DISTRICT COURT.—Yesterday.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VIII, Issue 2154, 22 September 1875, Page 3

DISTRICT COURT.—Yesterday.

(Bc;oreF.D,I£HXOX, Es(i., District Jiu^c.

IN BANKRUPTCY

. Be Bichabd Onyon.—Bankrupt ap-peared-to pass his final examination and apply for his discharge. Tho liabilities were £d-2712s and tho assets £18115s Bd, leaving a deficiency of-£245 16s 4d.~ Mr Brassey appeared on behalf of Mr Tyler, who was indisposed for tho bankrupt.—Mr Macdonald who appeared for the only opposing creditor and stated that tho opposition "was withdrawn.— Bankrupt was then examined, and tho Court declared tho bankrupt to have passed his examination hd ordered that ho be discharged,"

Be Thomas Henby Spbague.—ln this instance also tho bankrupt appeared to pasij' his last • examination, and apply for his discharge. Tho liabilities .were £93 8s 3d and tho. assets nil,—Mr Dodd for tho bankrupt,—There was no opposition, and the bankrupt was examined, aud discharged.

Bennett v. Cassin,—Application ?ob New Tbial.—Mr Brassoy appeared or the defendant, the applicant, and tfr Macdonald to opposo on behalf of tho ilaintiff.-Mr Bra'ssey said that the action vas heard at tho last silting of the Court, »n the 17th of August. . Plaintiff sought oi recover £100 damages from defoudant or false .imprisonments Defendant paid 210 into Court apd pleaded certain cirmmstancos in mitigation, but the jury eturned a verdict for £50 and costs. Defendant was dissatisfied with tho verlict, and uuder the rules of tho Court ipplied for a_ now trial. Ho servod tho lecessary notices on tho plaintiff and on ho Clerk of tho Court, and tho grounds in which ho claimed a new trial wore hat the damages were excessive. It could be unnecessary for him to comment in the evidence, as it was no doubt fresh n the mind of his Honor, and ho simply nade' application that a new trial bo [ranted on the ground that the damages iwarded by the jury were excessivo. -Mr H'acdonald said this was tho first time in yhich ho had ovor appeared to oppose an ipplication of this sort in which tho pplicant's counsel had nothing to urgo a support of bis. application further han) that ho wanted it . granted. -His Honor said that perhaps hat showed a moral consciousness in the trength of his ease.—Mr Macdonald, as lis Honor was aware, damages and the mount of damages was a mattor cntiroly rithin tho. jurisdiction of tho jury. II pas ono with which tho Ju'dgo had lothing at all to do, except to ndministei ho usual hackneyed caution, but tho natter of damages was loft entirely to thi ury. He was awaro that a jury having bund damagos, tho Court could review heir finding, and. if tho damages were scesnve could order a now trial. Hi jailed attention to tho fact that thi ilaintiff might have brought his aclioi nto the Supremo Court, laying thi lamages at a much larger sum than h lone, but choosing this Court did no liter his position, further than asregardei ho amount which he claimed as damages lo would there havo a jury of twolvi astead of .four; the same fasts would b< iroughtout; and the jury would fix the .mount of damages, suppose tho caso hat leen brought into tho Supreme Cour nstead of this Court, Ho asked whethe: lefendant wguld not consider himself wol iff in getting off so low as £50, ant whether tho Judge would onlertain an .pplication for a now trial if suol ras the amount of damages awarded. I ippeared to him that tho only roason foi application was, that thoy claimec 3100, and got half what they asked, but t was becauso they camo to this Court rom motives of economy that thoy onlj ilahnod that amount, that being thi imit of tho Court's jurisdiction. Thi luestion was, was £50 excessive damagei ogive. Tho Court, must bo eatisHcc ,hat it was excessive, and not only that )ut so outrageously excessivo as to shovi hat tho jury lvero actuated by passion, jartiality, or prejudice before it woulc ;rant the application made; Ho hac )bservcd tho attention which tho jurj paid to the evidenco, and was unable t( jlean from their faces a glimmer of foel ing which could lead him to understanc ivhat they were likely to decide, and ii ivas a fair conclusion to arrive at thai they were not actuated by either of thosi jjements.. They not only gavo calm con' iideration to tho evidence, but look som< timo afterwards to consider their dcci 9ion, and then camo back into Court witl a verdict for £50, It was not for thi Court to enter into tho question, oi damages -at all. It was not that thi Court thought them excessive. Th< Court may bo satisfied that thej were to somo extent excessive but of that the jury were tho bes judges, and to them it was lef by the constitution. The action was at action for tort. In an action of this tort there was nothing to guide tho Court. Ii was a matter ot feeling,and sentiment with the jury, which could not be re viewed by tho Court. Mr Macdonali then quoted several cases from Addisor on tort, and Mayno on damagos, in sup port of his argument, and a lengthenoc discussion ensued, in which, his Honoi admitted . that Mr Macdonald's argu> ments were logical, but they went rathej to the legislature than to the Court. Th< power to grant a rehearing was given tc the Court. to bo exercised, and if th< Court had the power, could there, lu asked, be a fitter case than tho pmenl in which to exercise it.—Mr Brassej roplied, and was about alluding to thi facts of the case, when hij Honor saic that was not necessary, He was dissatis fied with the verdict of tho jury, and would be glad to grant a new trial if il oould be shown that he could do so. Mi Brassey contended that the amount ol tho damages allowed was so large as tc prove that tho jury were actuated eithei by gross misconception, or by somo othei motive, and it was for his Honor to decidt whether the damages wero excessive.— His Honor said it was clear lhat Parlia ment in granting the power to the Coiirl to order a new trial intended that powci to be exercised. He thought the damages excessively great, and whatever he might think about Parliament giving sue! power,' ho felt bound to exercise it, anc would grant the application for a no\i trial in this case. It was arranged thai the case should come on for hearing nexi Court day beforo a jury, and his Honoi reserved his decision on tho question o costs until after tho sccond trial.