The Express.
London, England, 1852-06-15 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

This court commenced Its sittings yesterday before the
Big:it Hon. the Lord Mayor, the Right Ron. the Re-
corder, ,Vd,enten Sir G. Carroll, Cha Sir W. R. Car
,l n, and Wily, Mr. Sheritl Coils cell, the Undershetitis,
Nli.iard and Ilmwood, &c. &C.
The first edition of the gad calendar contains the nouns
of 109 prisoners for trial at the present session.
The learned Recorder having briefly charged the grand
Jabez Burns, a Baptist minister, surrendered to take
his trial upon an indictment charging hint with wilful and
corrupt perjury.
Mr. Parry said the defendant, who was the minister of •
Blum Chapel, Marylebone, was in that capacity the suc-
cessor of the Rev. Thomas Gsrennap, who bring
possessed of property, charged his estate with au
annual payment of 914. for purposes connected
with the maintenance of the defendant's ministry, and
various aaritis; appointing Dr. Burns and a Mr. Mekin
trustees. By the
15w pf mortmain, such a deed of gift, to
be 'alit), should be executed!"- rii;:nths before the death of
the donor; the gift, also, should be )0;:l'Aele, ant ~.."1
tm-
mediately to the I arty in whose favour it was made. When '
atter the death of the donor his relativis became for the
first time aware of the existence of ouch a deed, they ap-
plied to the Court of Chancery to set it aside, on the
ground of fraud, as an evasion) the law of mortmain, it
being contended that neither party intended the gift to
pass at once, but it being understood between them that
it was not to come into force until after the donor's death.
The result of this •poeal to the Court of Chancery was that
the defendant was called upon to answer certain inter-
rogatories, and among others, one to ascertain whether any
agreement was really made between him and the deceased
that the provisions of the deed should not be enforced until
after Mr. Owennap's death. To this lest rrogatory the de-
fendant answered by declaring that no such agreement was
ever made, and it was upon this statement the present in-
dictment for perjury was founded.
This was the case represented for the prosecution.
An officer of the Court of Chancery
fe court, produced the evi-
dence of the dendant in that cou, in which he denied
the existence of any secret collusive agreement between him-
self and the donor.

Mr. East, a deacon of defendant's chapel, read a docu-
ment which he and defendant signed at the house and in
the presence of the late Mr. Owcnnap, a memorandum in
the text of which the defendant and witness admit that the
deed conveying moneys to the defendant and wants.. for
certain purposes has been devised to meet the legal diffi-
culties arising out of the Mortinaia Act, and that they per-
fectly understand that it is not to have effect during the
donor's life.

Mr. Ballantine, for the defence, contended that no cal.
deuce had been given to chow that when the deed was
signed there was any airreemi nt that it should not be en-
forced until after the death of the donor, and any arrange.
mcnt made after signature mi;;;,t fairiy V ascribed to the
proper feeling of the trustees.
A great number of highly respectable witncues were
called to speak to the defendant's character.
The Recorder summed up the case with great clearness
and impartiality, and the jury, after deliberating a short
time in the box, expressed u wish to retire.
They returned in about a quArter of an hour and gave a
verdict of Not Guilty.
Mr. Metcalf applied for the expenses of the prosecution.
' The Recorder would require time to consider the apple.
I cation. The defendant had not been committed by a
magistrate.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—YesmaDAy.
IItIPOLS Mt. Stlll/14011. ADAM.
THE WEE,: V MENAI'', SILL.

Mr. Ribton, on the part of Henry Broome, the prosecutor
in this case, applied to the Assistant Judge to send the last
indictment found at this court against the defendant to the
Central Criminal Court. The learned counsel stated that
an application had been made to the Court of Queen's
Bench for a certiorari ; but Lord Campbell refused that ap-
plication ; at the same time, however, he expressed an
opinion that it was a case that should be tried before one
of the judges at the Central Criminal Court. Renee the
present application.
The Assistant Judge said the proper course would be to
apply to a judge for an order to remove the indictment,
showing cause, and not to come to this court and ask him
to send it without assigning any cause at all.

THE POLICE COURTS.
MANSION•HOUSE.

Mrs. Lkyd appeared before Sir Peter Laurie, in answer
to the complaint of Mr. Thomas Flight, who a few days
ago suntuioned her up n the charge of having obtained
from hint the BUM of 315)!., under the icetence that the
securities she had to produce were ample, and under her
exclusive t ontrol. The evidence had been taken upon the
first examination, and yesterday was the day appointed by
the magistrate for the delivery of his opinion ou the merits
of the question. Mr. Flight's solicitor attended upon the
occasion.

Sir Peter Laurie said—l have examined the evidence and
the documents upon this subject, and given them the most
careful consideration. I think that the subject was one
which was properly brought forward, but 1 am satisfied
that the lady had no intention to commit frauu upon the
complainant. If any skill has been exercised in the affair
I do not think that mho is chargeable with having used it.
I believe that she borrowed the money without being con-
scious of having used any misrepresentation, and that she
considered the securities to be what she stated them to be,
ample. It appears to me, from the statement of the pro-
fessional ecnticman who drew up the settlement decal, that
there is property from which Mr. Flight's demand may be
I paid, and I hope that Mrs. Lloyd will pay the money as
soon as she can.

Mn. Lloyd assured Sir Peter Laurie that she had never
entertained the slightest intention of defrauding Mr.
Flight.
Sir Peter Laurie—l am of that opinion, and I discharge
the ease. _ . _

iT. Flight's attorney thanked the magistrate for the
trouble he had taken, and said that, upon the evidence
which bad been given, the complainant could not have
expected that a conviction could take place.
Mrs. Lloyd then withdrew.