The Sun. — London, England, 1850-06-14 00:00:00

COMMON LAW CAUSE LIST. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. MIDDLESEX CAUSES FOR THE SITTINGS AFTER TRINITY TERM. Remanets. Cahill v. Macdonald, stayed—Rewe v. Cope, dine Davies v. Wilkinson, ditto Williams v. Whiceway, injunction Bestone and another v. Rosa, ditto Fiddes v. Toogood, ditto—Crowther v. Edwards, ditto Becke v. Parish an another, stayed Moon T. Connop, ditto—Clerk v. Hughes, injunction Neal v. Ward, ditto—Cluterbuck v. Carter, ditto The Queen v. Johnson and others, ditto Ghialin v. Gregory and another, ditto Dean, &0., of Christchurch, Oxon, T. Hicks, S. J. Simmonds Y. Simmonds The'Queen v. South-Eastern Railway Company, S. J. Barker and another v. Cleobury, S. J. Daniel v. Cailia and another, S. J. Countess de Salis and others v. Bagley, S. J. The Queen v. Edwards and others, S. J. Walker and others v. Hindley and others, S. J. Feskett v. London and Blackwell Railway Company, S.J. King v. Cannon, stayed The Queen v. Rabett and others, S. J. Gillingham and others v. Kendall, S. J. Brown v. Sargent and another, injunction Robson v. London, Brigh ton, & South Coast Railway, S. J. Tayleur v. Lennox, S. J.—Le Comte v. Brie, S. J. Connop and another v. Burge, S. J. Lock v. Wilts, Somerset, and Weymouth Railway Com pany, S. J. The Qucen v. Saunders and others, S. J. Swanger v. Gardner—Blane v. Bingham, Esq., S. J. Beckham v. Wright, S. J. The Queen v.Baron Dunboyne, S. J.—Same T. Same, S.J. Doe dem. Rackstraw v. Rackstraw, S. J. The Queen v. Bryer and others ' S. J. Thompson v. Y oung , S. J.—Ch adley v. Homan Duke of Brunswick v. Harmer, S. J. George and another v. Curlewis Collinson v. Westoby, S. J. Cobb v. Hakewill England v. East Anglian Railway Company, S. J. Betts v. Walker and another, S. J. Harris v. Bainb r id ge , S. J.---Simms v. Marryatt, S. J. Doe dem. Parkinson, Nash, and others v. Moreing, S. J. Great Northern Railway Company v. Padwick, S. J. Waterford, Wexford, and Dublin Railway Company v. Logan, S. J. Harrison v. Evelyn, S. J. Paul v. Cochrane and another—Morris v. Cooper, S. 3. Gray v. Webb, S. J.-Gray v. Bowes, &c., S. J. Mackenzid v. Gillen, S. J.—Perkin v. Collinson, S. J. Lister v. Warrington, injunction Seymour (pauper) v. Maddox The Queen v. Phillips and others Walker v. Lawrence and another—Wright v. Taylor Nash v. Waterford, &c., Railway, S. J. Gallini v. Earl Courtown and others, S. J. Wolton v. Fre ese , S. J.—B urton v. Wilkins Barber v. Curling—Gardner v. Allen Doe dem. Rolfe v. Tizzsrd, S. J. The Queen v.,Phillips and others, S. J. Burghes v. Campbell—Quallett v. Barwell James, Esq., v. North Western Railway Company, S. J. M'Gregor v. Galsworthy —Hobhe v. Barnard, S. J. Architects', &c., Insurance Company v. Wilson, S. J. Doe dem. Ottten v. London and Blackwell Railway Company, S. J. Tyson v. Lendall—Hancock v. Bewley, S. J. Brown Y. Glenn and others—Holloway v. Bentley, S. J. Turner and another v. Venables and another Corr (pauper) v. Cole—Hoare (pauper) v. Todd Heathcote v. Gordon, S. J.—Dunne v. Lewis Wilcocks v. Walker—Boyson v. Jones—Clay v. Edge Pfeil and another v. Merchant and another Blackstone v. Hargreaves—Knight and another v. Maule Westmacott v. Ftiut, S. J. New Causes. Krause v. Reicheeberg, S. J.—Dryden v. Fryer, S. J. Ritchie v. Preston, clerk, S. J.—Mallan v. Slater, S. J. Robinson v. Shaw—Davies v. Oldeker Yelland v. General Commissiou, Ship, Loan, and Emu ranee Company Scott and another v. Pilberm Mitchel and another v. Lewis—Whalley v. Glover The Queen v. Cohen and another—Fowler v. Williams Osterman v. Bateman--Sturges v. Bowie Doe dem. Hunter, Jackson, and others, v. Beaumont Morton v. Bentley —Burgh v. Richardson Head v. Sanderson, S. J. Pugh and another, executors, v. Jenkins Harries T. IL wlett COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. MIDDLESEX CAUSES FOR THE SITTINGS AFTER TRI NITY TERN. Retnanets.. Stead v. Williams, S. J. Fearn v. Countess Waldegrave, S. J. Bleck v. Boys, S. J. Burke v. Parkgate, Chester, and Birkenhead Railway Company, S. J. Rennet, the younger, V. Fitzgerald, S. J. Deraster v. 111‘Curdy (first sitting in Michaelmas Term) Pudney v. Long, S. J. Newnham v. Stevenson and Wood, S. J. Doe dem. Goodwin v. Joyce, S. J. The Queen v. Mill, S. 3.—Wills v. Mills, S. J. Munday v. Stubbs—Warner v. Cabbell and others, S. J. Warner v. Cabbell and another, S. J. Same v. Randall and another, S. J.—Same v. Large, S. J. Eastern Counties Railway Company v. Jackson. Heath v. Unwin, S.J.—Freeman v. Remmett Hamilton and another v. Terry Hargrave v. Hargrave, S. J.—Clarke v. Martyr), S. J. Adron v. Barnett, S. J.—Carden v. Woolley, S. J. Teanent v. Palmer, clerk, S. J. Jones v.. Hutchinson, S. J.—Cross v. Gaskell, S. J. Lloyd v. Baldwin, S. J.—S. Wright v. Wilcex Smith and another v. Lovell—Haley v. Bosley, S. J. Cross and another v.Cross, S. J.—West v. Baxendale,S.T. Casey v. Ditnsdale, S. J,—Morris v. Gardener Young and others v. Twymau Doe derv. Colesworth, and others v. Miller T. G. Philpotts v. J. Philpotts and another Jordan v. Elliott—Smith v. Whittaker, S. J. Hopper v. Smith, Kat., S. J.—Lonernore v. Bussey Weller v. Schsverder—Roynoldi v. Hambrook and others Sznc• ' uinetti v. Eaton ( withdrawn ) — Smith v. Fraser Dobson v. Tourniaire and another Fry and another v. Bromley, S. J. Thompson v. Chaneellnr New Causes. Wiele v. Enthoven (commission). Simmons v. B ,oth rand another, S. J.- Doe dem. W. Hale v. P. Galvin.—Liigginson v. the Com missioners of the Lord High Admiralty of the United Kingdom, S. J. Stovell v. Potts.—Bunting and another v. Lewis, Eq., S.J. Doe dem. Burrell, v. Davis.—Cook v. Gasket], S. J. Upton v. Webb and another. Pritchard, executor, v. Bagshaw and others. Gibson y. Bolton.—Walker and another v. Elder, S. J. Propet t and wife v. Tregear, S. J.—Doe dem. Burrell and another T. Bond.—Nathan v. Cleland and Brown. Jackson v. Eastern Counties Rail way Company. Hinde v. Morris and Ross. Doe dem. Verge and others v. W. H. Beale. Lewis v. Ranting and another. R. Booth (pauper) v. George Clive, Escp• Crater v. Chapman. Mitchell and another Thompson and others. Jones v. Kaye. Bridget. and others v. Cosleff. Langdon v. G. B. Hildebrand, S. J. Buttingeig v. Booker and another.—Fisher Y. Smith, S. J. W. Bourn,. A. Mays. Williams and another v. Woodward. T. Peacock v. W. Jenkin. Sir J. Hare, Knight, v. C. Fleay. J. Morg an v. Styles.—D. Ahern (pauper) v. C. Gotham. Wade v. Hughes.—Davis v. Burrell and another. Marshall ve the York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway. Denby v. Bloria.-.-Cook v. Scott.—Boyea v. Black, clerk. Clossman and another v. Same. Percival (pauper) v. Drake. Ambrose v. Mitton.--Marsh v. Crate. Kiernan v. Newmar. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. MIDDLESEX CAtSEIS FOR THE .ETTINHI7 AFTER TRINITY TERM. Rev( nue Causes—Customs. The Attorney-Genernl v. Duncan John Stewart, S. J. The Slime Y. John Robson S. J. The sam e v, George Warr'en, S. J. The same v. G. S. Pasley, S. J. The same v. Benjamin Brookman, S. J. Inland Revenue Cause,,. The AttOrney-General v. John Fryer and Charles Henry Kilby, personal information, S. J. The same v. Thomas Smithson. York, ditto, S, J. The same v. Charles Thomas Smithson, ditto, S. J. The same v. James Boyne, ditto, S. j . Remanets. O Aldermen ad Ci tizens of R oc h ester, wltt Araor, S. e J.—CockYrane v. Lewii, , S. 5. Christie and others v. Massey, S. J. Prescott v. Mahon, S. J. Pennell and others, assignees, v. Anderson, S. J. Luerson v. Busk, S. J. , Hart v. Baxendale, S. J.—Giles v. Pritchett, S. J. Lindsey and another v. Smith, S. J. Osborne v. Ridout, S. J. Hancock v. Bewley, S.J.—Knight v. Fox and another, S.J. Neale v. Le Paigg, Sturge and another v. Clarke, Bart., S. J. Sims and others, v. Balton and another, S. J. Glenie v. Baron de Delmar, S. J. Skinner London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, S. J.—M'Gregor v. Hughes, S. J. King and another, executors, v. Bruin, S. J Barker and another v. Branches, S. J. Elmes v. Ogle, S. J.—Dub.urg v. Lord Ingestre. S. J. Webster v. Plsnch e , S. J.—B a rnl e y v . V e r g e, S. J. Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland,. kilythe,S.J. Same v. R. Moore, S. J.—Same T. C. Moore, S. J. Doe StauntJ.—SameW.E.Voules, S. J.—Sae v. H.J.Voules, S.J. W. others, S. j Merr yweather and wif e v . T urne r and . Bonsfield v. Bret n , S. J.— Arcloin v. Mavrogordat. S. J. Craufend T. Co c k s and others, J, , Williams v. Lowe, S. J. Brown v. Wigram and another, S. J. Dawson v. Gwynn, S. J. Oliver Learmouth, S. J.—Soloman v. Howell, S. J. Watts v. Penny, S. J.—Penny r. Watts, S. J. Smith v. L on d on and North-Western Railway Com pany, S. J. Romeraham v. Woly )1.11 atnre n Was erworks Com pany, Pound" Kelly, S. J.—Mvers v. Austen 5. • Pope an d others S. J.— , S. Pilmer, Bart., v . Mount, S. j. Sempley.Hewitt,S.J.---Moore y. Hawes and another,Sii, Doe dem. Guilt v, Tayler.—Harris v. Tillcock. Whitcombe v. Webb, s. j, Same V. Earl of S trathmore, S. J. Taylor v. Hughes. — Priest v. it, meant, B. Bolton and another v. Shiflett, the younger. Richardson v. Pepper.--Addington v. Fenkw, THE SUN, Mr. YARDLEY—Have you been in the practice of acting in this manner in Irehnd ? The prisoner— No, sir, I regret it very much. I differed from the preacher in some respects. Mr. YARDLEY—And knocked him down ? That is not carrying out the principles of civil and religious liberty. Are you in the habit of using that sort of argument with your opponents ? The prisoner —No, sir. I trust you will liberate me. I regret having acted so much unlike a gentleman and a scholar. Mr. YARDLEY—What are you, and where do you live ? The prisoner hesitated, and Inspector Ellis, of the LI division, said the prisoner told him he was a priest. . The prisoner ---No, I am a clerk. Mr. YARDLEY—What sort of a clerk ? How sin Ito apply it ? The prisoner—l am a clergyman , sir. Mr. YARDLEY—Oh, you are, are you, sir ? The prisoner —Yes, sir ; a Roman Catholic priest. I re gret it very much. lam very sorry indeed. Mr. YARDLEY—It is in the highest degree impro per for one of your cloth to be drunk. The prisoner —I regret it very much. Pray look over it. Mr. YARDLEY—I will not indeed. Any punish ment I can inflict will fall very short of the disgrace you have inflicted upon yourself by your disgraceful conduct. Police-constable Tallent, No. 102 K, here stated that the prisoner certainly bore the same name as the late Member for Dublin, and that he was brought to the station-house a few weeks ago for obtaining Ss. by false pretences from Mr. Henley, landlord of the Blue Posts beer-shop, in the Mile-end-road, who did not press the charge in consideration of his being a Roman Catholic priest, and promising to pay the money. The prisoner continued repeating his regret for what had happened. Mr. YARDLEY-4 should be acting with great cul pability if I showed the least consideration for a man who has no consideration for himself, and I sentence you to be imprisoned in the House of Correction for seven days for being drunk and disorderly. The prisoner, after being locked up for some time, sent a supplicatory letter to the magistrate, begging to be relieved from the imprisonment. Mr. YARDLEY refused to attend to it, and the pri soner was sent away in the van. William Tarling, a carman, was brought up on re mand before Mr. Yardley, charged with uttering a forged order for the delivery of goods, and obtaining 15 quarters of oats. Mr. YARDLEY committed him for trial. LAMBETH. Yesterday John Savage, a pelice-costable, 497 A, appeared before Mr. Elliott, by order of the Commis sioners, to answer the complaint of Joseph Long, a young gentleman of the highest respectability, whom he had grossly insulted and publicly stigmatised as a member of the " swell mob." The complainant, whose friends reside at Holloway, deposed that on Monday evening last he, in company with some friends, visited the Surrey Zoological Gardens, and while in the refreshment-room he ob served a female take up a parasol and walk away with it. It struck him at the time that the parasol did not belong to her, and he, in consequence, took more than ordinary notice of her, and in a few mo ments his suspicions were confirmed by observing a lady looking about and inquiring for it. He told the lady what he had seen, and also the defendant, and walked about for some time'with him in the hope of being able to see the woman, and pointing her out to the constable. He did not then suc ceed, but in a short time after he did see her, and instantly went in search of the defendant, and brought him to the spot, where the woman stood, but she was then gone away. Soon after this the defendant asked him to go round the gardens with him, for the purpose of pointing out the woman to him ; but he replied he could not do so, as he was engaged with his friends. Immediately on his refusal the defendant said he knew him very well —that he was a well-known character—that he had met him at several houses, the resort of thieves. Men tioned the " Globe" as one of the houses, and that in fact he was a member of the " swell mob," and must be well acquainted with him. He (defendant) further said that if he had kept quiet he might not have noticed him ; though' he knew well what he was, as he had his eye on him for some years. Finding him self thus grossly insulted and represented in the pre sence of the crowd as a bad character, he sought his friends to take their advice as to what he should do, and they recommended him to appeal to Mr. Tyler, the proprietor of the gardens, for redress and protection, and accompanied - him before that gentleman. Mr. Tyler took them to where the defendant was on duty, and spoke to him on the subject, when he repeated his former charge, and said he knew him (Mr. Long) for years as the asso ciate of the " swell mob." Witness gave his card to Mr. Tyler, and assured that gentleman that the con stable's assertions were gross calumnies, and Sergeant Turner coming up at the time, he gave him a card also, and complained of the defendant's conduct. The sergeant told him that if he had any complaint to make against the constable, he had better attend al the station-house at Stone's-end the following morn ing, and make it before the superintendent or the in spector. Even after this the defendant, as he passed by, pointed him out to the people in the gardens as an improper character whom he had known for years. r. Henry Leach, a divinity student of Cambridge University, corroborated a great part of the statement of the complainant, and said he had remonstrated with the defendant and told bim he was quite mistaken, and that Mr. bong was a most respectable gentleman ; hut remonstrance appeared to have no effect upon him ; he still persisted in describing Mr. Long as a bad character, and told him that if he did not keep quiet he should turn him out of the gardens. Sergeant Turner, 459 A, said, that after the com plainant had given him his card, Savage continued to say he knew him as the associate of the swell mob. The defendant, whenasked what he had to say to the charge, admitted that all that had been stated was per fectly true; but the fact was, that he had mistaken the young gentleman for another person, who is a member of the swell mob, and he was exceedingly sorry for it. An inspector, who attended to watch the proceed ings, said he was desired by his superintendent to in form his Worship that the-prisoner had bean in the force for upwards of five years, and bore a very good character. Mr. Randall, a solicitor in Birchin-lane, and who attended with the complainant, addressing the magis trate, said he was instructed by the father of the young gentleman, the complainant, to state that it was not his wish to press the case harshly nor vin dictively against the defendant: but, at the same time, he felt it to be his duty towards his son and to the public to bring it forward under public notice. He hoped that a severe reprimand from his Worship would have the desired effect of acting as a warning to the defendant and others to act with more caution for the future. On account of his good character up to the present, Mr. Long was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt of believing that he acted from indiscretion and not from wilfulness. Mr. ELLIOTT remarked that the conduct of the de fendant was highly improper, and there were Many points in the case which led to the belief that his acts were more than those of indiscretion. The conduct of the complainant in noticing the robbery of the pirasol,, and his subsequent acts were, in his (Mr. Elliott's) opinion, sufficient to satisfy an officer of the slightest experience, unless indeed that his knowledge of the fact was beyond all doubt, that he was not what he represented, a "swell mnb thief." His con duct on the occasion undoubtedly - 'merited punish ment, but as the case froni a most kindly feeling was not pressed, he (Mr. Elliott) would not impose that which must result in his' discharge from the force. Mr. Ranaall said that was by no means the wish of the complainant. Mr. ELLIOTT told the defendant he should feel very grateful to the complainant and his f iends for the very indulgent manner in which they had viewed his conduct, and he hoped that bis escape from punish ment would have the effect that was intended of making him more cautious for the future. The defendant was then discharged. HOLLOWAY RAGGED SCHOOLS. The second anniversary of this laudable society was celebrated by a dinner at the London Tavern on Tuesday ; Mr. Sheriff Nicoll presiding, supported by about 60 friends of the charity. Theusual loyal and patriotic toasts having been drunk, The CHAIRMAN proposed the toast of the evening, and in doing so stated that he believed that ragged schools were amongst the most important institutions of the day, as tending to develop the germs of goodness which lurked in the hearts of even the most depraved. There could be no doubt that the vast amount of good which they were calculated to effect was daily in creasing, not so much from the increase in the number of the schools as from their improved discip line, order, and efficiency. He might be allowed to refer to an observation which he had heard from M. Guizot, shortly after he came to this country in consequence of the revolution of France, to show the position in which the charities of this country stood. That eminent individual stated that abroad every cha rity was supported by the Government, but that in this country they had the genius of Britain stamped upon them, always bearing the inscription in large letters, " supported by voluntary 'contributions."— (Cheers.) That was the case with the institution whose pros perity they were specially met to promote; and he trusted they would not let the feebleness of his ad vocacy affect the liberality with which they were pre pared to support the Holloway Ragged Schools-- (Cheers)—but that they would do all in their power to support them.—(Cheers.) The value of those schools might be shown from the fact that the average at. tendance at them consisted of 80 boys and 50 girls, and at the present time there were upwards of 160 children attending them. He begged to give them, " Prosperity to the Holloway Rigged School.," truating that, root and branch, they might live fur ever.— (Cheers.) The roast having been duly honoured, the toasts of " The Lord Mayor and Corporation of London" and " The health of the Chairman" were drank, afrer which Mr. Aldrich, honorary secretary to the schools, sand secretary to the Rlyal General Annuity Slciety, proceeded to read a list of donations in aid of the in , titution, in doing which he stated that the present school•rooms were inadequate for the pur pose, and it was shortly proposed to lay the founda tion-stone of a new building (the plan of which was exhibited in the room) in the Hornsey-road. He also stated tbat the Primate of All England bad honoured their society by preaching a sermon in its aid, which produced upwards of 501., being the first he had ever preached for a ragged school. The subscriptions of the evening amounted to 2001. (including 101. from the chairman, and about 251. from Mr. Phillips, of Holloway, an d hi s family). Mr. BREWSTER proposed the health of Mr. Aldrich, and stated that about two years since the school was about to have perished for want of support, when that gentleman undertook the office of honorary secretary, and at once rdised it to the position it now held, viz., that it had not space to meet its requirements. Mr. ALDRICH briefly acknowledged the compli ment; and some other toasts having been drunk, the company separated at an early hour. NEW SAFETY YACHT. On Wednesday afternoon there was exhibited on the Serpentine, opposite the Royal Humane Society's receiving house, a yacht of very peculiar material and construction, th e i nvent i on of Mr. W . Bonney, of Claremont Vill a , St. John's, Fulham, who has registered the design, which is so simple and so useful as to render it exceedingly likely to be pirated if not thus protected. The dimensions of describ e d by th e i nven t or , are as fallow ,w e :—Length, 13 fe e t 6 i nc h es ; b rea dth, 4 f ee t 10 inches 2 feet 4 i nc h es . Th e h u ll i s clinker built,lo vessel, d e e l , p t a h , s planks of gutta percha (but the principle of for mtn a a t t e i o r n i a w l s ) i 1 , 1 c e e l m tl e a n l I t y e d pe and rm c i t o o p f p tehr e r i e v m e t p t l e o d y t m o g e e n tthoefr.o The sides are double from the bilge upwards to the spa deck, and divided into water-tight compartments, as are also the fore and aft parts of the boat, and likewise the out gunwale. The keel and keelson are of iron, the latter being groove d t o rece i ve t h e r ib s, and the whole is bolted together. The deck is double laid, the upper diagonally, with marine glue. The bilge timbers are deeper than usual, acting as extra keel , ., and they, with the buoyancy of the outer wale, and the iron keel and keelson as counterpoise, render it next to impossible to capsize her. All the anticipations formed, not only of her floating, but of her sailing capabilities, were fully realised. She was repeatedly filled with water ; men in at tendance got into her ; and there being a very stiff breeze blowing, her powers of resisting overturning were fully tested, and with complete success ; for not only was she not water-logged, but her rate of progression when filled was scarcely impeded as com pared with what would have been the case with a boat of ordinary construction, though, indeed, any such boat under the circumstances would have ne cessarily been wholly unmanagable and useless. From yesterday's experiment it may be safely as sumed that boats built on Mr. Bonney's plan cannot be sunk or capsized by accident, and scarcely intention ally; and, as the principle of the inventor does not interfere with external form, it is applicable to craft of nearly all sizes. The most approved lines of launching can be adopted, not merely in the case of new boats, but those already built can be altered so as to participate fully (or nearly so, except as regards the complete substitution of gutta percha fur wood) at a very reasonable expense. It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of the extension of this discovery to life, and fishing, and race-boats; and we look for a speedy and extensive recognition of Mr. Bonney's merits in this matter at the hands of the Royal Yacht Club, and, indeed, nearly every regatta club in Great Britain. The attendance yesterday was not as numerous as could be desired, but this was owing to the -state of the weather, which suddenly assumed an almost wintry aspect, threat- ening rain all the evening, though, fortunately, there was none to diminish the satisfaction of the aquatic amateurs and professionals who did assemble according to Mr. Bonney's invitation, and by whom that inge nious gentleman was warmly congratulated, as he de served to be, on the great practical value of his con tribution to science and safety in one important branch of things nautical. [The fillowing appeared in our Third Edition o last night :—] FRANCE. Several conflicting 'rumours of a novel character have sprung into existence regarding the grant of additional moneys to the President.' One report is to the effect that the Committee strongly recom mend the postponement of their report on the mea sure until at least six weeks shall have elapsed, the object of such delay being to allow the excitement caused upon the subject to subside. Another report is that a portion of the Cabinet has agreed to a compromise to this extent, that the debts incurred hitherto should be paid off, but that the al lowance shouldstill continue as hitherto. Some of the members of the Cabinet may certainly, it is true, consent to this compromise, but the Prince himself has already distinctly avowed his determination to consent to no compromise at all—no compromise of any kind whatever. His debts arose principally from his munificent charities and benefactions; and it would appear that even in the last journey of the President to St. Quentin his expenses in deeds of beneficence have amounted to nearly 20,000 f. He presented, in savings bank pass-books, to the industrious workmen of St. Quentin, 3,000 f. ; to the well-conducted workmen of various manufac tories, 1,500 f. He gave to the charitable fund of St. Quentin 1,0001.; to the Mayors of two com munes at La Fare, the inhabitants of which were reduced to misery by a fire, lighted, perhaps, by some frire egare, he gave 500 f. each. The Mayors had implored him for some assistance for the houseless families of the sufferers—in all 49. To the charit able fund of La Fête he gave 500 f. He gave 500 f. to a postilion who, while in the act of driving, fell to the ground and broke his legs. He gave 500 f. to an unfortunate man who at tempted to destroy himself by means of poison, being driven to despair by poverty, and with a witie and four children starving. The money WB3 given to support the family during the time the father is in the hos pital. To the escort that accompanied him, horse and foot, he gave 2,500 francs, making about ten sous for each man. The President received during his stay not less than 500 petitions, and none of the petitioners were sent away empty-htinded. If to all this you add the most ordinary nod necessary exp9nses to postilions, cmichmen, conductors of the railway carriages, etc., it will be seen that the sum of 20,000 francs, already mentioned, is not more than what was actually ex pended, and in this,expenditure there is little or no thing extravagant. One anecdote of his journey not yet mentioned de serves commemoration . :—During the review at La Fere a National Guard s t eppe d ou t from the ranks and taking off his cap cr i e d out " Vice rEmpereur 1" and another stalwart-looking fellow advanced and shouted " Oui, oui, et tout de suite." SCIILES WIG. TV* head-quarters of the Danish troops in Jutland is moved to Kolding ; part of the Life Guards had arrived there , and th e w h o l e corps was to follow in a few days. The Swedish neutral troops have received orders to be in readiness to march. The officers state that the present corps will be relieved by an other. DISTRES SING ACCIDEN T.—On H ackney omnibuse s was go ing up - -.- - Ludgate-hill, when a Tuesday one of the little boy carrying in his arms a child about eighteen months g old was see n runn i ng across the roa d, and endeavou r i ng t o it is suppo se d, was trodden upon by being naturally a e t d u ra up l l was o l e pass in fro n t o f the horses., d Th e driver immediately checked one of the horse s , an d on his horses with A l l his po thrown wer, but not sufficiently to p reven t the children f rom b e i n down. The younger child, an in immense crowd of p ersons, a frightful state to a neigh bouring snrgeon's, y where it expired i n a few minutes. The accident when several gen tl emen w h o sa w it came forward and en tirely exculpated the driver from all blame. The latter went to the police-station in Fleet-street, and gave his name and address to the superintendent on duty, who expressed his willingness to take bail for his appearance yesterday before the magistrate. This instance shows the extreme imprudence of parents trusting infants to the care of children in crowded thoroughfares. 1 SINGULAR ACCIDENT.—Last week Donald Mac donald, from L uAbernethy, h a d gone to v i s it a f r i end at the Castletown of Braemar. On his return he had been carrying some deer's heads; but finding he could not conve niently take the whole and manage his pony at the same time, he selected one of the number, and pursued his way homewards.•at L . ne On leaving Avonside y chork, he went along the hill track leiding to the braes of Abernethy, till he arrived at a farm called the Crusk. Here his pony stumbled in crowing a ditch, and precipitated its rider. when one of the antlers penetrated the unfortunate man's temple. Me dical aid was procured, but the wounds occasioned some de gree of fever and delirium. He lay till Saturday, when he was conveyed home, still seriously ill.—Edinburgh Adver tiser. THE IRON IVORIES OF SCOTLAND. -- There are four great iron-fields in Scotland, containing 28 works and 135 furnaces, which were in blast in July. 1849. The most northerly field lies on both sides of the Forth, and contains 5 works, and 15 furnaces—Devon 1, Forth 5, Loehgelly. 2, Mimed Carron 3. The largest is that of Clydesdale, con t4iniug 15 works and 85 . furnaces--Garscube 1, Govan 5, Clyde 7, Gartsherrie 16, Summerlee 6, Dundyvan 9, Calder 7, Carnbrae 6, Monkland 3, Omoa 4, Coltness 6, Shotta 4, Castlehill 2, Chapel 3, Langloatt 6. The most westerly field is that in the north of Ayrshire, containing 4 works and 22 furnaces—Rilbirnie 9, Blair 6, Kilwinning 3, Portland 4. The British most southe r l y fi el d li es on t h e b or ders of the shires o f A yr, Ltinark, and D umtr i - a, conta i n i ng 4 W o rks and 13 furnaces._. Lugar 4, D a l tnellingtou 2, Uairk i r k 3, Nithadale 3..—.0T 0r t/ t Mail. Kings v. Reid.—Peel v. Peel.—Lacy and others v. Brown. Great Northern Railway v. Southall. Bertram v. Hutchins.— Wagner v. Armistead. Laidlaw v. Leach, S. J.—Dee v. Palmer. Sowerby, the younger, v. Jackson.—Bradfield v. Duncan. Joseph v. Everett and another. —Claridge v. She well, S. J. Trail v. Holt,—Woods v. Fienis and another. Mosse and another v. Jones and another. Dim. s v. Lord Cortenham, S. J.—Methley v. Killick. S , a, Fire, and Life Assurance Society V. Williams, S. J. Gay v. Shackle and another, S. J. Dick v. Jonides and another, S. J. Mackeson v. Phillips, S. J.—Hunter and another v. Moss. Langridge (executor) v. Johnson. New Causes. Davis v. Newton, S. J.—T. Colledge v. Harty. Gogga and another v. Gibbs Tyrwhitt and another v. Halsted. Hall v. Squire—Mitchell v. Gunnell. Sharland v. Marshall. Gell and another, executors, v. Deighton. Humphrys v. Freshfield. Gregory and others v. Miller and others, S. J. Caussidiere v. Long and another, S. J. Swaby v. Industrial and General Life Assurance and Deposit Company. Day and another v. Commerell and another. Buessard v. Brotherton and others., Keogh v. Keogh—Allen v. Ogden. Willson v. Hale, S. J.—Wilson v. Ashley, S. J. Oakley v. London and North-Western Railway Com pany, S. J.—Cook v. Hulls and another. Stevens and another v. Houstou—Sherley, administer, v. Smith—Hulme v. Hatteraley, S. J. Sadler v. Boyle—Florence and another v. Crosse. Doe dem. Tilson and another v. Langley. Thorpe, P. 0., v. Boyes, S. J. Squire v. Prew—Tucker v. Shaw. Todd, administrator, v. Webb. Doe dem. Mean and others v. Dando. Biddies v. Ledger—Vizitelly v. Chapman. Miall and another v. Dobell—Ambergate. Nottingham, Boston, and East Junction Railway v..Kitchin. • Pai•frement v. Bending—Lycett v. Crockett. Phillips v. Pound—Wells v. Drummond. Lenny v. Moffat, S. J.—Lloyd v. Howell. Rowley v. Wright—Wilkinson v. Boycott. Booth v. Lamie and another—Short v. Ponsford. Short v. Woollett—Carlisle and others v. Vonillon. Lawder v. Berton—Newbon v. Benfield. Goldsmith v. Bell—Calisher v. Annesley. Tharratt v. Trevor—Cooper v. Harris and another. Cocker v. Scott—Almond and another v. Shepherd.- Browning and others T. HolDles=4eakeS v. White. Rice v. Gibson—Wood v. Dickeson. Williams v. Aldred, sued, &c. LAW INTELLIGENCE. EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, June 13. (Sittings in Error, before Mr. Baron PARKE, Mr. Baron ALDERSON, Mr. Justice MAULS, Mr. Justice CRESSWELL, Mr. Baron PLATT, and 111 r. Justice TA LPG U an.) The Court sat to-day to hear errors from the Queen's Bench. GREGORY •. TEE QUEEN. This was an appeal against:the judgment given on a conviction of the appellant, the late proprietor of the Satirist, for a libel on the Duke of Brunswick. The indictment had been removed by certiorari into the Queen's Bench, and thence taken to the Court of Ex chequer Chamber, where it had been argued on a for mer occasion. Mr. PEACOCK, Q.C.—The real question was one of costs, and it was deemed material to get rid of one of the counts in the indictment if possible. The Learned Counsel,took various technical objec tions to the form of the retraxit which was entered, but they were all over-ruled. He then endeavoured to maintain that the allegations in the Bth count were not libellous without an inuendo. They were—" If she does invite the Duke of Brunswick. she dues what very few ladies would do; but of course she is at liberty to invite expatriated foreigners to her table if she thinks fit." Baron PARKE said the greater part of the Court were of opinion that it was libellous. The judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench must be affirmed. GREGORY V. THE QUEEN. This was an appeal against the judgment given against the appellant on a criminal information for a libel on the Duke of Brunswick, in the Satirist. &Ir. Peacock, Q.C., appeared for the appellant, and Mr. Henniker in support of the conviction. Mr. PEACOCK said there were four counts in the indictment, on which separate judgments had been given, and punishments awarded on each ; the punish ment in respect of the second, third, and fourth, to commence from the expiration of that on the preced ing count. In the first count the words were— " Why, asks a correspondent,- after the acquittal of Hubbard for the murder of Eliza Grimwood, did all inquiry cease to find out the perpetrator of that horrid deed? Who furnished Hubbard, on his discharge, with the means of leaving this country ? By the tone in which these questions are put, we are led to the inference that the writer knows more than he un folds. We have heard hints dropped on the subject of parties who have not been brought forward, and who could state in whose company (a foreigner be it re membered) the unfortunate woman was last seen:' The inuendo stated that this was intended to mean that the Duke of Brunswick was the murderer of Eliza Grim wood. Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—Thero is no inuendo that it WAS the Duke of Brunswick who furnished Hubbard with the means of escape. Mr. PEACOCK—The jury found that as well, that that the Duke was meant by the last person,a fo reigner, who was seen with her. The second count was for the following libel :—" It is owing to this that, although Dublin may be the most plisant city that sits on the say,' yet its suburbs are free from foreign adventurers and refugees, whose crimes have driven them from their native country. There are neither ex-dukes nor rapalers in the capital of Pat land. Their pockets are not picked (rather a difficult job to do sometimes), nor their Cyprians murdered." The inuendo alleged that this was of and concerning the Duke of Brunswick, and, in fact, accusing him of the murder again. "Again we repeat our thanks to Observer.' The evidence to facts, in relation to the particular subjects alluded to, is procuring, and we have no doubt sufficient information will be ob tained fora strong case to lay before the Home S-cre tary, to enable that functionary to cause it to be inti mated to the suspected party" (inuendo meaning the Duke of Brunswick) " that his presence here can be dispensed with, as it may be attended with danger to himself." The inuendo stated that it was hereby in tended to be conveyed that the Duke of Brunswick was suspected of having committed murder, and in fact had committed some murder which would bring his life in danger, according to the law of England. The fourth count, alluding to the inducement of cer tain prosecutions which the Duke had commenced against Mr. Gregory, contained the following alleged libel :—" We repeat our thanks to 0. ; we shall not require such aids to overthrow the prosecution. We will beat him" (inuendo meaning the Duke of Bruns wick) "on the merits. We are not a defenceless fema.e, to submit quietly to strangulation, or to a knife being drawn across our throats." The inuendo " thereby causing it to be believed, or suspected, that the Duke of Brunswick murdered Eliza Grim wood." Several technical objections were raised, principally on the ground that the inuendos were too large, and gave a meaning to the alleged libels beyond their, fir; construction, and also on the ground that there walla' be it difficulty in apportioning the sentence ; but, after a somewhat discursive argument, Mr. Baron PARKE said—We have no doubt, then, the first count is sufficient, as there is an introductory averment of the fact that Eliza Grimwood was mur dered. The second count is also good; but the third clearly bad, as there is nothing to show the Duke's life was in danger:--it only goes to show that he was in danger here, and contains that allusion to Eliza Grimwood. There may be difficulty as to punish ment, as each is to commence at the expiration of the term awarded on the preceding count, and we have reversed the judgment on the third. Ultimately the judgment was affirmed on the fourth count, the imprisonment to commence immediately on the expiration of that pronounced on the second count. Altogether the result is, that the appellant will have to undergo imprisonment for six months. Mr. Sergeant Talfourd having while at the bar been Counsel in this case, took no part in the proceed ings this day. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. . - Mr. Daniel 0, THAM.E.:S. drunk and °autiltlht disorderly. a Roman Catholic priest, before Mr. Yardley charged with being Reed, a po - lice-constable, 199 H, stated that duty a i f n te t r h n e oor ig George on ne Wednesdaywas on neighbourhood of Tower-hill knocked an o'clock, and was in formed that a man had place in a very disorderly on Tower-hill, and off his stool, and was behaving open-air preacher manner. He wen w t h t n e the ve i ry anflourishing about saw the priioner, mention n ot h ingt a stick, and said the preacher kne a j our Saviour, and bad no right to The bystanders . among whom were severa ll name. clerks, called out " Shame," and said the prisoner ought to be locked up, and that he had struck the er preacher a violent blow across the head with his stick and knock-d him down, and that it was a most brutal end cowardly assault on an unoffending man. li e took the prisoner into custody, when he commenced flourishing his stick again, and struck a horse which was yoked to a cart on the head. The animal reared, and nearly threw the driver from the cart, and it was some time before it could be secured, and had nearly done very serious mischief. The prisoner was in toxicated- The prisoner, a man of portly figure , a nd dr essed in a good s u it o f black, on being called upon for his defence, said he was sorry he had forgotten himself. He bad only arrived in this country from Ireland a few weeks ago, and was out with a few friends on Wednesday afternoon. He supposed he wag provoked at somethin g th e p reac h er sa id , an d s t ruc k him. He regretted very much what he bad done. L _'+~ ~+ LOND ON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 14, 1850. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF 00,1111.104.V5, June 13 The SPEAKER took Oh) Chair in the INT-m House a , Four o'clock. THIRD READINGS, &a. The following Bills were read a third ti me an d passe d Kent Waterworks. Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton Railway. Southampton Waterworks. Tyne Navigation. The following Bills, as amended, were considered and agreed to:— Borough of Salford Waterworks and Improvement. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway. The Manchester Bonding Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. PETITIONS. Sir JAMES DUKE presented a petition from the parish of St. Giles's in favour of an equalization of poor rates; also several petitions from various parts of the metropolis in favour of the Marriage Bill. Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS presented a petition from a place in, Denbighshire in favour of international ar bitration. Mr. MACKENZIE presented two petitions from Ren rewshire against the Marriage Bill. . Mr. WODEHOUSE presented a petition from a place in Norfolk pray log for the abolition of Sunday labour in the Post office. An HoN. NIUMBER presented a petition from Romford, in the county of Essex, praying tor protection. Mr. FITZROY presented a petition in favour of the County Courts Extension Bill. Mr. W. PAT I'EN presented a petition from a body of clergymen connected with the Established Church in favour of the Bill for amending the Church Rate Act. ST WILLIAM CL AY presented a petition from the Tower Hamlets in favour of the Marriage - . Act. Mr. B. DENISON presented a petition from a place in Yorkshire against the Highway Rate Bill; also seven teen petitions from various parts of the West Riding in favour of the Marriage Bill. Mr. HOBHOUSE prernted a petition in favour of the Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill. Mr. E. ELLICE presented a petition from a place in Scotland in favour of the Marriage Bill. Viscount CASTLEREAGH presented a petition from an Irish congregation against the Marriage Bill. Mr. WYLD presented two petitions from different parts of the metropolis in favour of the Bill. Mr. STUART WORTLEY presented a large number of petitions from various parts of the country in favour of the Bill. Lord R. GROSVENOR presented seven petitions from various pelts of the metropolis to the same effect. lir. P. SCROPE presented a petition from a place in Roscommon in favour of a district union rate. Lord DUDLEY STUART presented a petition from cthe Society for the Protection of Trade, signed by the hairman, in favour of the County Courts Extension Bill. Mr. C. PEARSON presented a number of petitions in favour of the Marriage Bill, and two petitions from the Limbeth Savings Banks against the Savings Banks Bill. Sir GEORGE PECHELL presented a petition from the Brighton Savings Banks to the same effect. Sir DE LACY EVANS presented a petition from Westminster in favour of the Marriage Bill. Colonel LLOYD WATKINS presented a petition from the trustees and managers of the savings' bank at Brecknock against the Bill for the amendment of the laws of such banks. Mr. DISRAELI presented a petition from the parish of Wickham, in the counties of Bucks and Oxford, complaining cf the refusal of the Poor-law Board to sanction the redaction of the salaiies of their officiils. STEAM-ENGINE IN OLD PALACE-YARD. Mr. GREENE rose to ask Viscount Ebrington ;he aler there was any intention of erecting St steam-engine at the corner of Palace. yard for the purpose of forcing the contents of the sewer to a higher level. It there be such intention, whether it was proposed that such steam engine shall permanently remain, or was it only to be placed there for a temporary purpose; it for a temporary purpose, how long may it be probably required to remain there? He would ask whether it was the intention of the parties in charge of the engine to stir,up the contents of the sewer at this hot season of the year?—(A laugh.) Lord EBRINGTON said there was an intention of erecting team-engine in Old Palace-yard. The drainage of the Westminster district had been long under the consideration of the Westminster Commissioners of 'ewers with a view to its improvement. The object f which the steam-engine would be erected was for the purpose of bringing the sewer in St. Margaret-street up to the level of the sewer in Great George. street.. With regard to the second question, he could state that the engine would remain until the sewer was finished, and it would then he removed and the ground made good. The Commissioners had had great complaints that the sewer was unavoidably necessary. Mr. HENLEY said, that the Noble Lord had not condescended tl say what means the Commissioners had taken to preserve the inhabitants of Westminster against the effects of the stench of the sewer which he was about to stir up. Lord EBRINGTON said he did not know that any but the ordinary precautions had been taken. It was obvious that if the works were to be retarded during tho summer months, the progress of sewage in the metro polis would be indefinitely postponed. Sir B. HALL wished to know if the Board had ever considered that the dog-days was the best season fur opening these sewers? He also wished to know whether the matter had been brought before the Board of Health? He wished also to make a complaint relative to the sewage of that (the new) house. He noticed at one of the doors by which he entered a smell of a most abominable and inexpressible character, and he should be glad to know whether , the sewage of the new house had been complete i ? Lord EBRINGTON said he had already explained the necessity of opening the sewer. With regard to the drainage of the Houses of Parliament, he did not consi der that the sewers were satisfactory in their construc tion, but the architect (Mr, Barr)) and the Com mittees of the House had to deal with them, and not the Commissioners of Sewers. He did not think they had been constructed on the best principle on which they ought to be constructed ; they were a great deal too large to allow the sewage water to be carried off rapidly; but, as he had said be• fore, they were not made under the direction of the Commissioners of Sewers. Sir B. HALL said, what he wished to learn wa., whether the sewers made under the superintendence of the architect were on so low a level as to render it ne cessary to pump up the whole sewage water in the neighbourhood. Lord SEYMOUR said he was not in possession of E sitting sai d on th t e hre C e o sufficient information on th e su bj ect to give a definite answer to the question of the H on . B aronet. L c m e m ss i p ss ) i o o i n s, er w s h o ic f h Sewers were un derstood him t..) st a t e were cons i dered necessary to obviate the evil.—(L aug h ter .) o r a d t p A r eSsielnLt BERMUDA. Mr. HUME moved for a return of the several public establishments at Bermuda, on the Ist day of January, 1830, stating the name and rank, pay and allowances of every kind, of the garrison; also, the number of officers of every class, civil and military, under his command, in detail, stating the name, the office held, the duty to be performed, the pay and allowances of every kind re, ceived by each officer; and the amourat of contingent ex• penses of every kind incurred, so as to exhibit the total charge of the garrison staff and establishment (the troops excepted) for the y est- ended the 31st day of December, 1849: similar return of all officers, civil and military, belonging to the Ordnance department, &e. Similar return of all officers, civil and military, belonging to the Naval and Vietnalling depart ment, stating the number of hulks and vessels, houses and buildings for their use, and the total charge for the year ended the 31st day of December 1849. Similar return of the Medical department, and the number of hospitals and buildings for their use, and the total charge for the year ended the 31st day of December, 1849. Returns of the troops, infantry, artillery, pioneers, and marines, on the ltt day of January, 1850, distinguishing the number of each rank, and included in any of the previous re turns. Of the number of convicts at Bermuda, on the Ist day of January, 1830, the number of hulks and barracks for their reception, and the establishment of all classes maintained for them, and the aggregate charge in the year ended the 31st day of December, 1849; and, of the total fitnount of revenue collected at Bermuda in the year 1849, stating the several sources, and the amount derived from each source ; also, a return, in detail, of the manner in which the revenue for that year was appropriated.—Agreed to. HOME-MADE SPIRITS. Colonel DUNNE would be glad to hear from the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the report of the resolutions relative to home-made spirits. agreed to on Tuesday night upon the motion of the Noble Lord the Member fir Kildare (Lord Naas), would come on to morrow? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—It does not depend upon me whether it will come on or not. Mr.F. MACKENZIE intimated that the report would certainly be brought up to-morrow.-- (A laugh.) BOARD OF HEALTH. On the motion of Mr. MO WATT the following re turn was agreed to.—Copies of the reports of any engi neers or surveyors, together with the plans and sections, and estimates of cost, upon which the report and recom mendation of the Board of Health are founded, for sup plying the metropolis with water from Bagshot-heath. THE STEANI.ENGINE IN OLD PALACE-YARD. Lord ARUNDEL and SURREY said, with reference to the conversation which had taken place about the steam-engine in Old Pahice yard, it appeared there was a strong feeling against the impropriety of erecting such a machine for disturbing the sewage ; and as the Noble Lord, the Chairman of the Corn mi,sioners of Sewers (Lord Ebrington) did not feel disposed to remedy the nuisance, he (L ird Arundel and Surrey) hoped the Secretary of State would take some steps to protect the House against it.—(A laugh.) Sir G. Grey joined in the laugh but rondo no further response. THE RAILWAY AUDIT BILL, ''77,7 On the motion of Sir G. GREY, the Ruilwuy Audit Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time onThur.day next. SUNDAY TRADING BILL. Mr. BARING WALL asked the Hon. Member for Lambeth if he would consent to poitpone the second resding of the Sunday Tradin Bill till Friday week? Mr. C. PEARSON said that, providin = tha- h.. could see some opvriunity of ringing on ihe Bill of, Wedtie day week, he should have no chjection to poelporu. the .Bill till Wedne,day week; but otherwise, et this late period of the s,sision, h, et , _ul , l n ot con „ rit. COUNTY COURTS EXTENSION BILL, The House , then wait into Committee on this Bill; lir. BERN AL 'n the chair. The ATI OItNEY-GENERAL proposal several ad-: ditioual clauses, which were ordered to be brought up. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he had to make the same complaint that he had made yesterday; he could not hear a single word of what, was going on. He wished to call the attention of the Government to the evidence which had been gime before the Committee on this Bill by a genilemon in the Treasury-office. He understood that these clauses were respecting the clerks to tee judges in the county courts, and he was very strongly of opinion that these clerks, though they were ap pointed by the Judges and approved by the Lord Chan cellor, should be under some general superintendence, say of the S-cretary of St ite for the time being. He thought that the opinion of the ccuntry had been pretty loudly pronounced in favour of the extension of these courts. There were many other suggestions of very great importance pointed out by the evidence, but he would not dwell on them, because, as the law now stood, the executive had the power of carrying them out. He un derstood that a commission of five County Court Judges had been appointed by tho Government, to consider what alteratione in the practice of the courts might be advis able. As to the present clause he would suggest that the Attorner-G- n, ral should carry it a little further. Sir G. GREY said he believed that great inconveni ence had resulted from the mode in which the clerks were appointed, because sonic of them resided in London, and, therefore, were obliged to be represented by depu ties who were sometimes very efficient. but the Govern ment had no powt r of interference except in eases of mis conduct. -The commission to which the light Hon. Baronet had allueed was appointed under the Act passed : last session, and it was the intention of the Executive to adopt any alterations in the prucice of the courts which they 'eight think necessary. In reply to Sir JAMES GRAHAM', Sir G. GREY said the suggestion to diminish the number of pieces where cases were tried was under the consideration of the eieverrmer►t. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in reply to Mr. B. Deideoe, said it was his inteuton to produce a general clause to dismiss clerks for misconduct. The A PTORNEY-GENERAL said, in consequence of the representations made to him, he proposed to leave out, the clause which he had been induced to in sert. to allow parties to serve their own summonses, as he found that practice would give rise to considerable objections. Sir G. PECHELL said, although the Attorney- General spite on his side of the House he had scarcely heard a word uttered by Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME said he also found it impossible to hear a word, and suggested that they should retire to the old House.—(clear, hear.) The only speech he had heard was that of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham). Mr. GOULBURN said it was rather singular, but although he heard the Attorney-General, he could not hear Sir James Graham, notwithstanding he sat behind him.—(Lauehter.) Sir JAMES GRAHAM said if that ware so, it was owing entirely to the defective construction of the House. Members could hear what passed on one side but not on the other, and such being the case it was impossible to go on with business in Committee.—(llear.) Mr. STAFFORD said he took great interest in the Bill, but was in the same predicament as the other Hon. Members.—(Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, at present, as the Act was worded, if a party laid his plaint, and served it upon the defendant, even though the de fendant might not intend to make any defence, the plaintiff was obliged to go into court with his case, and incur all the expense of proving it, even though it was an undefended plaint. Ile now meant to propose a clause the object of which was, whether the defendant was served with a plaint or not, if he knew a suit was about to be instituted he might with the plaintiff agree about the amount of the debt and caner that agreementin writing:with the clerk of the court, and thereupon tee Judge should proceed to hear and dispose of the cause. It would be a most economical measure, and he (the Attorney-General) thought it would be a satisfactory one. Mr. 11 rzßoy objected to the clause, on the ground that parties personating a plaintiff or defendant might impose a statement as to the amount of debt on the clerk of the court. The clause was agreed to without a division. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed another clause imposing certain conditions on the plaintiff and defendant, in case they agreed as to the amount of the debt.—Agreed to. Mr. HENLEY offered some objection to the clause. After a few words from Mr. DENISON, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he would consider the matter, and make some amendment in the clause on bringing up the report. Clauses G and H, relating t the appointment and dis missal of clerks and assistant-clerks, were then agreed to Deter a short discussion, in which Mr. Aglionby, , Sir G. Grey, and Mr. Mulliegs, took part. 0.1 clause I, which provided for the hiring of town halls and public buntlines for the holding of th courts, 'the AT I'ORNEY-GENERAL said that this clause had been brought under the attention of the lion. Mem ber ter Liverpool, and that Hon. Member had drawn up a clause which be proposed to .substitute for hi* own. Mr. HENLEY agreed with the principle of the clause, but thought some words ought to be introduced to pre vent any expense falling on the county in respect to the repairs requirel, in consequence of the town-eull, ur other county building, being used by these courts. After a short discussion the clause was agreed to. The other el3uses proposed by the Attorney-General were then put and agreed to. Mr. MITCHELthen rose to propose the Billowing clause-:—Be it enacted, that nothiNg• contained in this Bill shall take away the power of the judges of the :Alpe rior courts to make, or shall inter ere with the exercise of their discretion in making, orders for holding de fendants to hail in actions commenced in the superior courts for claims nut exeeedieg 501.; and that when, in any action, any such order shall remain, the provi• sions of this Act shall not apply with respect to such action. Af.sr a few words from the ATTORNEY-GENE RAL, the clause was agreed to. M'CULLAGEI moved the following clause.— " And be it enacte i, that the court shall, after the first day on which it shall sit in each district or place, com mence its sittings not later than nine of the clock in the forenoon, save when prevented by the illness or utia voidable absence of the judge appointed to preside in such court; and that no trial, case, or business shall be entered upo❑ after the hour of six cf the clock in the afternoon of any day, by such court, except at the re quest of both parties." The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the clause, which he thought would unduly interfere with the dis cretion of the judges of those courts. Lord D. C. STUART also opposed the clause. Mr. M'CULLAGII said he heard of instances in which the judges of those courts had commenced the hawing of cases after midnight. But if the Committee did not approve of his motion he should not press its adoption. The clause was then withdrawn. Mr. CROWDER rose to move certain clauses which would give a right of appeal from the decisions of the ,judges of those courts. The Hon. and Learned Gentle man said that that right had been given in the Bill which had originally been introduced by the Hoe. Member for Lewes (Hr. Fitzroy). But objections having been urged against the mode in which the clauses conferring that right had been framed, those clauses had been withdrawn. He found, however, that it was proposed that the right of appeal should be given by the Bill then before the Committee. Now, he thought that such a proeueding would be most unreasonable, and he was at a loss to conceive any ground on which it could possibly be jus tified. The establishment of those courts had been first suggested in the report of the Law Commis sioners, published in the year 1833, and it had been stated by Lord Cottenham, when the first County Courts Bill had lei en adopted, in the year 1846, that that measure had been founded on the report of those Law Commissioners. It was a remarkable fact that in the discussions of that measure ho did not find that a word had been said either for or against an appeal clause. The report of the Commissioners of 1833 stated it as the opinion of the Commissioners that to disallow the power of appeal altogether would be attended with considerable ineutivenieece, and that ►he lads of justice would be best attained be permitting appeals under cer tain restrictions. In 1841, he found Sir E. fiugden staing in the House of Commons, in reference to that subject, that ro maintain is proper check on the judges two things a ere necessary—a vigilant, intelligent, and independent bar, and a court of. app-al; and that, with out these checks, very few of them would do their duty in a manner satisfactory to the public. A very remark able instance had been communicated to him by a learned friend of his. The other day a case occurred in one of the metropolitan srasll debts courts, in which a decision was cited which had been given in the Court of Ex chequer, to the authority of which the judge of the court bowed, and decided accordingly. Tne party engaged on the other side stated that the judge of an adjoining metropolitan court had d. -tided in opposition to that judgment ; and the judge of a third and neighbouring court said that he should in such cases always decide upon his own judgment. And why not ? There was nothing to control him. The re 4 usal of an aepeal was opposed ti the principle upo❑ which the law was administered in this country. It must be recollected also, that, although in the appointment of judges to these courts there was a restriction to barris ters of seven years' standing, the judges had the power of appointing deputies to act for them, who might be barristers of only three years' standing. Would they then permit questions involving an amount of 501. to be decided by such judges ? It appeared to him that they wished to destroy the efficiency of the Bill, and raise the voice of the whole country against it as much as it had been hitherto raised in its favour, which he admitted they would accomplish by passing it without permitting a power of appeal. He admitted that an appeal could not be given without creafing some delay and some increase of expense ; but he had endeavour° I to frame his clauses in such a manner as to obviate these objections as far as pos►ible. He would not read the clauses which he was about to propose at length, but merely sta'e the effect of them. First, he proposed to give an appeal in cas s where the dispute was not on points of law or the ruling of the judge. In such cue& s he proposed that the judge should have the power of allowing a❑ appeal. With respect to the other clauses, they were framed with the view of allowing an appeal on points of law, and this whether the judge permitted it or not, where the sum sought to be recovered exceeded 20/. in anions of contract, or 51. ill actions of tort. In these cases, if the decision of the jege was obk(:cte m.n. the matter went up to the ,uperi , r comes at judge i chambersster, thei i % cd a i t e r i 3 u , ay T i o n e tt . ir i m it. ti a T l e d , Lelei.driiocda disrobes concluded by moving his (nausts. Mr. FI; ZitOY said that tile Ilion. and L:.arred At torrmy-Geut•ral had sail last year that he was oppwed to an appeal, arid he had th,refore ornittpd any ptovi si It. h,r that purpo,e in his Bill this year. I. re _ ett fere to the question itself, be thought that it' t i n y adopted the appeal proposed in matters of fact al won as in matttrs of law.°) they would superadd -----d irg l Y tu i n gl e d e e vsntages to those already suffered by the enter suitor. Ile would support the Hon. a nd Len"d At torneysGeneral, if h e would move the rejection f clauses. wcak Mr. CROWDER sad the judge's permissi°P, he r. quised w h ere t h e error arose on matters of l'i t e Sir G. GREY h a d state d on a f o rmer occasion lateh'ell they extended the sphere of the county cce l-r3 ,' n j ig would run th e r i s k o f d epr i v i ng t hem of their P`T of ig. eleunnt; and that if they materially enlarge[[ Orin, diction, the question of an appeal would be raised. : t ot , House had (held.- d on extending the j ur i s diction to v‘ j rio : but his wish wa s t o reta i n t h e character of these eau and would therefore oppose the clauses. to til l Mr. AGLIONBY o bj ecte d t o the provision de e iv i ol appeal on matters of tact, which said that t, ° f the should state, at the end o f hi s no tes, to what Part cal, evidence he attached credit. Ile objected t o tbe.l' a r t to and would rather submit to a decision again st hi try A an appeal. ir' t ' n The T FORNEY-GENERAL said it " his 11 OAS tion to ()pp se is the clauses. He was quite ni ec es[ see s much mi g ht be said as to the profriety of on the case of large sums, but to introduce w sold he to destroy the principal oaject of si r ' if PoSS rase d which way to have summary, cheap, and, satistactery decision. But the noose having ego; it it decelsd in t - avoer of the jurisdiction , tbo ea• it iuto.htvuro. to tie his du:y to assist as far he could in inakieg tb , f i e fe .ure as perfect us possible.—(llear, hear.) e s as by introducing these de110... the), would do gen _ sl oe chief, hy destroying the effleierai , and general 0 1 3 . `, 00 be of the courts. Then he objected to the distiu c ,, fi d is tween the ca-es in watch the appeel was alto oug ht oag ht whicti it was retustd; if any appeal was allolf:ee io be general. Me COCKBURN said there was net 9' mo_ n o. entious or mere warm friend than himolt tooteesrdmi• cipl.4 of these courts. He was for lornii 6in g aior ( ' tc ; uistration o' justice as far as possible, tied " o f see these courts gradua'ly absorb the greater P how' the legal business of the country. He tboug7 l9 , l os ever, an appeal essenti a lly necessar y. lie b ‘ ad :a t ty, seen the judge—ho wever exa l te d i n point ol 6 " 5' 4 tee ray, aed position—oil whom the conseiousnie:orf superintending power would not be attende d bY r d COW results. There was no judge—not even the 1 1, wsi cellor —who was not subject to some appeal. the P rip jece d that th ese c h utes wou ld i nter f er e T l 4" ei f i ed the ciple of the Bill, w hi c h h e a d m i tte d ti be Cb mars, and speedy justice ; but when they jurisdiction to am oun t s above 201., they wer e in :C t tu riscli c ; a new class of b us i ness . Under the extend° lice lion, questions involving very intricate aud C ore , r 4oo l4 questions of law wo u ld b e brought betore these ' ye 0 3 ' and unless they had so me ap p eal t h ey would ha flitting decision;; without cud. cast of Sir J. GRAEIA., ,as all'anxious for the 5° t ha; the Bill as the Hc:*WLeitrned Member for SO glad ton, who had ju s t spoken, and. he was eXtrere, core' th the Goverucnent hal t a k en t h e ir Pres °. et P °9 ; They had endeavoured t o ma k e t hi s Bill les f ar t ot c' sible in coeformity with tho reasonable exPe cti 01e) l ieo ber the people. He wa s n o t i n a pos i t i on to ontr able arguments used by the Hon. and Learned ~de o t to who had just s pok en . I t m i g h t h ave been P r '" of O le , have waited somewhat longer to see the worki9g te d [bat system before extending it further. He a dra t t eleci°l ° ,l it would be impossible to secure uniformity e e ' e . 31; ',A" - amongst the sixty judges without a court or afr e 00 , " if the two Hon. and Learned Gentlemen who lePfotbs its introduraion into the present Bill were to argnet,:d belt wisdom of Sol o n, it was t h e i r m i s f ortune , $4 It be told the misfortune of oth er em i nent persona ges, t ° 6 ; e piei'd , ' ; " These arguments ar e urge d too l ate ." It was S " - bst fr °- in this country th a t i n th e super i or co urts, vd the delay of process and the expense, justice dear. They, therefore, desired a more surnrf e ,,fotii: ready process. He feared that this cheap ti e d be found imperfect, as compared with that hhr• ill had hitherto been acc us t ome d to see admiiiiefered•of the he also had some leers as to the indirect e&, 6 1 , 1 eec °l3 ,,i measure on the bar at W es t m i nster H a ll, whic h beg, sidered the proud e st o rnameut o f t hi s co untry► I o pd men who were the defenders of our liberties, ti sere whom we were under e t erna l o bli gat i on . If tilit-1?11, to be the result, he s h ou ld b o aggr i eve d ; but judgment of the peopl e h a d gone f ort h that W e t , deb t , proceeding in the su p er io r courts w i t h re ference to • d of 501. was so extravagantly dear as to a mount !fed to nial of justice, and that they were, therefore , re! y t try the experiment. He would not cuter In ff itill question as to ehether this was the best gouda et. ;pest the appeal, but would treat it as a question e or no appeal, and felt that if they granted SO nap;°' all they would violate public opinion, and plund e r 11°' long into all the costs and delay - of the fore -e 3 ceedings. t to he el Sir R. INGLIS thou g ht i t qu it e as i m portan d oolr certain justice us to have cheap, speedy, en d ,:4l justice. Without appeals they would have a" th e [ ere which attended taeir former election coaniltl: ee ,leciii7 it was impossible to form any idea of what the' r ,,,itsiti woul,i except by looking at their shicual ee ti "; v re ss :, Disclaiming any wish to fu tter or impede the' the 13i11, hut rather desiring to make it more Per feet, would give his support to the proposed clause. Mr. S. WORTLEY doubted whether th ese se b ee s sist , A the introduction of these clauses we re : L bst friends of the Bill, for his fi rm conv i ct ion w e '% - oies';; less some provi s i on was i ntro d uced w i th i n a % L ot' tively short tu ne th e measure would be as unrerse it lie-, was now p o p u l ar . T he pr i ncipal objection tese-te lstet was the expen se; b ut here the appeal might be a r c i t ort i : trifling expe nse , as i n t h e case of appeals f r o . °p ro d sessions Itwassaid or th t a b t e a fi n i a ll p ip pe b a u l t tsitnousledobtletrillbegsyl,l heardprinciple it sail u p t o 101. no appeal was given , LA.. O , that sum it was allowed to the Court of 63 51 that system worked well. Colonel THOMPSON supported the clausel.,, Mr. EVANS did not know what might he 11/I • ij if un economical mode of appeal could be dev'''" ;O A ' he was sure the appeal pointed out in these clan 6e „ s i re" ' be most objectionable. He had himself a new sr ll , s ing in the Court of Queen's Bench, which wa s t he e year old; and when, under these cireunastsne e "bo at was again put int ) his hands, he knew net mo re than it he had never heard of it before. Mr. CROWDER, am id st cr i es of "Di v ide ' " u n e "Ye el ,; say a few wo r d s i n rep l y. Il e thought t h e , ber for Cock e r mout h an d t h e Ri ght H on . u e- ile 13 '0 opposite were a little too hard upon his clane es 'eell sl it framed the first clause in deference to the :LOA d originally stood—mainly, to give a power of e 'fisle e es cases in which the judge permitted it. Ile he"„ E‘ of,ris with great attention and respect to the arglitn i e l e ilec of Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, but they bil"„ l ";,,itli ° :‘ convince him of the propriety of passing the 131 " • 9v b the appeal clause. Although there might be de c o 's ' trial twelve months old in the Court of C2n egn olO te , - st there were no arrears in the Exchequer or i d otie - y Pleas, and the fact of there being cases Yee, r „,% 113° ' not to deprive parties of their right to appeal " -e thougt it essential to the ends of 'ustice. are a" The Committee th en divided, when there llPP e ee For the amendment ••• leg Against it „, ..• ..• Majority against the ilendn3ent •••,---„ of 1 : ," Mr. FORSTER then moved the intro follo big clause:—" And be it enacted, that in c e i e volving matters of disputed account betweoe 0 1 4 tics it shall be lawful fur the j u dge of eg eb f ,sic court, if he see fit, to refer the examina ti°n - ci bi l r ; disputed matters of account to an accoubtot 1 ; 1 ; 0 11 fi ll e port thereon, and that the cost of such repot . o p of recoverable as costs in the suit, at the discrut,— judge." 'the ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected the and after some conversat i on it was w i t hdrawn. pilot!: Mr. MULLINGS then moved the insertion of I " he ing clause:—" And be it enacted, that the fees i ng - by barrien rs-at-law and attorneys said cow ts in cases brought within thej P u r r a i c e idiiie b i ll i r e rg by this Act, shall be as follows:—An attorneYyt entitled to h ave or recover a sum not exce eding ' den ".., his fees and costs, whtre the debt, damage' orer o r e el claimed in any plaint in covenant, debt, dot soy of sumpsit shall not exceed 35Z, or more thao 21. 5,,,a ' „f Case within the j uristJ • • • to • Act, ll' Ale j tenon given by t is we- b e o ease , shall any fee exceeding a/. Gd. be gl en , 0 empaiying a barrister or counsel in the cie s % eit v r expense of employing a barrister or e ttornef o tf! k‘ by plsititiff or defendant, shall not be allows and ation of costs unless by order of the judge' oi tin° t o judges of th e sa id courts respectively ircP artil bJ time determine in what cases such exPenees 5 allowed." 0 of ib Sir G. GREY h a d no o bj ect i on to the ineerii° of the el Mr.ause, which *es then agreed t the introdue t o of the ' 100 following clause:—"And whereas by the 4 °- ° , e d, i t es o f her presen t bl a j esty, here i n b e fote ree l ms y l enacted that th e j e d ge o f any coun ty court, what dg . orders consierbing the time times, an d - 11•01 1 . ,11- 1, or stalnients any debt or dare, gasa Cr costs. fo r t :Ti l lie P el e i merit shall be obtained inthesaid court, recoilf„ d e bt tn . ' be it (elected, that in any case where anY An n , 0 1 under this Act shall amount to more 016 - the psY -- ) ;i• patty against whom any order for et o f of of such debt shall be made, shall be h i „ el farra trade, business, or calling, subject to 1 " - s ee judg e 13 1 3 10 to bankrupts, it shall not be lawful fo a nt o f s uch I to ing such order to postpone the Por 3 rnot ith from beyond, the period of one calendar 0 4 lc time of making such order." es under If, The AT TORNEY•GENERAL j; vr g ,,d i n some A ws pe object to the clause unless it was innu e e' - ; CLAY an , After some further remarks from of relati; BAs", the clause was negatived. I trodutehe - eOl Mr. BROVIERTON then moyeucotuble iri d not ca tch, a clause, the purport of which we f e which was ulfimately withdrawn. , eduction Of Lord D. STUART moved the inir - w hich - fe ,• t clause to facilitate the service of sutnnio n3 f„"d pegs ° objected to by the ATToRNET.GENEnAL, 0" r ° without a division. .... e we Lord D. STUART then moved the introntube co os/ clause for the protection of offieerd ° f court in the discharge of their duty. a i sTORS After some objections made by the al' GENERAL, . Toe clause was negatived without a divie i°°• ef „ ger The preamble of the Bill w a s then agre e- O ught er which the House resumed, the report was d and the Btli, as ame n d e d ordered to be prinie • pastel , PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND .MUSEUM° ile a s f Mr. EwART, in moving that the House resolvwee of into Committe e u p on t hi s Bill , stated that tilt the measure w as t o ena bl e t h e i n h a bitants or her" which there was a population exceeding 10,000 ' ; p ro t the adva nteees o f tree l i brar i es an d mus eums. „et. tmieil that the t own counc il s h o uld have the samer, 01 w%s given them in the Bill for the establishnle,7 t he baths and witee-houees, but that the free consent :yertil ate - payers must first he obtainett. He had inade.s_tiono )11,e f at ions i n th e Bill, in ordee to meet the ob j et first opponents to the measure that he 1141 w en' I[l:n:die:ed. Tie inapir, upon the request of a 4 . 0 ber of the rate-papas for the estahiishMeUt : 0 00 library aucl museum, will be obliged to put eons he f were whe food don rem.; EiII. and thin! peg poop of t 01" frien pet ftJ —(L were the peo then in upon th of Scar the Rig positlor it as p , into Co Color tended 1 Mr. understi his inte Mr. the Bill olsitnies payers. the tens Payers. latter. for the jest, no cided by institute from the posed to should n As far a institutir 4,000 vol of a very rote for ing infor for Duru Mr. K that the] tion. Mr. S divide th house ha Principle Mr. Fi divided tl port him avid he m Mr.AV oppose ih Museums Caine act cea.ed to diffused c 'The. IL Fe The H NAL in tb Upon c Mr. BI Port prow ting es Bil The Co Fol Ag The Ch Mr. E% Wednesda Mr. LA Mr. LA I:s4ll:Q4fls: l i T elß2:Mtdil t dhtri :l ori w :hr e n:Yie a lgl3taili fl s tthi.ilwl o tr atinli' l For Agi , matted on