The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-03 00:00:00

THE QUEEN V. THE BISHOP OF EXETER.

Mr. KARSLABE said, in this case he bad to apply for
leave to withdraw the demurrer and for leave to amend..
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Bishop of Exeter
was applying here before argument for leave to amend,
and, at that stage of the case, it would be as well for
him to offer one argument against the discretion of the
Court being exercised here. He (the Attorney-Gene-
ral) could not be taken to be a consenting party, for the
Crown felt vi ry much aggrieved.
Lord CAMPBELL said there would be leave granted to
amend on the usual terms of payment of costs.
Mr. KARSLAKE said in a case where the Crown was
concerted tnere could be no costs.

- P
14 P

4 9 1, 4
614

34%

654
614
5,4

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL23;T he was not a consent-
ing party to this application, and he was in Court on
this occasion in his private capacity, on behalf at Mr.
Gorham, who used the Crown, as he had a right to do,
in an application for a quare impedit. He (the At-
torney-General) did grievously complain of the course
which the defendant had taken. This was the second
special demurrer for raising a question which might have
been raised long ago.
Lord CAMPBELL said, on consulting the Master of the
Court, he found there had been instances before where,
upon the application for the exercise of the indulgence
of the Court, e the Crown was a party, it had been
usual to impose such terms as the payment of costs; and
the Court thought, in the exercise of that discretion, the
coats should be paid in this case.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in akneo, berme the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE. and
Justices CRESSWELI, WILLIAMS, and TALFOURD.)
No busioers of any interest was brought before the
Court this morning.

EX CHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, in the Exchequer chemi er
at W estminster, before Mr. Baron ALDERSON and a
Common Jury.)
GAY v. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY CultrANY.
This was an action to recover compensation in da
mages for assault and false imprisonment by the defend-
ants' servants.
Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Browne appeared for the
plaintiff; and Mr. Martin, Mr. E. James, and Mr. Wines
conducted the defence.
It appeared from the opening statement of counsel,
and the evidence of witnesses, that the plaintiff
was a gentleman of great respectability, and one
of the corn meters to the corporation of Lon-
don, and having occasion to go to Romford on business,
he drove down there in a gig in company with a gentle-
man named Town. On arriving at Romford they met
with an accident, the horse having ran away, and they
were compelled to return to town by the railway. They
went to the Romford station, and procured two third-
class tickets. The up-train to London had just arrived,
but as it was market-day every compartment in the
third-class carriages was filled, and en intimating to a
porter that they were unable to get a seat,
he directed them to go into a second-class
carriage. They got inside, and when they
inquired whether they were not doing wrong, as
they were only third-class passengers, the porter re-
plied, •" Oh lit is all right," and then closed the door.
Just before the train started, a number of passengers ar-
rived at the station, and to accommodate them a third-
class carriage was put on behind, but the plaintiff and
his friend were not requested to get into them. When
the train reached Shoreditch, they tendered their tickets
to the guard, but he demanded 9d. more of each of them,
as they had travelled in the second-clasp. They
refused to make this additional payment, and explained
how it was they came to get into the carriage, but the
guard refused to let them at liberty, and they were ulti-
mately given into the custody of one of the company's
officers, named Shackle, who took them before the ma-
gistrate at Worship. street, but they were immediately
discharged. They, therefore, went back to Shore-
ditch, and offered to return to Romford in company
with one of the officers, and to pay all the expenses of
the journey, in order that the matter might be
explained, and they exonerated from all intention to de-
fraud the company. This offer was, however, not ac-
ceded to, and the present salon had been instituted not
for the purpose of making money. but to show railway
companies that the public were not to be placed at the
mercy of their servants without having some means of
redress.

Mr. Town and other witnesses were called, whose
evidence went to show that the plaintiff and his friend
were treated in a somewhat summary and abrupt manner
at the Shoreditch station.

Mr. Qusack P. Roney, secretary to the Eastern
Counties Railway Company, stated that Shackle was a
detective officer of the company, whose business it was to
trace out frauds and robberies upon the company, but he
had no authority over the passenger traffic of the line,
and had no right to take the plaintiff into custody. When
he found out cases of fraud and robbery, it Wm his duty

to report them to the superintendent. He had received no
directions from the company to act in such a case
as the present, and therefore he was not justified in the
eyes of the company,
Mr. Baron ALDERSON thought there was no evidence
to go to the jury. It had beta shown that Shackle was
not authorized by the rules and regulatioi:s of the
company to take the plaintiff into custody, and then -
fore they could not be held responsible for an act to
which they were nut a party.
A juryman wished to know whether Shackle was
still in toe service of the company?
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—You may take that lor
grauted as far as the question in this case is concerned.
Another juryin:n, after a short consultation with his
hrettirt n in the box, said they were then decidi.dly of
opinion that the cowl:any was responsible for the acts of
their servants.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—Bat it is my duty to tell you
that in point of law they are not. It would be absurd
to make a man responsible for the acts of his sets ant
when he was unauthorised by his muster.
Another juryman—But, niy Lord, we all agree in
thinking the company are in this ease responsible.
Mr. 13art ALDERSON (rather warmly)—Then as you
appear dissatisfied with my direction, nod are going to
take the law Otic of my hands, I will try with another
•

lury.
After some discussion between his Lordship and