The Express.
London, England, 1853-10-01 00:00:00

Raw itutellteence.

JUDGE'S CHAMBEIts.—IE,TLUDAT.

Mt. Juoice Williams presided to-slay, and disposed of a
number of susnaluaus. The vacation will terminate on the
21th instsnt.

Tits pcsar Ir. ABRAH•3I4.—Tus LILTS F•TILL

DENT IN THE STRAND.

It will be roncmhered that on Monday night the jury on
the inquisition touching the falling of the house in the Strand,
recorded, by their verdict, a charge of Inaaslanghter against
Mr. Abrahams, the •for to the Duke of Norfolk, and
the coroner issued his w for the apprehension of that
gentleman. The warrant was placed in the hands of Su-
perintendent Dodd, and on the following morning, in order
to obviate the impriscoment of Mr. Abrahams, the parti,ll
attended before the Lord Chief Baron at Chambers, and an
application was made to allow him to remain on bail until
the neat session of the Central Criminal Court. An afIL
davit was made in the matter, and the attention of his lord-
ship was called to the circumstances of the ease.
The Lord Chief Baron granted the application, and ad-
mitted Mr. Abrahams to bail in his own recognisance in
2001., and two sureties in 1001. each.
The recoguisances having been completed Mr. Abrahams
was discharged, and will surrender at the October session
of the Central Criminal Court, which will commence in a
short time.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YESTEROAY.
811.0 11R MR. CoIIIIIMMNIM GOVLBOVIN.
IN us R. WILLIAMS.

The b inkrur, a boot and shoe manufacturer, at Brent-
ford, applied for his certificate. His debts mere small ;
3...ets sufficient for a dividend of about 7s. in the pound.

Mr. Beard supported ; there was no opposition. It ap-
pearing that the bankrupt had kept no temiks, his honour
cautioned him as to his future trading, and granted Win •
certificate of the second class.

IX •s Woos.

This was the certificate meeting in the ease of W. Wood,
stationer, of Edgevare-road. Hie debts were 2.1021.;
assets, in good debts and property, ebeut 1,0001. He had
begun, five years sr , with a capital of 3701. ; the profits in
the interval had been 1,0871 ; It) aes, 4771.; (of which 100:.
was incurred by the realisation of the stock) ; trade ex-
penses 1,1191.; household ditto, 1,3271. Thera we no
oPMliolian•
r. Vermeil, the official assignee, repor'ed that the
hooks had been well kept, including • daily account of
the cash received and !mid. There had been a dividend of
7s. in the pound.
. . . . .

The bankrupt imputed his Udine principally to inane
in his family.
His Honour thought the failure one arising from mister-
taws only, and gratvid a certificate of the lint class, observ-
ing that the bankrupt would return to trade without any
imputation 'lntent on his character.

THE POLICE COURTS.

GUILDHALL
Tawas COIIIIINLTIONS.

Francis Friend, James Friend, Bober! Brind, Joseph
Harper, James Cochran, Michael Connor, John Ildnnson
and Thomas Clark, printers, in the employment of Mr!
Jackson, the publi.ber, of ;Angelortreet, St. Martin's-le
Wand:were summoned to answer a charge of conspiring
together to procure the dismissal of Frederick Spence, •
journeyman printer, in the same employ, and to p
his continuing at work in that establishment.
Mr. Humphreys attended for the prosecution, and Mr.
Lewis for sll the defendants.

The evidente taken on the former occasion was read
over, and
Frederick Spence was then examined. He said—There
were two chapels held in the work-room on the 15th of
September, and all the defendants were present; but I was
not called to either of them. All the defendants worked
in the male room with me daring the time I was there.

Crossazansined—l said Francis Friend had always
treated me well. I never said I did not wish to carry on
these proceedings, but the trade made me. What Francis
Friend said to me wee this, " I hops, Mr. Spence, you have
no ill-feeling against me." I said, "Certainly not. I
have no vindictive feeling against any man in the establish-
ment. It is purely a trade question whether you have a
right to persecute a man as I have been." I did not say
that the trade supported me in these proceedings, nor any-
thing to that effect.
Mr. Jones, the foreman over the defendants, em.
played Santee on the 13th September, and discharged him
on the 16th; but previous to my doing the latter Harper
and Robinson came to me. It was either on the Thursday
afternoon or Friday morning, I don't remember which, end
I cannot tell by my hooks now.
Ald. Lawrence—Yon are speaking rather to facts than
data, I presume.
Witnees—Tes, sir ; when Harper and Robinson came to
me the former asked me if I know the man Spence, or
anything about him. I said I knew nothing of him, nei-
ther did I recognise him ee a printer when he applied for

work ; hat that he mantioaed a :treumstance which recalled
to my recollection my haring seen him at work when he
had been employed. Harper then said Spence was a person
he should not like to be compelled to work with, or, it be
did, he should not associate with hint as long as he (Spence)
continued to work there. Robinson said nothing but
merely "yes," or "no," ac:ording to what was proposed
between us. That was all that occurred.

Mr. Hamphreys—Wc shall seo presently. Wu not
Tallies name mentioned in the conversation?

Witness—l think it was mentioned by one of them, but I
cannot say which it was.
Mr. Humphreys—And how was it mentioned ?
Witness—l believe that it was merely that Spence wee
• person who had been at Tallies.
Mr. Humphrey—DA he say " been " or " worked" at
Tallies ?

Mr. Lowia—l object to that question. You may ask this
witness what was said, but you must not lead him.
Mr. Hamphraya—vary well, then, we'll get at it in alio-
ther way. When he said that Spence had "been" at
Tallis`s what impression did it make on your mind ?
Mr. Lewis—l must object to that question also, as a
man's opinion cannot be received as evidence.

Al&rman Lawrence—Well, Mr. Lewis, all we waat is
to get at the facts, and I think the question put by Mr.
Humphreys is a very proper one. If a man came to me
and said he bad been at any other place I should have pre.
sawed he meant ke had worked there, and I have no doubt
that wu the impression oa Mr. Jones's mind.
Witness—My impression was that Spence had worked at
Talks's, and was therefore not considered a free man. I
have now stated all, to the best of my belief, tkat passed.
It was not altogether in con equenee of that communication

that I discharged Spence, for I only engaged him for that
week, and probably the next, so that I could die: harge him
at the end of the first weak. When I discharged him his
first wee► was finished. That requires explanation. It is
the custom in our establishment to pay the men on Friday,
so that if a man came to work on Monday, his week would
end on Friday, and he would be paid for five days. When
I discharged Spence he said, "Have you any objections to
me ?" I said I had not; and he then said, "Are there
any?" I replied, " I suppose there must be some,
but sot on my part." I then referred him
to the men, and ho asked me which of them
he should apply to. I told him Francis Friend, be-
cause he was the oldest band in the establishment. All the
defendants present were in the employ of Mr. Jackson at
the time Spence was at work there. I was not present at
either of the chapels held by the men, as the foremen are
never allowed and never mix with them.

Cross-examined—Not a seaknos passed relative to
Spena's being discharged, beyond what I have already
stated. All the defendants are respectable hardworking
men. The other reasons I bad for discharging Spence
were, that if I had ens person working in the place who
would be likely to create a disturbance, or be sent to
" Coventry," mit is termed, I should feel I ought to dis-
charge the individual, and keep prom in the establishment.
I also knew that if I discharged him at the time I did, he
would be able to get work ; but if I had kept him on for
another week he would have laat both places. I did not
discharge him for want of work, nor was it suggested to me
by any of the men, for I should not have taken a sugars
tics from them.

R.selansitie4-1 did not know of the chapels heing held
until Spume informed me. If I had heard nothing from
Harper aid Itobinarni I should not of thought of discharg-
ing apiece. The men coming and complaining to nin inter-
fered with what would have been the usual course of pro-
ceeding.

Mr. Humphreys said this was the whole of his case, and
if it was required he would quote very excellent authorities
upon the subject 4 support of this being a combination and
a conspiracy.
Mr. Lewis said, the only persons at ell implicated were
Francis Friend, Bind, Harper, and Robinson ; and with
regard to the other defendants there wan nothing to show
they took any part in the matter beyond attending the
meetings or chapels as they were called, and persona were
not 4,bl liable to ao indictment for conspiracy for holding
• chapel; because some might be for and others against
the propositions. Briad took an pert, although he wee