The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-13 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY
,EVENING, NOVEMBER 13, 1846,

proceeded to say that the name of the objector in this ease
was not in any parish list, but in the general list of freemen,
and therefore the schedule which referred to "parishes"
could not be strictly followed.
The Lord Chief was of opinion that, according to
the broad and reasonable construction of the statute, it re-
quired that the person objected to should be informed upon
what list the name of the objector was to be found. In
the present case the notice of objection stated that the party
objecting was on the list of voters for the borough of Idan-
cuter; and inasmuch as all the lists, however subdivided
they might be, were lists of voters for the borough, this
description was not so distinct as it ought to have been. The
statute required that the lid should be particularised in the
notice to be given by the objectors, and if it failed in this
respect, the act had not been complied with. If then the
notice was insufficient in not pointing out the particul..r list
in which the name of the objector was to be found, was it
competent to the revising barrister to correct the descrip-
tion as inaccurate, and to say that the notice of objection
was available, because it expressed something " commonly
understood ? " Looking to the rule laid down in the 101st
section, he (the Chief Justice) was of opinion that in this
case this misdescription was not such as the revising
barrister had power to correct. On the whole he thought
that the notice of objection was insufficient, and that there-
fore the revising barrister was wrong in holding the con-
trary
opinion. The other learned judges being of the rame
opinion as his lordship, the decision was ordered to be re-
versed.—Decision reversed.
COURT
SOFngs EXCHEQUER.in
Sane*.
Shortly after one o'clock the ordinary business of this
court was interrupted by the assembling of the judges,
together with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Camp-
bell (Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster), Sir George
Grey, &c., for the purpose of " pricking for," or nominating
the Sheriffs for the ensuing year.

circumstances, great difficulty was felt as to the beet course to
bepunued. A party in London, however, at whose house the
lunatic was staying, acted on the advice of a medical man
Who was called in, placed a keeper over him, and ultimately
caused him to be removed to a lunatic asylum at Stoke New-
ington ; this °marred in July last , and in this asylum the lunatic
has been gradually growing worseand worse until atthe present
time his mental condition is most deplorable. It was stated by
Mr. Rupert Kettle, and proved in evidence thatf the lunatic
now exhibits not one, but every symptom o
mania. is conduct is violent ; his reasoning power gone ;
H
he labours under hallucinations (amongst others, that he is
the Saviour, a friend of Louis Philippe, and a son of Napo-
leon); his personal habits are of the filthiest description,
and hot treatment of every one connected with him is bear
upon unfounded suspicions. It
the map from what
was stated by his keepers, and the medical men who had
attended him, that be had attempted self-destruction.
Upon being called before the jury, the unfortunate man
seemed totally unconscious of the objects ofthe procecdings,and
quite unable to receive any explanation respecting it. lie
could give no satisfactory reply to the questions put to him
respecting his friends, although he named one or two persons
at Birmingham, with whom he was connected in business
transactions, and who, he said, were trying to defraud him.
The jury, after ten minutes' examination of the lunatic,
found a unanimous verdict, " That Thomas Teague had
been of unsound mind since the 29th of July last."
With respect, however, to the canoe of insanity, and as
to the representatives or next of kin to the lunatic, they de-
clared that no sufficient evidence had been placed before
them. The question as to the lunatic's property will, there-
fore, remain to be decided by the Court of Chancery. It was
stated by Mr. Kettle, in the course of an elaborate and
affecting speech, with which he opened the case to the jury,
that inquiries for the lunatic's relatives had been induce
triously made in vain, that his estates were going to deer:, n
consequence of no person being authorised to tees;,in the
rents or to take care of the property, and that altli^,sigh they
were of considerable valve, yet that the lunatic nim,,eie
was
so turned by the prosperity which his P.LICONIS in life had
brought on him, that he estimated *:neir. at an enormous
amount, offered to purchase the Alsylum in which he was
rietor, and give the keepers
confined, to pension the prot,
5,0001. each to retire and leave him in possession. The
lunatic himself stated to the course of his examination, that
he knew his estat
'..11 were valuable, tLat they were going to
decay, but 'cha't he did not care for money.

SHERIFF'S COURT.
Before Mr. Under-Sheriff Barthel!.
SIRTIIORP v. LAYSLIE.--ORATITCD/L—Thill was a writ of
inquiry, the action being brought to recover the sum of
1351. 19s. 4d., from Mr. Cavendish Lapslie, a eon of Lieu-
tenant-Colonel Lapslie. The plaintiff is Mrs. Mary Ann
Sibthorp, a lodging-house keeper, at No. 24, Howland-street,
and sought to recover the amount of a bill for board, lodging,
and washing, together with an item of 501., as money lent,
for the purchase of clothes. It appeared that the defendant,
who lately held a situation on the Morning Post newspaper,
entered the plaintiff's house on the 12th of October, 11342
a condition which excited her compassion, and be rer-..atned
there until 1845, without offering any rer-_,nneeeti,m,
although he lived at the plaintiff's to ;e. At length
he left the plaintiff's house in an, ungrateful manner.
When applied to for payment by tht plaintiff's solicitors, he
made a distinct promise of payrsent.—For the defence it was
argued that the plaintiff Ktct entertained the defendant as a
guest, and that she hail never recognised him as a lodger.
To prove this, two letters addressed by the plaintiff to the
defendant were read, in which she said she bad the time
affection for h'.n as if he were her own offspring, and hoped
God would bless him for his ingratitude. She said she
should retain all his worn-out clothes, and an old pipe, in
remembrance of his conduct, and hoped he never might
meet with a worse friend than she had been to him. She
concluded by imploring blessings upon him, and a hope that
he would never have to repent of his abuse of her kindness.
• The court having summed up, the jury, without a moment's
, hesitation, gave a verdict for the plaintiff, with costs.
, PROCLAMATIONS OF OUTLAWRT.—Proclamation of out-
• lawry was made against Arthur Wellesley Williams, Samuel
Bertie Ambosse, George Pitt Rose, Samuel George Beamish,
Francis Charles Perry.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Commissioner Evans.
ROBERTS v. GOWER.—PRIVILEOR OP A ROYAL GROOM.
—His Honour said,—ln this case the plaintiffs recovered a
judgment in the Court of Exchequer against the defendant
for 51.85. 11d., and 41. 19s. Bd. costs. They then applied
for a summons, calling upon the defendant to appear in this
court, under the S& 9 Viet., cap. 127. Such summons is-
sued as a matter of cause. Upon the date of appearance
the defendant did not appear, and it being suggested that he
was a groom to her Majesty, in daily attendance open her, I
adjourned the matter for some days, intimating that in my
opinion he was bound to obey the summons, unless he could,
give a sufficient excuse. On the day of appearance by
adjournment, counsel appeared, and stated that ho appeared
for the Queen's Muter of the Horse ; that he was instructed
to make no excuse, but insist that the defendant, being a
domestic servant of her Majesty, was privileged from attend-
ing in pursuance of the summons. The learned counsel
then cited several cases to prove that a domestic servant of
hu Majesty was not liable to be arrested for dt. I told
him that I was quite aware that such was the law, but
begged him to state any cues decided that any person
was privileged from obeying the process of a court
of competent jurisdiction. He did not favour mo
with any such authority, and I have been unable
to discover any. If the defendant be privileged from
obeying the process of the court, all peers, members
of parliament and other privileged persona, would be jus-
titled in disobeying all process from courts of justice, from
attending as witnesses, from answering bills in equity, and
from being examined in this court. Such a privilege would
be most injurious to the public, for although not a large
portion of the public, yet they are a very influential portion.
Since I have sat in this court, I have issued summonses to
a very great number of peers and members of parliament,
and none of them have refused to obey. Had any one done
so, I should, without hesitation, have issued a warrant for
bringing them before the court. The question is therefore
very important, but it also appears to me to be without dif-
ficulty. As I have already stated, I can find no case of such
a privilege, and I find that it was decided in Serjt. Wel-
lesley's case, 2 Russell and Wigham, 609, that there is no
person privileged from being arrested if he be guilty of a
criminal contempt of a court of equity. This case has bens
cited and approved of in many other cases, and this case
would. I think, be sufficient to warrant me in commi
the defendant; but in the case of the King v. the Bishop a/
St. Asaph, reported in 1 Wilson, 332, Sayer 50, it was de-
cided that an attachment may issue against a peer for
refusing to obey the process of the court. To the same
effect is the King V. Ferrero, 1 Par. 636. See also Miller v.
Knox, 4 Newbans, 574. In the King a. Preston, 2 Salt.
278, it was decided that the Court of Queen's Bench was
justified in committing a peer who refused to be sworn. For
these reasons, I feel compelled to grant the warrant which is
- for.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
Before Mr. Commissioner Harris.
ADVERTISING DISCOUNTERS. -- The insolvent, named
Hance, who had passed this court and the Court of Bank-
ruptcy several times, was described as a bill discounter's
agent, and was opposed by three learned counsel. The in-
solvent had been in the habit of raising money upon accom-
modation bills for gentlemen with whom he became ac-
quainted by means of advertising in the different newspapers.
The case of Mr. Small was first entered into. That gentle-
man had answered an advertisement of the insolvent's, in
which he offered to get bills discounted for " gentlemen upon
their personal security ;" a correspondence was established
between them, which resulted in the insolvent's drawing a
bill upon Mr. Small for 3001., half of which sum was to be
handed to Mr. Small, and the other half the insolvent was
to retain, each to pay their own portion when the bill should
become due. The sum raised, however, was only 2001.,
of which Mr. Small received 70/. instead of 100/.,
but he was now liable for the whole amount of the bill. Mr.
Low's opposition was for damages awarded in an action on a
bill of exchange. The bill was drawn by Maria Hemming
on the insolvent, which she paid to her landlord, a Mr.
Phillips, and, upon its becoming due, the bill was honoured
by her. By some means, however, it afterwards got into
the hands of the opposing creditor, who sued the insolvent;
and, when the case came on for trial, there being no defence,
a verdict was given against him. It was contended that the
insolvent's plea to the action was frivolous and vexatious
but the court considered the case to be full of suspicion, and
thought the objection hardly sustainable. The opposition of
the Rev. Mr. Travers was then gone into. The insolvent
had received two bills from Mr. Travers for the purpose of
being discounted; the amount was 4101. Upon receiving the
two bills, the insolvent placed them in the hands of a Mr.
Levy. Some time after, the Rev. Mr. Travers applied
for the return of these bills. The insolvent, how-
ever, could only obtain one of the bills m Mr.
Levy, the other having been paid away. Mr. Travers had
never received any money upon the bill, which the insolvent
declared he had repeatedly endeavoured to get back for him.
The insolvent wrote a letter to Mr. Travers, cautioning him
not to pay the bill when due, and undertaking to defend
any action that might be brought against him (Travers) on
account of the bill. An action was afterwardsbrought against
Travers, but instead of going to trial he settled the matter,
and then brought his action against the insolvent upon his
undertaking. The insolvent pleaded to the action, but on
trial the verdict was given against him. It was contended
that this was a frivolous and vexatious defence.—The Com-
missioner held that an action for damages was not within
the penal clause of the statute. The defence, to be frivolous
and vexatious, must be to an action for debt. Here no debt
existed until after the verdict was given. He added, that
the law was not made to protect parties who were weak
enough to connect themselves with advertising money-
lenders. Those who had dealinis with such parties must
suffer the consequences. The iveilat would be discharged.
Discharged accordingly.

ive,cii

COMMISSION OP LUNACY.
An interesting inquiry, under a Commission de tuna-
floc issquirenzlo, took place yesterday, before Mr. Corn-
atimioner Winslow, at the Manor House Tavern, in the
Green-lanes, Hornsey. The alleged lunatic, who was named
Thomas Teague, has for many years past carried on the busi-
ness of a plumber and glazier, in a considerable way at Bir-
mingham. His history, and the cause of his insanity, as
detailed in the speech of Mr. Rupert Kettle, of the Oxford
circuit, who appeared as counsel for the commission, were
curious. Teague was a native of Wales, of humble parent-
age. At an early age he went to Birmingham, where he
worked in the shop of a painter. Having saved a little
money, and taken advantage of the favourable accidents of
life, he commenced business on his dwn account, and by
great indiurtry, real, and perseverance, amassed considerable
property. In the course of time he purchased land, and
i built houses n and about Birmingham, and also be-
came a landed proprietor in his native county.
This prosperity, however, proved too exciting for
a mind not naturally powerful. Two or three years ago he
exhibitedptoms of insanity, which, in the month ofJaly
hot, during a sym bushing visit to London, developed itself in a
form too clear to admit of doubt. The peculiarity of the
case, however, was that no one knew who were the lunatic's
relations. No one who had known him had ever met with
any one with whom he claimed acquaintance, or had heard
him speak of 7;•latives, save once, when he accidentally
dropped that a ...4ted of his had gone to America in early
life, and had never ss yea been heard of. Under these ein,ndar

1 per Cent Grow& Bond:i0---
5 per Cent. Mexican Ws., Acct.,
Nor. 16, 22)
4 per Cent. Portuguese Bcodx,
And., 564
5 Per Colt Spanish Bonds, Acct.,
Nov. 16, 664 4

POLICE v _ESTERDAY.
CLERKENWELL. ROBBERY. - Joseph Judd was
placed at the bar, charged by Charles Marlborough with
stealing 130 sovereisrns.—The prosecutor and the prisoner
lodged together in a house, No. 3, liayward's-place, Wood-
bridge-street, Clerkenwell, and slept in the same apartment. 41
The former was porter to Mr. Lemaire, egg-merchant, of 1(
Tumnall-street, and by industry had contrived to save 130
17
sovereigns, which he kept in a box in his bed-room. Forty
sovereigns were found on the prisoner when taken into
custody, and half a sovereign, which was identified by the 31
prosecutor as being amongst the property stolen. lie had 4,
also been traced to have been spending money extravagantly. 2;
—The prisoner denied the charge, but was remanded.
MARYLEBONE.—EXTESTSIVE FRAUDS UPON TRADES-
MIN BY A FEMALE.—EIiza Clarke, a well-dressed young
female, was charged with having, by means of fraudulent re- i
presentations, obtained shawls, &c.,of tradesmen ,to a consider- 1;
able amount. The court was much crowded. On Wednesday, II
the 28th ult., the prisoner obtained from Mr. Evans, draper,
High-street, Hampstead, four shawls, for which, as al- ;
leged by her, she was sent by Mr.. Collins (a customer), who
was desirous of selecting one. Inquiries were sulwiesvientiv
made, when it was ascertained that the lady alluded to had
not authorised any one to go to the shop. Nothing more
was seen or heard of the prisoner until the following Friday, 34,
when, after shelled endeavoured to " victimise " Mr. Naylor 1(
of Kentish-town, in a similarly artful way, she was captured
is
by Bradby, 337 S, who met with her in the shop of a stay- 1;
maker in Camden-town. It was also proved that she had
11
obtained seven shawls from Messrs. Johnson and Son, Ux-
bridge ; from Mrs. Luxford, Suffolk-street, Southwark, three r,
pairs of stays ; from Mrs. Schooling, Warsiour-street, Soho, u
five pairs of boots; and from Mr. Martin, High-street, High-
gate, six shawls and a scarf. None of the property has been 11
met with • and the prisoner, although most positively sworn
to, denied' having ever been in any of the shops. She was t
committed for trial upon five charges. It
SOUTHWARK.—A CHARGE OP POISONING.-IftS.
Mary Worrell, the wife of a tradesman, living in Union-
street, Borough-road, made an application to Mr. Seeker, 1
relative to two men whom she found attempting to poison
her.—The applicant produced a small hand-basket, contain- 2,
t
big various kinds of food, into which poison had been in-
fused, by the two persons she named, for the purpose of de-
stroying her,—/dr. Seeker inquired how they had contrived
to poison her food ; and she said that they contrived to in-
trude themselves into the house, which gave them an oppor-
tunity of putting poison in the sugar, the bread, and even in
the meat ; that she was perpetually followed by them, and
that they seemed not only determined to destroy her, but
also her family ; that she was then under medical treat-
ment from the effects of the food she had taken, with which
poison had been mixed.—The applicant, who appeared to be
in a state of great mental anxiety on the subject, implored
the magistrate's interference to prevent such a foul plot
against her life.—Mr. Seeker desired the applicant to com-
pose her mind, that he should give directions for inquiries to
be made on the subject, and that if it was ascertained such
poisons as those she described had been resorted to for the
purpose of effecting her death, the parties she complained
of should be taken into custody. The applicant then thanked
the magistrate, and withdrew.

EDMONTON PETTY SESSIONS.
RAILWAY Bye-LAWS AGAINST DKUNKENNLBI3.—Mr.
Henry Lock, linendraper, was brought up, charged with
being drunk and creating • disturbance on the Eastern
Counties Railway, at the Tottenham Vale stat:on.—William
WoRamses, porter at the station, saidthat the previous &re-
noon, about half-past ten o'clock, he was on duty at the
station, when, on the down train stopping, the defend-
ant got out. He wished to enter the carriage again, as he
had to go to the Mash-lane station, but was detained, as
some complaint had been made that he was intoxicated.
Upon being prevented, he caused a great disturbance.—Mr.
Chapman, the station-master, said that the conduct of the
defendant was so violent, that they were obliged to send to
the police station, where he was taken.—Chairman : You
proceed against the defendant under your bye-laws 2—The
witness observed that, by their bye-laws, no per-
son is allowed in a carriage in a state of intoxi-
cation ; but ho was directed to press the charge
under the Metropolitan Police Act. The defendant was
such a state that the persons in the carriage were glad to get
rid of him.—The defendant said that he left home early that
morning without his breakfast, and went to London on
business, where he took a glass or two with& friend, which got
the better of him. He was fined 55., with Ss. 6d. coats.
CAUTION TO DELLIELS IN FIREWOIII3.—Miss Mary
Bourne, dealer in fireworks, Tottenham, was summoned un-
der the 9th and 10th Will. 111., with selling a quantity of
catherine wheels, squibs, &c., to a boy named Wm. Sinclair,
by which she was liable to a penalty of dl., without mitiga-
tion. The charge was proved by Policeman Greay and the
boy, and the defendant was assisted by a solicitor.—The
chairman said, that the bench had no alternative to lower
the fine, but that if the solicitor of the defendant could find a
clause in any subsequent act, of mitigation, he would make
the fine less. He added. that on Guy Fawkes night his horse
nearly ran nway with him, and a friend of his had a valuable
horse severely injured in consequence of the fireworks.

MONEY MARKET.
THURSDAY Brims°.
The increased demand for money noticed yester-
day has prevailed again to-day ; the rate payable for Stock
Exchange purposes continuing at 24 per cent. This less
favourable state of the Money Market seems at length to
have produced a corresponding effect on the value of the
public securities. Console have declined 8 per cent. It was
however a particularly quiet day. The government brokers
purchased a larger amount than usual for account of the
savings banks, taking 34 per Cent. stock to the amount of
10,0001. The daily investment for account of the Commis-
sioners for the Reduction of the National Debt was made in
tie New South Sea Annnities. Previous to one o'clock the
r money quotation for Consols was a shade better than that
fir time ; but, at the close of business, they were at 944 to I
both for money and account. Exchequer Bills remain
steady at lls. to 14s. prem.
In the foreign house there was some heaviness in Peruvian
stock. Spanish was firm at the rates of yesterday. The
Five per Cents. left off 264 ; the Three per Cents., 374.
Peruvian, 33 to 5. The Chilian Three per Cent. Deferred
Bonds were rather in request, but there were no sellers.
From Hanover, on the 6th inst., it is stated that the
government had contracted a loan with four houses of that
city, for 4,800,000 dialers, in order to complete the railways
towards Hamburgh and Bremen. The loan is at the rate of
5 per cent.

ENGLISH FUNDS.—Noe. 12.
Bank Stock, 2044 51 Long Annaitief.„ 30 ream, expire
11 per Ct. Reduced Atinrdties, 931 Jan 5, 1560, 10 3-16
i India Bonds, .ClOOO, 24
3 per Cent. Conn* Anna, 941 Ditto, under £lOOO, 24 19
i 1 South Sea New Anna., 911
New 31 per Cent. Anna., 951 11 Consols for Acct., 941
1 I N. Binh. £1.4, 0. 144., 11 14
Long Annuities, expire Jan. 5, Ditto, 5001., 11 14 pm.
1560, 91 Ditto, Small, 11 14
-----1 FUNDS.
2 per Cent. Venezuela Bonds, 40
2i per Cent. Dutch Exchange, 12
Gull., 591
4 per Cent. Dutch Certificates,
92 11 2

• --- -
EXCHANGES AND STOCKS ABROAD.
VIENNA, Nor. 4.—Fire pet Cents, 1081; Four per Cents., 991 ;
Three per Cents, 701; Lose of 1841, 136; Ditto, 1839, 127;
Bank Shares, 1,534.
Beaux, bor. 7.-Bt. Behold Sch. Three-and-a-Half per Cents.,
961 bills, 921 money. Foreign Exchanges: On London, IL sterling,
two months, 8 221 bills, 6 211 money. On Hamburg, 300
two months, 1491 money. On Faris, 300 francs, two usontrea,r;2
money.
thousoso, Nor. 7.—Austrian Fire per Ceuta., 11l Mlle; Bank
Shares, 1,570 tills; Russian English Loan, 1061 bills; Ditto, lire per
Ceuta Hamburg Certificates, toll bills, 1011 money ; Ditto, let Berke
Inscriptions, 1021 hills; Ditto, Ffope and Co., 3rd and 4th Bevies, 971
bah • Ditto, in Certificates, 961 MM. New Four per Cents, Hope
sad.&, 87 money; Ditto, Weigle, 87 bills; Spanish New Floe per
Cents, 181 bine, 18i mosey ; Dane Actual Debt, Two-an:La-HMI
pee Cents., 38 bills; Dank& Lash Loan, S 4 bilis.