr was bound to pay single or double costs.
tLue defendants, it appeared, took out a summons to stay
til'e Proceedings, and obtained an order thereupon that
Tie l? should be discontinued on the payment of costs.
th.:,kiaster taxed double costs, amounting to 1301., and
th:ge,feildants had paid 501. on account, contending that
' uthe-payer could only b© called upon to pay single
costs.
• The
ORDSDIPS granted a rule to show cause.
11,s4fterir L
hearing another motion, which, however, was of
tt's Pereubblic: interest, the Court rose at half-pa eleven,
'meing no other business before it

COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
PARISTI OF ST. PA.NCRAS.
r• Ross, on behalf of the commissioners of the
tt4_ Ineers' Estate in the parish of St. Pancras, applied to
• Court for a mandamus directed to the inhabitants of
o'7 Parish, to assemble on the 21st of November, at the
.!aces of the commissioners, and select certain commis-
o,,eners to'carry out a local Act relating to the estate.
410 eirc.imstancs under which he made the application
Were these :—ln 1813 an Act was passed, providing for
the paving and lighting of the parish, and directing that
on the 24th of every succeeding June the inhabitants
and householders residing within the limits of the parish
Who had duly paid their rates, should meet and elect
31 commissioners, to execute the proviions of the Act.
'JP to the present year the election had legally and re-
gularly taken place, but frora inadvertence, or some
°ther cause, Mr. Dixon, the clerk of the commission,
obrovi as appointed in 1839, convened the usual meeting
June 24, which happeced to be on a Sunday, and the
a 1 commissioners were elected on that day. Now, by the
4tiel 4th William IV., chap. 32, it was enacted that every
4e,.:tint of a public or secular nature, held according to
tic,"',cf Parliament or charter front the Crown on a par-
Cilto thzy in the year should be held en the Saturday
flejleedibg or the Monday succeeding, whenever that day
Sunday, and in this instance, therefore, the elec.
i'v-tl,lvaa illegal and the commissioners had not acted.
t6' w'te 11th George 1., cases like ,these occurring in
till'Poration elections were directed to be provided for by
satianlll3, while the 3 and 4 William IV. provided the
to Prevision of the 11th of George 1., applicable only
onlieorporations, should extend to every species of
heidToll or mistake, and in accordance with that Act ho
aiii,f)w to more for a mandamus to amend the election
tiro. took place on the 24th of last June.
lir Jslice PATTESON grant‘d a rule nisi.
had : Foss had been instructed that under the Act be
MrVioned the rule was absolute in the first instance.
andnd •
oUtitiCe PATTESON consulted with the Master,
h ing the practice was so, made the rule absolute.
e abiolute accordingly.

ti-601V-STREET.—CrIiIS DAY.)
1.2 IsTuR
Qin BANCE AT TILE lIOLBORN CASINO:—A tall,
c'bstr-„1"61Y attired,- young man as charged with having
411c,"aeted.the police in the x,cution of. their duty, and
'lll, ,4 clisturhance at the Holburn Casino..
srld b„:4efehdant was at the Casino de Venice last night,
tOlief,'ll'g somewhat noisy, he W2S requested b.y the
Ettl tog
retire lie said, no one should remove him; he
Paid 11. would
13 money, and stop till the entertain-
over•' and conduct led to se much confu-
te jr-„f4t police were compelled to use force in ejecting
'°118;"41 the building and conveying him to the station-
; Ttl
fed efrniant denied the charge, and said the officious
i'lltliar, rice ce of the p•Alce was the caust.: of the etts•
I'llali"Ll4RY did not belLve him, and inflicted the full
Thejf 5/, or a mouth's imprisonment.
mlttM 'tirt 'lle Was paid.
litS'r NIGHT AT JULLIEN'S.—A respectably-
-I.°llth) named Brown, the 5,11 of a merchant, was