The Express. — 1853-11-05 (London, England)

THE MAMA OF JOHN ANDANIF NOLAN.-ASSLCLT  DT •  ON THE TVIIP.  -----__ This insolvent, who bad betted on the turf, applied to be discharged war the act. Mr. Mow lipped on the part of Mr. Morris and his wife, and also fee • Mr. Smith; Mr. Sargood supported. The complaint we.. that the insolvent was indebted for damages is two srtNss he assaults, and that the injury complained of was smodisises. It appeared that he lodged at the house of Mr. Mar* who is a pruner, in Tennisonstrect„York road, Lambeth. la the early part of February he west home at half-past 12 o'clock at night, and asked Mrs. Morris, who lighted him up stairs and gave him a candle, whether the " fellow " in the first door had come home, as he should not sleep there again I He was informed that be had not come home. Without the slightest provocation he struck Mrs. Morris, aad blackened both her elite, and she declared would have thrown her over the stairs, had aot her dress given way. She cried Murder," and her lodger, Mr. Smith (the other opposing creditor), came to bier assistant*. The insolvent attacked him, and whilst on the stairs 'track him with a poker, and he was fend to the ground and bleu profusely. Both Mr. Morris and Mr. Smith were attended by a surgeon and confined some days. lAn union was brought and tried at the Surrey Assists. In each ease the jury awarded 751. damages, which, with the costs, amounted to a considerable sum, and for which the insolvent was now in custody. The question raised was whether there was " malice," in order to bring the case within the set of parliamsat. It was stated that the insolvent was tipey at the time he conemilled the meanies.  Mr. Commissioner Murphy thought there was malice in law, but he wished to hear the evidence of the parties; whereupon Mn. Morris and Smith were examined. The insolvent stated to his counsel that he had been to a dinner party, and was intoxicated when he rsturned hone. _ _  Mr. MAWS, wished to know whether the insolvent was not connected with a gambling house ? In answer to question, The insolvent stated that he was not connected with • gambling house. He bad betted, and on the last Chester Cup lost 1101. He had betted on a gond many races. H. had bought tickets at betting offices, and had lost money. Mr. Macrae prayed a judgment for the damage. awarded in two cases of gross assault, and contended that the injuries had been maliciously inflicted. It would be an abuse of the act to allow • person who had dissipated his means in betting transactions to wipe o•t the damages and costs by going through this court without a serious judgment. Mr. Sargood insisted that thus was no malice in law, and that di m•e MOM ad come uc der the Act of Parliament. The iimiteamt INS auk at the tine, and not is his senses. Mr. Co--'mieossw Murphy imposed himself clearly of *Maim. tint*., wee =•lise law proved against the Meelveut, and That fatoziestios was as Pmn•amt or enlessatice. Mom was II Imes, who, without soy pinto  cation, had her rite blackened, tad a lodger who cause to •ee what was the row, felled to the ground with a poker. It it was sot malice, their as the 'wag said, it was for " love he was knocked down." Malice had been made out, and for the climaxes awarded the insolvent would receive a judoment of sit months. Judgment accordingly.