The Sun. — London, England, 1841-12-08 00:00:00

EVEN ENW SUN LAW INTELLIGENCE. VICE CHANCELLORS' COURT, Dec. 7. (Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRA M.) 3720ML1N t'. TOMLIN. The argument; in this cause were brought to a conclu sion. His Hbnour ordered it to stand in the pap,:r for judgment or. Thursday next. ( I Lefoue Vice-Chanceller KISNIGHT BRUCE.) TULLOCK V. HARTLEY. The hearing of this cause was continued the whole day. COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH, Dec. 7. BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE. DAnnoN V. ROSSER. Mr. PLATT (in continuation from our Afternoon Edi tion), said—On the 4th of September, Mrs. a nd Mi ss Darbon, and'Mr. Rosser made a party to go to Milton, near Gravesend ; and on that occasion the dekndant, who paid the expense of the trip, said how happy he felt in the anticipation of the coming nuptials, which should be celebrated as soon as the year after the death of his first wife should have expired. On the 31st October, 1837, he again wrote a letter to the plaintiff, in which, after desiring to know the reason - why she ex pressed her apprehensions of her unworthiness of him, and his belief that more perfection could not be found in w human being, he went on to say, "I shall come triiven to you on Friday, and stay till Monday, and talk all matters over. I shall take the sacrament on Sun daes, and I hope tb have your. mother and yourself on each sidle of me to join in that beneficial tepast, as a fitting preparation for another holy sacra telent;" and lifter a great deal in the same str a in, h e concluded by swing, let us set our house in order, in order teat we may establish ourselves as tabernacles for the entertainment of' the Holy Spirit." .t appeared that when the plaintiff and her mother and sister came to town, their circumstances were such that they could not afford to lodge in such expensive places as Red Lion-square or Ormond-street ; and accordingly, with a praiseworthy prudence, they took lodgings of an humble character, better suited to their circumstances. This, however, did net meet with the defendant's approbation, and accordingly, in a letter dated Nov. 21, 1837, after stating the great anxiety he had endured on her account, he says he is glad to find that bath herself and her sister felt an aversion to the lodgings, as he did not consider them sufficiently respectable. He then went on to urge her to be of resigned mind, of cheerful pious habits ; and expressed his belief that she was the most innocent hearted girl alive. He concluded by saying, " You are in my thoughts from morning till night. Cheer up, my best beloved, be happy." To that letter there was at tached a postscript, in the following words :—" When ever you wish to indulge your f e eli ngs o f l ov i ng -ki n d- Tim towards me, do so copiously. It is balm to my soul."—(Great laughter.) In a letter of the. 24th November, the defendunt said " I hope to come soon and seal the mutual assurances of our affection on your sacred lips. We must regulate our minds by a pure and holy train of th s ought. I beseech of you to read often the sacrament Of matrimony, and I will do the same, that if * it should please Almighty God that we should enter into that sacred bond, we may be found worthy of it." Various other letters pawed between the parties, to which he would not draw their attention, until the 18th December, when he wrote a letter, beginning, "My dear little angel love." In that letter he ex pressed his intention of marrying her as soon as " the period shall have elapsed in which, according to custom, an unfortunate widower or widow can contract such en gagements, without subjecting himself to unpleasant ani madversions." He went on to state that he fell convinced that they purely and holily loved each other, and that the plaintiff was a model, both in person and mind, of a being calculated to ma k e him happy, and urged her, in a ll her trials to put her trust in the grace and holy spirit of God. On 11th February following he again addressed her " My dear affectionate Sophia." In that letter was the following passage :—" I hope the affection I feel for you is not assimilating to idolatry, for I believe you to be the most honest-hearted, inartificial creature in England ; tell me your whole heart's desire ; get religious habits ; offer up your whole soul to God ; I pray to him for our mutual guidance. If you were a giddy-minded girl, I should call myself an old blockhead ; but, knowing you to be what you are, I am convinced that God himself will approve of our unions Do not be agitated by the sneers and irony of any, because you have induced an elderly man of experienced Christian principles to love you for your own sake—a thousand kisses to you." On the 24th of the same month he wrote to her, stating that he should be greatly distressed- if he were not permitted to make some manifestation of his affection for her, and that in order to do so he had transferred 3001. Con sols and 3661. Three-and-a-Half per Cents. into her name ; that he had preferred adopting this method of making her independent, in the event of his dying before he should be enabled to marry her, to leaving heranything in his will, as in that case his daughters must know of it, and might look on her with anger." This money it would appear had been thua invested during the time he was compelled by decorum to remain in widow hood, but it must be manifest to the Jury that on his marrying her the money would ',via become his own. In another letter written - about the strtne time he said he had sent her pencils and drawing apptratus by the Chcrtsey coach, and expressed a hope that she would take him as her pupil. The next letter to which he should dm the attention of the Court was written on the 2d June. 1838, after the expiration of the twelve months from his wife's death. In that linter in aeknowheigi ng the receipt of one from her, i.e said, "I took it from the postman at my own door." "It seemed a cerdiat to my heart." " I kisFed it all over." " I acknowledge the kind effulgence of your heart." • " I think that the ex pression of my love is a conduit to your dear bosom." "Accept my best affection." The next letter was 17th August, and begins, " My. dearly alel truly beloved Sophia." " are the last thing in me eAning, and the fhtstslhing in my terming thim; , ;lie' He then went on to say, "We mutually deserve a union of our hearts and souls; a mutual bond of aff;. , ction, not for our present gratification, but to bring our hearts and minds into such a g a t e o f re,endated and pious disi oline as may be pleasing in the sight of Almighty God." g lle then went on to express a wish that she might be • come a vessel of honour and piety, and thus complete a seraphic, serene, and angel-like curse. A considerable period had elapsed beyond that which he hiinselfhail. fixed for the performance of his promises, and, as might naturally have been expected, some uneasiness was expressed by the young lady and her friends on the subject, and he was urged to declare explicitly what his intentions were. Ac cordingly, in .the letter dated September 3, 1838, after expressing his distress of mind at her letter, demanding from him a plain " yes" or "no," he states that his state of health is declining, that his daughters are averse to his again marrying, that lie shall ever regard her with feelings of amity and friendship. Two days after that letter he wrote her another, stating he felt that she was essential to his happiness, and that he was determined to take her for better for worse, and containing the following couplet— ".in spite of all my friends cin say My dear Sophia has stolen my heart aw a y."—(L aug h ter.) The letter then went on to :say s that he would arrange lin• the sacred ceremony as sou as they should come to town, and concluded with these words " Keep you own secrets, and you wi!l rise as a nhOmie or an angel."—(Loud laughter.) On the 6:li September defendant had even the plaintiff's mother, and she had explained to him the stitfi,rings which her dangle ter hind experienced hi consequence of his vacillating centime. lie then stated to the mother that the marriage should take place before the expiration of that year. On the 14th, howeve r , lie wrote another letter, beginning, " lay dear Sophia," in which, after making complaints that he was unwell, that he was troubled with cramps and spasms all over, that the weather was cold, and his daughters were ailing, he said, "I tun fighting ag,etnst hope in my wishes respecting you ; all I can do will be to imp rove your finances, and manifest my elks:lion to you in t h at way. " So that eight days after declaring that the marriage should he celebrated before Christmas lies wrote a lstt er d eclaring entirel' off. In that letter hu aid, o She - 0, his Hearts' best affections for her welfare, but that it was useless in his present dethroned state to think of marriage, and thev mu st submit to what , Almighty Ged had been pleased Co or d er ;" so that the Jury would perceive he attributed hie refusal to perform his promise to the i nterference of -the Almighty, instead of to his Own vacillation. Out the 16th of September • he wrote, another - letter begining "my dearly beloved Sophia," stAd stating how great a relief it was to his feelings to re ceive her 'kind and aflisctionate hitter. It then went on to forget you, cannot reply say, "..Is4with your requesti m Oates reply ; you are too engrafted on * V s one. Place y()a us a child, and would succour yott Christ ," and chee your hopes in God and his Son Jesus . to have bent went on to say that lie at one timehopedsuch a casket, e e a7al happy in the possession of ather such a pious that he might have been permitted to e m nosegay.—(great laughter.) The next letter was of the 18th September, and ;vas in a chiles ent strain. It began, s" Miss Sophia Darbon,', a"( "1 him, 1848, 1 • weased his surprise at the great injustice she wasdoing and pr ocee d e d t o sa y, • " R e member t develop gents c eveop ments von made to nee eat the outset of our ikintacs: respecting a certain pretheate, w u° s 3 id, was annoying von, and other matter.- ealenlated to excite inv sympathy iii yOur behelf." The letter concluded- with saying--" tee wish the spoiidence to cense, eense to reply to this blies. the 26th lie wrote another letter, and in the interim aPPeSTOd to have changed his mind. It began "My dear Sophia," and stated that he had had some serious conversation with his daughters on the suhject of their union, and that they were impacifiable, that he thought it not improbable that one of them might write a letter to her on the subject, • and that should such an event t a k e p l ace he desired that she would write to his daughter the reply which lie enclosed. If that, an swer should be put in by the Counsel for the defence as evidence of' the conduct of his client, Ise should have an opportunity of observing upon it, and characs tensing such conduct as it deserved. That let ter showed that ho again endeavoured to • re vive the hopes the lady. On the 18th of December So he at hiaeain sent and address e d h er " M y d ear l y - b e l oved p ;" . in which, after expressing his unalterable ffecti • a on and devotion to her, anti deshine her t look u to heaven, which • "' P would consider them as conjunct hdev estith otees to its will, he sa i d, " Take care of your and get stoutish, for the marriage state requires health and strength.—(Roars of laugtery I take every pains and care with n • "—(Continued laughter.) On the I st of January fo llowin g, in 1839, h e wrote her a letter, leeg . ai h , at ; a n; S °gin ," in which, aft er eapressinssla l s a d lls e estre to ire on terirs of friendship with her b he said, " Believe me, m y person is not worth a pin's hen(;" and he concluded by telling he r that, although. she seemed not to care for his age and infirmities, she had better look up to heavenly things than such an old worthless trunk as he - The correspondence eorre - '' On continued, and on the 26th of June, 1839, he again expressed, by letter, his intention of marrying her, and he hoped that he should soon arrive with joyful tidings. On the 15th of April, 1840, he again wrote a letter, in which he promised to purchase the ring and the license at the earliest oppor tunity. He did purchase the ring at Storey's. in Regent-street ; he did purchase the license, for he should put in the affidavit, he made on obtaining it ; he applied to a milliner to make her is. tended wedding clothes, and went with Miss Darbon to 319, Regent-street, where he ordered a bonnet for her, and behaved as if she was already his wife, instead of about to become so. He continued writing to the prain tiff, and deluding her with false hopes until the three months for which the license lasted had expired, and in the month of October, 1840, he wrote to her desiring to putan end to the connection, and offering to settle an annuity of 401. a-year on her as a proof of his affection, and stating that nothing should again tempt him to enter the marriage noose. This proposal she rejected, and determined to appeal to a Jury . of her country against one who had stolen her affections, and induced her to believe that it was his intention to raise her to station and to wealth. Up to that period, he did not complain of the tone of Mr. Rosser's letters ; but he had since written letters which he (Mr. P.) thought he must be sorry he had put his hand to. On the 7th of May, 1841, after the plaintiff had con sulted her legal adviser, he addressed a letter to her, beginning, " You little ingrate ;" and after stating that he had received a letter from a lawyer, who stated that he had been the friend of herself and family fur years—added, " you never mentioned him to me, and if this be so it must be another of your sly secretions?' The letter then went on to threaten plaintiff with an exposure if she persisted in her action, and to say that, in self-defence, he should be obliged to say all he knew of Kitchen and the Northumberland. Shades, the Opera Parade, and her being driven one night from the Northumberland Shades, because the lodgings were occupied by.some other person, and her paramour, when she had to throw herself upon his pro tection, he had to get a post-chaise, and take her home at twelve o'clock at night. Of the meaning of all this he (Mr. Platt) was utterly ignorant ; these stories were fabrications from beginning to end, and he declared that any insinuations against the character of the plaintiff were utterly and completely false. Mr. Rosser did riot seem inclined to heal the wound he had inflicted, for, on the 17th of March, 1841, he wrote her a letter, stating that—Auld Robin Gray—and he (Mr. Platt) wished that the defendant had followed Auld Robin Gray's example—that Auld Robin Gray thought he should die shortly, and before he did so, he wished to provide for a certain person ; but before he did so, he must be sure that she had given up all her intentions of Pickwicking him, and warning her not to spend her money on law or she would ruin herself. He would recommend her to beware of the fangs of the law ; such proceedings would in the result do her no credit. That, said the Learned Counsel, was evi dently held out to preVent her from coming into Court, and challenging inquiry. On the 29th March, he wrote that, wishing at all events once more to bid his favourite protegee farewell, he would see her at her own house, or wished to see her at his, adding, that she had still Old Robin's best wishes for her health and hap piness. On the 12th of April, 1841, he wrote that he had received some rent on her account, and said he had before expressed a 'desire to know how her sister was, but had not been gratified ; so that there were threats on the one hand, and wheedling on the other. Proba bly, he said, she would be soon coming to receive her dividends. He would be glad to see her, accompanied either by her mother or by her sister Elizabeth, to settle money and other matters. She might, 'ere long, have oc casion to say that Old Robin Gray was very good to her ; she knew his affectionate heart towards her. First they had a threatening letter ; then a wheedling letter in reference to money matters, hoping to get the affair settled in that way. By and bye, it would be said that the parties had relinquished each their claim upon the other, and, therefore, that no claim could be set up now on the part of the plaintiff. But, in addition to these, a letter was written addressed to the mother of this lady. In that letter he said that on his return to town from Gloucestershire, to him a very wearisome journey, he had learned that Sophia was promising him a very indelicate, iniquitous, and Pickwickery suit again. He could not believe that it had originated with herself, and wished to prevent her from being hold up to ridicule for aiming at an old man such as he was fur a husband against all causes and reasons on his part. He then went on to allude to the connexion between the plaintiff and a Mr. W. E. Kitchen, who, he said, lived in Northumberland-court, which had written upon it at both ends " Beware," and said that in case she persevered in her present conduct all the circumstances would be exposed. His confidence in Sophia had, he said, sunk materially ; but still he had a kind feeling towards her, pitied and sympathised with her, and although h e th oug h t s h e h a d d ea l t un f a i r l y by him, he was rather more inclined to rescue her from the terrible fangs of the laws than to hold her up to ridicule. If she chose to pursue her Pick wickeries, he would take back the monies which he had placed in her name, to enable her mother to afford her more comfort, and to make her less of a Cinderella or drudge to the family. He had acted under the belief that she was an innocent and artless girl. Ile wished the mother to read Mr. Kitchen's letters attentively. The engagement had, he believed, been broken off; because Mr. Kitchen could not afford the match. If he found Mr. Kitchen an eligible match he would do something towards removing that difficulty. It was then suggested that her object was to unite with him because stie knew he could not last long, and she could then unite herself to Mr. Kitchen. lie was truly sorry, lie continued, for the trouble which Mrs. Darbon must have experienced, occa sioned by Sophia's pursuit of him against all his ream'', .itranccs. This letter, said the Learned Counsel, as a most artful and designing one. It was addressed to the mother, who of course had the most tender regard for her child, who would be„particularly desirous that the breath of slander might not sully in the least degree the reputation of her child. On the one hand he held out to her the chance of an exposure, and on the other lie made an offer of compromise. An attentive perusal, however, of those three letters seemed to have changed his mina. Oa May 11, 1840, there was a letter in his hand-writing addressed to Mrs. Darbon. In this letter, he said he sent, by Sophia's request, three letters of her's, of the 3d, 9th, and 15th of October, 1836,. which he had again perused with attention. He did not ; he said, attribute the least blame to her, but he considered it a misfortune to her that she should have been connected with a per son of the description which she mentioned. Ile begged, in conclusion, that she would give his very kindest regards to Sophia, showing, that upon that date he had passed a deliberate judgment upon those letters. On the 20th of July he addressed another letter to the mother. lie said he had yesterday received information from the family attorney, that she hail sent him his confidential letter, totiss quoties, or neck and heels." He (the attorney) seemed in great anxiety lest the Pickwickery scheme should be frustrated, by his calling upon and seeing eiophia, and getting her to unriddle the scheme which she had brought upon the tapis. To release them from any further trouble on that score, he assured them that he did not intend to intrude any call upon them but with their entire approbation, and he (the attorney) need not hold himself in readiness for meeting him at their residence. The Learned Counsel said the Jury would know that this matter, having been placed in the hands of an attorney, it was altogether unprofessional for the defendant to send a letter to the parties interested. It was to a complaint made in conse quence of this unprofessional conduct that the letter alluded. When speaking of the anxiety of the attorney, " Mine and Sophia's," continued this letter, will be a tidy little farce, and may be entitled " A Timely Discovery and Lucky Escape. On the 4th of October,. 1841, Mr. Rosser, continuing his course of in sult, addressed a letter to the plaintiff. In this letter he said he lamented much for her sake that she had been placed, or been driven into the trammels of the instead of accepting gratefully his philanthropic future boon ; induced purely by compassion tOr his circumscribed means, and relying' upon his as surances respecting W. E. Kitchen ; but, as she had chosen to pursue her suit against him, he had been under the necessity of ;searching out those who had been able to iteerpret Mr. Kitchen's three letters. He had been informed, he said,. of many of her adventures, and amongst the rest of her accepting an invit a ti on f rom an East ndian Captain, and the offence given to Mr. Kitchen by that act. He left it to her whether she would ithdraw her abominable action, or submit to an exposure. The defendant next tried the persuasive powers of. his poetry upon the plaintiff. But he (Mr. Platt) could not say whether his verses were iambic or trochaic, or of that peculiar style which the writer him self described them " doggrel."—(A laugh.) One epistle ran thus_ “ I_ }y, i oo t u tl r e il S o o y p in l l , l l e ' t v t e er n s o , t an f ( o i r \ g v o h t a t not, , 11:3:(ue)etettl , rnissr _ .:(i)vn _ oigt,;.trrtpti , le. ,,, ,([d7s,,e over your long epistles, tlio wll lo n v o i t n a g b i u n s i e s , siles ; you called foriltlr honey being and of mighty use; bar)tic.,,, of beinw gone, that ere long, .I: l l d ea r i !” , own you that all you d o i s ,„•,„ What cheats of all degrees there And China talk is earthenware are ' Your conduct it is most provoking And Pickwick 's driven beyond joking. These lines are doggrel, I allow, But yet will think they meanin g show ; But if you come with due subjection, - You shall have all my kind protection?' (The reading of these verses was frequently interrupted by bursts of laughter.) He ( Mr. Platt ) conld not doubt that the Jury would percei ve that all th e object of th e letters and epistles was to insult and terrify th e plaintiff They were a gross aggravation of his previous conduct. He, therefore, did not doubt that when he had shown them that the character of the plaintiff was irreproach able, and that the defendant had no excuse for his inju rious conduct towards her, they would give her such damages as would satisfy. the world that she had not merited the treatment she had experienced. Mrs. Sarah l)arbon was then called and examined by Mr. Wright. She said she was the widow of Mr. John I)arbon, who died in 1812. His father did not die until 1821, witness having succeded to her father-in-law's bu siness in 1814. In 1822 she gave up the business, hav ing met with some losses in it. Each of her three daugh ters, Sophia, Sarah, and Elizabeth, had been left legacies by the will of their grandmother. Her daughter Sophia had always been brought up at home. She had never been absent from home, except for about three weeks, when she stopped with the Countess Montalembert. - The -- - property to which she was entitled by the will of her grandmother was a little wider 401. a year. Witness TilE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1841.1 and her daughters had resided for the last ten years at Hampton, in thi s county . M r. R osser received the rents for her daughters, who used to call on him to re ceive them. Her daughter Sophia went to tet Countess Mon talembert before the death of Mrs. Rosser. It might be a year or two, or it might be more. It was by Mr. Rosser's recommendation plaintiff went to the service. About a month after Mrs. Rosser's death plaintiff went to defendant's house. In answer to Mr. THESIGER, who objected to the question, wit ness sa id s h e did no t go with her daughter and did not know of the visit, of her own knowledge. Had seen a letter from Mr. R. to her daughter in April, 1837. It was received by her daughter at Hampton on the 10th of April, about a week before she went to Mr. Rosser. About that time was in the habit of coming to London with her daughter, and went generally to Northumber land-street. After the 10th of April recollected the letter now shown to her coming. Her daughter was making a communication relative to this subject when she received the letter, at the time they were at Mr. Robinson's in Northumberland. street. Had been in the habit of going to that house when they came to London. Her daughter went to Mr. Rosser alone, a few days afterwards. Recollected a letter being received by her daughter, begging the acceptance of 201. Recollected Mr. Rosser coming to her house at Hampton, shortly before the burial of the late King. He came by the stage-coach. He came purposely to state the affection he had for witness's daughter, and to ask her consent. They had a long conversation. Witness felt surprised at the proposition, so early after Mrs. Rosser's decease. Witness said she could not approve of itt nor would any of his relations. lie said he must beg to be excused making his proposals so early, as he was afraid she might be engaged at the twelve months' end. On witness tell ing him that his family would not approve of it, he said they were well provided, and would not object. He said he had always liked her daughter since she was eleven years of age. Told Mrs. Rosser what her daughter had said about him naming the subject so soon after hiswife's death. He spoke of Mrs. Rosser in very kind terms; but said he could not bring her back again, and he thought her daughter would make him comfortable. Upon witness objecting to. the age of Mr. Rosser, he said he enjoyed excellent health, and was in constitution not more than 30 years of age. Witness told him she dis approved of the match altogether. He told witness that he had amassed great wealth by his own industry ; that what he might acquire could be settled on her daughter, and that he would marry her at the twelvemonth's end. Mr. Rosser, on this occasion, was with them several hours. He saw witness's daughter on that day, and addressed her as her suitor. On the following Sunday Mr. Rosser came to witness's house. On the previous interview Mr. Rosser left her house, with the understanding that he was to marry her at the twelvemonth's end. When the defendant came on the Sunday, it was about eight o'clock in the morning. He came in a carriage. Witness was at breakfast ; and, upon asking him to breakfast, he said he had had it before he came out. Th e carr i age an d h orses were sent to the Clarence Arms, Hampton. Mrs. Bennett was vi-. siting them there. Witnessand her daughter went with Mr. Rosser to Hampton Church. He paid great attention to her daughter, and would not have a book to himself, but read out of that which witness's daughter hal After wards went out a drive with Mr. Rosser, who dined with them. At dinner he paid her daughter great attention, and said that Providence had been kind in finding him such an object. Mr. Rosser drank tea with them, end left her ho,use while witness was gone to Church with Mis. Bennett in the evening. On another occasion went to Mr. Rosser's house ; at his written request. Mr. Rosser was very busy. He paid great attention to witness's daughter. In the har vest of that year the defendant again came to witness's house at Hampton. He took witness's .daughter for a walk. Witness mentioned to Mr. Rosser, on another occasion, the circumstance of his transferring stock into the name of his daughter. Witness remonstrated against it, when he said it would all come back to him again. by his marriage. Upon his stating he should make further transfers in favour of her daugh ter, witness begged him not to do so. Before Mr, Rosser went to Wales he requested her not to let her daughter go out of her si g ht. R eco ll ecte d going to .31ilton with Mr. Rosser and her daughter Sophia. Her youngest daughter dined at Mr. Rosser's house. When ever witness had any conversation with Mr. Roseer, he always spoke of his marriage. On the occasion of going to Milton he said he had a house at Islington, which he wished witness and her daughter Sophia to have, stating he would furnish it, and increase her daughter's income. Witness objected to it. Mr. Rosser paid the expenses to Milton. On their return Mr. Rosser accompanied them to Hampton. Witness's daughter always behaved very kindly to Mr. Rosser. All the letters sent by Mr. Rosser to her daughter were seen by witness. Witness's time, and that of her whole house, had been occupied for the last four years with answering his letters. Her daughter had received upwards of 400 letters from Mr. Rosser.— (Laughter.) One day went to Mr. Rosser's to dinner, and stated to him she did not like to do so, when her daughters were absent. He afterwards wrote to witness, requesting her and her daughter to come and stop with him a week, which she refused to do, thinking it improper as his daughters were absent. He said he would introduce his daughters to them when they returned from Wales. Some time alter this witness said to Mr. Rosser that he was trilling with her daughter, and that he had Dotter break off the connection ; to which he replied he could not. When his daughters returned they objected to the match, and witness then told him she thought he had better marry some of the old ladies whom he said were in love with him, to which he re plied, "I marry an old woman ! Not I. I would not be troubled with one."—(Laughter.) In September, 1838, Mr. ItossE-r came to witness'S house, said he was deter mined to be married, and that he would not listen t, his daughters' objection, as he was sure those objections would be all forgotten by Christmas. Recollected send iog a letter by her daughter to Mr. Rosser, which came back to her open. After September, 1838, witness and her daughter went Co Ormond-street for the purpose of seeing Mr. Rosser's daughters, but he told them his enughters would not see them. Her daughter Sophia became ill in Ormond -street, through fretting at the way they were received. Mr. Rosser was afraid to be seen out with them in the street, and he was so jea lous he would not let them go out by themselves. They removed to Richmond. Mr. Rosser visited them there fre quently ; he continued the same as ever ; it was always "to be or not to be,"—to marry, or not to marry.—(Great laughter.) Witness frequently re proached Mr. Rosser with his conduct, and told him the injury he had done to the whole family. She told him she believed he had had no object all along but to pass away the time of his widowhood with more amusement than he could enjoy with his own family. He still persisted in saying that his purpose was not changed, but his eldest daughter could not be reconciled to the match. Her daughter at length became so ill that she looked like a corpse, and was worn to a skeleton. In April, 1840, she received a jewel box, contain ing a wedding ring, from the defendant. This certainly improved her daughter as much as anything could im prove a skeleton.—(Laughter.) At defendant's request her daughter sent to him a bet of patterns for dresses. Witness and her daughter had told defendant that there STAINES-IV IRIDGE V. VOOHLE V. KLATOWSKY This was an action to recover 1661. 15s. for work and labour done in the printing and stereotyping of plates for come English and Foreign school boots. The plaintiff was a widow, residing at Camberwell, where she carried on the business of a printer, left her by her late husband. In March, 1810, the defendant applied to have a vocabulary . printed and stereotyped, in which the p f tges should be in columns, one in English, another in which the corresponding words appeared in French, another in - Italian, and another in German. lie required an estimate, which was given him, and it amounted to 3. 9s. per sheet. Ile gave an order, and work was done fur him to the amount claimed. was no occasion for any such thing, as she had sufficient dresses already, but he insisted that he should buy her a Suit himself. The licence for the marriage was bought about the same time. The day before the ring was changed a " letter was received from Mr. Rosser, to the effect that he would that day procure the licence. The ring was bought from a jeweller of the name of Storey. The first ring was too large, in consequence of her daughter having grown so thin since her linger had been measured be fore. A smaller ring was procured. Aft er th a t th ey re ceived a letter fromdefendant, in consequence of which witness and plaintiff went to see him. He said on that occasion that he had known before all about the matter he had complained of in the letter, and he felt it his duty either to marry or provide for Sophia ; that his family still objected, but he would consult his own feelings• and marry. He would warty as soon as his daughter, Mrs. Allen, went out of town. After that her daughter re ceived a packet, containing a bond from the defim dant, securing her an annuity of 60/. a year for life. Mr. MESMER objected to this statement. Witness resumed.--Defendant came to his house at Hampton, and having called in her two daughters to the parlour, took their hands, and said that they should all be happy by Christmas. Witness told hint that his conduct would not have been so unprincipled if she had a son or a husband to protect her. She was ruined, and her child's health and prospects blasted by his conduct. She never saw him since. .... This was proved by the son of the plaintiff. In his Cross-examination, he denied that he had ever told the defendant that he was the successor of his father; the business was wholly the property of his mother. He bad given instructions to the attorney, but merely as the agent of his mother. There was nu custom in the trade that persons having whole works printed had twelve months' re but ccnlietvelrt to o • pr tsu i t ya a te l t p o er g s i o v n e s. w t credit to book sellers,thahen he sent in the estimate, he stated that the setting up was to be at three months' credit, and thQ stereotyping was to be paid cash. In dealing •with the defendant, he spoke.to him in his own name.• The stereotype plates had not been delivered, nor would they until they were paid fur. The present action was for the work. • Re-examined—His mother's name was over the door. The porter to the plaintiff proved the delivery of the books. Mrs. Voghle was the owner of the business, and when he received any money he always gave the receipt in her name. Richard Clay, a printer, proved the reasonableness of the prices charged. _ _ _ Air. COCKBURN for the defendant, complained that the delay which had occurred in the completion of the vocabulary, had, in fact, prevented the defendant from completing his contract. That delay had put an end to the contract. and the defendant was entitled to the credit given according to the custom of the tra-le. ought not to have been sued until next year. He called witnesses to prove-the custom of the trade, but His LORDSHIP -refused to, receive the evidence. The credit was a matter of contract as well as the price. Under his direction the Jury found for the plaintiff for the sum claimed. Cross-examined by Mr. THESlGEa—Witness became a bankrupt when she was in business as-a wine mer chant. Was not in prison. Did not know what sort of confinement the Counsel meant ; there were several kinds of confinement.—(Great laughter.) Had not thought defendant so old. Had heard from himself that he had lived fifty-one yQars with his late wife. She often told him it was indelicate and unfeeling to go looking for a young wife so soon after his wife's death. He replied that heaven had smiled upon him, in presenting to him a person so like his former wife. Witness did not smile upon him too.—(A laugh.). He threatened to withdraw all his favour from them if they would not allow his visits. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 7. CLARIDGE V. BeKENZIE. This case occupied the Court from its sitting yester day, and had not termivatod when we went to press— we subjoin the conclusion:— Two witnesses proved the facts stated by Mr. Sergeant Shea as to the payment of rent by plaintiff, first on de mand, and secondly after a distress levied. Witness could not afford to lose his friend ship, and, besides, she was grateful to him t 4 his kindness. . lie had the management of her affairs, and possessed all the vouchers of her daughter's propert y , and her own. Had. heard how many children Mr. Rosser had, and told him repeat edly that she could not believe his family would ap prove of the match. She often said that he ought to marry a person of his own age. He always spurned that advice, and said he would not be pestered with an old woman. Witness always remonstrated on the impro priety of proceeding in the matter without the approba tion of his family. She did not insist on it as strongly as she would have done, if sin The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE left it to the Jury to say whether they believed the testimony . of Tilbury, and the document produced by him, that the interest of ill'Kenxie expired in 1838.—V er di et f or t h e p l a i nt iff; 491. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Dec. 7. MESSRS. WRIGHT AND CO.'s BANKRUPTCY. This day being appointed for a dividend under the fiat, a number of creditors were'in attendance. Mr. DIXoN appeared to move that a proof for 1,7051. 125."1d., by Air. George Robins, the well-known auc tioneer, of Covent-garden, admitted on the 19th March, against the joint estate of Messrs. Wright and Co., be expunged. The proof was esta bli s h e d on Mr. Robins's affidavit, which stated the firm to be indebted to him at the time of the fiat issuing in that sum, being the ba i lance of a banking account for money in hand, and re ceived fOr their use, and for which the deponent re ceived no security or satisfaction. -The ground on which ho (Mr. Dixonl , applied to have that proof expunged was, that the 'transaction was one in which Mr. John Wright alone was concerned in his individual ca pacity. By a pass book, which lie produced in Court, it appeared that Mr. John Wright was debited fur 17,000/. A sum of 18,0001. had been lent to the Right lion. Mr. Howard, through the instrumentality of Mr. Wright, by Mr. George Robins, in June, 1839, and it would appear that that sum bad been paid into the bank, after some time, on account of Mr. Robins. The first document which he (Mr. Dixon) should produce would be a memorandum, bearing date the Bth of June, 1839 , which appeared to be a security given by Mr. John Wright to Mr. Robins in certain Cuba bonds for the amount of 17,0001. It was in the form of a letter ad dressed to Mr. Robins, as follows : , . were not - a - n uncertiticated bankrupt and entirely de pendent on her three daughters. Sophia received hand- some presents from defend — ant from the beginning of his courtship. Could not say that they amounted to 601. a year. Sometimes her daughter returned the presents. Could not say that she returned the 51. presents and kept the 20/. One 201. was given for her to buy a suit or mourni ng , t h at she might correspond with his own appearan ce in walking out with him. Witness thinks . that she h a d h eard something about the presentsin money amounting to 601. a year. Plaintiff received be sides that presents of dresses and shawls, but never of night-caps. —(Laughter ) Never heard such a foolish story as that he should send night-caps.—(Laughter.) On her birth -day- he sent her some b presents; witness could not say what. He transferred to .her daughter's name stock to the amount of 6661. lie used to accom pany her d aughter to r ece i ve the dividends. That pre sent was i ndependent of the 601. a-year.—(A laugh.) It was all to become his again upon marria,ge.—(A laugh.) —A letter was here put in to witness's hand, which she look some time to read.] I don't consider the match to have been off when that letter was written. When a letter came in one way, there was anot h er be fore the day was out the other way. One was for, and the ' other against, the match. I knew 8, person named Kitchen; He was never the ac cepted suitor of my daughter. He was not paying his addresses in this way. There was a cor respondence between them. It might have been as long as two years. I saw the letters put up and sent to Mr., Rosser, there were three letters sent, but there were several others which were destroyed. Those three letters were returned by Mr. Rosser. The de fendant purchased the ring in May 1840, just before he came to Hampton the last time. I suppose he purchased it of his own free will. I certainly wrote to him at my daughter's request to purchase the ring, as a token of friendship, and to show that his intentions were honourable, but that the matter had been broken off because his friends were averse to it. That was on the 23d of March, 1840. The ring was sent down in April, I believe. I told my daughter it was a silly request, but she said, "it would show the people who were aware of all this correspondence that bis intentions were honourable." There was no fail ure of letters during these three years. I do not recollect copying any of my daughter's letters to Mr. Rosser. lam quite unconscious of hnving done so ; but it is impossible to recollect. The case was so extra ordinary that it put me into a state of great wretched ness. Such a thing, I dare say, has not occurred for a hundred years. lam sick and tired of it. I am very unhappy, being in hourly expectation of hearing of my eldest daughter's death. Mr. THESIGER —Are you not aware that this engage ment has been the cause of Miss Rosser's death ? Mr. PLATT objected to the question. Witness—l had a letter from Miss Rosser, stating something to that effect, which I considered very unkind of her. I did not like the lodgings in Ormond-streeet. It was a very noisy unpleasant place. There were seven or nino men in the house, and, in my opinion, Northum berland-street was a palace to it. Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—My father-in-law car ried on the business for some time after my husband's death, and then he gave it to us. It was worth about 1,0001. Since my bankruptcy I have been wholly de pendent on my daughters. I never was in pri son, but I have , been arrested. It was in relation to a family property. I don't think my daughter had more than 201. after the first time. There was 201. also given when the ring was brought to buy what she thought proper, for herself and her sisters to go to the wedding. Ho never sent any night-caps. Kitchen was an acquaintance of the family generally. He lived in London, and we saw him once in a month or six weeks. I received the two letters, now handed me, from Mr. Rosser. They are rather intended for that gentlemen (pointing to the Solicitor). The letters were handed me, one in my daughter's handwriting. [Several large bundles of letters were here handed to the witness, which she took some time in turning over and examining.] There are some of them in Mr. Rosser's hand-writing, and some in my daughter Elizabeth's. _ Joseph Arthur Sharpe—l am a clerk in the Office of Faculties. There is an affidavit of the 15th April 1840, made by Mr. Rosser. It comes from the proper office, where they are deposited on obtaining marriage licenses. There is a mark on it by which I know that the license has gone forth. It is sent to our office before the license is issued. The affidavit was then read. It was in the usual form for license between defendant and Sophia Darbon. Mrs. Mary Anne Bennett—l am the wife of Mr. Henry Bennett. He is engaged iu a mercantile . house in the City. I knew the plaintiff. In the month of July, 1837, I was at Mrs. Darbon's house at Hampton on a visit, and saw the defendant tiler/. twice. I was at Mrs. Darbon's for six months. One time I saw him there was on a Sun day. I recollect his dining there on that occasion. I think . plaintiff and defendant walked out together. She was in good health and spirits then. She is rather lively, and I think her person attractive. Mr. Rosser appeared old, but a healthy old gentleman.— (A laugh.) I thought him about 60. His conversation was lively, and he was courteous and attentive to the ladies. Ono of the visits he paid was in his carriage, and he went to church in it with Mrs. and Miss Sophia Darbon. He dined there that day, and Miss Sophia sat next him. The plaintiff always appeared to me a person of modest manners. I saw her three weeks or a fortnight ago. Her appearance • was changed. She looked like it. person who had suffered anxiety of mind—she was thinner and paler. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER—I did not suppose Mr. Rosser to be less than 60. He had good hair, but 1 don't think it was quite white. I thought him a fine man for his years. He seemed a man of intelligence, and his conversation was good. Miss Darboa called on me in London, and told me that she supposed I would be called upon about this trial. She was in low spirits, and had an appearance of anxiety. She remained three or four hours. At six o'clock the case was adjourned lin to-morrow, and the Court, which was extremely crowded during the day, then broke up. COURT OF EXCHE Q UEI?,Dec.7. BORNE, PUBLIC OFFICER OF TIIE CO3IMISBIONERS OF This was. an action b.-ought against the defendant for the purpose of recovering the sum of 5001., under the following circumstances :—ln November, 1840, the tolls of the bridge were let by public auction, and were taken by a person named Thomsont The lessee was obliged to obtain two persons to enter into a bond as securities for the due payment of the rent of 1661. 13s. 4d. per month. Thomson gave in the name of the defendant as one of such sureties, and he signed an agreexent to exe cute the bond. Thomson tools possession of the tolls on the 31st Dec., 1940, paying one month's rent in advance. In February application was made to the defendant to execute the bond, but he then refused to do so, and gave the trustees notice of his intention of, withdrawing him self as surety, of which no r.otice was taken. Thomson continued to pay his rent regularly, until August, when lie ceased. There were three months rent due, amounting to 5001., which they now sought to recover from the de fendant, considering that he was bound by the agreement which he had signed. Mr. EIILE contended that the plaintiffl3 had no right to recover from the defendant, as surety, until they had shown that Taylor was unable to liquidate . his debt; and that the conduct of the trustees, after receiv ing notice in February that the defendant withdrew himself from his liability, was such as to induce him to bolieve that he was relieved. He hoped they would consider it a case for nominal damages only. Under his Lordship's direction, the Jury found fur the plaintiff for the amount claimed. RA:thins—l hope your Honour will make an order requiring the opponents to pay my expenses. I have come up here from Brighton ' with four horses.— (Loud laughter, in which the Learned Commissioner joined.) Mr. HAMILTON--I dare say, Mr. Robins, you won't spare expense in this case ? Mr. COmmissioner HOLROYD—The terms of the Act, ordering the payment of all reasonable expenses, shall be complied with. Mr. FRANCE, on behalf of a number of stock claimants, among whom were several Roman Catholic clergymen, applied to the Court to be allowed to prove their claims. The bankrupts acted in this case as trustees, and, there fore, it was competent for those creditors to prove either against thejoint or separate estate. Many applications had already been made to the Court of Review, and the case had been considerably prolonged by this, but he hoped, under the circumstances in which his clients were placed, his Honour would order a lengthened adjournment. Mr. Commissioner HoLnovn—These debts cannot be proved without an order of the Court, giving them per tui6sion to come in and prove them, and in the case of ?jr. France's clients that order has not been obtained yet. After some further routine matters had b2en disposed of, it was finally arranged that the case should stand over to the 20th of January. ST ATE OP TRADE. —There was a fair demand for cotton during the greater part of last week, which continued yesterday, but we regret to say that there is no improvement in the accounts from the manufacturing districts, which are still as unfavourable as possible. The Commissioners appointed recently by Government, for the purpose of ascertainin g w h et h er any increased fa cilities can be given to trade and commerce by improved methods of collecting the revenue, are expected in Liver pool about the end of this week, and, we understand, that they will take evidence on the 13th inst., from mer chants, shipowners, and others, as to any defects which exist at present, or any improvethents which can be sug gested in the mode of collecting the very large amount of revenue which is paid in Liverpool. W'e have reason to believe that several matters of consequence will be brought before them, and, amongst others, a plan for ex tending the hours, and increasing the services, of the landing waiters connected with the port. — Liverpool Timer. The Rouen Papers state that a well-known poacher was found (lead three clays ago at the foot of a tree near Quillebceuf. His skull had been shattered by a discharge from his own gun, and it appeared on ex amination that he had formed a retreat among the branches of th e tree, whence he could the better mark his " June 18, 1839. i game, b u t i n getting up a twig had no doubt caught the " place at y our di s p osa l C u ba Bonds to the t tri gger of his gun, and thus produced the accident. amount of 22,0301, which you hold as security for 17,000!., which you have placed in our hands, subject to be realised by you, or repaid by us, at one month's notice, and interest to be paid to yoa, ad inte rim, at 5 pei ant *e held ourselves responsible to you, in the event of a loss being stisteined, for the defi ciency of any of the security. (Signed) " JOHN WRIGHT. " P.S.—The nominal value of the bonds is only 801., although we lately purchased them at 83/." The Court would observe, that in this letter, both at the commencement and the end, John Wright alone appears, although in the body the plural number omen. How ever, it appears to have been written at the Ake of Mr. Robins, and none of it, save the postscript and Sigtititute, is in Mr. Wright's handwriting. He (Mr. Dixon) c 0 tended that this letter was enough to prove the transac tion of leaving the money which had been paid into the bank on account of the loan to Mr. Howard was with Mr. John Wright only, and this assertion would be strengthened when he said that the firm had no interest whatever in it. Therefore, though the plural number appeared in the letter it was no proof that the firm was implied. Again, those Cuba bonds were the property of John Wright, and the partnership had not one penny interest in them. The cheque for 17,0001. in favour of Mr. Robins was drawn by Mr. John Wright in these terms —e Pay to self on Cuba bonds, or bearer the sum of 17,0001. on account of George Robins, Esq. Signed John Wright. Addressed to Messrs. Wright and Company." Nothing could be more conclusive to prove John Wright to be the principal actor, and that it was a separate transaction, than that cheque. Mr. Robins had the pass-book connected with this transaction for 17,000/., yet he made no formal objection until now, when he is called on to establish the fact of its being an account with Wright and Co. Cuba bonds to the amount of 5,000/. were retired from the box, and Mr. John Wright's name alone is mentioned in that affair. Again, in all the entries made on account of interest paid to Mr. Robins the name of John Wright was to be found, and the same observation holds true in the transactions with respect to the principal. Mr. Robins had sold out the Cuba bonds at 65, and as a security, in case of their falling below 80, there were certain Steam packet debentures lodged, which had been sold out also, as the Cuba'bonds only realised 15,750/. The Learned Gentleman concluded by saying he should put in the pass-book and the checks, and ask a few questions of Mr. John Wright, by the way of a cross-examination of his previous evidence. Mr. George Robins—l object totally to this proceed ing. I can't recognise any right to undo my proof, which has been already fairly established, and by the Learned Commissioner admitted. The more so do I pro test against this, as I shall be compelled to touch upon matters which may be painful to Mr. Wright ; and, also, unless it can be proved that there is some suspicion at tached to me, as I think it quite enough to lose my money without being subjected to vexatious opposition. There ought not to have been Counsel brought into Court to upset my claim, without having first given me adequate notice, which has not been done, as I only got notice yesterday. Mr. Commissioner HOLItOYD said . the Act of Parlia ment authorised the assignees to take certain steps to as certain whether any proofs under a fiat had been im properly admitted ; but, at the same tune, they were bound to pay such costs as the Court might award in case the opposition should prove frivolous. Mr. HaanuroN—A summons had been served upon Mr. Robins before. Mr. Robins—Yes, it was served at the time when I was engaged in the sale of Lord Southampton's estate, which had been advertised in every Newspaper in Eng land for three months previously. As he considered his case to be equitable he should dispense with Counsel, and leave the legal points in the hands of the Court. Mr. John Wright, being sworn, stated. that he recol lected having some transactions with Mr. George Robins concerning a loan of 17,0001.—[Here the Learned Counsel, in opposition to Mr. Robins's claim, handed the witness the pass-book before alluded to.] In it he found an entry, dated 19th July, 1839, of John Wright, for 17,000 L About that time he made an application to Mr. Robins, telling him that the Hon. Mr. Howard wanted to borrow a large sum of money, at the rate of 5 per cent. ; and he thought it would be more advanta geous to him (Mr. Robins) to let Mr. Howard have that sum, instead of only receiving 3 per cent. on his capital. He (Mr. Wright) thought 'Mr: Robins was at the time under the impression that the lean was to be guaranteed by the firm ; but such was the stability of the bank then, that he paid very little attention to the exact words used. The interest on the loan was credited to the ac count of Mr. Robins, and witness never had any other transactions with him. If it were a partnership transac tion, it would not have been entered as John Wright's, in the book. However, his position in the firm was such, that Mr. Robins might naturally consider his act that of the firm ; and in his (Mr. Wright's) opinion, it was of very little consequence against which estate Mr. Robins proved, as he would be quite as likely to get as large a dividend from the separate as from the joint estate. He could swear the-transaction was with him, but what Mr. Rubins's impression was he could not say. Mr. G. Robins said he was not by any means aware it was a transaction separate from the firm. He felt that his own credit with the world depended on his rendering an explanation o all the facts of the case. Mr. Wright said to him, " You said you can't get more than 3 per cent. for your money, but I shall be able to get you 5 per cent, if you lend the Hon. Mr. Howard 17,000/. on certain shares in the London and Southampton Rail way." To this ho replied, that he did not know the value of those shares, but would consider the house of Wright and Company to be sufficient security. The money was accordingly advanced upon these terms, and also that it was to be repaid upon the sale of some pro perty to the Duke of Newcastle by the Duke of Nor folk. But the chief point upon which lie (Mr. Robins) relied was, the wording of the letter originally quoted by the Learned Counsel, for the word " we" must, in the mind of any man of common sense, imply the firm, and the firm alone. When this sum was repaid by the Hon. Mr. Howard, Mr. Wright sent for him (Mr. Robins), and said the loan had been paid into the bank, and he could lay it out again in the way of loan on as good security, and offered Cuba bond's to the amount of . 22,000/ as security for the. 17,0001 which had been paid in. To this .he replied he was not aware of the value of the Cuba bonds, but was quite satis fied with the security of Messrs Wright and Company. The money was, consequently, never drawn from the bank, and surely the Court would not believe that he required the security of the house in the first transaction, without observing a similar precaution in the next. It would be ridiculous to suppose that he would risk his money in a loan to any one bank, when he knew all the other banks were getting money for 3 per cent. The fact is, that the banker is generally the lender, and not the borrower. The fact was, be thought lie was lending the money to one of Mr. Wright's very numerous clients. The letter had been written by Messrs. 'Wright's own clerk, Mr. Beadle, and he (Mr. Robins) thought the sentence " we hold ourselves responsible for any deficiency" in the depreciation of 'the nominal security of the 'Cuba bonds, to be ample proof that the firm was involved, and not an individual. If such a fact were known as any bank to borrow money at an interest of 5 per cent., he could have made it bankrupt in 24 hours. Mr. DIXON having replied, Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD said this was an applica tion to expunge a proof against the joint estate of the bankrupts. After the loan to the Hon. Mr. Howard had been repaid, the money being in the bank, Mr. Robins allowed the use of it . on the joint security of th e p ar t ners hi p. Taking all the circumstances of the case in to consideration, considering that the loan to Mr. Howard had been given on the guarantee of the firm, and considering that in the material part of the letter the plural number had been used, there was not enough to satisfy him that that debt had not been contracted on the responsibility of the firm of Wright and Company. He would rather form an opinion from the documents that had been produced that day in Court than upon the evidence of any person, no matter who he might be, at that distant period. From all the circumstances of the case he came to the conclusion, that as the loan to Mr. Howard was originally given on the security of the firm of Messrs. Wright, so, also, when that money again came to be disposable by its repayment, Mr. Robins would again require similar security. Under those circumstances ho should not entertain the appli cation. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. AN EXTRAORDINARY CASE.—GROSS PERJURY.— Elizabeth M'Cabe, 19, a- respectable looking girl, was indicted for stealing four bank-notes of the value of 251., and ten sovereigns, and a great number of articles—con sisting of a pair of stays, a quantity of knives and forks, salts, plates and dishes, smelling bottles, tea-pots, china, glass ware, earthenware, and a variety of other articles — .the property of Beagley, Camden Head publie house, High-street, Camden-town. Mr. Phillips conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Clark son appeared for the defence. It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner had been in the service of the prosecutor for nine or ten months, during which time she had always conducted herself with propriety and honesty. In October last the prose cutoi• came to her and said that he had been robbed, and t h at h o mnb : search her box, as he had done his man's. She replied that mi.,: could not allow it, as her box was not fit to be aeon by t. man. He then requested her to have it searched the . I „: s 7sence of his (prosecu tor's) wife ; but she refused unfoo hes: mother was pre sent. The prosecutor then called in a pohc znan, and gave her intucustody. As soon as the priscner was c.;27 veyed to the station-house, the prosecutor took the police man, and opened the boxes of the prisoner, where the property named in the indictment was found. The pro secutor was severely cross-examined by Mr. Clarkson, and it appeared that, on several occasions, he had taken liberties with the girl, and had of fered her two sovereigns if she would comply with his wishes, but she refused, and told her mistress. The girl had twice complained to her mother that her boxes had been attempted to be opened. The prosecu tor had previously sworn that what liberties he had taken were in the presence of his wife. He also swore dis tinctly that his wife was not in the habit of getting tipsy. The wife was then called, and swore to the property being hers. She deposed that she had never seen her husband attempt any liberties with the prisoner in her presence—not so , much as kiss her. On cross-examination she declared that she had taken no intoxicating drink the whole of yesterday, and that she was perfectly sober. The stays produced she would swear were her property. The cross-examination of both witnesses was at great length, but these were the principal features. The policeman who took the prisoner into custody was examined, and Mr. PIIILLIPS said that was the case for the prosecution. Mr. CLARKSON then addressed the Jury for the de fence, and concluded by calling the following witnesses : John Blackmore deposed that he was a glass-dealer, and had sold the prisoner at the bar the salts produced. Had no doubt whatever on the subject. Caroline Batteley deposed that she was a china and glass-dealer, at 28, High-street, Camden-town. Sold the prisoner several articles produced aboutrsix months ago. James Sergeant stated that he resided at 127, High street, Camden-town. About eight weeks ago sold the prisoner the broach produced. It is the one sworn to by the prosecutor's wife as her property. Mrs. Jernomy Huntsmack deposed that she resided at No. 47, High-street, Camden-town, and kept a druggist's shop. She was called to prove that she had sold the prisoner a smelling bottle, but on its being called for' in the Court, it was no where to be found. Mr. CLARKSON said the Jury saw it when it was pro duced at the examination for the prosecution. Mrs. Huntsmack said she would describe the bottle without seeing it, so well did she recollect the circum stance of selling it to the prisoner. The officer who took the prisoner into custody, said that perhaps the bottle might be in a basket he had in his possession of the prisoner's, which contained some things of her own. The RECORDER asked how it was that this basket had not been produced before ? The Officer—l was told to bring it, my Lord, but it belongs to the prisoner. The RECORDER—If you presume to come into Court after having searched property belonging to prisoners, and you keep back any of the articles, you shall take the consequences. It is a most harsh thing that when a prisoner has submitted to be stripped of everything, that those things most in their favour are held back. I shall expect this bottle to be produced. After considerable search the bottle was found and identified by the witness as the one she had sold to the prisoner. A witness proved he had sold the stays, named in the indictment and produced, to the prisoner. Could swear to the stays, they had his private mark upon them. Nicholas M'Cabe, the next witness called, stated that he was the father of the prisoner, and lived in Bear-street, Ratcliffe. The prisoner had been a Servant in one place for upwards of eight years before she went to the prosecutor. She had 151. in her possession when she went into the serviie of Mr. Beagley, which she had saved from her former service. Witness had often told her to put it into the Savings' Bank, but she said it was safe enough in her pocket. The prosecutor came to witness at the police of fice, and said if his daughter got oft; he would take her into his service again. The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Phillips, but nothing was elicited in any way to alter the features of this evidence. Mrs. M'Cabe, the mother of the prisoner, deposed that she had seen 151. in her possession, which she had saved out of her wages. She came home one day while in the service of the prosecutor, and com plained that some one had been trying to get into her box. That was about two months before Beagley insti tuted the present prosecution. The witness knew of her daughter having ear-rings and black ornaments, and a necklace of jet. Tito prosecutor's wife was again called up by the Recorder, and she said she would swear - the articles were hers, or at least like them. She swore positively; in the first examination, that they were her property. William Henry Finch being sworn, deposed that lie lived at No. 5, Union-street, Islington. The prisoner sent him to pay some money for a coral necklace. Has known the prisoner about two years, and never 'heard a breath against her character. The witness knew her when she lived at Islington at her last place. By the COURT—Mrs. Beagley, if these are your orna ments, will you state where you got them ? Mrs. Beagley (hesitating for some time)—ln Tottenham Court- road. -The RECORDER—What iS the person's name ? Mrs. Beagley—l can't say the person's name ; it is some years back. The RECORDER—Did you ever wear this brooch ? Mrs. Beagley—Never but once. The RECORDER—Where did you get the ear-rings ? Mrs. Beagley (hesitating)—l think the name was liar.. rison, in the New-road. The RECORDER—Did you ever wear them?—Yes, Sir. The RECORDER—How long ago? Two years ago. [She was then asked a variety of questions by the Court as to the price she gave for the articles, and answered each question in the same hesitating manner as before. She said she could not tell whether she gave - 4s. or it for the brooch. The REconnEa—Where did you get the stays &Om? Mrs. Beagley —From a person over the bar. The RECORDER—Da you mean to say you tried them on in the bar ? Mrs. Beagley—No, kdid -not try them en at all. The RECORDER—Remember you have taken a solemn oath. Was it a man or woman that you purchased these articles from ? Mrs. Beagley—lt was a woman. The REbonDER—By the solemn oath that you have taken, do you mean to represent that you bou g ht th ose stays ? No answer, On the question being repeated she said she did. The RECORDER—And you swear that you purchased them over the bar ? Mrs. Beagley—l cannot possibly say, Sir, it might have been in the kitchen. 'The REconliEn—Did you wear these stays ? Mrs. Beagley—l never wore them but once. The stays were lying on the table in the Court, and were considerably worn. The RECORDER, addressing the Jury—l really put it to you whether you can believe this woman ? Mr. CLARKSON said, if the Jury would wait a little he would prove that the witness was all day yesterday in a beastly state of intoxication, although she had sworn that she was not, nor had tasted any intoxicating drink. Here then was a witness who was put into the box who proved that he saw Mrs. Beagley yesterday in such a state of intoxication, that she could not support herself, and she was obliged to •be led about the street by her husband. The RECORDER asked if there was any other witness to prove this ? _ A gentleman in the strangers' gallery rose, and said he had witnessed the same scene as described. Several other witnesses also spoke to having seen this. Several witnesses were called to speak to the character of the prisoner, but the Jury said it was not necessary, as they had already decided upon their verdict, which • was Not Guilty. As soon as this was announced several persons in the Court commenced clapping their hands, and otherwise expressing their satisfaction .at the result of the trial, when • The RECORDER said if he could ascertain who had been guilty of clapping their hands, he would commit them to Ncwgate. The prisoner was again placed at the bar, and in dicted Ibr stealing five sovereigns, and 13 half sovereigns. The evidence was similar to that in the last case, ex cept that the prosecutor swore that the prisoner had never been paid any wages, whilst the wife in her exami nation swore the prisoner lAd been paid 5/. at one time. PI,III.LIPS—My Lord, I do not think I should act in a manner becoming the profeslion to which I belong if I proceeded with the case upon such evidence. The RECORDER—Let everything be carefully ac counted for to the prisoner, and given to her. - I shall not allow the expenses of any of the witnesses except the officer, and that point I shall reserve for consideration. The prosecutor is an ill-looking man, of about forty five. His wife seemed much older. The prisoner is an interesting-looking girl of about 19, and bras very re spectably attired. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. --- 111.41?LB01?0UGH-ST.REE 7 . THE LATE CASE OF EXTENSIVE SWlNDLlNG.—Yester day Joseph Adams, the fashionable swindler, who was brought up in custody from Southampton, on a charge Of obtaining„ by false pretences, from Miss Emma Clap_ ham, of No. 99, New Bond-street, a black velvet dress, of the value of 151. 18s. 6c1., and who was remanded from this office on Weslnesday last, was brought up for re-examination, and placed at the bar before Mr.Maltby, the presiding Magistrate. Mr. Humphries, the solicitor, appeared on the part of the prosecution, and prayed for a further remand of the prisoner until Monday next, as the time had not been sufficient to enable him to procure the attendance of wit nesses, who had to be fetched from Southampt on, and also of other parties who intended to prefer other , charges After some against remarks the Mr. Flower, who was engaged for the prisoner, the Magistrate postponed the further hearing of the case to Monday next. EVENING SUN •A i r S' • MONEY MARKET and CITY NE FROM TIIE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAT. 'C D o, TIMES.—The suspension of Messrs. B Berry, and Co., bankers, of Berwick -on-1 Iw`tvii was formally announced this morning, C ) 0 ' no reason was given by them for their stoi I'll, Yesterday there was a rumo ur of their s i sion, which now turns out to have been lest founded, but even those parties who bad th e b he means of information were so uncertain as 1%0. ke real state of affairs, that it was adiisable to • no notice of the matter until bette anti de, cated. The bank is not of any great nrairl ,iou a 1( and its stoppage can scarcely occasion any ~.rw the other banks in the vicinity, as they are J to issue only Bank of England notes. POST.—The mails received in town yes te'r , from . Mexico bring some intelligence &nu' .ha miniag districts. The Director of the ilj tv e Mexican Mhzing• Company, unable to bring be t Sardanapala family and other Proprietors to agree amongst themselves or to accede to, w te . lose the mine and 5 terms offered by the Company, had resolveaco. s hou cetvi ,,J it . better policy ,hat the Company . 1 uspend all operations; wind up taeir affairs and realise one million of dollars as a mOrtz' age on the l u to than sub tw due to the English Company) dictation or imposition. • n (still the per dtoietTek:l The Brazil mail brought the infoonatl°- as the 20,000/. deposited twenty years g . ' " be re guarantee for the duty now reduced, is . 1) aa reo' turned to the Brazilian Mining Company, jities ably to a vote passed in the Chamber of D,ei to that effect, to which reference was nuaue terday under this head. The question ()flute; e r e was not settled. The returns at the wipe l a tia at the rate of about 51b. of gold s. the prospects of this Company, owing covery of some large veins of jacaing 43l e ,tr veu rs the whole, more cheering than for s'° - ,T o .'iise. s past. The stock is rather better, I.l o ' l ' from 41. and 51. to 61. and Si. per share' . le dfor The Bankruptcy Court has been occa be far some days past, as it seems likely to'• several days yet to come, with a case, the e o * l o- nation into which has already led to some, far ordinary disclosures. The ev idence tn; % i toirc given is ex pante, and we therefore ab yle, from entering, for the present, into details. may, however, observe that much of it is b u o nature to bring disgrace upon firms that The heretofore stood well in the general opin i° ,% i linS . showy warehouses fitted up in the A, e ,; too' thoroughfares are, it is • quite evident , for many instances started by moneyed Peu,l 3 ; for no other purpose than that of protnot' D l their own benefit, a system of plunder %.' d most wholesale description, which IS ca c redit by means of fictitious credit, or rather, c„ based on false appearances. The extenslc,:thau• of manufactured goods of late at m uch le' o ple 4; the prime cost, of which numerous O La ii ' a feo t 's have been detected, has rendered it a P w r le that they could have been obtained o n ly species of thieving. , n osiO T SUN.—The Stock Market was in ago rottVr to-day, though not so buoyant. Money Was„ 54* easier. For immediate transfer Consols reaa'neno with the dividend, and for money, and for the ',lgill-4 88k, alternately buyers and sellers. Excheque*D italc; were 10s.' to 12s. premium, and India Stock Paro' 4 1f per . Stock was steady at 165. New Three-and -a "; - Celit 6 " Cents. were at 991 to 991, and Reduced Three P e ' at 881 to 881. SW ;61. 5'. Only a limited business was done in Foreign . ,, l 4l but Spanish and South American Bonds it:Vt.° 11 value. The Active Spanish were done at 2 3 7 5 .., 3 , a n Portuguese • New Five per Cents. remained itv ; er e the Three per Cents. at 19i. Mexican Bon ds w . ret an improvement to 25i and 26, but Colon:Ns ° at 20a. Brazil Stock, in consequence of t he l from Rio yesterday, has improved from 5 9 1 t) ,rbii c r 62. Russian Bonds were steady at 1134, an" Two ,and-a-Half per Cents. at 52. WO K° Shares were rather better to-day. Great a , the, Railway Shares were 161 to 171 ; the th London and Birmingham, 70 ; the New, Vp s 'tell i c York and North Midland, 36i; and the South . ., t oo . 17* to 17% premium ; Brighton were 1 4 1 to 1 3 1' fie North Midland, 331 discount. National ]link land Shares were par to i• premium. er or° in the Foreign Exchanges there was vith , 2e , to . buoyancy. Bills were negotiated on Paris at 25f. A l o ; on - Antwerp at 12 3/ ; on Frankfort at .. 1 ,1 0 ; trt• 150 ; on Hamburgh at 13 101 w ; on Atost . 12 4/ to 5 ; and on Trieste at 9 51 to 53. DISTRESS IN SPITALFIr- 41 ' p 5 or The Committee of Journeymen Silk-sveav er° ;fi e lds . pointed to inquire into the s t a t e of the SO' air trade, and the, extent of the di s tre ss existing in tbat e trict, laid the result of their investigations bni°„fight meeting, convened for that purpose. on SaturtleY at the Groan and Anchor Tavern, Bethnal -green' • _ 'ell3vving is the report : 'I" C . - , cts i 0 JO Are Comiiiiace had visited thirty-six stre-- ,alfields, Bethnal-green, and Mile-end NOV-WWII. f ffO SIt them were 784 families, comprising about 3,436 P c- , 00 taking men, women, and c hildren. Th ere were "5,5 looms in work, and 6.58 out of work. There Werv d str empty houses, lately occupied, in w hi c h on an avel' o o were three looms each, which made 189 more I °° tA l out of work ; which, added to the former, made of 847 looms vacated. The Committee were olf ere, those looms Which were at work were only 176 , too t ployed. From a general calculation, it is believ e ; the there tire between 12,000 and 13,000 looll?° t he re' district, half of which are not in work, w bli g c dr I ° °l° , maining half are working h a lf ti me ; an d ag Or ,e i employs three hands, the weaver , war p e r' wily li. d " to a large portion of the p o p u l a ti on is neee 6 ' f to g° I ? h out of mph)) went. The great body objec t S i n o bte the workhouse, so that there are many 0° — two and three families are living together. SU. a „ al A meeting of Deputies from all 'the 1°W ., 11 : coi l " villages in Forfarshire, and th e adjacent countliace nected with the lined t ra d e , is fixed to ta ke of Ctn.' Dundee on the 6th of January, for the purr, r ; f° warding the cause of repe a l of th e Corn and - P °l"fr E. J. DENT, 82, StFand, by Special p to ment CHRONOMETER and WATCHOM CE ADEi t ',.' QUEEN and his Royal Highness PRINCE lied obtained the great Government Reward fur the utleq ua . c d sl l l' formance of his Chronometer', No. 114, which o nly va i r a l . t i o n tp four hundredths of a second in twelve months. In attic yora: this distinction, he has just received, by order of " gite' Commissioners of the Admiralty, the highest reward or,. en ers. by their Lordships for the good performance . of ti ln" b7s ris6 Mr. Dent, anxious to remove an y prejudice which 11 ? is el to his general business from the idea that his attention beg s 0 elusively devoted to instruments of the highest order , a t , tb' state, that while his principal care is nedessarily direc tc y . ,itche st latter, he is not unmindful of the manufacture 016001 which, while they are greatly lower in price, are suulocal i accurate for all ordinary purp . oses, and wil!, therefore, b e vra telle s . , most in demand. The whole of his extensive stock 00 4 lie has had the advantage of his selection and examinatioup has arranged a department, under competent superinte7coo for offering to the public good plain watches at as low P o lice is compatible with any pretensions to correctness, fc", l ld pating, from an Increase of business, an advantageous cur sation for reducion in price. Ladies' or Gentlemen °;_afit Watches, from 10/. 10s. each; Silver ditto from 41. 44. Strand, • tole' PATENT LEVER WATCHES.--Th is br b brated construction (the most accurate on which a Ica," be made) is now offered at the following prices, w ith Inc! f e ar improvements, i. e. the detached esc a p e ment, jewelled to n c"" holes, hand to mark the second s , an d ma i nta i n ing 1: 40 ‘" tinue going while winding up. SILVER CASES. 6 With double-bott ome d cases , ca pp e d ......... 6 6 With hunting cases, capped 6 16 - . GOLD CASES. . 0 Size for Ladies, with elegant gold 1 2 0 Ditto, in donble-backed cases.. 14 14 0 Size for Gentlemen, enamelled dia1......... 1 3 13 0 Ditto, extra full size, capped.... 17 1 various A pamphlet, containing observations respecting th!_abot constructions on which Watches are made, with t he P rw ew in gold and silver cases, and a variety of sketche s of '.lo,in signs, which have just been completed in gold Chais . s, to 3 , sent, gratis and postage free, on a pplication by Ictteern doors Cox Savory, Watchmaker, 47, Cornhill, London, Eel from Gracechurch-street. -- - BIRTHS. last °f $ On the 7th inst., in Wilton-cre s cent, Lady D o g daughter. lady o 1 On the sth inst., at Duk e - s t ree t, W es tminster , the E. M. Harrison, Esq., of a daughter. Pugh' of On the 6th inst., at Hampstead, Mrs. Charles r e, King's-road, Bedford-row, of twin du hters. L a urno On the 6th inst., at Fulham, th• a II of Henry EN., of a son y _,-~ MARRIED. V,q , 0 ' On the 2d inst., at Mu c k Wenlock, Richard BaY , ''' selY Holmes-terrace r Kentish• town, to Mary Elitbeth, daughter of Humphr e y Hi nton, Esq , of the former Placiioilis- On the 4th inst., a t Mi tc h am Church, Mr. Wi lli , a r„ of "r• son, of Upper Tooting, to Frances, youngest daugo,— Rtu.sell, Esq., of Mitcham. Esq., to Jane Delieiageed' On the 6th inst., at All Saints, Southampton, PhiliP , 0 ,0, Cram , h of the late eldest son of the late P. H. ton, of Fassaro, W ie jobo - clang tor M . Robert, M.D , Esq ' ) ° er• On the 7th inst.,. at St . George's, Bloornsbury, the ." bird Maude, of Newport, Isle of Wight, to Mary snUar''' daughter of G. H. Hooper, Esq., of Bloomsbury cs______.-- - " F' airier, t R. F. G th . e F l as l J. W. Fast, of the Bengal army, g aged 26. G. g C llag d ' On the 21st of October, at Rajkote, Captain C. 14th Regiment of Bombay Native Infantry. . e ides 11th of f th O e c i‘ t i o a b d e r r a , D s t E l C E n optm:ebeartso,rsee,coSnedcosnodn Lofieouteennearoat On the 22d of October, at Bangalore, W. E. Monteith! eel,. son of Major-Ge t . o ra l NV. Monteith, of the M adras Eno es. On the 27th ult., at Cologne-on-the-Rhine, Madame 0. -"4,0, On the 30th ult., in Claremont-square, Charles F a llo "" Esq., of Messrs. Cox and Co.'s office, Craig's-court.. e i oiya• On the 4th inst., at Wotton-court, Gloucestershu:ki belh, widow of the late G. C. Hopkinson, Esq., a ged e lm no ir! On the 4th inst., in Russell-place, Fit z ruy_squar P Daniel Davis, M.D. , aged 61. It * Ol Bic 1 On the sth inst., in slecklenburgh.s uare, Edgard q re lief Comyn, Esq., aged 60. On the 4th inst., at Skreen., the Lady Louisa llarveY, of the late Admil al Sir Eliab Harvey, aged 54. London: Printed a•id Published by MURDO Yu" i° No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Office, No. 11 % the County of Middlesex, Wednesday, December 8111" ..-' i c n 1 1 a