The Express.
London, England, 1851-12-29 00:00:00

OURT OF

aVI.--BATCEDAT.
Dotes MS. OMMIIIMOSIIM GOSINVIM.
IN DS WILLIAMS AND MARCMANT.—ALLIGED CON-
FIRM' or Col:l2.—Tvasise OVS a 31DOiliNonm.
The bankrupts wen weetreetors for railway works, sad
bed maderteksa a .s act an the Oxford, Wereseter,
wed Welredtesples . At the woods. kw abase
elm= lips:=ed Sat the raessweser air the ewer(
ef braes _tuna, et plat sad pro-
perty 111 *et Ilse. es the Winn. Sue Sed it woe the pro-
perty et the leoltrapes. het bed ewbewleently lees dis-
pleased by the *Seem Gabe eraspery. A ride was takes
eat In show cause why the parties &mid not be committed
ke eastern' t; and Use wittier now eine on fur argument,
thepeeeasettaps Wag esslbsed to the cue of Mr. Charles
Bletekley, ewe eldieveekbeet tab-engineers of the company.
XL Terrell supported the motion for committal:
Mr. Bramwell, r. Quain, and Mr. Phipsoa opposed.
Mr. Linklater appeared for the company.
Mr. Blatchley was examined, and stated that he was
roused from bed about half-pest two on the morning of the
let of December, with the information that a party had
takes possession of the works. They had come in a clan.
destine way, like a robber in :the night. A portion of the
tunnel at Campden was then merely resting on timber ;
and it would have been very dangerous for it to remain
longer withuut the masonry being put in. This was repre-
sented to Mr. Amber, the messenger, but he said he could
not allow them to proceed with the works. Witness cams
to town, consulted Messrs. Parsons and Burchsll, sad west
down to Torquay, in Devonshire, to consult Mr. Brunel.
the company's engineer. He returned to the works. Two meet
were then in possession in the timber-yard,outaide the tams& '
lie told them he should go on with the works, and they
protested against it. Having given notice to the men, they
went to work in the usual way, to the number of 600.
Lucks had been placed on some of the waggons and doors
they were got rid of by drawing the staples. There had
been disputes between the company and the contractors,
Williams and Merchant, who had partially discontinued
their working on the line since the 29th of May tut. The
works had since been carried on by the company under
agreement—the disputes being referred to Mr. Brunel, and
afterwards to Sir William Cubitt. Part of the plant seised
by the messenger was originally the property of the bank-
rupts, but had been used by the company, and was so used at
the time of the seizure. Had not the tunnel works been pro-
ceeded with, there would have been great danger to life.
Some of the timber was breaking right and left; it
was not safe to be left two days. Did not remember
that the messenger said he must apply to the court for
' authority to proceed with the works.
Mr. Liaklater read the affidavits of Mr. Amber, the mes-
senger, sad other parties. Mr. Amber distinctly stated
that on being applied to by Mr. Blatchley, for authority to
proceed with the works, he had stated that he could not
give it, and had told the party he must apply to the Court of
Bankruptcy.
Mr. Terrell hereupon submitted that this was a very ag-
gravated case of contumacy. Mr. Blatchley had had pointed
out to hire the course he ought to pursue to obtain permis-
sion for proceeding with the works, but had chosen to go
and tura out the messenger brevi mans.
His Honour, without hearing the counsel on the other
aide, said he was clearly of opinion that the rule ought to
be discharged. Undoubtedly the process of the court
should be respected, and its officers in executing it should
receive the utmost protection, or they would be subject to
continual conflicts with parties claiming property; but the
court, would not, on the pretence of inquiring into a charge
of contempt, undertake to settle contested rights, and decide
to which of two parties disputed property belonged. lie
should confine himself to the simple question whether
Blatchley had been guilty of contempt ; and this involved
two considerations—how the officer got possession of the
property, and whose property it was. lie had certainly
gone at an unusual time—half-past one in the morning—
probably from an apprehension that he should be resisted
by the force of the company. But upon whose property
bad he entered to take possession of these goods? His
warrant only authorised him to enter upon the house or
houses of the bankrupt, or other places belonging to the bank-
rapt, where his goods were or were suspected to be. It
could not be said here that the soil and premises were the
property of the bankrupt. As the evidence stood, they
were those of the company ; and the bankrupts were only
working for them on their promisees. The fact
of the resident engineer living on the premises
was strong evidence to show that they were the
empany's. The messenger had not the warrant authoris-
hog him to enter the premises of others and take the goods
of the bankrupt-. Lnder these circumstances Mr. Batch-
=thought himself warranted in preventing a stoppage
was fraught with 'prejudice, if not with danger to
Mk. His conduct was not at all thati of a man who meant
tis act contumaciously ; for he had explained the danger to
re messenger. If anybody was in fault it was Mr. Brunel,
elms owned to have given very bad advice.. Had applica-
tion been made to that court tor permission to continue the
weeks, it would have been granted peens much of course
exparte Dixon, S Vesey, Lord Eldon had said, that the
petty indemnifying another for turning out the messenger
wee himself guilty of contempt. Here, it was very natural
Ike Mr. Blatchley to suppose, the company having carried
ea the works for a long time, that the premises
WM
theirs ; and as he saw the messenger's warrant,
whisk only authorised him to enter the premises of the
bankrupt, it was natural to suppose he had acted Roder a
sibtake • at any rate, there was no evidence to satisfy the
dellft that he had acted contumaciously. That being so,
Ile ride must be discharged.
Mr. Bramwell asked for costs, on the ground that the
proceeding was • vindictive one, not done fur the purpose
etf protecung the estate, but to irritate the company.
His Honour said he could not grant costs against the
messenger, who had acted with great propriety in refer-
ring the parties to the official assignee or the court for the
required permission. They, however, had not thought
proper to make such application. The rule must, there-
fore, be discharged without costs.
Mr. Ferrell said the messenger hail been obliged to
enter at that early hour, as the sheriff was in possession
under judgments obtained by three contractors, and the
sale was to take place that day.
His Honour regretted that the question as to the right to
the property could not be put in come course for being de-
termined upon.
Mr. Bramwell said that nothing could be done now ; but
his clients had always held themselves open to refer the
I matters in dispute.
IN SE D'Aacr.

This was the last examination. The bankrupt, who was
described es a hotel keeper iu Pall-mall, had not surren-
dered. Debts have been proved to the amount of 5001. ;
the assets are about 200'. The bankrupt was ordered to be
proclaimed in the usual form.

THE POLICE COURTS.
GUILDHALL.
REMAKICABLIS N ILL CASE.
Mrs. Dawson, alias Plizette Diokeney, residing neat
Maida-hill, appeared in discharge of her bail, before Sir
Peter Laurie, for re-examination on the charge of haring
committed wilful and corrupt perjury in the year 1833, by
making an affidavit in Doctors' Commons to the effect that
she was the only lawful daughter and the next of kin to the
late Mrs. Elam, the widow of Lieutenant Joseph Elam, of
the Bth Garrison Battalion.
It will be reoolletted that on the former examination it
was stated that Lieutenant Elam married a Miss Hood or
Good, in 1807; that • separation took place, and in 1828
Mies Georgina Elam was born, and in 1829 Lieutenant
Elam died. That the late Lord Portarlington lived with
Mrs. Dawson, then a friend of Mrs. Elam's, and at the
death of the latter, in 1833, she took charge of the child,
Miss Elam, and administered to the property of Mrs. Elam,
sworn at under 5,0001., as her daughter, and only next of
kin. It was alleged tor the defence that Mrs. Elam was
57 years of age when she died, and not 48 as
stated in her burial certificate, and that during
the several years site was separated from her hus-
band she lived in intimate relationship with Lord Porter-
lington, who had been also living with Mrs. Dawson, who, it
was contended, was Mrs. Elam's daughter, by Robert
Blakeney. her former husband. It was also stated for the
defence that Lord Portarlington was 62, and Mrs. Elam 53
years old, when Miss Elam was brought forward as his
lordship's child, in 1828, the year in which she was born,
and Mr. Ballantine pledged himself to prove that Miss Elam
was purchased by Mrs. Elam, and palmed off upon Lord
Portarlington for the purpose of obtaining money from him,
he being highly delighted at the birth of the child.
Mr. Huddlestone appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Salentine for the defence.
Upon the resumption of the hearing on Saturday Sir
Peter Lade observed that on the last examination he
threw out • hint that, as the late Lord Portarlington was
mixed up in this affair in a very peculiar way, it would ) •
advisable for the present lord, if he had any respect for the
memory of his uncle, to instruct some respectable attorney
to watch the case, and, for the honour of the family, pro-
tect the reputation of his lordship. He (Sir Peter), there-
fore, wished to know if any person was present on Lord
Portarlington's behalf ?
No pesos responding to this inquiry, the case was pro-
ceeded with, and Miss CillOrgiOS Elam was called and
croes-examined at considerable Leath, with • view to elicit
circumstances injurious Is bar &erecter, and that might
tend to weaken her emblem& The object, however, en-
tirely failed.
Mrs. Mary Anse litobiama was seat examined, sal
stated*** she kept a rim
low bias' subset at Zelerd
ia 1113 Moo. Doom 10. ping lw
with bee, ialealited Ms. Wm. able boner 11;;WZ
dams dill be years aid. Mrs Dawes. said Mrs. likta
wee bar nether, but witness very mob doubted it. lan
Elm was under her care for six lasalbs in 1833, and Ms
Elm took her child as she calla her, away, and gold Ito
half- 's bill. flaieserntly vitae', heard Mn.ion
of Mks Eh= Ida. Davao; *iiiihoo Mier
•W bat emu dam &la" ow woo&
after awwwon• dear
Lad P Mead
Damn., sad Mrs Dawson celled, end informed witness a
Mrs. Elam's death. Miss Elam shortly alter retuned be
a few weeks, and called Mrs. Dawson " mamma," and
Mrs. Dawson directed that the child should be
called " Georgina Davao," which name she went
by ever since. Mrs. DaWllO4 was equally kind
to Miss Elam as to her own daughters. At
Christmas the children were taken home, lat were
back on the same evening by Lord Portanington,
ra=iDawson was then in her confinement with her
mews* isaibter. M. Dawson had told witness she
was within a yew or two of her age, which was not 65, and
sbe believed Mrs. Elam wee not more than a year or two
older tbaabenelf. -

Sir Polar Lune. said it bad been alleged that Lord
Portarlinglan lived with mother and daughter, and that
the dull was purchased by the form; and palmed off as