The Express.
London, England, 1846-09-28 00:00:00

I at') Intelligence.

COURT OF BANK RUPTCY.—SATIMDAY.
DECISION RESPECTING ARTICLED CLERKS.-011 Satur-
day, Mr. Ashurst, solicitor, attended before Mr. Commissioner
Shepherd, and complained that, in a matter of bankruptcy,
in which he was concerned, his articled clerk, a gentleman of
family and station, was not allowed to be heard. Mr. Com-
missioner Shepherd said the question of respectability
did not affect the matter in dispute. It was desirable that
uniformity of practice should be observed in all the courts,
and that there should be no encroachments upon the privi-
leges of the bar.
Mr. Ashurst said, the encroachments affected attorneys
who had practised for many years in this Court. The
judges allowed clerks to attend summonses, and without
replying upon his Honor, he would suggest that an articled
clerk was in a very different position from a mere clerk, inas-
much as the Court might require that he should register him-
self, and would always have a c introlling power over his ad-
mission, if he misconducted himself. The attorneys had
never experienced any interference or difficulty until the
gentlemen of the bar exhibited so much anxiety for the half-
guinea side motions.
Mr. Sturgeon remarked that, after that observation it
would be unfair to banisters to allow attorneys' clerks to
practise, unless banisters' clerks were also permitted to plead.
He had no doubt his clerks would be enabled to make many
side motions, if allowed to do se.
The Learned Commissioner decided that he could not dis-
turb the present practice of the Court, and Mr. Ashunt's
clerk was therefore not heard.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.-SATURDAY.
OLD COURT.—Before Mr. Justice Maul. and Mr. Baron Platt.
POST-OFFICE ROBBERY.—Mr. Bodkin applied to the
court for a remand until next session of the case of George
Norris Kernot, Postmaster, Raleigh, in Essex, who was
charged with stealing a letter, containing a bank note of 5/.
value. Mr. Chambers, who had poste the letter in which
the note had been enclosed, and who was, therefore, a
material witness, was not able to attend to give evidence
this session, and he hoped the court would let the case stand
over until the next sessions.—lt appeared that the grand
jury has not returned a true bill against the prisoner, in
consequence of the absence of Mr. Chambers, and in the
ordinary course of things he was entitled to be discharged ;
but was willing is give any reasonable amount of bail for his
future appearance.—Mr. Baron Platt : tinder these circum-
stances he thought it reasonable that the prisoner should be
discharged on bail, himself in 1001., and two sureties in 601.
each.
Tim POISON BERRIES.—John Hilliard was indicted for
the wilful murder of Thomas Parker, by administering to
him certain poisonous berries, called the deadly night-shade,
which he represented to him as good and wholesome food.
Mr. Bodkin stated the case on the part of the prosecution.
The prisoner got his living by selling different berries about
the streets. On the 15th of August he called at the beer-
shop kept by the deceased, in-Whitechapel, and offered
some of the berries for sale to his wife, representing them to
be wholesome, very sweet, and excellent things for pudding
or pie. She bought some, and made them up into a tart, of
which she and the deceased partook. They were both taken
very ill almost immediately afterwards. Medical assistance
was called in, but Parker died on the following day, and his
wife was ill for a considerable time afterwards.--Mrs. Maria
Parker, the widow of the deceased, and other witnesses were
called, whose evidence confirmed the statement made by the
learned eounsel.—Mr. Clarkson then addressed the jury on
the part of the prisoner, and contended that there was no
ground whatever for charging him with the dreadful crime
of murder, that his offence at the very utmost amounted to
manslaughter. He was so little aware of the poisonous
nature of the berries which he sold, that he ate some him-
self, and was ill for several days in consequence.—Mr. Baron
Platt summed up, and said that if the jury thought there
had been a culpable negligence on the part of the prisoner,
they were bound to find him guilty of manslaughter.—The
jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict of Man-
slaughter.—Mr. Baron Platt sentenced him to six months'
imprisonment and hard labour in the House of Correction.