The Sun. — London, England, 1841-12-10 00:00:00

MORNING SUN order it might afterwards think fit to make. The Act of Parliament, however, could not be obtained during the last Session, as the House of Commons had come to a determination of not proceeding with any Private Bills; and in the meantime the works complained of had been since continued by the Company. After some conversation among Counsel it was agreed that the Company should undertake, by their Counsel, to proceed with their application to Parliament, and that the question of the legality or illegality of their acts should be tried by indictment, and not before the Court. The whole order stood thus—" The defendants, by their Counsel, unde=ke to proceed with their application to Parliament; an also undertake, by their Counsel, to submit to, and abide by, the order which the Court may think fit to make ; on condition, nevertheless, that the Attorney-General do, on or before the last day of Hilary term next, indict the Company, to which indictment the defendants under take to appear, and to plead in such manner as to try the question, whether the acts complained of in the indictment are legal ; but the Company admitting that that which they have done respecting the bridge over Bermondsey-street is contrary to the Act of Parliament, no indictment is to be preferred in respect to what they have done with regard to that bridge." The motion was ordered in the meantime to stand over, with liberty on both sides to apply. Mr. Bethell appeared for the Attorney-General, and the Solicitor• General for the defendant. (Before Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.) TULLOCII V. lIIRTLEY. _ _ _ The arguments of Counsel having been concluded, His Hosoca went over the whole of the facts, and stated his opinion on most of the points raised during the hearing of this cause, but reserved his final decision for Monday next. (Before Vice-Chancellor IVIGRA3I.) TOMLIN V. TOMLIN. His HONOUR gave judgment in this cause. The plain tiffs were two out of four residuary legatees under the will of a lady of the name of Elizabeth Belcey. The testatrix, by her will, appointed four persons her execu tors ; those executors disclaimed, and administration, with the will annexed, was granted to Thomas Belcey and Mary Belcey, the brother and sister of Elizabeth. Thomas and Mary Belcey had since died, and adminis tration de bonis non of Elizabeth had been granted to Robert Sackett Tomlin and James Tomlin, who then represented the estate of Elizabeth. The object. of the bill was to administer the estate of Elizabeth ; and the plaintiffs had for that purpose brought before the Court the personal representatives of Thomas and Mary Belcey, treating them as persons who were ac countable for part of the estate of Elizabeth. In strict ness, therefore, the representatives of Thomas and Mary Belcey were to be considered merely debtors to the estate of Elizabeth, and upon that principle the case must even tually be decided. It had been argued, however, at the bar, that the representatives of Thomas and Mary Belcey were persons who had in their hands assets of the estate of Elizabeth ; and evidence was tendered on the part of the plaintiff, to show that those assets consisted in part of a debt of 50,0001. An objection was taken to the ad missibility of the evidence upon that point, and the cases of Law v. Hunter, Ward v. Woodward, and Ifornby v. Hunter, were cited in support of that objec tion. Those cases appeared to him to decide, very clearly, that the person beneficially interested in the estate of a testator or intestate, might elect to consider a debt owing from the executor of that estate, as assets in his hand. It struck him, however, when the argument was urged at the bar, and he still thought, that if the exe cutor himself said he had no such assets in his hands, he might he treated like any other debtor, and the plaintiff would be entitled to the usual decree. In the case of a decree asked against the executor who administered an estate, or of a single debt against the personal estate alone, in every case where the Court might make a de cree for payment without taking an account of the assets against the party, or only an account of the personal estate, in respect of which the Court could decree pay ment without directing all the creditors to come before the Court, the Court would in all such cases make a de cree against the party. But the question was, whether that could at all affect the decree to be made in that case. It altered the question to be tried, but it did not at all alter the decree then to be made ; the only effect of the alteration was, that instead of treating the debt of fifty thousand pounds claimed against the estate of 'Thomas and Mary Belcey, as being assets in their bonds, the plaintiffs were to be treated as creditors seeking payment out of the assets of Thomas and Mary Belcey. In the present case the bill was filed to recover a debt against the assets of a deceased party. In the case of Owens v. Dickenson, in Craig and Phillips's Reports, the question was, whether the plaintiff was at once to be declared entitled to be paid an ascertained sum of 2101. out of property it had passed under a testamentary disposition, and the plaintiff having got a locus standi in Court, the debt was sent by Lord Cot tenharn to the Master's office to be proved over again. The bill in this cause proceeded against the real estates, and asked a decree to bind the estate finally. The established course of the Court was to accept such proof as would give a title to a decree, and then to direct it to be tried again in the Master's office. It appeared that no injury would be sustained by the plaintiff by pursuing the ordinary course, whereas great injury might be done to the defendant by departing from it. Upon these grounds he would make the usual decree for the plaintiff in this cause. Ile was anxious .not to say anything with respect to the evidence : it might prejudice the case of either of the parties ; but he thought a strong case had been made for proving a debt, ultra the debt sought by the plaintiff. It was not denied that Mr. Belcey, though at one time he admitted, had afterwards disputed, the debt. It was quite true that the arrangement between Thomas and Mary could not bind the parties beneficially inte rested, because Thomas was himself an account ing party. But Mary was one of the repre sentatives of Elizabeth, and her own interest being deeply concerned, she admitted that Thomas had over stated the account. It was said that she was suffering at the time from an attack of paralysis, but there was no evidence to show that she was incompetent to the management of her affairs. No attempt,had been made to show whether Elizabeth had any property , which could account for the enormous increase which had taken place in the debt between the year 1818 and the year 1828. The usual decree was then ordered to be entered for the plaintiff, the Master being directed to state how much was due upon the bond. LITTLE V. GREVILLE. This cause, which was entered in the paper of to-day, was ordered to stand over till the 20th. COURT OF Q UEEN'S BENCH, Dee. 9. CONSPIRA,CY TO CARRY THE ELECTION OF BRIDGEMASTER. THE QUEEN V. MACNAMARA AND SIXTEEN OTHERS. This was an indictment against the defendants for perjury, conspiracy, personation, and bribery, alleged to have been committed by them at the City election for Bridgemaster, in January last. The Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Richards, Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Bullock, and Mr. Gurney appeared for the prosecution, which was instituted by the City of London. Mr. Kelly, Mr. Jervis, Mr. Chambers, Mr. C. Jones, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Payne, Mr. Heaton, and several other gentlemen appeared fur the different defendants. Up wards of twenty Counsel altogether are engaged in this case. The ATTORXEY-GENERAI„ in opening for the prosecu tion, said it was his duty to call the attention of the Jury to a case the magnitude and importance of which could not be exaggerated. It was an indictment preferred on behalf of the City of London, in consequence of the dis covery of a very extensive system of bribery and corrup tion, perjury and personation, such as could not fail to astonish the Jury, and would, he was satisfied, diffuse equal amazement throughout the country. He regretted to say, that the facts, showing the existence of this mul tifarious system of crime were proved beyond a doubt. In consequence of the death of the Bridgemaster, which took place last year, a vacancy occurred, which it be came necessary to fill up. .A. writ for the election was issued, which took place in the month of January, 1841, on which occasion Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Ledger were the candidates. The s how of ha nds fell on Mr. Gibbs, and a Doll was demanded o n behalf Mr. G. Ledger. O n t h at 'occasion one of the defendants was taken in the act of attempting to swear to a fictitious qualification. This circumstance created suspicion,_ an inqui ry was insti tuted, and a number of persons who had presented of th the selves to poll, were found to . have voted several.h times.em. which the There were various citizens had been violated wa3's on ln that occasion.... rig e distinctly Theesdar I dead or absent were personated. In the contn i s t io n n .a n s attendant upon the bustle of an election, this sort were made. ascertained that 150 attempts Personation was extensively of mixed. up with bribery, thus perverting an election, hich should be the result of free choice. There were two w defendants in particular, to whom he should refer, whosecase was marked by pe culiar turpitude. One of the defendants was detected in the actual . commission of the ° had made, ff •nce • by means of the revelations which that person a clue was obtained to the entire conspiracy, and which had led to the presentproceedings. The credit to which that individual might be entitled was a question for the Jury to decide. They would find that a consider able number of persons who were from home had been personated. The defendants assembled at a public •house and then arranged the conspiracy for which they were_in; dieted. Of the guilt of these parties, of their assemblint, at this house, and of the arrangements they entered into there could be no doubt. There were two defendants. M‘Narnara and Simpson, who stood prominently forward Oil this occasion. M'Namara was a respectable coach proprietor, Simpson also was a man in a respectable sta tion of life. There were two other defendants, who, under the superintendence of M'Namara, took an active part in those transactions. The other defendants were in in humble life, and appeared to have had no hesitation to damn their souls by wholesale perjury. Their pecu niary interest in the transaction, however, amounted to n o mow' than eight or ten shillings. The City of Lon don had undertaken this prosecution solely from motives of duty. This ease was too notoriously flagrant to be passed over, and it was for the Jury to say how many of the defendants were obnoxious to the charge. If the defen dants, on inquiry, should be fou n d inn ocen t, t h e City of London ought, nevertheless, to have instituted this prosecution, seeing the materials of which they were in possession. If, on the contrary, the defendants should be found it gu--ty, that justice which this Court and the country demanded at the hands of the jury, would, he had no doubt., be fearlessly administered, The Learned Counsel then proceeded to call his wit nesses. Alderman Lainson, Mr. Perkins , Mr. Moulding, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Second ary James, - and Mr. Secondary Potter, severally deposed to the facts of the vacancy in the office of Bridgemaster, of the issuing of the writ of t h e holding of the election, of the declaration of the show of hands in favour o f M r. David Gibbs, of a poll h av ing been demanded, of the poll having been taken, an d of the return of Mr. Gibbs. The Secondaries pro dttced the poll-books, to which, however, many parties had had access in the absence of the Secondaries, in con sequence of an order of the Court of Aldermen. Daniel Richard Hacker had been one of the poll-clerks at the election for Bridgemaster, and administered either an oath or an affirmation to each person who voted. All the entries in witness's two poll-books are in witness's handwriting. He has examined the books, and will swear they are in the same condition in which he delivered them up to the Secondary at the conclusion of the elec tion, except that certain tickets have been inserted where there are supposed to be fictitious votes. The other poll-clerks employed at the election, gave similar testimony as to the correctness of their respective books. On the cross-examination of Hacker by Mr. Payne, it appeared that the name of Reynolds had been struck out, because the person voting under that name was neither a freeman nor a liveryman—the person, whose real name was Morris, was then given into custody, and committed by Sir George Carroll for perjury. Thomas Fether had made inquiries at the addresses appearing in the six lists of persons which had been produced, and there were no such persons residing at any of the addresses given. Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY - The answer I got at John Archer's, Fore-street, Limehouse, was, that he was not known. Fore-street, Limehouse, is a long street. I made inquiries at a chandler's shop, and several other places. My memorandum opposite the name of Samuel Shervill, Curtain-road, is—Not known. Could not find a Sherwood in the road. By Mr. JERVIS—I am not employed as the City so licitor's clerk, but am employed by him occasionally to make these sort of inquiries. I have known Mr. Pearse twenty-five years. Re-examined—ln many instances I could find no such street as that given in the list. Mr. L. Knapp—l am clerk to the Haberdashers' Com pany. William Trye (one of the defendants) is not a liveryman of that Company. Mr. C. B. Luttley—l am clerk to the Dyers' Com pany. Samuel Shervill, of Curtain-road, Shoreditch, is not a liveryman of that Company. The clerks to the respective Companies of Coach makers, Brewers, Blacksmiths, Clock-makers, Merchant Tailors, Drapers, Weavers, Needle-makers, Farriers, Glaziers, Barbers, Lorimers, Spectacle makers, Cooks, Bakers, Leather-sellers, Plasterers, Cordwainers, Gold and Silver Wire-drawers, and Inn-holders, were called, and proved that the names appearing in these lists put in, and which had been extracted from the poll-book, as those of persons polling at the late election for 13ridgernaster, as liverymen of the different Compa nies, were not to be found in the lists of their respec tive Liveries. The names thus appearing in the poll lists, without appearing in the livery lists, were very numerous. They likewise proved that the proposer and seconder of one of the candidates were liverymen._ James Kemp—l am a liveryman of the Farriers' Com pany. I voted for Mr. Gibbs at the last election for Bridgemaster. I voted only once at that election. I gave my address 7, Typen-street, Bethnal-green. I said no thing about living in Fleet-street when I voted. James Thorne—l am a freeman of the Brewers' Com pany, but have never been admitted to the livery. I did not vote at the election for Bridgemaster last January, nor did I ever reside in the City-road. D. R. Harker, re-called. I saw defendant Murray at the election, and Tyre, Sherwin, Haggett, and Powell. I know Job Jones. I saw Murray active in bringing per sons up to ♦ote for Mr. Gibbs. I observed upon several occasions as he sent them forward, he stood behind at some distance and pointed at the hustings. I remember his bringing up a person named Morris, at the time he voted in the name of Reynolds. Murray was present in the Hall when Morris voted as John Reynolds, plumber, Redcross-square, City. Morris upon that was taken into custody. I should think Murray stood about six feet from Morris when he voted. On the sixth day of the election, defendant Trye voted as Mr. 'Frye, haberdasher, Russell-street, Whitechapel, for Mr. Gibbs. I administered the oath to him. I know defendant Shervill. I noticed him during the election ; he voted on the sixth day as Samuel Sherwood, dyer, Curtain-road, Shoreditch, for Mr. Gibbs. I adminis tered the oath to him. I know Haggett ; on the sixth day he veted as Mr. Smith, cord-maker, Paul-street, Fins bury. I administered the oath to him. About an hourand a half after I saw the same man at No. 3 booth—he was polling. My attention was drawn to him by policeman Cayle. I saw him again in about an hour at No. 2 poll booth ; he then gave the name of Thomas Smith, farrier, 4, Huntingdon-street, Hoxton. I then taxed him with having voted twice previously that morning. He said he had not, he had two brothers. Some one on the hustings said there are three brothers, and the oath was administered to him ; at that time he was dressed differ ently to what he had been before. I have since heard that his name is Haggett. He is in Court now, and I recognise him. I saw the defendant Jones on the sixth day of the election. He voted as John Jones, blacksmith, Windsor -street, Islington, for Gibbs. I saw Powell vote at No. 2 booth. I administered the oath to Jones. Powell voted on the sixth day, as W. Powell, clockmaker, Curtain-road, Shoreditch. The oath was administered to him ; he voted for Mr. Gibbs. He was much engaged in the election. I have seen him talking to M‘Namara, on one or two occasions. Cross-examined by Mr. PAYNE—I took a great many votes ; more than a thousand, I should think. I know Powell, the defendant, was the person who voted, from having seen him frequently during the election, which lasted seven days. I have never had any communication with Morris. Cross-examined by Mr. HEA:rox—l took Trye's vote on the sixth day. I did not know him before. By the CounT—He was brought up to vote by a per son of the name of Browning. I knew Browning was active for Mr. Gibbs, and after what had occurred with Haggett, I was more on the alert, and that makes me recollect Trye. By Mr. THOMAS—I have been employed by the soli citor for the prosecution to write the lists that have been given in, and have been paid for it. I do not recollect knowing Murray before the election. Ido not know whether Morris was an agent of either party or not. Morris and Murray walked side by side, and Murray stopped short at the railing. I cannot swear 'to anything they said. I had known Shervill for a year or two. I had never seen Morris before that election, I did not know what Shervill was. I do not think I saw him again during the election. I did not know when I took his vote whether he was a liveryman or not. It was after Mor ris had been been taken into custody that Mr. Gibbs was declared the successful candidate. At the conclusion of this witness's examination, the Court adjourned for a quarter of an hour for refreshment. Lord Denman previous to retiring stated that he should take no other cause to-day. On the re-assembling of the Court the examination of witnesses was resumed. W. Jacques—l was one of the poll-clerks at the elec tion for Bridgemaster. I know defendant Haggett. I remember his coming up to tender his vote to me in the first instance. He had polled once, and two days after I recognised him coming to poll again. He polled the first time at my booth, and was going up the second time to poll at Hawkes's booth. I sec Haggett in Court now. I cannot swear positively that he came to vote with me mere than once. I know defendants M‘Namara and Hogg. I saw M'Nainara frequently at Guildhall during the elec tion coming up with persons who voted. I saw the de fendant Powell at the election at the Hall in the same manner. I know defendant Darrow. I saw him vote at No. 1 booth, and again afterwurds at No. 2 booth. I men tioned the fact at the time to Emans, and Darrow was taken into custody in the name of Baker. I remember Bradstock voting with me. I asked him his name, and he gave it Thomas Bradstock, draper, 4, Newport-ter race. Mile-end. I administered the oath to him, and re corded his vote for Mr. Gibbs. Cross-examined by Darrow—l do not recollect the day you polled. I cannot describe how you were dressed. I was taken to the Queen's Bench to identify you. J. C. Meech—l am a liveryman of the Innholders' Corn pany. I knew defendant Bradstock. I saw him at the election; he presented his vote at the hustings. I was em ployed by the agents of Mr. Gibbs as check-clerk. Brad stock attempted to give the name of Bradlock, or Black stock. I said his name was Bradstock. I said it to Mr. Jacques, the poll-clerk. I asked Bradstock how long he had been a liveryman, he said fourteen months. I then asked - his address, and I think he said in Cleveland-row, but I do not distinctly recollect. He voted for Mr. Gibbs. I have known him sinco 1832. Soon after that, I saw him at the British Oak public house. I said to him, " You polled at the last election ;" he answered " Yes." I asked him how long he had been a liveryman? he said six months. A person asked if he recollected the oath he took ? He said Yes. He was then asked how many times he had polled ? He said once. He was then asked how much he had for his vote ? and he said a crown. John Cayle—l am a police constable in the City police. iwasin the G u ildh a ll at t h e City e l e ction for Bridge master.sawHa I kn ow H aggett, an d L ang l e y, an d D a r ro iv. I €,,tttowards the l a tt e r e nd of the election polling in No I booth . in the n ame of I observed him take the oath. He polled He then t oo k the Smith.oath. I saw him poll again at No. 3. I observed the fact to Harker. He came up a third time on the same day, and polled at booth No. 2. He i Was again sworn. On that Harker h av i ng polled b e f ore . H aggett sa id h e would swear he h a d not polled before. He had on then a black velveteen coat, a cigar cheeks blacked. I did not seewl:lann g ri le rs y p m o o ll u . th, He an w d as h i i n s the hall, near the poll-clerk,hi m erepersons usually stood when about to vote. I savr him at after tii he was taken into custody, and ,recegnized s e Judge's chambers. He said he should not have done so, o n ly he had been advised by one party, and had voted° .er__the direction of Mr. Moodie Hill, who said it was a cs in nse with safety, as it was a City g i ft. 17::wleg Darrowe he might Guildhall. He was afterwards given into my Cross-examined —I never saw Haggett beforeutltieod. elec tion. It was some months after before I saw hi m in i Bench. I was there a considerable time with llaggtet; and Darrow. It was four mouths after the e l ect i on before. Haggett was taken, into custody. Cross- examined by Mr. JERVlS—Christie, Burke, Martin, Mr. rearson's cleric, Mr. Croucher, agent f or Mr. Ledger, accompanied me to the Bench on the first occasion. I cannot say whether several of the defendant s were called cut by name, and whether the Marshal did not interfere to prevent it. I never heard him. On the second occasion .they were not called out by name. We went and sat and smoked, and.drank with them, Christie paid for what we had. We went from the office of the City Solicitor on both occasions. Re-examined—lt was by direction of the City Solici tor's clerk that we went. Thomas Chapman—l am a liveryman of the Gold and Silver Wire-drawers Company. I voted for Mr. Ledger. I had a brother named John Chapman, a liveryman; he died in May, 1840. Defendant M'Namara, knew my brother by sight. I saw 2.l.‘Namara during the election for Bridgemaster the morning I voted.' He asked me how my brother was. I said he was dead, and M‘Na mara expressed his sorrow. R. T. Perkins--I am a grocer, living in Clerkenwell. I am a liveryman. I interested myself for Mr. Ledger. I know defendants M'Namara and Simpson. I saw , them frequ en tly d ur i ng th e e l ec ti on . I saw M'Namara I accompany several to the hustings, who voted for Mr. Gibbs. M'Namara and myself had some talk about Chapman's vote. ld'Xamara said to me Thomas Chap man has been to poll for you, where is John ? I told him John had been dead for several weeks. He said, " Oh, never mind, I am not very particular as to what we poll, we have plenty of money, and we mean to win this election." I saw Darrow in custody. He was brought into the Committee-room. Croucher said he had polled when he was not a freeman. Darrow cried, and said he was very sorry for what he had done. He confessed that he was not a liveryman, nor a freeman. I went to the address he had given, and there was no such person living there. Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY—I am sure M'Namara knew I was opposed to him. Mr. Thompson was standing near when I had this conversation with M'Namara. Thompson was also in the interest of Mr. Ledger. I have not seen him for the last four months. I was en gaged at the City election for 1837, in the Reform interest. I will swear that not 101. passed through my hands at that election. I gave money to two or three for their expenses. I gave those persons a sovereign. I had the money of my own, and paid it out of my own pocket. I had received no money from any body before. I gave money to six persons. It was to pay the expenses of coach-hire from the neighbourhood of Islington and Clerkenwell to the committee-room. It was for their coach-hire and their loss of time for the half day. After the election was over, I received money to the amount of 101. ; that was all I received. I said I had expended money to that amount ; the remaining 4/. was for my expenses during the election. I gave evidence before the Committee of the House of Commons, summoned by the opposite party to that forwhich I had acted at the election. Cross-examined by Mr. JARVIS—I am now a grocer. Three years ago I was a jobber or clerk on the Stock Exchange ; I jobbed on my Own account ; I was en gaged for six or seven years in that way. I never had any thing to do with Dublin and Kilkenny Railway shares. I went frequently on the hustings during the course of the election for Bridgemaster. Mr. Banner—l was poll-clerk No. 6. On Monday, the sixth day of the election, a person voted with me in the name of John Chapman, gold and silver wire-drawer, St. John-street-road. It must have been late in the day. James Christie, Superintendent of Bethnal-green Workhouse—l was employed on behalf of Mr. Ledger. I was in the Guildhall during the election on the 20th January. I saw Darrow vote. Mr. Thompson and myself went and took him into custody. We took him to the Guildhall Coffee-house. He begged to be let off, saying he had only done what others had done. He said he had voted four or five times. I saw Court at the election. He is not in custody. I saw him vote. I do not believe he is a liveryman. I knew M'Namara and Powell. I saw them at the Guildhall-yard together. I know Morris. I saw him and Powell together during the election in Guildhall. Cross-examined by Mr. CHAMBERS—I was not super intendent at the workhouse at the time of the election. I solicited persons to vote for Mr. Ledger, but I did not take any to the poll. I went to Guildhall to watch bad characters. I was paid for my time by Mr. Croucher. I was paid 7s. 6d. a day. I was then ale-conner of Shoreditch. I did not solicit Mr. Johnson of Old street-road. I know Cayle the policeman. I have been talking with him since he was examined here to-day. He said he was asked if he had been over to the Bench. That was all he said to me. I will swear he said nothing more about it. He said I have been told about never going over to the Bench. He did not say in my hearing when the visit was made to the Bench. The first two visits took place a fortnight since. Mr. Martin, Mr. Croucher, Mr. Harker, Cayle, and my self went. Ido not think there was anybody else. There were two persons went with us whose names I do not know. They are now outside. I did neither. The defendants asked for Mr. Martin. Went in before I did. On going in Haggett and Darrow were in the lobby. I did not see the Marshal or Deputy-Marshal. Thoso were the only two of the defendants that I saw there. On our second visit I went into the tap and stayed there about an hour. Cayle was with me, but no one else of our party. Darrew and Haggett were there. I volun teered to give them some half-and-half. I knew the indictment had been found against them. We went to see if we could see any persons we knew. We did not recognise • any more. I paid for the beer. I have never been repaid. I have no account to put it down in. I shall never ask for it. Ido not expect to be paid. I had no instructions to spend any money. I suppose I paid about Is. 6d. I will swear that I did not hear Cayle say that he had sworn in this Court that I had paid for the beer. Cross-examined by Mr. PAYNE—I began to watch in the Hall on the third day. I have had about three guineas altogether from Mr. Pearson. W. Browning was called upon his subpoena but did not appear. Mr. H. Morris—l am a plumber, painter, and glazier. I remember the election for Bridgemaster, in January. I voted at that election. I was at a beer-shop belonging to Silverthorne, in t he City-road; on a Tuesday evening. .During the election Haggett, Snow, and Silverthorne were present. We were drink ing. A man named Knightly came into the room and spoke to Haggett. They went out together. On Haggett's return I asked what he had got to say. H said the election was going on in the City, and if I liked to go down in the morning I could have ss. every time I voted, and every one else might have the same. He spoke to all there, and said he hoped we should all be down at the Bell. I went the next morn ing and met Haggett and Black at Silverthorne's. We went to the Bell Inn, near the Guildhall, into a back room on the first floor. Silverthorne, Jones. and Snow, came after. Shervill was in the room when we arrived. Hoge. and Murray came shortly after, as did Knightly. I asked how it was going.to be done. Murray said you could go and poll in any Company you liked. I said I did not understand it, as I was not a freeman. He said it did not matter how I did it, if I polled for Gibbs. On our way to the Guildhall Hogg said to me, " You stand, and when I nod my head you go to the poll-book." I went to the poll and waited until he nodded his head, and then I polled with Mr. Harker, and gave my name Mr. Morris, Hoxton- square. I polled as of the Comb-makers. Langley, Salmon, Haggett, and Black were with me. I saw them go up, but can't say if they polled. We went back to the Bell. Hogg took down the name of the Company we had polled in. We then had some refreshment. I saw Murray go out with a lot more and return with them and take down their names as they had done with me. In about half an hour I went with Murray and polled again. Murray asked me if I would go again, and I said Yes, I did'nt mind. Langley, Salmon, and Clark went with me, then I voted again as Wm. Smith, of the Plumbers' Company. I then went to the furthest booth. I then returned to the Bell and gave the name and Company to Hogg, as I had done before; the others did the same, some giving their names to Hogg, and some to Murray. After remaining about an hour I returned to the Guildhall with Hogg, and polled asW. Mattwood. Shervill, Silverthorne, Clark and Black, went with me on this third occasion. They went up to the polling-place as I did. When Silverthorne came back he said he had polled as Thorne, brewer, of Castle street, City-road. I had not always the same clothes on. We had a Mackintosh, which was sometimes worn by one and sometimes by another. When I polled a third time I had on Haggett's coat and he had on my Mackintosh. Silverthorne had the Mackintosh once. Hogg, Murray, Shervill, and Black were present during these arrangements about the dress. After polling the third time I asked Hogg for my money, he said I must stop till the poll was closed. I did not get it then. When the poll was closed we went three and four at a time to the Three Brewers, London-wall. Murray was there, and sent us to a public-house in Moorfields. Hogg, who was in the bar, sent me up stairs. Snow, Haggett, Black, Murray, Bradstock, Silverthorne, and all of them were there. I asked for the money, and Hogg said stop till Shervill comes in, for he has got the list. When Shervill came it was found that Haggett and I had voted three times, and Black twice. Black got change for a sovereign, and I had 6s. Bd. The sovereign was given by Hogg, and had been lent him by a man named Powell. It was ar ranged to pay the other pound at Brookman's, in Leaden hall market. I, Snow, Haggett, and Silverthorne, went to Silverthorne's beer-shop, where I sold the other 6s. Bd. to Snow for 4s. The next day I went to the Bell, and did not see anybody there. I was told Darrow was in custody. I went the next afternoon and polled again. In the Hall I saw Murray, who asked me if I would poll once. I told him I did not mind. He said, Be very care ful ; there is a little suspicion. I polled as John Rey nolds, plumber, Redcross-street. I was taken into cus tody. I am neither a freeman nor a liveryman. I saw M'Namara on the Tuesday, talking to Hogg. They were on the stairs. I was in the back room. I have ' not seen Black since. I do not see him in Court now, that I am aware of. I know Brookes. He is not the same man as is meant by Black. I saw Brookes in the back-room during the election, but never saw him poll. I saw Clark at the Bell. I saw him about my bail when I was in custody. I went before the Grand Jury in April. Haggett came to me a week before that, and asked me to go and see Hogg. Hogg and I met afterwards, on the day I ought to have gone before the Grand Jury. We drank to gether, and he said if I would not go before the Grand Jury he would allow me a 11. a week as long as I had any occasion to stop away. Powell and Shervill were present. I have recognized, Langley, Salmon, Snow, Darrow, and Haggett, since they have been in custody. I have been at work for Mr. Howlett, Aldersgate-street, since I went before the Grand Jury. M'Namara once said he would do something for me, if I would only go away. This was at a public house in Smithfield. Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY—I do not know the sign of the public-house. I was in custody about six weeks on a charge of perjury. A bill was found against me. I made a confession to the Governor of Newgate. I expected to be tried on the Monday. Mr. Pearson called and said to me he had seen what I had said to the Governor, and that if I would tell all I knew about it I should be let out. I was told it would be better for me. I have had a policeman with me for the last two or three days. I have been in custody four or five times before this for being intoxicated. and such as that. The first time was on suspicion of stealing some shoes ; that was four y ears ago, when I was 22. I was in custody two l a iav have I do no t reco ll ect w h en I was nex t in c ustody. been twic e i n custo dy on a c h arg e of stealing— once or getting into a man's stable, where I went to lie down. Mr. KELLY—Were you not in custody on a charge of rtriatwiles?s—WNiqu' sir, —Yes, steln . g K h E tt L y LL sir. I do not recollect why I w as i n custody on the other occasion. I was once in custody • on sus picion on a charge of stealing in Ratcliffe-highway. • Mr. KELLY—Stealing what ? Witness—Nothing. There was nothing to steal. This is the first time I ever turned Queen's evidence. I have been committed as a rogue and vagabond for three months to Clerkenwell. I polled four times at the election, and on the three last times I swore that I bad not polled before. I did not understand the oath. I knew that I was swearing I had not polled before, and I knew that I had polled before. I swore that I was a freeman and liveryman, and I knew that I was then swearing falsely. Cross-examined by Mr. Tuomns—l have not lived with my wife for the last twelve months. She used to assist in supporting me. She had no business. She did not use to go out of a night. She went out of a day, and sometimes brought home money to me. She never brought any men home. I believe she obtained the money by seeing somebody else, and this I knew when livinr , with her. When this witness left the Court, his exit was accom panied by a loud hiss. This expression of disapproba tion was, however, checked by the officers. Charles Langley—l keep a public-house in Moorfields. I know Mr. Hogg, and saw him there soon after the election in January. There were several persons with him who were not in the habit of coming there. Hogg came first, and asked to have the up-stairs room for a short time. He said some men were coming ; there were from twenty to thirty. 'They had something to drink. Hogg paid for it. I gave him 71. or 81. of silver change. They remained about an hour and a half. Ann Webster—l kept the Bell in January last. I know Simpson. He engaged a room two or three days before the election. He was alone. I saw him and M'Namara together several times after. Many persons came to the room after it was engaged. Among them M'Namara and Simpson. Simpson paid for the room. The persons who used it had refreshments. I received tickets and money, the tickets were paid by Simpson. I do not think M'Namara paid for any. They were signed, some by M'Namara and some by Simpson. Thos. Irving, the waiter at the Bell in January last, corroborated the evidence of the last witness. Cross-examined by Mr. JAnvis—The great room was the Committee-room; all the rest of the house was open to our customers.. George Fetch Court, keeper at Guildhall—l acted check-clerk to Mr. Emans, the poll-clerk, in January. I know defendant Powell, and saw him go up to the polling place No. 5. There was a man named Darrow there, but I should not know him again. John White—l am a printing-ink manufacturer. During the election in January last I was at the Roe buck in the Hackney-road, with Drysdale, Turner, and several others. Some one came in there, but I cannot recognise him here. I saw a person in prison. I be lieve it was the man, but am not sure. I think it was. Lord ])EN lAN—You had better call some one else ; he is not sure about it. ' G. K. Troume—l am a jeweller. During the election in January a person named Gibbs applied to me about it. I agreed to meet him next day at the Jolly Coopers, in Clerkenwell. I there saw a man named Browning. I went to the Bell and saw a person called Simpson. Browning was present. I never saw Simpson again. I saw the person to-day that I consider to be the person, in Palace-yard. I voted on the day I saw Simpson. I did not vote in my own name, and I have forgotten the name I voted in. It was written on a card which was given to the by Browning, at the Coopers, and he intro duced me by that name to Simpson. No one was with me when I saw the person to-day in Palace-yard. A person named Justin said go and look and see if you know the person with the umbrella. I did so, and said that man is the one who was called Simpson at the Bell. • George Justin—l know Simpson, the defendant. I saw him to-day in Palace-yard with an umbrella, and directed Troume's attention to him. Cross-examined by Mr. JARVIS—I am a debt collector, I have been a news-agent. I was in the police some time. I left it because I was tired of it. I was a Ser geant, and I was degraded to the ranks. I continued in the police four years after that. I was engaged in the election for Mr. Ledger; that brought me here to-day. I have been employed by the City Solicitor's Clerk in the business of this prosecution ten or twelve days. I have taken witnesses to the office of Mr. Pearson. I never told Mr. Ferris that he and I should make a good job of it. Mr. Simpson is the Ruler of the Fellowship Porters. I was on the terrace opposite the Hall, when I directed the attention of Troume to Mr. Simpson. Simpson was on the terrace. Troume recalled—When I went into the room at the Bell, Browning introduced me with a card in my hand to Simpson, and left me. Mr. Simpson said to see me then "Go with him." I went and voted and came back, the man said " It is all right," and Simpson paid me the money, Bs. 6d. M‘Namara was in the room when I was paid the money, but I do not know if he saw it. Cross-examined by Mr. JARVIS—We were close by the coffee-house, when Justin told me to look at the person with the umbrella. lam not a liveryman. I swore I was at the election, and I consider myself perjured. Charles Clark—l am a copper-brazier. I recollect the election for Bridgemaster. I know Browning, but had no talk with him about the election. I went with him from Sutton-street to the White Bear, St. John-street, from there to a public-house in a court at the back of the Guildhall. I went to the Bell, and inquired for a person named Simpson. I was sent up stairs, and was asked what I wanted. I said I wanted Simpson, and came to vote for Gibbs. Mr. Simpson asked me my name, and I said John Alfred. He asked what Company, and I said the Goldsmiths'. Some one in the room asked who sent me, and I said Browning. My name was written down, and I was sent out of the room with one of the party ; I think by Simpson. I went to Guildhall-yard, and was delivered over to an other person, who took me into the Hall, and I voted for Gibbs, in the name of Jbhn Alfred. I returned to the Bell. Simpson asked me if I had voted ; I told him, Yes. I had some ale, and received 7s. 6d. from Simpson. Cross-examined by Mr. JARVIS—I swore I was a liverymen at the Hall. I carry on the business of a copper-brazier at 29, Sutton-street, Clerkenwell. I work with my father. Thomas James Jones—l am a liveryman of London. I know defendant M`Namara, and saw him with Mr. Simpson at the Bell before I voted at the election for Bridgemaster, in January last. I voted for Gibbs. I received 10s. from Mr. M`Namara. He asked me if I had voted ; I said Yes. Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY--I was examined as a witness in the case of Sheppard v. Gibbs. I was em ployed as a door-keeper by Mr. Gibbs' Committee during the election. I was to receive 21. for my services as door-keeper, and that 10s. was part of it. I considered it as remuneration for my services as door-keeper, and not as a bribe for my vote. Hardwick Trye—l am a liveryman. I polled at the last election for Bridgemaster for Mr. Gibbs. After I had polled I went to the Bell. I received 7s. as I was going along Coleman-street. It was given me by Shep pard, who had taken me to the Bell. I had a brother named Wm. Trye, a liveryman, but he has been dead 20 years. That was the case for the prosecution. Mr. CHADWICK JONES applied on behalf of the defen dant Brookes, who had been indicted as Back, and against whom there was no evidence. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought there was some evidence. _ _ _ Lord DEN3IAN would look over the evidence. The application could be renewed to-morrow morning. The Court then adjourned at seven o'clock, to half past-nine to-morrow morning. COURT OF EXCHEQ UER, Dec. 9. HAYWARD V. BARLOW-CRIM. CON. Sir JOHN BAY LEY having stated that the plaintiff in this case sought damages for the loss of the society and comfort of his wife, _ Mr. ERLE stated the case to the Jury. The plaintiff was compelled to appeal to a Jury of his country for pecu niary redress for one of the most grievous injuries which one man could inflict upon another—viz., the seducing of his wife's affections, and causing her to desert her home, but the law allowed no other remedy. He would not generalise upon such a topic, because it was a case that must of necessity come hOme to the bosom and feelings of every man, especially one who had enjoyed the comfort and peace of his own home. It appeared that the plaintiff was married in 1834, and had lived with his wife in the utmost peace and harmony, until unfortunately, by some means the defendant got introduced into the family circle. lie became a frequent visitor to the house and was treated like a friend, but he had repaid that friend ship with the basest ingratitude, for he had used it for the destruction of the domestic peace of those whose hospitality he had so often shared. It would be proved that he had been for a long course of months, and lie might say for years, engaged in seducing the affections and virtue of the plaintiff s wife—that he visited her at all times of the day, when he knew that the business of the plaintiff demanded his presence in town. The plaintiff was a bookseller, carrying on business in Pater noster-row ; lie resided at Chelsea, where he kept his wife in comfort, while he was struggling with an adverse trade. He was detained all day from home, and , was therefore unable to control and watch the actions of his wife ; but they lived in the utmost comfort and confidence until the wiles of the seducer had proved successful, and the victim abandoned her home in the May of the present year. The defendant had put a plea upon the record denying the marriage. That was for the purpose of obliging him to give evidence of an unfortunate circum stance which had occurred previous to the marriage of the parties. It appeared that they had had a child born previous to that event, but the plaintiff had made every reparation in his power for the misfortune ; and it did not become the defendant to set that up as any justification of his own wrong. It would be proved that after the marriage they lived happily together in the utmost comfort and peace, which had been de stroyed by the conduct of the defendant, and he trusted the Jury when they had heard all the circum stances of the case, would award ample damages as compensation, so far as was in their power, for an in jury so great. He then called — Mr. Stamp, register clerk of Marylebone, who produced the register of the marriage of the plaintiff and Miss Driver, on the Bth September, in 1834. Mr. E. Driver, brother of '.firs. Hayward, was present at the marriage of his sister with the plaintiff. He was a stationer. After the marriage she resided several years in Sloane-street, and then in Whitehead-grove, Chelsea. Witness constantly visited them until within the last four months, and they appeared to live upon the most friendly terms. The plaintiff treated his wife very kindly. Cross-examined •by Mr. „ DUSKIER. —He never visited them since they left Sloane-street, about twelve months ago. They called upon him sometimes , but not together durin g . t h at t i me . About six months ago he net them tog e th er on board a steam boat. The reason he did not visit them was because he thought their con duct was cool towards him. A nother sister was in the habit of visiting them and staying with them a week at a time. Her name was Mrs. Sandford, and he believed she was not in Court. He had frequently dined with them in Sloane-street, and the plaintiff was invari ably kind. his sister was 20 years of age when she was married. Their only child was between eight and nine years of age. The plaintiff met her first at Mar gate, where she was staying with her mother, this was two or three years before they were married. Did not know that the plaintiff belonged to a Punch Club. Never saw him in a state of intoxication, nor seen any dispute between him and his wife. Mrs. Driver, the mother of the last witness, and of the wife of the plaintiff, occasionally visited them, and stayed some Weeks at a time until near the separation. The conduct of the plaintiff was very kind—she never witnessed any unkindness on his part; he was always, kind, attentive, and affectionate. Cross examined—The last visit was about March ; she remained all the winter. She had seen the defendant there, but the plaintiff always knew of it afterwards. He never made any remark upon these visits, nor had she ever made any suggestion to him that the defendant should be forbid the house. Never heard from the plaintiff that Mr. H. went to Epsom Races or to the Caledonian Ball with the defendant. The plaintiff ge nerally kept regular hours. Never heard him say that he belonged to a Punch Club. Had seen him only once the worse for liquor ; he was then quiet. Miss Emily Smith—Had been acquainted with the plaintiff and his wife. Visited them at Sloane-street and Whitehead's. grove. Had continued to visit them down to last April, and had stayed with them for weeks toge ther. They lived upon very affectionate terms, and plaintiff treated his wife with much kindness. Knew the defendant, but never heard him say what he was. Cross-examined—Had seen Mr. Barlow there, and had accompanied him and Mrs. Hayward two or three times to the theatre. Did not know of their going alone to any place of public amusement. Mr. Hayward knew of their going to the theatre, but said he was always satisfied when Mrs. Hayward was with her (wit ness). They never quarrelled in her presence, nor were her other married acquaintances in the habit of doing so before her. The defendant did not visit very often when she was there, nor did he stay long. Re-examined—Mrs. 11. (lid sometimes complain of being out of spirits, but for what reason she did not know. George Spear, a lace-dealer in Fleet -street, was in the habit of visiting plaintiff and his wife along with Mrs. S. Their conduct was always affectionate. Cross-examined—He believed he had upon one occa sion heard Mrs. 11. complain of the apprentice being out to a late hour at the Cock public-house. lie did not consider it a quarrel--it was a mere casual con versation. Witness occasionally visited at the Cock along with Mr. Hayward. Occasionally did not mean every night—he was not there sometimes for six weeks. He did not belong to a Punch Club. He had not met the plaintiff in the " Cock Tavern" 50 times, nor 40, he would say not 20. Mr. Hayward resided then in Sloane-street. He frequently called at witness's house both with and without his wife. When he came alone he might have stayed till eleven or twelve o'clock. Yle did not recollect meeting him at any other place. The ap prentice stayed with them at the Cock, because he and plaintiff might walk home together. Re-examined—There was no quarrel about keeping the apprentice out late. Mrs. 11. merely said it was a shame to keep him so late. R. Jas. Moore, a partner of the plaintiff—Since March, 1838, to March last. They were booksellers, and plaintiff at first was traveller, but that did not oc cupy much of his time. lie attended the business regu larly, and sometimes he was kept till nine o'clock. Wit ness was married, and on Magazine-day was sometimes detained till twelve o'clock. He and his wife visited plain tiff, and he uniformly treated his wife with great affection and kindness. In March last they had the misfortune to become bankrupt, and then the plaintiff was unable to attend to make out his accounts, in consequence of the absence of his wife, He had not yet obtained his cer tificate ; the time fur it had not yet come. Did not know the defendant. Phoebe Mason was a servant with the plaintiff in Whitehead's-grove. Went there in November, 1840, and stayed until Mrs. Haywood went away. Had seen the defendant often there ; he generally inquired for Mrs. Hayward. Ile called as often as twice a week, and sometimes his visits extended to three or four hours. They sat sometimes in the drawing-room, and at other times in the breakfast-room. She had gone into the latter and had seen them sitting on the sofa, with the blinds down. Mrs. H. told her (wit ness) not to come into the room when defendant was there unless the bell rung. Had got letters from her mistress directed to defendant to put in the post, and very frequently letters came. She had orders never to take in any letters to her mistress w hen her master was at home. She wore a likeness of Mr. Barlow, secretly, and had given it her to keep, so that Mr. Hay ward should not see it. Plaintiff generally came home about six o'clock to dinner. Once he came home at two o'clock, and found her mistress and Barlow just sitting down to dinner. Mrs. Hayward was very much agitated. Plaintiff dined with them, and went away in about half an hour. Barlow storiped till seven o'clock. Plain tiff came home soon after, and asked witness how long defendant had stopped, she made no answer, but her mistress said he did not stay long ; that was in March. Had first seen the miniature in November last. Plaintiff was uniformly kind to his wife. Defendant's visits continued in the same way down to May, 1841, when her mistress packed up her clothes. She sent witness out for a van. On her return defendant was there, who said he would have a coach ; the van would not be wanted. The coach came, into which her mistress got, and drove away. She ordered it to go somewhere in the City-road. Cross-examined---Mrs Hayward sometimes went with the defendant. Not very often, and she had come home as late as half-past eleven or twelve o'clock. Could not say whether it was half a dozen times or more. On those occasions she met defendant, and plaintiffknew nothing of it till he came home. Had heard, him ask why she had not told him she Wits going to the play, he would not have come haute th gtop`by Her master had asked her (witness) where her mistress had gone. She said she believed to the play, and that she had gone alone. He never mentioned Air. Barlow's name when making such inquiries. De fendant had often dined in company with the plaintiff when all these visits were going on. Did not believe that they dined together after. March, 1841. Her master sometimes came home at twelve o'clock. Witness sat up for him, but had never seen him intoxicated. Sometimes a little the worse for liquor. Knew nothing of the throwing; of a decanter on one of the late nights, nor did she ever know him bring any one home with him. Mrs. Rice, the landlady of the house in Islington where defendant lodged until within the last fortnight. Ile belonged to the Portable Gas Works. Knew Mrs. Hay ward, but not by that name. Defendant called her his wife, and said they had been married three years. They lived at her lodgings for two months as man and wife. She used to visit him occasionally during the last two years, then he said she was his wife, but he did not want it known on account of money. It was about two months since she came to reside permanently. On these occasional visits she never stayed later than nine o'clock, and they always left together. She frequently stopped three or four hours. She told witness that she had been married before. By the JUDGE--They left her lodgings to go abroad. One one of these occasional visits she had a servant with her with a cake. She said it was the wedding-cake come too late.—(A laugh.) Mr. THESIGER—It was late, indeed—three years after. You appear very unsuspicious. Witness—l am so, indeed. Had I known what was going on they would not have slept a single night in my house. Mrs. Vick had formerly lived as servant with plaintiff. Defendant ofte.i called, and on one occasion Mrs. H. took her to Mrs. Rice's house, where defendant lodged, with a cake, some jam, and wine, or liquor. Had fre quently been out with Mrs. H. when they met defendant. Cross-ex amined.—Defendant called frequently while she was there,and had seen her mistress frequently walk out with defendant. They went to the play, and when she came home she said sometimes she had been at the play with Miss Smith and other young ladies. She never told her master when she was out with Mr. Barlow or any other gentleman. She had orders not. Many gen tlemen used to call and stop an hour or two when her master was from home. Remembered her master coming home after one o'clock, and bringing with him a man with very bad shoes, and no stockings ; he was very much intoxicated. She had to take his boots off, and then he said, " Davey, here is a seat for) oft," ask ing her to sit upon his knee. She told her mistress next morning. He generally came home early, except on nights. Never saw him so much intoxi cated before. By the JUDGE—The men who came to the house were not acquaintances of plaintiff. He did not know of their visits. It was only now and then, and they came singly. Witness never saw any criminality between them, but they remained sometimes hours in the room with her alone. They were principally officers. Mr. THESIGER (with whom was Mr. Crumpton) ad dressed the Jury for the defendant. These cases were generally very painful ones for the advocate who appeared for the defendant, and the opening of, his 'Learned Friend had certainly frightened Min until his Learned Friend commenced to make apo logies for the conduct of the plaintiff: How did his Learned Friend set out ? By saying here was the case of a seducer, who for a long course of years had been practising his arts upon the virtue of a loving and faithful wife—who had destroyed the peace and comfort of a long enjoyed home, and introducing misery and wretchedness after the discovery of her guilt. Now he would ask who was it that told his Learned Friend that he had to make pieparation in the minds of the Jury for neglect which might have existed on the part of the husband. Why the plaintiff himself who was aware that it was true. However he must say that it had been much more extensive than even he was instructed, as shown by all the servants who had been called, but more par ticularly by the last witness, whose evidence had taken both parties by snrprise. Bad his Learned Friend had any suspicion of what she would have said, he would never have presented her to the notice of the Jury. After commenting upon the evidence, he asked whatda mages a plaintiff was entitled to who in the very tender years of his wife was the first to break down all the guards of her virtue—what damages did he deserve for conduct which had led to such unhappy results as those detailed by the last witness ? From all that appeared in the cause, he (Mr. Thesiger) would say that he was w ilf u ll y blind, or he had been the solicitor of his own dishonour. It was their duty to estimate the pro per amount of damages to be awarded, but under the cir cumstances of the case lie had no doubt they would be very small indeed. his LORDSUII said—Whatever reparation a man might make to a woman by marriage, still the value of a wife must be very much deteriorated by former con duct, such as was proved to have been that of the plaintiff If he was aware of what was going on he must feel obliged to the first man who took her away—if not, of what value was she ? The Jury consulted for a few minutes, and then found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 201. SHERIFFS' COURT, Dec. 9. MATTHEWS V. BIDDULPH. This was an action brought against Robert Biddulph, Esq., one of 'the leading partners in the firm of Cocks, Biddulph, and Co., bankers of Charing-cross, by Mr. - William Mathews, a gentleman holding a confidential situation in the establishment of Mr. Prosser, the well- I known army accoutrem e nt maker, of Charing-cross, for the recovery of damages for false imprisonment. Mr. Charles Phillips appeared for the defendant. Mr. JAMES, on behalf of the plaintiff, before entering upon his case, intimated to his Learned Friend (Mr. Phillips) that the plaintiff was quite willing to drop any further proceeding, if Mr. Biddulph would acknowledge his error in giving him into custody. Mr. PHILLIPS, having consulted with his client, said the case must proceed. Mr. JAMES then proceeded to say, that the plaintiff had been confidentially employed by Mr. Prosser for three years previous to the Bth of January last, on which day he was sent by Mr. Prosser to lodge some money in the bank of Messrs. Cocks, Biddulph, and Co., which was nearly directly opposite Mr. Prosser's place of busi ness, and had been absent for about ten minutes, when he returned to his (Mr. Prosser's) office with Mr. Biddulph, who sent for a policeman, and gave him in charge for endeavouring to obtain a blank check-book fraudulently, in the name of Mr. Thompson, a tailor, in Frith-street, Soho, who banked at the establishment. Mr. Prosser expressed his astonishment and disbelief of the charge ; but Mr. Biddulph persisted in it, saying, that a lad came into the banking. house, and said he was sent for a blank check-book for Mr. Thomas ; and upon being asked who sent him, he said, a man who was waiting outside. The boy be ing refused, left the place in a hurry, and he (Mr. Biddulph) followed him out, and catching hold of his arm, asked where the man was ? when the boy pointed out Mr. Mathews as the person. Mr. Prosser again repeated his disbelief, as Mr. Mathews had been only ten minutes away, from the time of his leaving the shop until he came back again, having, during that time, transacted his business in the bank ; so that it would be impossible for him to hare had time to arrange any plan to send a boy into the bank in the manner d scribed. Notwithstanding these representations, Mr. Biddulph persisted, and the plaintiff was taken in cus tody of a policeman along Whitehall and King-street to Gardiner's-lane police-station, at four o'clock in the evening, and thence removed to Bow-street next morn ing, where an examination took place before the Magis trates, but no indictment was preferred ; and, to remove this stain upon Mr. Mathews' character, he was com pelled to institute the present action. Evidence having been adduced in support of the Learned Counsel's statements, Mr. PHILLIPS could only say, with regard to his highly respectable client, the whole tenour of his life would lead to an inference that he was only acting conscien tiously in the present case. The plaintiff in that action had only himself to blame for the inconvenience he suffered. A blank checkbook is the first instrument sought by forgers, and he hoped the Jury, after calmly looking on both sides of the question, would do his client justice. Several witnesses were called for the defence, amongst whom was George Atkinson, the lad who went for the check-book, who said his father was a clerk in the office of the Morning Post newspaper. He swore posi tively to the identity of Mathews, as the person who sent him for the check-book. Mr. JAMES addressed the Jury, and said all his client wanted, was to have the case stated before a jury, that his character might be cleared from the imputations which had been cast upon it by the report of the proceed ings at Bow-street, which had appeared in the news papers ; but this had been denied to him in consequence of Mr. Biddulph refusing to prefer an indictment. The UNDER-SHERIFF having summed up, The Jury, after a short consultation, returned a ver dict for the plaintiff—Damages 501. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. WORSHIP-STREET. Yesterday no less than three persons were charged with having attempted self-destruction. Samuel Jac/son, a working man, was the first of them, and was brought from the H police station. His with, a decent-looking woman, was present, and stated that he was a good sort of husband, and had not been in the habit of drinking much for the last two' or three years, but when he did take a hale too much he became frantic. He had done so oa Tuesday night, and upon his return home behaved so wildly that his wife was frightened out of the place, and he then hanged him self. A lodger in the house, however, hearing a strange noise, entered the, room, and saved his life by cutting the handkerchief with which he had suspended himself. . . The prisoner now expressed contrition for what he had done. Mr. BROUGHTON remanded him. Two young women, named Emma Edwards and Mary Harlton, remanded from last weck, were again placed at the bar. Emma Edwards, a rather handsome young woman, had attempted to drown herself in the Regent's Canal, but was prevented and taken in charge by a police constable of the N division. Kempt, a constable of the same division of police, in formed the Magistrate that the prisoner had been for many years leading an abandoned life, and she had been passionately fond of a smart young fellow, but a notori ous burglar, who a few months back was transported for ten years. She had gone mad, or nearly so, on that young fellow's account, and had been for a time in a workhouse, and afterwards at service, but had again taken to bad habits, and at length was found attempting to drown herself, as above stated. The prisoner wept and expressed sorrow for th.e at tempt, and promised reformation.—She was discharged for the present. The other young woman, named Harlton, had taken laudanum to destroy herself, but a policeman, who found her suffering from the effects of it, obtained medical aid, and the prisoner was restored. The prisoner, who was known as having been in cus tody at different times for felony, now expressed a settled determination to put an end to her existence. Mr. BROUGIITON said there were then two prisoners in Newgate for attempting suicide, he would remand the prisoner again for a week, and if she then manifested the same inclination he would commit her to Newgate also to be tried for the offence. PROGRESS OF PUSEYISM. (From the Oxford Chronicle.) PROFESSOR KEBLE'S SERMON AT ST. MARY'S.-Mr. Keble, Professor of Poetry, and one of the Tractarian triumvirate, preached the University sermon on Tues day last ; the substance was such as to remind us most forcibly of Mr. Sibthorp's University sermon, preached only a few months before his conversion to the Catholic religion. The public are anxiously looking for the publication of the episcopal charge of a sixth Bishop (Winchester), the diocesan of Mr. Keble. The trumpet of his spiritual overseer has blown no uncertain sound, and the reverend gentleman is in this awkward dilemma : he must either retire, or will show that, when, in his letter to Mr. Justice Coleridge, he spoke of " feeling deeply the slightest word of his Bishop," lie meant to frighten the Bishop out of speaking (just as his Lordship of Oxford is dumb), or not to heed his voice, should he be so rash. The Rev. Isaac Williams, candidate for the Poetry Professorship, has published a defence of his doctrine, that the " Atonement is not the centre of the Christian system, and is to be preached with reserve." It is in the form of a reply to the censures of Bishop Monk, and is said to be "by the writer of the Tract." Nwould be in convenient just now to say, by the Rev. Isaac Williams! Mr. Palmer is still continuing ,his tracts against Ro manism ; a sixth, on the subject of Purgatory, has made its appearance. We observe that, while attacking with much vigour and success the doctrines of Purgatory, as generally held by the Roman Catholic Church, Mr. Palmer, at the same time, declares his belief in a Pur gatory according to the express terms of the Council of Trent. The Commissioners of Woods and Forests have given notice of their intention to apply to Parliament for leave to arch over, or stop up, the watercourse which at present runs from the Serpentine River to the Thames. This alteration is to be made in order to form the pro posed road from Knightsbridge to Bayswater, and which will pass over what is termed the " Palace-green" of Kensington-Palace, and which will certainly be the finest ride or drive in the park. As some alteration will pro bably take place in the Palace gardens in consequence of the improvements, the following notice will perhaps be interesting :—Kensington Palace was built by Sir Henry Finch, afterwards Earl of Nottingham, and was sold by the second Earl to William 111., who caused a Royal park to be made to it through Hyde Park. The gardens were then only 26 acres ; Queen Anne added 50 acres, and Queen Caroline took in nearly 300 acres of the park. The gardens are nearly three miles and a half in circumference. The Palace was the frequent re sidence of King William and Queen Mary, George 1., and George 11. Her Majesty frequently resided there, and the Duke of Sussex has apartments in the Palace. SMITHFIELD CATTLE CLUB SHOW. Yesterday the splendid show of fat cattle, oxen, sheep, and pigs, at the Bazaar, King-street, Portman-square, was densely crowded the whole day and evening, and this useful exhibition promises fair to repay the mana gers of the Club for their expense and exertions. Among the noblemen and gentlemen who visited the show were the Dukes of Richmond and Bedford, Earl Spencer, the Earl of March, Lord Dungannon, Colonel Sibthorp, M.P., and a host of country gentlemen, intimately connected with the encouragement of the breed of superior stock and general agricultural pursuits. The number of beasts was not so large as usual, but the quality was good. In sheep the numbers were compara tively scanty. Great improvement has taken place in the lighting, &c., of the bazaar, the numerous agricultural implements were shown to greater advantage than here tofore, awl the general arrangements are such as to give satisfaction to the visitors. A Committee for general purposes was held in the Committee-room in the yard, which sat for nearly four hours, the Earl Spencer, the President of the Club, in the chair, when several resolu tions calculated to further improvements were carried, after considerable discussion. The Royal Agricultural Society's Rooms, in Cavendish -square, were last evening opened for the admission of the members of the Society, and lectures will be delivered by eminent professors on the science of a griculture. STOPPAGE OF THE BERWICK BANK.----TO the already long list of failures of country banks, we regret to add that of the house of Messrs. Batson, Berry, and Co., of B e rwick-upon-Tvveed, which was announced in The Sun of Wednesday. It was known in the City on Monday, that a screw was loose in the concern, as their town agents, Glynn, Halifax and Co. declined to pay their notes and bills until "further orders." The full extent of the difficulty has been ascertained ; aid its results will, we understand, be most calamitous to the popula tion of the district within which their notes circulated, as well as to the numerous small farmers who had placed cash in their hands. Of these the cattle jobbers and graziers of the border form a considerable portion. We understand the liabilities of the firm are large, and that fears are entertained that but a small dividend will be realised. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE• TATTER SALL' S--••YESTE nrair. There was no improvement either in the cha racter or extent of the betting yesterday afternoon. AU that wo observed worthy of especial notice was a desir e in two or three quarters to back Chatham and Ballinkeele for the Derby, and Passion for the Oaks. The odds min' tinned below were taken about each, and we have doubt that their supporters would have gone on at lb° same prices. Closing quotations : THE DEBBY. 8 to 1 agst Colonel Peel's lot 12 to 1 agst Colonel Peel's Chatham —take n 30 to 1 agst Mr. Maher's Ballinkeele—tak en 35 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's three colt—taken 50 to 1 agst Mr. G. Clark's Master Thom as —take and afterwards offered 1000 to 10 agst Mr. Connop's The Oneida Chief-4,:!:1 100 to 1 agst Lord Albemarle's Robin-;-taken, afterwards offered 500 even on Policy agst Palinurus—taken OAKS. 6 to 1 agst Mr. Etwall's Passion—taken 11 to 1 agst Mr. C.Wilson's Sis. to Yorkshi re Lad --t. 25 to 1 agst Lord G. Bentinck's Topsail_ taken 40 to 1 agst Mr. Connop's yirabelle—taken COUIiSING. ive The Waterloo Picture Meeting.—This meeto l g' of understand, has been again postponed, in consequenceber the unfavourable state of the grounds. It will, permitting, take place in January. CORN AVERA GE3 • " cowl , . AVERAGE . GENERAL PRICES OF "tool r ,- For the Week ended Dec. 3, 1841, Made up from the " boo sod the Inspectors in the different Cities and fawns in FM Wales, per Imperial Quarter. 4d. Wheat l ,3s. rd. Oats 22s 2(1.1 Beans. .... ••' Barley 3ls. 9J.1 Rye F OP __ ---.— —.---.1.--....._ . 4 j ay a Oct. 29 64 5 31 7 22 9 39 0i 40 4 7). tt Nov. 5 65 5 32 8 22 0 3i 7 40 it 41 S 12 6; 4 33 4 2- 2 0' 40 2 40 40 -,- 40 19 65 11 33 4 8 .0 2 7, 4 e• I 26 6l 9 32 4 '2 6 14 7 4i : 0 . Dec. 3 63 6 31 9 22 2 44 5 39 1 0 , IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OFT Z FIE ^ i , j. /a. Wheat 6ss. 16. Oats ....... 225. 46.1 8ean5.......!;. 9 4 Barley.. 32s. 64. I Rye DUTIES. 0.• ON FOREIGN CORN. - egl• Wheat.... ..... 21s. 84. Oats •......Beans.... Barley l3l. 104. I Rye .. ... 00. 1 . . AVERAGES OF THE LAST SIZ . WEEES . %Wet ending WHEAT. BARLEV.I OATS. I RTE. I SO". THE MARKETS.-YESTER DI/ ''' COLONIAL MARKET. ode The market was quiet; shippers and the 11 0111e u blic operated with much caution. Good Bengal Rice at L 'bugs t sale went off at 12s. to 12s. 6d. per cwt. In Its"„; vo rti a fair business has been done at stiff rates. Th e • arc fair. • TEA MARKET. The market was dull, but holders were fill ll %, pany's Congou Is. cash. The deliveries keel ' TALLOW MARKET. The demand was dull, but prices were stead'' , pp t° to 48s. 3d. for P.Y.C., on the spot and for deli ver/ the end of the year. WH ITEC HA PEL HAY MARKO dali 4 The supply was abundant, the demand bar/ 13s• 1 and prices without alteration. Clover, 31 10 Hay, 21. to 41. Bs. ; Straw, 11. 6s. to 1/. 10s. COAL AI Ships arrived since [ARKET. la* last market.day, 11— ." Walls End Lanibto2 • " o . N' 0 Wails End Shincli ..0 0 . Walls End Stewar t p 0 South l'elton go Walls End Cassop , 0 0 Walls End rsartlep p 0 17 Tennant's Hartleln, Tein.o Walls En.l Parriftireg.,/ Walls End Rich ett 0....« i 1 g Walls End Tess win.' • Howard's Netherton d. Chester Main ... ii Llolywell Man ........... ....... 18 '- Old Tanfield l4 I Ord's Redheugh l4 F Tanfield Moor Bute's l5 0 West Hartley .... . West Wylain Walls End Hedlcy lB 9 Walls End Hilda lB 3 Walls End Harwell. ...... Walls End Hetton 2O 6 • COUNTRY CORN MARKETS • re . Wheat. Barley. I Oats. I D ell" ' ' --- —•--- _ 1 !_—......."*. it Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to s. s. to s. 55 to i ; g 40 Boston dralrittee 52 70 27 34 93 29 3 , IS; ighton 63 74 31 40 23 27 3 7 3 5 •••_. 40, Cambridge — 62 29 20 "-, 4 8 E Chichester 56 63 30 38 24 26 _,, 4 . 44 Dunmow 5B 62 30 3u 20 26 „,... 4 0 •••• Grantham .... 40 •••• Grimsby s(i 74 28 33 lb 21 ?.', 33, 1. 4 0 :,, Hailsham 66 72 33 35 22 23 . 5 •-• P Hitchin 5O 73 27 35 20 90 34 4 n ~•1 56 a 9 1 0 4 34 Ipswich 6O 67 28 21 26 , w x i ~, , Lewes 64 70 32 .36 21 22 . 4 46 '.l Lynn 54 66 26 34 20 26 40 4 0 --_,, , Maidstone 59 76 30 39 26 32 3 8 4 0 37, P,„ Norwich 64 72 29 33 28 30 3 t l 44 _. 4 v r, Petworth Romford 56 68 28 33 21 32 28 4 3 52 Li 62 71 30 34 26 30 _ 4 35 0 t i! I lij Sandwich Tnetford 57 66 32 36 24 28 VVisbech Witham CO 70 29 35 24 31 31 59 Varmouth.i 6O 74 50 32 24 30 3 8 9'. 9SI A LIVERPOOL CORN AI kftKET.--.'-- n,r, 94. 40 0 1,, WfigaT, English, White, per 701 b. ... ................ II 6 19; 0 ---.-- Red .... ~„ 0 • ...---- Scotch, Welch, and Manx ..................... 1 ,-; 9 . A A .—......... Irish, White ; 0 St ! -- Red . 8 6 S'i Foreign OATS, English, Welsh, and Scotch, per 451 b.........• ; ..0 9 0 0 (1 Irish ... ........... .. •o• n .., 9 . 1 : ,4 Foreign ns 0 • a - Foreign 5 l. - s 5 BARLEY, English, Malting, per Imp. quarter....••••• 4 5 . 4: • Stotch and Irish, per Mho. Feedin,- 44 • ":4 BEANS, English, per Imperial quarter 4 4430 O 1 -- Irish, &t. - Foreign PEASE, English, per Imperial quarter 4l A t 0 ..---• Foreign FLOOR, English, per 2801 b. lO A P A 0 •—•... Ir 111 I v a 7 .:, OATMEAL, ish English and Irish, per 2401bs .. 27 ; l' 0 INDIAN CORN, par 480 Th. .4,........ SS •9 . 0 RYE, per Imperial quarter MALT, per Imperial quarter .., • ab " ' ;natlest CORONER'S INQUEST.—Yesterdsi 6 aThiso n was held at the Duke of Sussex public-hourincifiri - At ill street, Oakley-street, Lambeth, ,„• he 7 - oftt.eser Imm, aged 41. The deceased 1' onaie'ci- yi.6l°raing * street, New-cut, Lambeth, and c o (' 1 1• 1 71 - a ill* ,,, ° A f °cl ; noise was heard in the room she ll ow", - )641 :. -- fr a person shuffling their feet in a gg,' A Q ' 1111 i l l ; ree door being found locked on stril insiul it lir "'" neck her fee t open, and the deceased was foutnhdesusPe. 111"-311 by a piece of tape tied to a nail in the pe"P°st'hing the bent under her, and her knees I n eire a tbst iotru sted golf ouch the de ground, and quite dead. It also ceased had pawned some articles that tha P t lo d beeli the nit • sli ed e to her to wash, and being unable to redeens 0000- co ded , e• b r e:l was induced by the fear of being pros b y her with an excited state of mind brought ell , i „ s troth e addicted to occasional intoxication, t° "'' • i O f Verdict, Temporary mental derangeme nt ' _l t Coi o d CAUTION.—A man dressed in a f rui l ao - ''',lC dark complexion, with brown whiskers, nn,„, - e j 0 A ; years of age, called at Mr. Broad's oil wareans7-eivennje vistock-street, Covent Garden, on Vi r e dnes t - i - 14s i and gave ,an extensive order fol. Vi b se u n t r e n ; g i i e_ li r c iet o w- 1 ,,1: 41 " whose service he stated he resided as shortly after, stating he had made a Pur ehase io ll . P it L4i garden market, and had not quite sufficient the articles, and borrowed a sovereign were sent on the following morning. gr. D i r ° l l o 3 ll o l the man had left, suspected he had been dufe u ' - 0 0 5 inquiry ascertained it was a gross position, person living in the Viscount's establishment' until tlvidie 1-OP" AT OA PATENT LEVER SILVER t y r —E. J. DENT, 82, _Strand, Chronometer, „ ( Jaitil Clock Maker, by special appointment to her ?o ots $ Queen and his Royal Highness Prince AlllOOOOO ASSORTMENT of these superiorly constructed t per .o o at 6/. 6s. each. They have double-bottomed fl : to *le i jewelled ( il: holes) mov ements, and contin ui n ts; 51 whilst being wound, with other modern inovelooPpents performance guaranteed. Their particular a o il ojos strength. moderate price , capability o f bearing Si d o n o, motion without derangement , and sma ll expense l op 1— if they meet with injury. Gold cases from 81. t° 82, Strand, three doors west of Cecil-street. PLATE.—T. COX SAVORA eologoatev taring Silversmith, No. 47, Cornhill, London , 5e,,. / FA v, Gracechurch-street. The best wrought FIDDL E 0 ,0 0 , A " ON SILVER SPOONS and FORKS, at 71. 2a. pe, r tiew", following are the weights recommended, but nee.W 4.60 be had lighter or heavier at the same price per 4. 0 Iti I os• i i i 1. 0 0 12 Fiddle Pattern Silver Table Spoons .............. .0 0 l'' 7 1••• 10 I, 4 /2 dit Dessert ditto ........ ...... 00 7 i i 12 dit to 'table Forks ............... 30 7 I , ' oii 0 12 ditto Dessert ditto.... ........ 2 0 7 "0 . 0 2 ditto • Gravy Spoons .............. 7 g••.! 0$ I I ditto Soup Lad1e......... ........ ' Ii" 1 10 0 4 ditto Sauce ditto.... ........... 10 0. 4 ditto Salt Spoons (gilt strung) ..... ".....,......... s4' 0 I ditto Fish Slice ..„ .............. t .... 7 o...triacti 12 ditto `,. Tea Spoons „ ............. 10 ....... II o , 1 pair ditto Sugar Tongs (strung) .............. I P 10 . • N. B. A Price Current, stamped as a NewsP*K: e l j uie _Aso by drawings, and containing every informatio n 0 iS si ssf purchase of silver or Sheffield plate, may f Vs ho age, ill ' tion, or will be sent into thecountry , free e to a paid letter. Oi l. BIR THS. stiff ° '' 0 On the 3d inst., at the Rectory, Livermore, _,,„., " of the Rev. Asgill Colvile, of a son. ..„ id" i s tif On the 4th inst., the lady of C. H. l urner , , Lee-place, Godstone, of a daughter. ft 00 On the 6th inst., at the Temple near , ai g uc heste f i d s of Hugh Beaver, Esq., of Glyn Garth, Aelici e 4 ge , a 'i!V. f' On the Bth inst., at Upper Homerton, ur— of a son, still-born. sr MARRIED. oy , the 0 , On the Sth inst., at St. George's , Moor' to Eile ° e , E. Coleridge, Vicar of Buckerell, DevonshZurn.,plac second daughter of H. Matteson, Esq ., Of sell-square. _--------'--- ith e i DIED. ~,,, A., On the Bth inst. from violent inflammation, b . 91- f PIO' emplary fortitude, ' Diana Mirian, the beloved wifecietooe Harris, of 66 Hatton-garden, leaving a dhusband 61 , 1 4 ,:e in the dren to lament her irreparabl e loss, age 33. sait' ' On the 2d of October, a t Secunderaba d , . 0 ~ i t ' ' Ensign S. Waller, of the I st M adras European Br .. A olio On the 11th of October. at C hitta g ong, Al ael' t 0 J. Morris, Esq., of the Civil Service, Bengal. ~...otter, On the Ist inst., at Broornhouse-mill, Young .• ' 0 1 ° 11" of Cruicksfield. idge, • On the sth inst., at SL Hilary, near Cowbr p ti ganshire, Llewellyn Traberne, Esq., aged 76. . fI , wife 0 o f On the 6th inst., at Beddington, Penelope, 01 $ l4" rence, Esq., aged 55. R On the 7th inst., Eliza, eldest child of J. Robert -street, A delphi-terrace, aged 18 monfilalory, tlle On the 7th inst., at Bradvrall Hall, Cheshire, of J. Latham, Esq., M.D., aged 86. 4 O f ' On the 7th inst., in Gloucester-terrace, Blile-en 2 d IY' or Redman, relict of the late R. Redman,_Esq., ag e , $.l , , Weston, itio On the Bth inst, Charlotte, relict of the late T. . F . ,54 , of CX4II Esq., of Stockwell-common, aged 83. On the Bth inst.., Mary, ' wife of S. CleasbY, - ' o r wall-terrace, Regent's-park. On the Bth inst., at Queen Charlot,e4ow, lle*. Of tain Francis Newcombe, R.N., C. 8., ag_ed 7 i , 4 °. , f ,/ O" ' ‘ ,( l' On the Bth inst., at Jeffery's.square, pt.,'',. -- is4ir , . - beth, eldest daughter of the late S. Stee neus—' / /inghana, Kent. aged 76. - .414. ._.--------- ___ . __ __ _ - - ----, yov,. i , ir London: Printed a - td Published by MURD`,I9i Si, No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Ciao, No• ' i n _OW ' the County of Middlesex, Friday, Peceisibar 1" THE: SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1841. MORNING SUN 114 , r i + ct:81 t'zi,' h,e;