The Express.
London, England, 1853-05-05 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 5, 1853.

ELECTION EXPOSURES
HARWICH.

When the committee met yesterday morning the
first witness called was

Adam Pratt, sea., who was examined by Sergcant King-
lake as to where his sou Adam now is, a Speaker's warrant
being Gut to compel his attendance on this committee.
The witnesesaid he saw his son on last Thursday. Wit-
ass left Harwich on Friday. He does not know where he
sw. The witness persisted in declaring he could not tell

where hie 80111 sow is, Igor could he ieli aiiy one who knew
where he le.

In reply to the committee he said be paid his son no
money at the period of the last election. His son boards
withhim, and is a brickmaker by trade.
Mrs. Maria Pratt, wife of the last witness, was also exa-
mined on the tame subject. She has not seen her son
Adam since last Wednesday night, nor has she seen him or
heard of him since then. She made no inquiry about him
since, nor does she know where he is.
Thomas Fuller, a builder at Harwich, said he saw Adam
Pratt, jun., lest Friday afternoon on his (witness's) pre-
mises *beat a quarter before five o'clock. That is only
about 160 yards from his (Pratt's) residence.
Oa noss-examination by Mr. Ballantyne, the witness said
Pratt, the father, had been In his ensl loyment before the
election, and for many yearshe (Pratt) voted for Wadding.
on and Peacock, and witness told him to go because he ex-
Mildile should have voted for Mr. Bagshaw. Witness had
ensetitnes on the other side himself. They don't
bufbour principle" at Harwich. (Laughter.) lie did
sot turn Pratt of, but he told hint to go.
Re-examined—The reason why he wished Pratt to leave
his employment was because he found Pratt had broken
his promise to vote for Mr. Begahawe. In point of fact,
Pratt, the elder, has not left witness's employ meat at all.
Hs is in his emp:oyment now, and has been all the time.
Prat, the younger, is alto in witness's employment, and
was wording with his father on some day last week.
James Hawthorne, an officer of the house, stated that he
went to serve the Speaker's warrant on the Pratt. and a
person named Jay, and he could not find Pratt the younger
nor Jay.
Mr. Alfred Hut. was next called by Mr. Serjeant King-
lake, and said he saw Jay in London on Friday and Saturday
last, but he does not know where he is now. Jay came tos
witness's lodgings. at the Ship in Chancery-lane. Wiwi=
was in this committee-room on Saturday, and heard the
case opened, and when he returned to his lodgings at the
Ship, when the committee rose, he found Jay there. Jay
said he was going into Berkshire to spend the Sunday with
some friends. Witness conversed with Jay on the proceed-
ings of the day before the committee. H.as no doubt he
mentioned Cottinghtm's case to Jay. Does not know
where he is now. Saw Adam Pratt, jun., at the Bell in
Harwich lately, but can't tell what day, nor does he know
where he is now.

Crose-examined—Jay told witness he was going into
Berkshire before this case was opened. The man Chisnall
did not vote at all at the lest election, as he was too late. It
was an understood thing between the two parties that the
bribery oath should not be put to any voters. Witness
never promised Chisnall or any other voter anythiag for his
vote, nor did any one else that he knows of. It is "an
abominable lie—thoroughly false," that Mr. Peacock was
in the street between three and four o'clock in the morning
(as sworn yesterday) with him (witness) and Danish and
Jay. He (witness) was in the street at that hour with
others, as he had been up all night watching lest any of
their voters should be carried away. It is not true that he
(witness) has been a party in any shape or way whatever
to bribe Adam Pratt or Nathan Chisnall, nor has he bribed
Osborne, Parkhurst, Sparrow, Lee, Johnston, or any other
voters. He had no hand, either directly or indirectly, in
bribing any voters.
John Neale, a labourer at Harwich, said he knew Chis-
nall well. lie saw Chisnall on the landing at the Bell on
the polling day. Haste, Payne, ;and Daniels were there,
and tried to get Chisnall down. Payne took Chisnall arm
in arm to the poll. Mr. Haste was on the other side of him.
After they had been to the poll Mr. Payne told them to go
to the Bell and have some beer. Chisnall then told without
he had got 101. while they were on their way to the Bell.
Chisnall was as sober then as he (witness) is now. They
stopped about an hour at the Bell, and when they went
away Chisnall was quite sober.
John Baker, who was examined yesterday, was recalled,
and said he knew Chisnall, and saw him in the street on the
polling day going to the hustings to vote for Mr. Bagshawe.
A party then came up, among whom were Derma, Haste,
Payne, Davide, and Clark ; they went round Chisnall, and
said, " Come along with us." Witness told Chisnall to go
to the poll and vote like a man. They told him to mind his
own business. They then tried to pull him with them.
They took Chinon with them. Witness afterwards saw
Chisnall at the hustings, and he said to Mr. Pownall, " For
God's sake come and put the bribery oath to this man."
Mr. Pownall did so, and Chisnall took the book in his hand,
holding down his head. Witness sung out, " Nathan, hold
up your head." Chisnall then looked up and said, " I can't
take the oath ;" and he then left the hustings. Witness saw
him afterwards at the Bell ; he was sober.
Cross-examined Does not know that his (witness's)
friends were trying to prevent Chisnall from voting for the
Blues; certainly Chisnall did not take the bribery oath; to
the best of his belief Chisnall did refuse to take the oath,
and used the words witness has already stated—" I can't
take the oath."
A witness named Wm. Aylett was examined as to seeing
a large number of persons perambulating the town on the
nomination night, partly distuised.
Baker was recalled to corroborate this witness's evidence,
and said he saw a voter named Osborne get something front
Daniels at the Three Cups inn, which he saw were bank
notes, but he could not tell how much. If he had been
able he would have "deuced" Osborne and seen what he
had got.
This witness, in crow-examination, caused a great deal of
merriment in the committee by a long rambling account ha
gave of an attempt to kidnap himself, as he called it, at
former elections at Harwich ; but it turned out that what
he meant by " kidnapping" was, that yeersons tried to bribe
the electors by promuing them a small sum of money, and
getting a much larger sum for themselves.
George Cooper examined—Witness is a voter. He pro-
mised Mr. &phew at the last election. He was canvassed
by Mr. Daniels to vote for Waddington and Peacocks.
Witness said if he (Mr. Daniels) would get his eon a situa-
tion, he would give one vote for his party. Mr. Daniels
gave no reply then, but he saw him afterwards. It was a
situation on a railway he asked for his son. His son came
up to London about the situation. He did not get the
situation then. Mr. Daniels afterwards " instructed" him
to vote for Waddington, as he thought Mr. Peacocke's elec-
tion was sure.
By the committee—The reason that induced him to vote
for Mr. Waddington was bemuse he was chairman of the
railway, but he had no promise of the kind.
The committee then agjoensed till this morning.

DEPUTATION FROM THE PEACE CONFER-
ENCE COMMITTEE TO THE EARL OF
CLARENDON.

A deputation from the Pease Conference Com-
mittee of London and Ma' ebessit Waited by appointment
on Lord Clarendon at the Foss iesilllms yesterday, at four
o'clock. It consisted of the (awls* gentlemen: Joseph
Hume, F,sq., M.P. Richard Cobden, Esq., M.P.; Charles
Hindley, Esq., hi.P. ; William Ewart, Esq, M.P.; James
Bell. Esq., M.P. ; Edward Baines, Esq., Leeds ; William
Rawson, Esq., Manchester; G. W. Alexander, Esq., Lon-
don; William Edwards, Esq. ; Charles Gilpin, Esq.; Dr.
John Morland, Esq. ; Joseph Cooper, Esq. ; Frederick
Tuokett, Beq. ; Alexander Brockway, Esq. ; Henry Richard,
Esq., itc. The object of the deputation was to present to
his lordship a memorial in favour of introducing into the
treaties now pending between this country and the United
States a stipulation providing for the adjustment of any
differences that may hereafter arise between the two
countries, by referring the matter in dispute to the decision
of arbitrators. The memorial stated that the subject
had been brought under the attention of the American
government by gentlemen in that country interested
in the question, and that both the senate and
the executive of the States had signified their entire willing-
ness to adopt such a stipulation, if those conducting the
negotiation on the part of the British government would
concur in the measure.
Mr. CoBDEN, in introducing the deputation, stated that
they represented the committee appointed at the conference
held in Manchester in January, to watch over and promote
ia every practicable way the cause of international peace.
As they understood by what lately fell front his lordship in
the House of Lords that very important treaties were now
being negotiated between this country and America, they
thought it a suitable time to urge the introduction into
them treaties of a clause, binding the contracting parties to
refer their differences to arbitration.
The Earl of CLARENDON replied that of course it was no
secret that negotiations of an important nature were pend-
ing between the two governments, which, if suenuful,
would place our relations with the United States on a
more reasonable and satisfactory footing. A very friendly
feeling had been displayed by the American government.
On the general question he could only say, that none of
the gentlemen forming the deputation could feel more
strongly than himself the desirableness of maintaining pacific
relations ; indee.i, as being more responsible, he might be na-
turally even more anxious than they. The only question was
as to the best means of preserving peace. He was not quite
convinced that the insertion of the clauses proposed would
have that effect. Re thought that the spirit of the age, the
improved feelings and good sense of mankind, of those to
whom governments are obliged to defer more than they
hail done—constituted a better:guarantee for the preserve-
-1 tion of peace than written engagements. Events bad oc-
curred in modern times without disturbing the peace of
the world, which at any other epoch in history would have
inevitably led to war. Every day that peace was preserved
rendered war more unlikely.
Mr. Hums remarked that arbitratirn was already adopted
in practiee,and mentioned several instanceswithin his memory
in which international disputes had been settled by refer-
' once to neutral authorities. His own idea was, that the
introduction of a clause to that effect into treaties would be
very valuable, as showing the animus and disposition of
the governments to preserve peace, by stipulating to do that
which was now often done without such stipulation.
Lord CLattr.soox saw so objection to the proposal,
viewed in that light ; but as the question was rather a novel
one, he could say no more at present, than promise to give
the matter his earnest consideration.
Mr. COBDEN stated that the Committee on Foreign Re-
lations had recently presented to the American Senate a
report recommending the Congress te advise the President
to secure a stipulation in favour of arbitration in ail treaties
hereafter entered into with foreign nations; and such being
the case, he hoped our own government would not
hesitate to meet the proposal in the same friendly dispo-
title&

Lord CLARENDON expressed his wish to see that doe--
meet (a copy of which Mr. Cobden premised to send to
him.)
The deputation then withdrew.

SPORTING.
CHESTER SPRING MEETING.
CONCLUSION OF TUESDAY'S RACES.
OPTIONAL SELLING STARES of 5 SOTS. each, with 30
added, for 3-yr.olds and upwards ; the winner to he sold for
150 sovs. ; allowances if to be sold for less; winners extra.
11 mile. (6 subs.)
Mr. Darling, jun.'s Welsh Harper, 4yn (301.),
Bst 41b (Whitehouse) 1
Mr. Munro's Mayfly, 3 yes (301.) (T. Cliff) 2
Mr. Merry's Sally, 4 yes (301.), Bst 4th (Mallow) 3
Mr. Read's Flying Buck, 3 yes (301.), 6at 10Ib
(Aldcroft) 4
Betting.-7 to 4on Sally, 4to 1 agst any other. Welsh
Harper held the lead throughout, and wen easily by •
length and a half. A length between second and third.
The winner was afterwards sold for 841., the fund thereby
realising 541.
TUE SETTING-ROOM AT NIGHT.'
During the early part of the evening Trifle and Peggy
again ruled the market—nothing else was thought of.
Gradually, however, a strong disposition was manifested to
lay against the latter, and to back Lord Lieutenant. The
movement had ultimately the effect of depressing Peggy to
9 to 1, and placing Lord Lieutenant on the vantage ground,
Bto 1 being the highest offer against him at the close-9 to
1 taken. The quotations at midnight were as follows :
CHESTER CUP.
3 to 1 eget Trifle (7 to 2t)
8 to 1 Lord Lieutenant (9 to 1t)
9to 1 Peggy
14 to 1 Lady Evelyn
100 to 6 Newminster (t and off)
100 to 6 Talfourd (t and off)
20 to 1 Black Doctor (100 to 6 also taken)
20 to 1 Missive (t and off)
30 to 1 Boarding School Min filly (t)
33 to 1 Little Jack (t)
35 to 1 Contentment (t)
40 to 1 Indian Warrior
40 to 1 Snowdon Dunhill (t)
60 to 1 Goldfinder (t)
900 to 15 Roealba (t)
1000 to 15 Pelion (t)
DERBY.
14 to 1 agst Cineas (t)
WEDNESDAY'S RACES.
The densely crowded streets testified to the undiminished
popularity and attraction of the Chester Cup. The vicinity
of the betting-room was completely obstructed, and so great
was the increasing throng of visitors that the " rows "
were rendered almost impassible.
Until noon special trains arrived in rapid succession,
but so efficient were the arrangements at the railway sta-
tion, and so ably were they carried out under the superin-
tendence of the station muter, Mr. Critchley, that disorder
and confusion were effectually avoided.
The scene on the Roodee was of the most animated and
striking description. The Grand Stand and Dee Stand were
chokeful, and swarms of spectators clustered on the slopes
and walls, and filled the windows of the neighbouring
houses. The weather was all that could be desired for the
occasion. The preparations for the start for the cup were
regarded with the most eager curiosity, and the preliminary
centers of the competitors were watched with intense inte-
rest. The drawing of lots for places was judiciously discon-
tinued. The start was, however, so unfairly made, that it
is to be hoped that the disapprotation which was expressed
will at length prove to Mr. Topham the necessity of having
the responsible duties of the office properly discharged in
future. After much tedious delay, which considerably
heightened the prevailing excitement. the flag was finally
lowered, and the race commenced. The result was unex-
pectedly favcedable to the " fielders," Goldfinder, the win-
ner, never having figured either frequently or conspicuously
in the betting.
HELTER SMELTER HANDICAP of 5 SOTS. each, with 30
added. Second to save his stake. T.Y.C. (10 subs.)
Lord Chesterfield's c by The Emperor—Begun),
3 yes, fist 81b (Ashman) 1
Mr. Phillips's f by California—Miss Kitty Cockle,
2 yes, 4st Blb (carried 51t) (T. Cliff) 2
The following also ran : The Gift; British Farmer, King
David, Evening Star, Fairplay, and Dressmaker.
SECOND YEAR OF TUE SECOND TRIENNIAL PRODUCE
STAKES of 10 eon. each, h ft, with 30 added; for 3 yr-
olds ; colts, gat 91b; fillies, Bst bib ; those by. untried stal-
lions or out of mares which never bred a winner allowed
31b; both, 61b. From the Castle Pole, once round and in.
(8 subs.)
Mr. J. Osborne's Mocassin, Bst 61b (I Oiborne) 1
Mr. Stevens's Damn= (late Hayman), B,t 91h
(Marlow) 2
Mr. Worthington's Jaquenetta, Bst 21b (Bramwood) 3
Betting: 6 to 4on Mocassin, who won easily by a length.
Bad third.
TRADESMEN'S PLATE, of 200 sore., in specie, added to a
handicap sweepstakes of 26 soya. each, 15 ft ; second to re-
ceive 60 eon. out of the stakes, and the third to lave his
stake ; extra weight for winners. Cup Course, about two
miles and a quarter. (218 subs, 85 of whom declared.)
Mr. Palmer's Goldfinder, by Faugh a Baliagh,
6 yea, 7st 61b (Aldcroft) 1
Mr. Knowles's Talfourd, 3 yes, fist 61b (including
1011, extra) (Ashman) 2
Mr. T. Parr's Trifle, 4 j (b b), Est 121 b ..(Wells) 3
The following also ran:—Little Jack, Retail, New-
minster, Lady Evelyn, Leopold, Indian Warrior, The
Black Doctor, Timid Fawn, Bellewstown, lanthe, Scare-
crow, Constantine, Missive, Snowdon Dunhill, Peggy,
Helena, Hannah, Contentment, Lord Lieutenant, Auchiu-
leck, Guicower, Roealba, Ann Page, Braxey, Allegro.
King of Trumps was struck out at 12.5 p.m., Montague
at 2 p.m.
Betting : 3 to 1 agst Trifle, 6 to 1 agst Talfourd, 7to 1
eget Peggy, 12 to 1 agst Missive, 10 to 1 agst Lord Lieute-
nant, 15 to 1 agst Newminster, 15 to 1 agst Little Jack, 16
to 1 eget Black Doctor, 20 to 1 agst Lady Evelyn, 30 to 1
agst Contentment, 30 to 1 agst Guldfinder. After a delay
of upwards of 20 minutes, a very straggling start was made,
several horses being so far in the rear that they bad no
chance of making up lost mound. Timid Fawn took the
lead, with Scarecrow second, and Talfourd third, Trifle, Re-
tail, Goldfinder, Snowdon Dunhill, and Lord Lieutenant,
being is front of the ruck—Peggy a long way behind them.
After rounding the turn into the Dee side of the course,
Trifle took third place, Talfourd, Lsrd Lieutenant, Retail,
Missive, and Goldfinder heading the next lot. Ac the
lower turn Scarecrow was in full possession of the lead,
with Trifle second, Timid Fawn third, Talfourd, Lord
Lieutenant, and Goldfiader well up. No change of
moment occurred in these positions until they re-entered
the further side of the course, when Lord Lieutenant drew
into the third place, but at the T.Y.C. post he dropped off,
and the race from this point was with Trifle, Talfourd,
Scarecrow, and Goldfinder. Scarecrow gave way at the
Grosvenor Post. Trifle was beaten at the distaace. Gold-
finder then challenged Talfourd, and a fine race with the
two ended in favour of Goldfinder by half a neck, the
second beating the third by a length. Scarecrow was
fourth. Constantine fell.
SIXTY GUINEAS (clear), the gift of the members for the
city, added to a sweepstakes of 3 sows. each; the latter to go
to the second horse; 3-yr-old colts, 6st 121 b, fillies, Sat 10lb ;
4-yr-old colts, Bst 61b, fillies, Set 31b. Once round and a
distance.
Mr. Gulliver's Chilton, 3 yes (Crouch 1
Mr. Dawson's Le bent, 4 yes (T. Lye 2
Mr. Flintoff's Whalebone, 3 yes (We 3
The following also ran :—The Miler, The judge, Game
Tommy, Whittsogton, Landscape, sad John Bull.
SCRAMBLE HANDICAP Of 5 son. each, with 30 added, for
all ages ; the winner to be sold for 80 son. (7 subs.)
Mr. Dawoon's Ads, 3 yes, fist 51b.... (Waddington) 1
Mr. Morris's Margaret of Anjou, 3 yes, 6st 1016
(Hiett) 2
Mr. Darling's, Jun., Welsh Harper, 4 yrs, Bst 71b
(Whitehouse) 3
The following also ran: Mire Hill, Ganymede, and
Mushroom.
Betting: 6 to 4 agst Ada, 4 to 1 eget Margaret of Anjou.
Won by half a neck ; half a length between second and
third.
(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
HER MAJESTY'S PLATE of 100 gs. ; 3-yrs-old, 7st 21b ;
four, 9st 21b ; five, 10st ; six and aged, 10st :51b. Thrice
round. _

Audubon, 3 yrs
Massaroni, 3 yrs 2
Deerhound, 3 yn
Nine ran. Even betting on Audubon.
ASCOT HEATH.

-
NOMINATIONS PO THZ ASCOT STAILIB.—T.O miles and
a halt—Gossamer, 4yn ,• Lord Fauconberg, 3 yrs ; Father
Thames, 4 yrs; Joe Miller, 4 yrs; Cardinal Wiseman, 5
yrs; Bird on the Wing, 4yn ; Little David, 3 yrs ; Lucio,
4 yrs; E eot, 4 yrs; Nancy, 6 yrs; Convulsion, 4yn ;
Break o' Day Boy, 3yn ; Rackapelt, 3 yrs ; Denique, 4
re; Miss Tennyson, 3 yrs; Chief Justice, 6 yrs; Lady
Evelyn, aged ; Jacqueline, 3 yes ; Buckthorn, 4 yrs ; Ire-
land'i Eye, 3yn ; Lamartine, 6yn ; Harbinger, 4 yrs;
&atlas, 3yn ; Chief Baron Nicholson, 4 yrs ; Montague,
aged ; Waterfall, 5 yrs; Octavio', 4 yrs; lanthe, 6 yes;
Mayor of Hull, 3 yrs ; Phantom, 4 yn ; Leopold, 4 yrs ;
Daniel O'Rourke, 4 yrs; Hurworth, 3 yn; Songstress, 4 yn ;
Ariosto, yn ; Waverley, 4 yn ; Black Doctor, 6 yrs ;
Gavotte, 3 yrs; Azael, 4 yn ; Extasy, 3 yn ; Gerforth,
6 yn ; King of Troy, 4 yrs ; Nutshell, 6 yn ; Nutpeeker,
3 yn ; Nervous, 3 yrs; Audubon, 3 7n; Hirsute, 4 yrs ;
Aline, 4 yn ; King Pepin, 4 yn ; Hothorpe, 5 yrs ;
Poodle, 4 yn ; Knight of the Shire, 4 yrs ; Tavistock,
3 yrs; Babette, 4 yrs ; Jack-the-Giant-Killer, 3 yrs ; Alp,
aged ; Merry Bird, 4 yrs ; Erycthon, 3 yrs; Puritan, 4 yn ;
Lady Emily, 3 yrs ; Trifle, 4 yn ; Defiance, 4 yrs ; Red
Lion, 4 yrs ; The Italian, 6 yrs ; Ruseborough, 6 7n ;
Mary Aislabie, 3 yn ; Don Quixote, 3 yrs ; Sir
John Barleycorn, 4 yrs ; Ammonia, 4 yn ; Toosey,
3 yrs ; Follew-me-Lads, 6 yn • Tartuffe, 3 yrs;
Ethelwolf, 4 yrs ; Little Davie, 4 yin; Sleeping Partner,
6 yrs ; Nonsuch (h b), 4 yrs ; Pancake, 4 yrs ; Caurire,
aged ; Creams (late Dacony), 3 yrs ; Talfourd, 3 yrs ; In-
dian Warrior, 4 yrs ; Lord Lieutenant, 3 yrs; Kingston,
4 yrs; Master Norton, 3 yrs; Ben Nevis, 4 yrs; Herbert,
aged; Grey Tommy, 4 yrs; Nabob, 4 yrs; c by Cother-
stone out of Lucy Banks, 3 yrs ; Line, 3 yrs; Hazel, 4 yrs ;
Mountain Deer, 5 yrs ; Sharavogue, 4 yrs.
IFES.
is LEWES Hawnicar.
and a half.

ACCEPTANCNS TOR Ti
One mile ,
Age. st. lb. Age. st. lb.
Madame Whir- The Handsome
ton
Don Pedro 5 712 Nonsuch (h b) .. 4 7 3
Worthless

Emu intelltgatte.

EQUITY counTs.—YESTERD 11r.
&FORS TVS MAST{{ 4.1 THU ROLLIN

TUI ATTOB.NET-GEVERAL r. Sr. ClloBb HUSP IT kL.
- •

-•
Attorney-General said this suit was instituted for
the reformation and better management of the charity
known by the minis of the Hospital of St. Cross, near Win-
chester. This charity was so ancient, that even early in the
twelfth century it was regarded as an ancient tution.
It was then re-established by Henry de Blois Bishop_
_d
Winchester, brother to King Stephen. The charter which
he executed to the Brethren and Masters of St. John of
Jerusalem is still extant, bearing date 1151, cud t.s was
the foundation of the charity as it now exists, although
most materially diverted or perverted from its ancient
objects. This charter stated that " the service and consti-
tution appointed by me is this: thirteen poor impotent men
and so reduced in strength se rarely or never to be able to
support themselves without the assistance of another, shall
remain permanently in the hospital, to whom
shall be given necessary garments provided by the prior
of the house, and be as suitable to their infirmities ;
also good wheaten bread to the amount of five measures
daily, with three dishes for dinner and one for supper, and
sufficient drink. If, however, it should happen that any
of these recover his strength, he shall be dismissed with
decency and respect, and another shall be introduced in
his room. Besides which 13 pocr men 100 other poor men
of good conduct, and of the more indigent, shall be re-
ceived at the hour of dinner, to whom shall be given
craiser bread of the same weight as above, and one dish, as
shall seem meet, according to the convenience of the day,
and a cup of the measure aforesaid, and who, when they
rise (rein dinner, shall be permitted to take away whatever
shall remain of the meat and drink. We further enjoin you
compassionately to impart other assistance according to the
means of the house, to the needy of every description. All
these things, I, with the assistance of the Divine Grace,
have appointed to be observed in the aforesaid house of God
for ever, to be continually and faithlully fulfilled by you,
but preserving in all things the canonical jurisdiction of the
Bishop of Winchester, that the appointment and udminis-
tration of the prior of the said hospital may be by the
hands of the said bishops; and that the rents, together
with all the appurtenances bestowed upon the said
hospital by me, may remain without disturbance or misap-
plication fur the purposes of the hospital, among which ap-
eurtenances we bays thought it right to enumerate the fol-
lowing by their proper names :—Tbe churches of Fareham,
of Nutscbaling (Nusling), of Merebrook, of Telford, of
Hinton, of Alweretoke, of Exton, of Hussebourn, of Whit-
church, of Chilboltoo, of Widney, of Oulton, of Wintney,
of Stuctone, of Ovington, with all their appurtenances and
appendages, and the tithes of the demesne of Waltham, and
other rents assigned to them in the city of Winton. And if
any person hereafter shall take unto himself to appropriate
or diminish the said rents, or to disturb or deteriorate the
statutes and customs of the aforesaid houses of God, which
have been confirmed by the authority tat the Holy See and
of the King, let him incur the anger of Almighty God, and
of the Bishop of Winchester, and of all good men, unless
he shall study to amend his fault by fitting satisfaction.
But to you and your successors, benefactors of the
poor, while you preserve our constitutions with
out breach, may there be peace and mercy from
the Lord Jesus Christ." That was the original
charter of foundation, from which it appeared that the pos-
sessions of the hospital were to be applied to 13 poor men,
who were to live in the house, and 100 poor men were to
be fed, and that assistance was to be afforded "to the
needy of every description." It appeared that the next
bishop raised a question with the master and brethren of
St. John of Jerusalem as to their right to the guardian-
ship of the hospital, he claiming it as Bishop of Winchester,
and there was still extant a charter in the flarleian collec-
tion, executed at Dover in 1185, in the presence of Henry
11., Praclius, patriarch of Jerusalem, the Justiciary Glan-
ville, and others, by which the patronage of the hospital
was transferred back by tho prior to the Bishop of Win-
chester, who added 100 poor men to the 113, so that 200
persons might be fed, and 13 persons fast, lodged, and
clothed in the hospital. Notwithstanding this charter of
1185 the master and brethren of St. John of Jerusalem
were anxious to recover the guardianship of the institution
for themselves, and accordingly, in 1189, King Richard 1.
granted a charter of that date, granting the custody of this
hospital with its appurtenances again to the toaster and bre-
thren of St. John of Jerusalem. However in 1197 the disputes
between these parties still going on, the matter was referred
to the Pope, Pope Celestin, and by him referred to the
Bishops of London and Lincoln and the Abbot of Reading,
and they by their award declared the guardianship of the
hospital to be in the Bishop of Winchester, and accordingly
since that time it had so remained so far as that the Bishop
of Winchester had had and exercised the power of appoint-
ment of the master. Things need still till 1336. At that
time John de Ndyngdon, who was nephew of William de
Edyngdon, the then Bishop of Winchester, was master of
the hospital, and he had become the incumbent of a living
,at Cheridoo' and the question was raised whether or not
he could hold
the two things together, it being alleged that
' they were both religious benefices. Accordingly a commis-
sion was issued by the Bishop of Winchester, no doubt a
friendly commission, to ascertain whether the master-
' ship was for the cure of souls, and the commies
lion found that it had not the cure of souls,
and, in consequence, William de Edyngdon continued to
hold his office of master; and it appeared that his object
was to make the hospital and its revenues his own. So the
matter stood till the time of William of Wykeham, who,
when he was Bishop of Winchester, found that the charity
had been grossly abused, and had been perverted to the ad.
vantage of the masters. In Lowth's Life of William of
Wykeham, an account was given of the efforts of that
eminent man to reform abuses, as particularly exemplified
in reference to St. Cross Hospilal. It was there stated that
" the revenues of the hospital appeared—by an old record of
inquisition, produced in Wykcham's time by the Prior of
Winchester, from the archives of his monastery, without
date—to have amounted to 2501. oer annum ; but they are
said by WykeLam, in his letters to the Pope, to be above
3001. per annum, and are proved by the testimony of one who
had been long steward of the hospital, and many others, to
have been at that time above 7001. per annum. The whole

revenues of the hospital were free from all taxes both to the
King and Pope, u being wholly appropriated to the poor,
except 71. 4s. 6d., called elsewhere 81. per annum, which
was the valuation of the prior's, or master's, portion."
The Muter of the Rolls—What is the earliest time in
which there is an account of the income of the charity ?
The Attorney-General—He does not say, but it is in

Wykeham's time.
Sir F. Kelly—Have you the document ?
The Attorney-General—They say they have not got it.
The Muter of the Rolls—Then I cannot regard it. The
manner in which the revenues were distributed at that time
may be material.
The Attorney-General—The work proceeded to state that
Wykeham represented to the Pope that some of the former
bishops of Winchester had preferred their nephews and
kinsman not rightfully as to the mastership of an hospital,
but as to, an ecclesiastical benefice, who had converted to
other purposes the revenues of it assigned to these pious
uses. In this, it was stated, " he seems to have a particular
view to John de Edyngdon, nephew to the late bishop, who
had quitted the mastership some time before Wykeham
came to the bishopric. By his manner of leaving this office,
we may pretty well judge how he had acted in it. He took
away and alienated the whole stock belonging to the hoe-
pital—all the cattle, corn, goods, instruments, utensils, and
moveables whatsoever, either in the house itself or upon the
estates. Besides, the necessary repairs of dilapidation* left
by him amounted by computation to between 3001. and
4001." South went on to state that Wykeham was no
sooner bishop than he resolved to rectify these abuses.
William de Stowell, Edyngdon's successor, fore-
seeing the storm, procured the rectory of Burgh-
dere in exchange for his mastership. Wykeham
allowed the exchange, but ordered him to make a full in-
ventory of all the stock and goods belonging to the hospital.
Stowell obeyed, and Wykeham then issued a commission
to inquire into the state of things at the time of the death
of Richard de Luteshull the late muter, and what
stock of goods his executors delivered to his successor,
John de Edyngdon. Lyntesford, who had exchanged with
de Stowell, and succeeded as muter, in his turn exchanged
with Roger de Clowns for the rectory of Campsall. Wyke-
ham then issued a commission to inquire into the particulars
and value of the true and accustomed stock and goods be-
longing to the hospital, as they ought to be transmitted
from master to muter. Upon the report of the commission
the bishop summoned the four masters, Edyngdon, Stowell,
Lyntesford, and Clowne to appear before him at Southwark.
He represented to them the design of the foundation of the
hospital ; that the whole revenues of it aro to be applied to
the use of the poor except the master's allowance, taxed at
71.45. 6d. and no more; and that the master of the hospital
is obliged yearly to make an inventory, and give an account
of his administration to his diocesan according to the con-
stitution of Clement V., " quia contingit," &c., that the
mastership is not a perpetual ecclesiastical benefice, but a
temporal office requiriug continual residence and personal
ministry; that, therefore, he would proceed against them,
enforce the said constitution, and compel all and every one
of them to make an inventory, and give an account of their
administration. They pleaded that they were not obliged, nor
was it ever the custom to do so. Roger de Clowm's plea in
particular was, that the house of St. Cross was a perpetual
ecclesiastical benefice, sinecure, free from all obligation of
making oath, giving an inventory, or rendering an account;
that it was principally founded for the honour and worship
of God, and that the muter had the free administration of
all the goods and poese-sions belonging to it, with the bur-
then only of making a certain distribution to a certain
number of poor both within and without the house—the
very answer that his such seer, the Earl of Guilford, was
new making 500 years afterwards in this Lilt. William of
Wykeham then issued a commission, consisting of the Prior
of Merten and others, and proceedings were instituted against
the four masters, which resulted ia Stowell signing a sub-
Derision in December, 1372, in which be stated that "the
stock and goods of the said hospital are for the use of the
poor, and are not to be converted to other purposes, except for
the moderate support of the muter." Lynteeford also
pirated a submission in the same terms on the 6th January,
1373, and sentence was pronounced by the commissioners
against De Clowne, stating that the mastership had al-
ways been given to secular clerks, and that the masters
,were bound to take an oath, and make an inventory. De
Clowne, who was then master, appealed to Pope Gregory,
who issued a bull in 1373, addressed to the Bisho; of Lon-
don, who deputed the inquiry to Thomas de Bake ton before
whom evidence was taken. Amongst other witnesses was
the then steward of the hospital, who stated that " the
porlicm of the muter is fixed at 8/. a year, ant no more,
so that all the other goods of the hospital shall bitsehverted
to the use of the poor, and that it is not an ectlesiutical
benefice, and that it has been governed by temporary clerks
' or wardens thereof." Then the decrees of Bakttoo stated
" that the aforesaid house was and is a hospital for •

master and 11 poor het t'aen ti he Wised and fed, and for
100 pew ni n to receive heed from tlio of the Loepi•
tat, Neel that the aforesaid h apical ought not to confer any
benefice, that it has Leen governed by secular clerks, ea
vendee., and that the ma-ter is bound to make au inven•
tory aft i hike an Bath." It also stated that there were in
the hospital one master and four priests, and that after
providing for their maintenance, all the other goods of the
Inspirit ought to be charitably distributed That decree con-
cluded the litigation. He now came to a,.other charity,which
was engrafted on this by Cardinal Beaufort, who chartered
and erg .w it another hospital within the precincts of the
hospital .4 St. Cross, which he entitled " the house of
noble poverty." They had not the original grant, hut they
lad a deed dated 3rd January, 1445,whsch recited that Car-
dinal B. aufurt, with the assent of Thomas Forest, Muter
of the hospital of St. Cross, and of the frethree of the said
hospital, hod founded within in precincts a certain alms-
house, called " the House of Noble Poverty," consisting of
two priests, 35 brethren, and three sisters, under the go-
vernment of the said Master and his successors, and had
imposed upon them certain statutes, observances, and de-
votion., fur the good of his foul, and had, by the license of
the King, granted to the Master and brethren, and their
successors, for ever, very many possesaions, including the
parish church of Crandele, reserving 10 masks yearly to
the vicar of the said church, and 10 marks yearly to the
prior and convent of t'...e church of the cardinal
at Winchester. By another deed, dated the 24th July,
1416 further events were made, including the church of St.
Faith, near Winchester; the hospital of nt. John of For-
dingridge, the free chapel of Echarswell, the free chapel of
Cold Henley, and also the free chapel of St. James, in
Winchester. The commissioners went on to say, The
intentions of Cardinal Beaufort do not appear to have been
fully carried into effect in his lifetime, although he restored
and greatly enlarged the building for the reception of the
additional number of inmates which he contemplated. His
successor to the bishopric, William de Waynfiete, procured
from Henry I. a charter in the 33rd year of his reign,
whereby, after reciting that the King, in consideration of
13,350 marks, had parted to, or to the use of, Cardinal
Beaufort (then deceased) certain manors and lands (therein
mentioned), with license to the cardinal to assign the same
to the master and brethren of St. Cross Hospital, which he
had done, and they were Belted of the same ;
that it ern the intention of Cardinal Beaufort
to found an almshouse within the precinct of the hospital of
St. Cross for 2 chaplains, 35 poor men, and 3 women, but
that it had not been established. The charter then went
on to etre that the King had empowered the Bishop of
Winchester to found the hospital, with power to make rules
and ordinances as to the manner of choosing the governor
or keeper, and the governance of the house. The commis-
sioners further stated that it appeared from an instrument,
stated in the life of Bishop Waynfiete to have been executed
by hiss on the 2nd August, 1846, that the charity had
been so stripped during the civil wars of the possessions
conferred on it by Cardinal Beaufort, that it was impossible
his intentions could be fulfilled, and the Bishop there-
fore directed that with what remained one chaplain
and two brethren only should be maintained. It
must be remarked that from this charter Bishop
Waynete alone was empowered to make regula-
tions, and he and his successors were appointed to
name the chaplain's brethren and sisters. He now came to
a matter of importance in this case. A suit had been insti-
tuted in the reign of Elisabeth against the Hospital .for
first-fruits and tenths, and the Hospital pleaded that the
revenues of the Hospital were all applied to the use of the
poor, and that in consequence bye statute of Elizabeth they
were exempt. The court sent a command to the Bishop of
Winchester directing hint to search his register, by which
he might ascertain the truth of the allegation. The bishop
sent • certifteate that he had searched his register, and he
hand that the said house or hospital was founded, and the
possessions thereof used, for the relief of the poor. Where-
upon the court adjudged that the hospital was discharged
Intone payment of first-fruits and tenths. It appear'
that, notwithstanding all the attempts to keep the revenues
under control, the tendency to abuses revived, and the re-
venues were again converted by the masters to their own
uses. la consequence of this an act was passed in the 18th
of Elizabeth which recited that one Reynolds, the master of
the hospital, had leased the lands at an under value, and
that there was a secret trust between him and the Inns
whereby he received part of the benefit. The act dealing
these leases void, and declared that neither the master an
the brethren should have power to turn the feuds d Ace
hospital from their original uses. Notwinablesind Ob.
however, it appeared that is the weak* emelelei
the master and brethren took upon themeden
to alter the destination and distribution of dmn
funds, and to establish every thing on a different fee in
Boa. la 1696, a document was drawn up which had=
by the name of the Consetudinarium, which had been
upon to justify the departure from the ancient terms and
conditions of the foundation. It was dated the 10th July.
1696, and it began by reciting that it was drawn up by the
master and brethren. It recited that upon strict and dili-
gent search no statutes could be found to direct the govern-
ment and regulation of the hospital, but that the same was
now governed by custom and usage ; that differences had
arisen between die master and brethren for remedy whereof,
and, to prevent all future differences, the master and
brethren had mutually agreed that the customs and
usages thereafter written down had been the cus-
toms and usages by which the hospital had been
governed ; and that inasmuch as the Bishop of
Winchester had been the patron and visitor of the same,
they beseeched him to ratify the saute. Then followed the
customs and usages, which, amongst other things, stated
that the master received all the profits and revenues thereof,
out of which he bore the whole charges of the house, and
that if there was any overplus he had the right to retain it
himself, that he had the right to keep the common seal of
the Hospital, and with it, in the common hall, to seal all
leases and other documents, and that he had the tight to
the perwroal estate of every brother dying 'whether such
goods were in the possession of the perms so dying or in
the posses ion of any other person ; and that he had the
right to appoint the chaplain and steward of the Use.
pital ; that upon the sealing of each renewal of as
each brother was to have 2d. in the pound on the
paid for the renewal, and that the whole fines of emboli
estates had been paid to the master for his own support
He now came to the important consideration, what wee the
existing condition of the charity. It appeared that tbe
annual income from the reserved rents amounted to 1,3661.,
but the system of letting the property of this hos-
pital, which consisted for the most part of very valuable
tithes, had been to let it upon leases upon lives, renewable
by fines, and it appeared that if instead of being let on this
system the property was let at rack rent, the income of the
charity would be at least 10,0001. per annum.
The property of the original foundation of St. Cross
Hospital would yield 6,0001. a year, and that of the second
founlation was worth 4,0001. a year, and in the nurse of
the last century there had been received in fines, and ap-
propriated to the use of the muter, the sum of 46,0461.
The present master, the Earl of Guilford, was appointed
in 1808, but it so happened that the previous master was
for some years prior to his death in a state of incompetency
from imbecility or insanity to execute any licenses, the con-
sequence of which was that there was a considerable accu-
mulation when Lord Guildford got the office. Therefore
be might take it that Lord Guildford bad received 45,0001.,
and of that sum 5,0001. or 6,0001. had been expended in re-
pairs. Besides this, 1,0881. of the annual income was con-
sumed by the ordinary expenses of the charity. Now there was
no doubt that this charity, with this income of 10,0001. per
annum, was capable of being applied to most important and
useful purposes, and what they asked his Honour to con-
sider and decide was whether the charity was entitled to the
whole of this fund, subject to such allowances as the court
should think the master was entitled to. It would be said,
no doubt, that Lord Guildford had done no more than his
predeceseen, and that he had acted in conformity with the
consetudinarium; and, not only that, but that there was
high authority for saying that the master was not subject to
any jurisdiction of this court, and that he was entitled to
dispose of the surplus of these revenues as he
thought proper. An opinion of Lord Stowell's would
be brought under consideration. It seemed the question was
brought before hint as to whether it was an ecclesiastical
benefice or not, and he gave his opinion that it was. The
answer to that was, that he had not the whole of the case
before him. No doubt it was the fact, that for several
centuries the mastership of this hospital had been conferred
upon ecclesiastical persons, and it would be argued
that the Crown had exercised its right, on the pro-
motion of the master to the hospital to be a bishop,
to present to the vacant mastership, and Lord Stowell,
on the case being put to him, said the Crown had
the right, but it did not appear that the original
foundation or the charter were laid before him. It also ap•
peered that Sir William Wynn, on a subsequent occasion,
had given a contrary opinion, and had further stated, that
the appropriation of the funds, as then practised, was illegal.
There was nothing in the original foundation to require
that the master should be in holy orders. The learned gen-
tleman then went on to contend that it was clear the object
of the charity was to benefit the poor brethren ; that there
was nothing in the foundation which justified the master
converting the profit to his own use ; that the consetudi-
nanum, which had cut down the recipients to 40, was al-
together invalid ; and he appealed to the court, whether
this charity, being endowed with 10,0001. • year, nine-
tenths of that sum should be devoted to the use of one indi-
vidual. He trusted his Honour would be of opinion
that Lord Guildford should be called on to account.
What they ptayed was, that his Honour would
declare that the master was not entitled to the surplus of
the revnue to his own use, that it be applied to the pur-
poses
of the charity, and that a scheme may be prepared by
which this charity might be devoted, not to the private
emolument of one individual, but to purposes of public
utility.
Sir F. Kelly—l have not heard that you ask more than
fora decrees alto the future. Do you ask more ?
The Attorney•Deneral— Certainly ; I shall claim every-
thing which the court will allow.
The Master of the Rolls—l understood you to ask for an
account of the past. The court, in these cases, assuming
that it is bound to interfere to set the matter right, is not in
the habit of making persons refund rents received in mis-
take. When was the information filed?
The Attorney-Generel—ln 1849.

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCII.—YEsfERDAT.
im.mone asses.—llereas L.'.H COMPILE, NIL JtMlCit WIGHT•
Na. Jrn-es ram %'o Mu. Jratet elosarram.
STEYEN4OS t TOONILS.—LIAKILITY Or INIFICTOR Or

WIIIOIITA AND MEASIMEi.

T Lis was an appeal from the decision of a county court
judge. The questions presented to this court upon a
former day,when the matter was argued, were two. First,
whether the inspector of weights and measures was justified
in seizing a false weighing machine ; and (if this were an-
swered in the negative), secondly, whether, where a false
seizure occurred, the fact of his having acted in a bona fide
manner, under the act relating to weights and measures,
did not indemnify him against the consequence of the
seizure.
At the sitting of the court, Lord Campbell delivered judg-
ment. As to the first qnestion, at the time of the argument
the court intimated an opinion that the inspector was not
justified in seizing the machine, and to this opinion their
lordships adhered. The second question therefore arose, and
ft turned upon the construction of the 16th sec. of the act of
William IV. Now this section, in effect, said that the
party damnified by the act of. the inspector should recover,
unless amends were tendered before action. In this case it
did not appear that any tender of amends had been made.
The judgment of the court below,_ which was against the
inspector, must therefore be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-YESTERDAY.
errtme T BA.oo.—Baron Ceur RIMS Jana, MR. JUSTICI
CIEVIWILL, 111/4 JCBTICI WILLIAM,. AND Ys. Rents TALFIKIW.
FLIED O. COILER.-FALSE IMPRISONYINT.

This was an action to recover damages for assault and
false imprisonment, and it was tried before Mr. Justice
Talfourd, at the last sittings in London ; when the jury
gave a verdict for the plaintiff for 251. upon two counts ;
and for one farthing upon another count. The facts of the
case have already appeared.
Mr. Serie. By!ee, on the part of the defendant, now moved
for a rule, calling upon the plaintiff to show cause why
there should not be a verdict for the defendant; or why
there should not be a new trial, upon the ground that the
verdict was against the evidence.
Buie granted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-YESTERDAY.
SIITIPOS ar XIII PIM/ Wsermixvrat.—Baroas Mi. BALM

ALcomos, Asp Cuomo). Juan..
COLBERT V. DE81,10318.

This was an action to recever the sum of 301. on three
promissory notes of 101. each, given by the defendant to the
plaintiff. It appeared that the plaintiff, Madame Matilde
Colbert, had formerly resided at No. 14, Sherrard-street,
Soho. She afterwards took a house in Newman-street, Ox-
ford-street, and then became anxious to get rid of her for-
mer house, of which she held a lease. The defendant
agreed to give SOL for the lease, of which amount she was
to pay 601. down, and give the three notes in question of
101. each. The 501. were duly paid, but the notes, on arriv-
ing at maturity, were dishonoured. The defendant pleaded
that the notes had been given for an illegal and immoral
purpose, inasmuch as the house had been one of ill fame,
and was intended to be continued for that purpose.
The handwriting of the defendant to the notes was proved
by Mr. OdeU, a clerk to the Chartered Oaa Company.
Mr. Parry was about to address the jury for the defend-
ant, when a consultation between himselt and Mr. James,
for the plaintiff, resulted in the matter being referred.

ADMIRALTY COURT.-YESTERDAT.
D.roaz Da. Lvesmoros.
Tits ALZWI.—DAKAos.

This was a proceeding instituted by the proprietors of the
Daniel Webster, an American vessel, bound from Liver-
pool to Boston, United Sates, against the barque Alert,
bound from Waterford to CanlS, for a collision which had
occurred on the 17th of January in the Irish channel. There
was also a cross action. On behalf of the Webster it was
alleged that about 2 o'clock p.m., they saw the Alert ap-
proaching. but as thee were close-hauled on the starboard
tack, they held on their course. The barque, however, in-
stead of giving way, came on, and the collision occurred.
When they (the crew of the Webster) saw that an accident
was inevitable, they ported to lessen the force of the blow ;
but it was ;toted, on the other side, that thsy had star-
beeesded whelk they ought to have held on, and had thus
NNW the maim
Des. Bayed and Twigs appeared for the Daniel Webster ;
Drs. Addams and Curteis for the Alert.
The Trinity Masters were of opinion that the Alert was
the only vessel to blame, and
The Cemrt pronounced accordingly.

Tun HOUTHANDEL.—SALVAOZ.
This was a suit to recover compensation for salvage ser-
vices afforded from the Bth to the 10th of October, by a
carrying venal, the Elizabeth, awl three fishing smacks, to
the galliot Houthiutdel, bound from Chrietiansand to Har-
lingen, with timber. On the 7th the galliot had been
struck by a heavy sea, which bad disabled her rudder, and
she was drifting in great distress towards the Dutch
coast, from which she war about 30 miles distant,
when the snacks took her in tow and brought her to Lowes-
toft. The defence was, that the 'elvers had been guilty of
misconduct in not taking her into the Tend as the crew
had desired. Several hawsers had been broken, and the
Elizabeth had lost a cargo of ice which she was taking out
to the fishing boats. The value of the vessel, her cargo and
freight, was 7001., and the action had been entered for 6001.
Doctors Haggard and Jeaner appeared for the sal, ars ;
and Dr. Hayford for the owners.
Dr. Lustungton, after severely reprobating the practice
of entering actions for exorbitant sums, and putting the
owners to the inconvenience of finding bail for an unneces-
sary amount, awarded the sum of 1201. to the salvon.
COURT OF INLAND REVENUE.—YESTERDAT.

Buoaz B. T. erzrzassow, Eaa.. C. J. Buiiu, Da., Lao
A. MONTOMEILIT, TWA.

HIAVY PZNALTT FOR BILLING EXCISRABLZ AETICLI

IN • PRIVATE BOARDING-ROUSE.
Mary Morro, keeper of a private boarding-house in
Cecil-stmt, trend, was charged, on several informations,
with having retailed wines, spirits, and beer, without
license.
Mr. Savage, an officer of excise, said that on the 11th of
February he went to the house of the defendant, No. 12,
Cedistreet, Strand, where he took lodgings. He dined
there that evening, with several other persons, in the public
room, and, after dinner, he was asked by the defendant's
son-in-law if he would take anything to drink. He replied
that he would take a little brandy-and-water ; upon which
this person gave • key to a waiter, who returned with a
bottle of brandy and set it before him. The waiter was not
gone more than two minutes. On the following day he
dined with a friend, when they had stout and a bottle of
sherry, both of which articles were served immediately.
On the next day, being Sunday, be dined with the com-
pany, and bad brandy again ; and, on Monday, he had
ale and cigars. lie then called for his bill, which he paid,
and went away.
The defendant said she slid not know that she was doing
wrong, and might have gone on for years in ignorance of
having vitiated the law.
In answer to one of the commissioners, the supervisor
said Mrs. Morgan had occupied these premises for about 14
years.
Mr. Commissioner Stephenson said this was a very fla-
grant offence, and it was the impression of the court that it
had been committed for year.. The should give judgment
against defendant in the penalty of 1201.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YEsTEADAT.

------
Bayou 1,. COXIIIIIIIOIIIIOOOI.IIOIIffI.
Ix fE LACT.—QI7IIIITION AS TO THII VALVE of BANNING

This was • dividend meeting, in the cue of John George
Lacy, gun manufacturer, of Great St. Helens, Bishopagate•
street, who became bankrupt about a twelvemonth ago, in
consequence of the failure of his son-irelaw, A. A. Luker-
steen, for whom he had given guarantees and accepted bills
to a large amount.
Mr. Pearson now appeared in support of a claim by the
Commercial Bank, founded on two bills of exchange, drawn
by Lackenteen, and accepted by the bankrupt—one for
2,5001., dated let December, 1851, the other for 1,500/.,
dated 23d February, 1852—both payable at four months.
The circumstances of the first bill were peculiar, and in
rogue of it the bank only sought to enter • claim ,
they wished to prove fur the amount of the second,
ohm deducting • sum of 1,0001., the value of shares
he tie bank held by the bankrupt. It was stated
thonth titoire bankruptu hadeen wlgonu
tin the
consideration,ofkQb
he
always Ink are to see that they were covered by the pro-
tasis ed imts ; and, in the case of the 2,5001. bill, he
and Leriu aMea went to the Commercial Bank to get the
bill discounted ; but Mr. Cutbill, the manager, refuted to
discount it without something more than :their endorse-
meats. Thereupon, they assured him that there were
proceeds sufficient to cover the bill, and distinctly consented
to give the bank • lien on certain produce which had been
shipped to Singapore. They, therefore, wished to enter a
claim, so as to be allowed to fulluw those shipments.
Mr. Aspland and Mr. Reed, for the assignees, admitted
the bankrupt's liability on the bill, but contended that no
proof could be made upon it, except on the usual condition
of waiving the security.
His Honour said the claim must come within the ordi-
nary rule. Either the bank might give up their security
and prove, or they might have it sold, and prove for the
difference.
Mr. Pearson submitted that they ought not to be put to
their election, in the first instance, but that a claim should
be entered and the dividend reserved.
The Cor
locking up
Pearson

_--....aier—Can you show me any authority for
pt up chimney from the creditors in this way ?
Mr. Pearson was not aware of any case where that point
ad been decided.
The Commissioner—Will there be any further assets ?
Mr. Pennell (the official assignee)—Oh yes.
The Commissioner—Then there is no necessity for lock-
ing up what you have is hand, and deferring the dividend ?
Mr. Pennell—Not the slightest. There will be • further
dividend.
Mr. Reed—The bank makes a claim on the property at
Singapore ; if they get it they will be satisfied; if not,
there is quite enough to pay their dividend. If they choose
to abandon their security, and prove for the whole 2,500/.,
We will consent to that; but we deny that they have any
MIS am those Gessigaments.
Peanal agreed to withdraw the claim ; and it was
siggehted thee the question of lien might be decided by
Ilwaw let the alwaaissiunerp, with the consent of the parties,
se at WU bilhileg without an appeal.
lb, app be had sever made any secret of his
°plan r le is filidilifactery ma el appeal at present;
mad be and avib=kit *h lan side would consent,
I fin Weil Wills WIWI of their humus, la

The Muter of the Rolls—Of course you do not uk for it
before that time ?
The Attorn•y•Oeneral—We arc in your honour's hands,
but we say that sines Sir William Wynn's opinion was
asked no further fines ought to have been taken, and that
they ought to have come to the Court of Chancery.
T. Muter of the Rolls—l understand what your ob-

Mr. Molt then addressed the court on the same side, and
at the conclusion of his speech the court rote.
The Muter of the Rolla stated that se to-sarrow (this
dy) was seal day, he world proceed with the ors es
nday.

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 5, 1853.

the manner of the old Sub-division Court, it being under-
stood that the decision shoWd be binding, witnout the'
right of appeal, unless their honours should differ in
opinion. By that means, 10/, would go as far here u 1(01.
in the appeal curt.
Mr. Pearson consented to this arrangement, and • day
was named for the argument.
His Honour said it was a great pity that Mr. Reed's sug-
gestion to the parliamentary committee at the time the last
act was before them, for the continuance of a court of
appeal of three commissioners, bad not been acted upon ;
it would have saved • great amount of money.
Mr. Pearson then tendered his proof on the 1,5001. bill,
and said the only question here was the amount of credit to
be given to the bankrupt in respect of 50 shares which be
had held is the bank. The sum paid on each share was
20/. ; and the bank contended that they ought not to give
credit for more than 1,0001., though the market price of the
shares, at the time of the bankruptcy, was something more,
1,4'51. The directors, by • resolution of their board, had
forfeited the shares held by the bankrupt, which they con-
tended they had • right to do. By the 83rd section of
the deed of settlement of the bank, which the
bankrupt as a shareholder had signed, it was
declared, " That the shares of every shareholder shall, be-
fore and in preference to every other right or claim what-
ever, be subject to and charged with the whole of the
debts, liabilities, and engagements due from and sub-
sisting between him and the company. . . . And the
directors are hereby authorised to extinguish and declare
forfeited, or to sell and dispose of the shares of any share-
holder, in whole or in part, as the case may require, in
satisfaction and discharge of the whole or any part of such
debts, liabilities, and engagements." The 87th section of
the same deed provided that the approval of the directors
should be necessary to the sale or transfer of any shares;
and this negatived the supposition of the assignees taking
the shares into the market and selling them at the market
price.
The crenimissioner—Wheu were they sold ?

Mr. Pearson said they had not been sold, but declared
forfeited by the directors according to the disjunctive op-
tion which they possessed.
The Commissioner—Then the question will be, what was
the value of the shares when the directors declared them
forfeited, and how is that value to be ascertained ?
Mr. Pearson—The only value which the dirsetors recog-
nise is the amount of the paid-up capital, that which stands
in the books of the company.
The Commissioaer—Suppose it bad been in the Law
Life, where 101. is paid up, and the value of the shares is
401. or 601.7 There are many companies similarly circum-
stanced ; some where only 21. had been paid. Would you
put no higher value than that on the shares ?
Mr. Pearson contended that the deed of settlement was
binding, as between the partners, u to the value of the
shares.
The

—.oner—What becomes of. the forfeited
shares? Are they not re-sold by the directors?
Mr. Pearson said they were extinguished, and became as
though they had been. If re-sold it must be dune
by a subsequent act of the direetors.
His Honour said the bank was bound, by its deed of set-
tlement, to keep up its amount of capital, and consequent
number of shares. He wished to know what had been
done with the shares in this instance ?
Mr. Pearson said the directors might have re-issued au
equal number of shares, but there was nothing to ear-mark
the shares, so as to identify those which the bankrupt had
held.
The Commissioner—How much has been paid upon the
shares ?
Mr. Cutbill, the manager of the bank—Ten per cent.
originally, and afterwards other 10 per cent., making 20 per
cent. in the whole. In our account with the bankrupt we
set off 50 new shares, at 201. each, against the amount of
the bills.
Mr. Pearson submitted that if the shares bad fallen in
the market, instead of rising, the directors would have been
bound, in forfeiting the shares, to set off the amount paid
up. As these shares could only be transferred by consent
ed the other partners, there could in reality be no market
price. Ile would suppose a partnership of three persons to
exist for the manufacture and sale of some article which
conferred great benefits on mankind—Holloway's pills, for
example—(laughter)—if one of the three, who was in pos-
session of the valuable secret, chose to retire, he could not
&pee of his interest to any stranger, who might divulge
the meret to the world. The consent of the other partners
would be necessary ; so that there could in reality be no
market value of the property.
The Commissioner—lt is a mere question of justice and
equity what you ought to set off; and you ought to set off
what you could make of the shares. If you go into the
market now, I suppose you can realise ?
Mr. Aspland—The shares are now higher than ever is
the market.
The Commissioner—My strong impression is, that it
would be the height of injustice net to allow the value of
the shares at the time of the forfeiture You can go and
get the money for those shares wh you like, and gain
by it. There are hundreds of people who would be glad
to give the price.
Mr. A. R. Cutbill, the manager of the bank, was then
examined. He deposed that the value of the shares at the
date of the forfeiture (Sept. 7, 1852), was from 281. to 291.
per share, estimating from sales made at the time. Their
present value was about 32/. per share. After
the bankruptcy; but before the forfeiture of the
shares, a dividend had been declared, whieb would
amount to 301. on fifty shares. The assignees were
clearly entitled to credit for that. Lsckenteen held
ten sUrn in the bank. Those shares were sold by his
assignees, with the consent of the bank, at about the same
price, 291., and his account was credited with the proem&
Lackenteen was still a debtor to the bank, irrespective sit
the bill now sought to be proved against Lacy's estate ; but
Lacy's guarantee extended over the whole—it was a gene-
ral guarantee against loss. The bank had proved on that
guarantee for 5411., independently of the bills ; from this '
the value of Lackenteen's shares was or ought to have I
been, deducted. If the bank had not given credit for those
shares, they would readily do so. Mr. Lacy stood in their
share capital account as a creditor for 1,0001. The entry
had been cancelled. The directors were willing to sell the
shares, and apply the proceeds to the liquidation of the '
debt; but there being some difficulty about the transfer,
they resorted to the other alternative, of forfeiture.
The Commissioner—Have you still got the full number of
shares ?
Cutbill—We have re-issued other 50 shares, so as to
asp the number.
.The Commissioner—How do you identify the shares ?
Mr. Cutbill—By the certificates. We were placed in this
difficulty. We cannot in our books recognise a market
value ; therefore in the forfeiture we only destroyed what
we had received on the shares. We re-issued other shares,
so se to fill up our number, but did not give them the same
numbers. We merely destroy the interest of one gentle-
man in our share capital and enter another, dealing with it
very much like a banking account.
The Commissioner—As by your deed of settlement you
were to have 20,000 shares, yon must keep up the number,
I suppose ?
Mr. Cutbill—We keep up merely the name of the pro-
prietor, destroying it in such a case as this, which is the
only instance we have had, and issuing fresh shares is other
The Commisaioner—And without reference to the num-
bs's ?
Kr. Cutbill—Having once made up oar number, we are
ant now • with regard to the numbers, as a mesas
al the shares ; but we do trace them by moss
et *tl~sae
TM Cassuhaisasr—But would not the other be a War
way of identifying them ?
Mr. Cutbill—We identify them in some way with the
other numbers.
Mr. Aspland—You say those shares were re-issued ?
Mr. Cutbill—They were.
Mr. Aspland—At what price ?
Ils. Cutbill—l am not quite sure ; 291 or 29. Whatever
is, we will make that right.
The Commissioner—That is the best possible evidence.
Mr. Reed—Then, whatever sum the shares may have
realised, that must be deducted from the proof.
Mr. Cutbill—Whatever was the proceeds of those 50
shares, we will give them credit for it.
The proof was then admitted, subject to that deduction;
also the amount of the dividend, if any, declared between
, I the bankruptcy and the forfeiture.
in

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.-YESTERDAY.
WORE MR. 811./lAIT ADAMS, ABWITANT JUDOS, AT CUMIN

John Judd, a young man having the appearance of a
labourer, wee indicted for having unlawfully assaulted
Mary Colston, with intent, &c.
While Mr. Parry was stating the case, it was intimated
that the defendant would plead Guilty to the charge of
common assault. •
The Assistant Judge said the view be took of these cases
was, that it did not follow that if a man committed an
assault of this description, he had the intention of obtaining
his object by force, if resistance was offered, unless such a
conclusion was inevitable from the evidence.
After some discussion, the defendant pleaded Guilty to
the second and third counts of the indictment.
The Assistant Judge then read the depositions, from
which it appeared that the prosecutrix, a girl about nine-
teen, living with her mother, a widow, at No. 3, Angel-
court, Shoreditch, had been keeping company with the
defendant for about six weeks prior to the transaction,
which led to the present prosecution. On the evening of
the 23rd of April he called at her mother's house, and re-
quested her to take a walk with him, and she consented,
on his promising to take care of her. They went to the
Victoria-park. On arriving there, about ten o'clock, and
before they had gone far, he suddenly threw her down,
placed one hand on her mouth, and with the other
ranged her dress. She screamed out loudly, in consequence
of which he desisted and went away. She followed him
in the hope that he was going out of the park as she did not
know the way, when he suddenly turned round and
repeated his conduct, with the exception that he did not
disarrange her dress. She succeeded in getting from him,
and begged of him to take her home, but the only answer
be made was one of a very gross description. She again
begged of him to take her home, upon which he conducted
himself in a most indecent manner. Ile then went away,
and she followed him out of the park, after which he asked '
her to drink with him, but she refused, and told a female
she met, named Stepto, what had happened, and seeing her
in conversation with her the defendant came up and used a
very base expression. This female, who lived at No. 4,
Grove-street, Hackney, took her home with her, and in-
formed her husband what hid taken place, and he went oat
, to look for the defendant, but could not find him. The
prosecutrin was placed in the care of a park-keeper, who
i took her to Cripplegate, and subsequently a warrant was
; obtained for the defendant's apprehension. Her month
, bled very much.
)tr. Cooper said them war no doubt an assault had boa