The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-20 00:00:00

co-operation of the bar. lie would observe, however, that
there were certain matters in which such precedence must
of necessity be accorded, and in which a denial thereof
would be simply destructive.

COURT OF QUEEN'S RENCR.—YvergRoAs.
etrnsus AT NIIII Poses AT Or ILIMALL.-111701ft LOAD CAXIIIII.I.
I,FaCIAL Jews.
Wuxi PAI:PER) r. Lawson.—Ltuet..
It appeared from the opening statement of the learned
counsel, and from the subsequent evidence, that this was
an action for libel brought by the former assistant gaol, r
of the Marlborough-street police court against the defen-
dant, as the printer and publisher of the times newspaper.
The plaintiff complained of an article which appeared in
that paper on the 23rd Dec., 1840. On the 27th April, 1819,
a person named Hackett was charged with a burglary at
the Marlborough police court, and remanded until May 2.
Upon that day it was the duty of Willis, as the assistant
gaoler, to lock up the prisoners who were brought from
Newgate in the cells belonging to the police court, and to
take them before the magistrate when they were called for.
It so happened that on the 2nd of May, 1849, Willis
was unable to leave his house through indisposition, and
the chief gaoler took Hackett and another prisoner, named
Mackenzie, from the police van, and locked them, with
three other prisoners, in a cell attached to the police court.
When the chief gaoler went to the cell to take Hackett and
Mackenzie before the magistrate, he found that they had
escaped; be could not, however, perceive that any violence
had been used to the door, or to any other part of the cell.
An inquiry took place, as it was thought that the prisoners
could not have escaped without the negligence or con-
nivance of some of the officers belonging to the police court,
as the three other prisoners who were in the cell at the
time had not escaped. A messenger was sent to
the house of Wilke, sail in a locker in the house!
there was found a duplicate key of the cell. After
due investigation had been made into the circumstances of
the affair, Wines was discharged from the situation oil
assistant jailer and reduced to his former rank, which win
that of a police constable. Some months after his escape,
Hackett was again arrested and imprisoned in the Yentas-
vine prison, from which place he likewise escaped, and it
was in giving an account of his adventures that the reporter
of the Tines had alluded to the affair at the Marlborough-
street police court. The following passage in the article !
was the one on which the action was brought: "The autho-
rities instituted an inquiry, and it turned out that the turn-
key bad received a large sum of money to effect his lihem-
ties, and be was discharged." The plaintiff now alleged
1 that in consequence of this article in the Times
parties had ceased to employ him since its publica-
fiat, who had done so before 'There was only one witness
leaned to prove the special damage, and he stated that he
had left off employing the plaintiff some months before the
article in question was published.
Mr Ilumfrey then addressed the jury for the defendant.
The plaintiff in his declaration had omitted the last Gmr words
of the passage complained of, which were, " and he was
discharged." The conduct of the plaintiff was calculated to
excite suspicion, for there was no place from which it was
less likely a person could e‘cape, unless by a troldeu key,
than the cells of the Marlborough-street Police Court, and
there was no doubt that the prisoners Hackett and Mac-
kenzie hail got out of the cell by the door, which was
°peat el iu the usual manner by a key. It was not the
article iu the Times which had caused people of retpueta-
bait), to withhold employment from the plaintiff, but he-
. ause he had been discharged from his situation as the
assistant jailer of the Marlborough-street Police Court.
Lord Campbell said the verdict must pass for the plain-
tiff, and it was for the jury to give such damages as the
attack which had been made on his character justified.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
farthing.

COURT OF EXCIIEQUEIL—YESTERDAY.
Nun Pam—Barons Sea F. Polices, Cum Bmost, ma A LONDON
Coaxes Jr.,.
MORTON T. TATLOR.—APsAns.
This wm an action of trespaas for an assault. It appeared
the plaintiff had obtained possession of the house :co. 1,
Trevor-square, Brompton, by stratagem, and the defen-
dant, on the 4th of December last, about six o'clock in the
evening, collected a number of persons, who laid siege to
the house and entered it. The defendant, who is a baker,
inked the plaintiff, a chandler, his busies so there, unit
walked him out. The principal question for the jury was,
whether more force was used than was necessary.
The jury found a verdict fur the —Da-
mages, 321'

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YESTERDAY.
Barns. Ma. tominissiosea YoNZIAX4CII.
IN RE ALEXANDER. BLACK.
The bankrupt, a bookseller, of Wellington-street North,
applied for his certificate. The balance sheet, prepared by
MOATS. 31.1(illop and Young, showed the unsecured debts
to be 1,3261. ; secured, 5411.; liabilities, 532/. The awls
were returned—good debts, 43.5/.; property, 7041.; ditto
held as ws:urity, 2/151. The bankrupt, on the let of July,
1819, had a capital of 1,2981., nod whilst the profits and
receipts were 661/., the trade and personal expenses were
1,4161. ; losses, 8071.
Mr. owrance supported the bankrupt.
Mr. Sturgeon, for a creditor named Hemsworth, ap-
peared to oppose, and examined the bankrupt, who de-
faced that be hail bad frequent communication with
Mr. Ilemsworth relative to the formation of a partner-
ship, and also to the negotiation of a loan, when a
balance sheet was prepared. lie then believed he was
solvent to the extent of 1,500/. In the statement
shown to Mr. Ilemsworth, private debts to the extent of
8001 iir 900/. were omitted, as was also private assets to
about the same amount. He believed that this statement
(made out in respect to the partnership) was mad* twelve
mouths before the bankruptcy. Ilemsworth never did suc-
ceed fur him in anything of the kind. Mr. Joseeph Hume,
M.l'., was one of the private creditors for 107/., who would
not have railed upon him for payment. Mr. Bowyer, a pri-
s aentlem..n and petitioning creditor, would not have
A-At..l for payment. Mr. Oxenford, a Costotn-house agent
and creditor for 100/., would not have called un him. Mr.
Hume held a promissory note payable ou demand as emu-
' rity for his debt.
In answer to a question, Mr. Stansfeld, the official as-
'deuce, said that the assets would pay about lbs. in the
pound.
The bankrupt, in further examination denied ever having
had any dealings in accommodation bills. Mr. 3l'f'urdy
had drawn bills, purely aceonunodation bills, on the bank-
rupt to the extent of 1,0001. in the first instance. Mr.
Hemsworth had told him that it was no use looking about
for a nurtner and that he always hail plenty of bills by him
on which he could raise money. Ile had tried to get bills
cashed, but did not succeed. Hemsworth had offered to let
the bankrupt have the use of a 1101. bill, he receiving 301.
or 40/. out of it. lie got 80/. for the hill. nut of which
Ilemsworth gave Idin 30/. in money. That bill was dis-
Messrs. Spalding and nudge, stationers, ad-
vaneed the 801.; the bill being giveu as collateral security.
After a lengthened examination, and much di cession,
His Honour said it was exceedingly to be regretted that
a person who had carried on business for 30 years unim-
peached, should have got into such transactions as with
Hemsworth, as would render him liable to any imputation
against his character. But for these transactions Mr.
Black's conduct would have stood totally unimpeached. The
court must therefore see what degree of credit was to be
given each, when their conduct came in contact. Hems-
worth statist that he was in business as a " private
agent,- and observed that it was not a business to be clearly
underetood in this court. This court hoped it never would,
and when the court feud that such a business extended to
unkindness, it ought to be placarded on every door,
'• lassware of private agents ;" for dealing with such agent,
was the sure road to ruin. The transactious as shown in
this ease, appeared to turn upon " ringing the changes,"
for there was now before the court the names of at least six
poetic., who did not appear to he worth 50/. of their
own recount". There certainly had been a misstate-
ment by the bankrupt, which might weigh in his Honour's
judgment ; but that would not so much rest on
the complaint of llenieworth. The next complaint was,
that there was a bill of Caldon's entrusted to him °souk-
rupt) to get discounted,which was deposited by la
rite. Iletneworth deeded the bankrupt's rightto deposite it,
anon there was nothing on the part of the bankrupt to show
[that he had ; but from the tone of the letters before the
' court it could not be implied that there hail been any con-
cealment, and the bankrupt hail nut been censured fur so
depositing it. And the statement of Black was, that out of ,
an 80/. bill Hemsworth had got 40/.—it is not contradicted.
These bills were concocted in the usual manner. as " private
agents" would do. *f he clerk to the " private agent" fills up
tae body of the bill, the drawer is a person with whom
the acceptor has no sort of relation, but with whom
the " private agent- appeared to have had very extensive
transactions. if the matter had stood on the merits or de-
, merits of the trap action the court would have said Hems-
' worth had nothing to complain of. lie would get 150. in
I the pound if he established his deb., and he had a large
amount by way of interest. The commissioner had said on a
former occasion that he had been upwards of thirty years a
commissioner, and had never seen a creditor pursue a similar
course to Ilemcworth in respect to his attempting to nego-
tiate with the assignees. But for the mis-statement Black
would have hod a first class certificate. Traders must know
that they were bound to disclose everything. and were not
to *peculate as to whether relatives would ask for their
debts. The certificate must be cusp. oiled for three months
from the last examination ; when granted to be of the
second class.—The case lasted four hours.

charged.
BENEVOLINCL.—The Lord Mayor requested that the
cwould acknowledge his receipt of I/. from Mr.
reisirLe, 1/. Is. from Mr. W. H. Italic (7th subscription),
and 10s. from " R. P. and W. H.," for the poor-box.
FALSE PRETENCES.—G.F.IIopping and John Drown were
brought up fur final examination, charged with having ob-
tained a quantity of iron, the property of Juhu Denies and
Co., under false and fraudulent pretences.
Mr. J. F. Morris, clerk to .Is•ssrs. Daniels and Payne, of
No. 29, Upper ThameiestrMt, iron merchants,
on Saturday, the Ist of February, between it and 9 in the
morning, a cart with the name of sharp upon it was brought
to our premises, and the carman, whose name I believe to
be Skegge, presented to me the order protium", for three
tons weight of rod iron. It purports to come from Mr. A.
T. Batchelor, of No. 146, St. John-street, a customer of
ours. We have executed similar orders before. The car-
man received one ton of split rod iron. I spoke to our ma-
nager, and by Isis direction a messenger was sent to Mr.
Batchelor, and from what he said, it was arranged that one
ton should be placed in the cart in order to give us an op-
portunity of tracing it.
The order was directed from " Star Foundry, 146, St.
John-street, Smithfield," and was signed " For A. T.
Batchelor, George F. Hopping."
Thomas Usher, iron and metal dealer, of Golden-lane,
said—On Friday, the 31st of January, 1 ordered from
Brown four or five tons of split rod iron. lie came to my
shop and showed me a sample. It was to be 8!. 10s. a ton.
On Saturday morning two men brought me one ton.
Skegg. was the driver of the cart. It was not delivered, as
they brought no invoice with it. I declined to receive it.
It remained at my door after 1 returned home about half
an hour. It had been brought before I returned home.
Brown and Hopping then came. The iron was still at the
door, and I asked Brown how it was that they had only
brought one ton, and Hopping showed me a bill-head of
Messrs. Daniels and Payne, stating that they were out of
the other size." 1 then said I would pay them if they gave
me a bill and a receipt, and Hopping wrote out the invoice
and receipt produced in Brown's presence. I sent my man
to unload the iron, but he returned and said there was
none then •; which Hopping accounted for by saying he
supposed the carman was dubious about being paid ; and
when I told Brown he went away in the same direction
Hopping had gone. I did not pay the money, but the re-
ceipt was left in my possession. 1 had seen Hopping pre-
riousl4, at Mr. Batchelor'`.
E. keep, carman, in the employment of Mr. Sharp, of
Alderestate-street, said, on the 27th of January I took a
letter from my master to Messrs. Duuiels and Payne, and I
received there two tons of iron, which I took to Artillery-
lane,l and delivered to a person I met in the street. I took
it down a passage. The prisoner Hopping was there, and
I gave him the invoice. I saw Brown there, and he as-
sisted in unloading the cart. They took it up the court.
We had some beer, for which Hopping paid. Hoppiug gave
me two shillings, and told me nut to tell anybody who
' might ask anything about it, and to say that I unloaded it
into a country waggon, and I told the officer so. On Satur-
day evening last I went with the second order. I had not
told my master about receiving the two shillings. When I
took the second order I received one ton of rod iron, and I
took that to Golden-lane. Hopping came to me in lion-
slums-street, and asked me for the invoice. I gave him the
paper I received from Daniels and Payne. He asked me
why I had not got the other. I said they had not got it.
I took the iron home to our yard.
Mr. A. T. Batchelor, of 148, St. John-street, said—l
believe the orders produced to be Hopping's writing. lie
let my service a few days before. Ile had no authority to
give these orders. I did not receive the goods. T'he
orders have been taken out of my order hook. When Hop-
ping was in my employment he had access to the book, and
was then accustomed to give orders for goods signed by
himself, but it was always dune by my direction.
Storey, the officer, gave evidence as to the course he
pursued in watching and apprehending the prisoners.
The prisonere, by the advice of their solicitors, reserved
their defence, and were committed for trial.
MARLBOROCOH-STREET.
EXTRAORDINARY AFFILIATION CASE.—The Earl of
Stamford and Warrington was summoned before Mr. Bing-
ham for refusing to maintain an illegitimate child, of which
he was alleged to be the father, by Mary Ann Parkes.
Mr. Fraser appeared for the mother of the child, and Mr.
Clarkson appeared for the noble defendant.
Complainant and her friend Jane Lewis repeated very
circumatantislly the evidence as to paternity on which the
summons was originally obtained, and were subjected to a
severe and protracted cross-examination by Mr. Clarkson.
At the close of the case fur the prosecution two witnesses
were called for Lord Stamford, who so directly contradicted
the statements of the two women, that Mr. Fraser said he
would abandon the case of the complainant at once, and
expressed the opinion that they ought to be indicted for;
perjury and conspiracy.
Mr. Bingham ultimately ordered the women to be de-
tainee' on those charges.
MARYLEBONE.
THE Gr erownea PLOT.—The young man Ilamillon,
who has been examined a great number of times on a
charge of having caused the explosion of a quantity of gun-
powder at his mother's lodging, thereby damaging the
house of Mr. Miller, of 10, Cumberland-street, New-road,
to the extent of 3001 , was again placed ett the bar.
Additional evidence was adduced, and at the conclusion
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.—VVIERD.Vf. lof the case, Mr. Broughton said that the event was one of a
Berets` lit (WWI, COMMI*I^MAR. very mysterious and suspicious character, but he did not
IN THE MATTES. OF WILLIAN l'ANN.—Puratuft feel justified by the evidence in detaining the prisoner.
DI6MySID. The magistrate then discharged him from this court, and
This ineolvent, a builder, was opposed by Mr. Dowse, handed hint over to the Superintendent of the Bury
and supported by Mr. Sturgeon. St. Edmunds police, she was armed with the authority of
It was elicited from the insolvent that he had signed his a warrant to apprehend him on a charge of forgery.
petition, which was filed under the Protection Art, at a WESTMINSTER.
public-house opposite the court. He had seen the attorney. THREATENING Sic W. Someiteitta —The Right lion.'
whose name was on the schedule only once, but the person Sir William Somerville, M.P., and Chief Secretary for
who hail pr pared his proceedings he had seen several ' Ireland, waited upon Mr. Broderip, and having handed
times. Ile had paid upwards of 91. to come before the lam some letters threatening him with personal injury, a
COWL He admitted that shortly before he petitioned he warrant was immediately issued against the writer and
received ail. from a gentleman named Hihlearv, on a wort- I placed in the hands of Mr. Cumming, an inspector of the
gage of some houses, which he had not mentioned in the It division, who, shortly before the rising of the court,
schedule, nor was Mr. liilleary inserted as a creditor. His brought the offender in custody.
debts, without the mortgage debt, were 293/. , The accused, an Irishman, of very genteel appearance
The Chief Commie-ion...rat oneedismissedthe petition, and and good address, gave his name Samuel M'Carthy,
made some remark, on the clam of persons who got hold of Mr. Cummings stated that he went with the warrant to
parties who intended to apply to the court, and were re- 15, Paultonerquare, where he saw the defendant, who in-
psalms of what they made them state. It was only yes- quired his business, and upon his informing him who
terday that a man had signed his schedule in blank. It he was and reading the warrant to him, he inquired
was quite `booking to hear of such things. whether Sir William had left the letter upon which
The petition was accordingly dismissed. it was granted with the magistrate. Witness replied
Berns Ma. Ceantissioxsa Law. that he had no doubt Sir William showed the letter to the
IN RE CHARLES WATTIL—UNDEL PREFERENCE. I magistrate ; upon which the defendant replied that he was
This insolvent, a builder, appeared for judgment. Mr. not only willing but moat anxious to go with him, as
Dowse opposed, and Mr. ItChols roppotted. The case was that was exactly what he wanted. Witness said,