The Press. — London, England, 1854-01-21 00:00:00

58 It being shown that the present bankrupt when ob taining the advances believed his house solvent, but was afterwards involved through the recklessness of his partner in the Mauritius, an immediate certifi cate of the first class was granted him. CASES OF DESTITUTION are familiar to the eyes of beadles, but, with all his experience in this line, the beadle of Ratcliffe has encountered a specimen which he felt compelled to bring under the notice of Mr. Yardley, at the Thames Police-office, describing it, with some justice, as the most shocking instance that had ever come under his observation : In one of the wretched alleys in his district (Ratcliffe -highway) a poor woman named Ellis, the wife of au old man who gained a precarious livelihood by selling fruit about the streets, was lying dead nom want, in a room without a stick of furniture, no food, and no fuel. The death was evidently the result of starvation. It appeared that on Saturday morning, when the husband awoke, he found his wife lying dead beside him ; and yet, to satisfy the cravings of nature, he was compelled to go out and vend his few oranges for food. The woman had been poorly for some time, but all she had from the pariah was a loaf and some oatmeal, with an offer of admittance to the workhouse ; but this they re fused, in the hope that the approaching fine weather would enable the husband to carry on his humble calling with more success. Mr. YARDLEY :If this be true it is very shocking. The case which you describe is one which should have been met with immediate relief. Had application been made to me I should have made a formal order to compel the overseer to do his duty. Had this case been reported to me I should have shown the parish authorities that I have the power, though I should be slow to enforce it, to compel relief under such circumstances. The ease is a most disgraceful and extraordinary one, and such as would well warrant the relieving officer in going fur beyond what he may conceive to be his exact duty. nimble subsequently introduced the husband, whose appear. ance betokened the utmost wretcheduesa and privation. Mr. YARDLEY: is your wife dead 9—Yes, sir. Mr. YARDLEY; And you say that she died of actual want?— She did, sir. Mr. YARDLEY: Well, if this case be indicative of the general conduct of the pariah authorities in this district, I must say it is most disgraceful. Oatmeal and a loaf to a woman in that state! It is very shocking. Did the doctor see your wife 9—Yes, 'sir; Dr. Sullen knew of it for a bug time. Mr. YARDLEY: That is very odd. In the distribution of the funds which I am now making from the poor-box several of the applications have been signed by Dr. Bullen, and I have always attended to them. Why do you not go into the house, my poor man 9—Ellis: I had rather not, sir. The spring is approaching, and, with a little assistance, I shall be able to get on, now that I have only myself to provide for. Mr. Yardley expressed his regret that the poor man had not told his tale before at the police-court, and dismissed him, with U. from the poor-box. THE "Ciocci C1.13E," which occupied the Court of Arches for several successive days a short time since, was decided on Wednesday by an elaborate judg• ment pronounced by Dr. Lushington. In this case Mrs. Ciocci sued for a divorce on the plea that her husband, who was an Italian refugee, had been guilty of cruelty and adultery. Evidence to a very voluminous extent and of a most conflicting cha racter had been adduced by the respective parties at the protracted trial, and Dr. Lushington occupied nearly two hours in reviewing this mass of testimony and the arguments that had been based upon it on either side. Finally he pronounced the plea of cruelty not proved, but granted the wife's petition for a separation, on the ground of adultery, condemn ing Mr. Ciocci also to pay costs. THE LONDON JOINT-STOCK BANKING COMPANY received a letter from Dublin, enclosing a bill of exchange for 301., purporting to be drawn by a cor responding bank in Australia in favour of Patrick Dillon, and asking them to send the money for the same under cover to James Daniel Lysaght, at Ennistimon, in Ireland. The bank functionaries easily detected that the bill was a forgery; never theless they enclosed as directed half notes for 301., advising their correspondent to call at the Ennis bank for the remaining moities. By this ruse Mr. Lysaght was caught with the half notes in his pocket• book, and, being brought in custody to England, stands remanded, after a preliminary examination at the Mansion-house, on the charge of attempted fraud. THE GREAT OPERA-HOUSE CASE OF LUMLEY v. GYE came before the Court of Queen's Bench once more on Saturday last. This action, it will be recollected, was broug ht by Mr. Lumley to recover heavy damages against Mlle. Wagner, the celebrated singer, for breach of contract; and for these damages Mr. Gye was liable. The plaintiff had obtained a verdict, but further proceedings were instituted, in the course of which a commission had been issued to take the evidence of Mlle. Wagner, who was now residing in Prussia. Difficulties had, however, arisen in exe cuting this commission. The learned counsel who represented the plaintiff refused to allow the exami nation to be taken according to the Prussian form, while Mlle. Wagner on her part declined to be ex amined except before a Prussian judge and in the language of that country. The first commission having thus proved abortive, the proceedings on Saturday took the shape of arguments for and against a new rule which had been granted, whereby a commission in a new form was ordered to issue, directed to a Prussian judge, and dispensing with certain formalities required under ordinary circum stances of similar character. Against the rule it was objected principally that, under the proposed ar rangement, the plaintiff Lumley would have no opportunity of cross-examining the witness, and, THE PRESS. further, that the testimony, when obtained, would be of little or no value, as the rules of evidence in Prus sia were totally different from what they were in England, and consequently the evidence itself would he almost or altogether rejected by an English court. Arguments in support of the rule having been heard, Lord CAMPBELL said ho was of opinion that, upon the defend ant paying the costs of the first commission, a fresh one should issue to examine witnesses. If the court ha d: power to issue the commission, it was very desirable that it should do so, for other wise most important evidence would be excluded. There could be no doubt Miss Wagner and her father were most material witnesses, and their evidence might be for ever excluded unless obtained iu this manner. It had been alleged as an objection that the manner in which the witnesses would be examined was different from what it would have been in England, and no doubt that objection was deserving of serious consideration. He thought, however, that it ought not to prevail, because the court was not to suppose that, although the witnesses would be exa mined according to the law of Prussia, the whole return would be contrary to the law of England. If it should appear upon the face of the return that it was so, it would be rejected. But, if the objection did not appear upon the face of the document, extrinsic evidence might be produced to show how the examina tion was conducted, and if the document could be impeached it would be rejected. If the court should be mistaken, an opportu nity would be afforded for revising its judgment, for it would be competent for the objecting party to tender a bill of exceptions to the reception or rejection of evidence, and the opinion of the House of Lords might be taken on the question. He (Lord Campbell) thought that in the exercise of their discretion the court would do well to grant the commission. The fact that the witnesses would be examined by the judge was not alone a suffi cient objection. It was also said that hearsay and other objec tionable evidence might be returned, but, if that should be so, the whole might be repudiated, or any particular objectionable evi dence might be rejected. Upon the whole, his lordship said he thought the commission ought to issue. The rule VMS accordingly made absolute for the commission to issue in four days, and to be returnable in one month. AN EMPLOYE OF Mn. WATERS, a wine-merchant in Whitecross-street, a man named Biggs, was brought up at the Guildhall, together with his wife, on a charge of robbing his master. Biggs, it seems, was employed in the bottle-warehouse, where he was often visited by his wife. The woman was suspected of carrying wine-bottles away, and, being watched, was traced to a marine-store-shop, and arrested. Mr. Waters, at the examination, said that he had been robbed of no less than 1,500 gallons of wine during the past twelve months. At the shop in question, however, the woman appeared to have sold only empty bottles, but in numbers calculated to excite suspicion in the purchaser if it had been his cue to suspect any one who brought business to his store. The following conservation passed between this marine-store-keeper and the presiding alderman : William Garratt said: I am a marine-store-dealer in tipper Whitecroas-street. I know the female prisoner. She brought some bottles several times during last week and the week pre vious, and my wife bought them of her. I have not known her more than a week or two. I have only been in the business six months. Alderman Moos : I suppose your predecessor made a fortune, and retired from the business ? Witness : No, sir. I married the person who had the business before I came into it; but, knowing nothing of it myself, I left her to buy everything. I was generally in the way when my wife bought bottles of the female prisoner, but I cannot say how many she bought. She might have bought four or five dozen last week, but I am sure that she did not buy that quantity every week, nor can I tell if it was two dozen a week. The female pri soner came several times with bottles during the week before last, and always said they were her perquisites. We sell them to the bottle-collectors, but I don't know what my wife gets for them. Alderman MOON : Do you keep any books ? Witness: Yes, sir ; we keep books, but we don't enter bottles in them? Alderman Moos : What do you enter then ? Witness : Oh—metals, sir ; we buy lead and other things. Esther Garratt, the wife, proved that the female prisoner had been in the habit of bringing bottles to her for sale. Daniel May, the officer, stated that both witnesses denied all knowledge of the prisoners, even after lie told them he was a con stable ; but, when he said he had watched the female prisoner into the shop several times, they both admitted that they knew her. The prisoners were remanded. ELLEN HARLEY has been victimising pawnbrokers by bringing them a tale of distress, and wedding rings, on which, believing them to be gold, several have advanced her Ss. The rings are, however, really worth but 35., being made of gilt platinum, whose weight and capability of resisting the ordinary tests with nitric acid render detection difficult. Notwith standing this difficulty the fraud has been twice detected, and, after a trial and verdict at the Mid. dlesex Sessions on Tuedsay, Ellen has been sent for nine months of hard labour to the House of Cor rection. She leaves, it is suspected, many accom plices still at large, pursuing the same branch of industry. The risk to any pawnbroker whom they may take in is far more extensive than the loss of some shillings on the pledge, as the rings are stamped with a forged hall-mark, and if exposed for sale would subject the possessor to a 201. penalty under the Goldsmiths' Act. THE LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS as the custodians of their lodgers' property was tried at the Lambeth County Court on Tuesday. One Harebel had gone to the house of a coffeeshop-keeper named Barnes on the Ist of December, and engaged half a bed, some man unknown being already asleep in it when he retired to rest. In the morning he found his fellow-lodger gone, and also part of his own apparel, for whose value he afterwards sued Mr. Barnes, the landlord. The arguments turned chiefly upon the SATURDAY, point of custody, and the question whether a coffee_ house where lodgers were taken by the night cam e under the law which regulated inns. Ultimately th e judge (Mr. Pitt Taylor) decided the latter poi nt i n the affirmative, and on the whole case gave judgment in favour of the plaintiff for the amount of his loss. THE most ingenious and original inventions seem always destined to plunge their inventors into ditti. culties. At the Great Exhibition of 1851 there were few specimens of mechanical contrivance which at tracted more curious interest than Count Dunin' s steel " model of a man," with its 7,000 sprin gs , wheels, and laminae so deftly combined that by turn_ ing a handle the figure could be expanded to th e dimensions of a giant, or wound down into th e diminutive proportions of a dwarf, and yet preserve a perfect symmetry among its various parts and limb s . The expenses attending this intricate machine, and some other contrivances of like character, have, how ever,resulted in making the inventor a ba n k rupt, an .djudication having been pronounced against him on Monday in Basinghall-street. His liabilities are stated to be considerable, chiefly upon bills of exchange. The count it was then said had dis appeared, and the only assests discoverable con sisted of some furniture, and this was claimed by a single creditor under a bill of sale. Ix A BANKRUPTCY dating from 1812, that of Messrs. Kensington, Styers, and Adams, heretofore bankers in the City, a small dividend is announced to be pay able shortly, property having accumulated in the hands of the official assignees to the amount of about 5,0001. _ . A LAD NAMED Duxxr.wv, aged only thirteen, and looking much younger, was tried at the Middlesex Sessions on Monday upon a charge brought against him by his own father for stealing a pair of trousers. The theft was proved; and in reply to the natural query why he placed at a criminal bar so young a lad, and his own son besides, Dunkley senior told the common story of innate depravity in his child, who he said was an incorrigible thief and had robbed him incessantly. The lad had been sent to two schools, but was expelled from both, as well as dis charged from several situations, on account of his de praved conduct and addiction to dishonest practices and disreputable companions. The assistant judge (Sergeant Adams), in passing sentence of two years' imprisonment upon the culprit, remarked upon the deficiency of the law, which gave the country no claim upon the parents of criminal children to con tribute to their support, as they ought to do, whether their offspring were in prison or out of it. This he said was a question to which he should never cease to draw attention in public and in private, in season and out of season, so that an end might be put to the disgraceful state of the law. - MARCUS BAIN, formerly a lodging-house-keeper, has petitioned the Insolvent Court for discharge from prison. His detaining creditors were the chil dren of a friend, a coachman, who at his death had left the insolvent trustee to his savings, consisting of some 300/. invested in Consols. Availing himself of his legal powers, however, the insolvent had sold all the stock and applied the proceeds to his own purposes. This breach of trust was now alleged in opposition to his application for relief from his debts. On his behalf counsel pleaded the ingenuousness with which the insolvent had confessed his fault in his schedule, and related in further mitigation how be had fallen into the clutches of a clever sharper, who pretended to be a barrister, borrowed large sums of this wrongfully-obtained money, and was now lying under sentence of transportation for another offence. The court, however, stigmatised his con duct, as showing a breach of trust of the blackest dye, and remanded the insolvent to Whitecross-street for eighteen months. THE RUSSELL INSTITUTION IN GREAT CORAM-STREET has sought to be - exonerated from parish rates, under the Parochial Assessments Act, as being "instituted for the purposes of literature, science, and the fine arts exclusively." After hearing arguments in the Queen's Bench on Wednesday, Lord Campbell gave judgment against the institution. He noticed that newspapers were taken in there, that politics were studied as well as science, and a magazine or Brad shaw's Railway Guide found more readers than "Newton's Principia." The objects of tbe estab lishment were highly laudable, and its utility great; but it was not entitled to exemption from the ordi nary parochial burdens. A DECISION on the long-contested point of the liability of railway companies to carry what are called "packed parcels " was given on Wednesday in the Court of Common Pleas. Several years back certain persons commenced acting as agents for the collec tion of various small packages, which they made up into a few large ones, and forwarded to provincial towns, such as Sheffield, Glasgow, dc., where they caused the contents to be delivered to their respective addresses. Great convenience to trade was thus obtained ; but the London and North-Western Com pany, fancying that the system deprived them of large profits, endeavoured in the first instance to make a higher demand for all such Tercels: but Li