The Express.
London, England, 1851-11-17 00:00:00

SUICIDE OF LORD DE
able

THE GREAT

It is a most commendable proceeding on the part
of the royal oonunissiotters to set shoat the formation of a
collection of specimens of raw prodeos sad manufactures,
with a view to the establishment of a commercial museum.
The exhibitors, both British sad fiessign, to whom the corn-
!
minioners applied for specimens with this object, having
liberally responded to the appeal, ea interesting and highly
useful collection has been maned. On this subject the fol-
lowing document hue been Wetted, in answer to several
anxious inquiries on the part of the trading and mercantile
community:

"Statecneut of the origin, premed prank's, and prospects
of the collection now in coarse of formation by the Execu-
tive Committee.—Ace many inquizias are beii constantly
made of the Executive Committee as to the object of the
collection in course of formation, and as to the position in
which it now steeds, they have deemed it advisable to pee-
pers the following statement. On the 6th of July, 1851,
her Majesty's commissioners authorised an official implicit•
lion to he made to exhibitors for specimens of the raw pro-
duce and manufactures exhibited by them, with a view to
the future establishment of a commercial museum. It was
at that time considered that such a collection would form an
interesting record of the Exhibition of 18.51, and, conse-
quently, of the state of industrial science in that
year ; and that it would not at first bo so ex-
tensive but that it could be contained in a good-sized
room. But the numerous and liberal contributions of the
exhibitors, both of Great Britain and foreign countries,
bare gradually extended the scope of the collection, and, in
fact, made it the germ of what may become, not merely in-
teresting to the statisticians of future ages, but of that which
may satisfy a great public want in this metropolis, vitt. a
trade collection of the imports and exports of the world,
where men of business may examine and practically test
samples of those articles in which they are trading. This
direction has been already given to the collection by the
Important contributions of exhibitors of al I countri,s many
of whom have deposited valuable articles in the hand; otthe
executive committee, with the certainty that it will be a
means of bringing the produce of their mines, cultivation,
or workshops, before the notice of the mercantile and gene•
ral public with even a more permanent advantage to them-
selves than his been derived from the Exhibition which has
just closed. The destination of such a collection,
as well u the further development of the under-
taking, arc, necessarily, subjects for future consideration;
but, in the meantime, the executive committee consider it
their duty to aid, so far as their authority extends, in satis-
fying the desire so universally expressed to them ; and it
must be obvious that the fate of such a cull. dims must en-
tirely depend upon the interest which the public of this and
other countries take in it, and individuals will bo able to
judge fur themselves whether, after this explanation of the
present state of tile matter, they do or do not wish, to be
re7resentcd in the collection. In order to guard themselves,
on the one hand, against overstepping the limits within
which their action is confined by her Majesty's commis-
sioners, and, on the other haul, against disappointing the
expectation of the public in forming this collection, the
executive committee have laid down for themselves and
their officers the following principles :
" I. That the collection should comprise samples of all
articles of trade.

"2. That fur the present exhibitors only in the Late Ex-
hibition will he permitted to contribute to the collection.
"3. That antiquities, curiosities, and articles relating
only to pure science, are inadmissible, there being already
places far better suited to the reception of such things than
what it is now contemplated to establish.
"4. That as it is to the interest of the public that those
articles nuly shall be received which it would be of advan-
tage to the producer to supply, no exhibitor should be
pressed to contribute to the collection.
"5. That the questioner presentation should be resolved
only with reference to the point whether it is of any valise,
iu a commercial point of view, for the public to kuow that
A. B. priduces such an article in such a country.
" el. That it shall be quite at the option of the depositor
to attix to his article all necessary information in regard to
price, process, amount of production, &e. eke.
" 7. That the presentation of objects is to be absolute, it
being clearly understood that her Majesty's Commissioners
are ins ested with the
.power of disposing of the articles in
the way which, in their opinion may be most advantageous
to the public. M. W YATT,
Secretary to the Executive Committee.
November, 1851.

CONCLUSION OF THE RAMSHAY INQUIRY.

PRESTON, SATURDAY, Nov. 15.
At the opening of the court the first witness called
was

Mr. George Stone, who said he was high bailiff of the
Liverpool County Court, and had been appointed by the
late Mr. Lowndea. lie considered the demeanour of Mr.
'Cambay as CAM, collected, and dignified. He had im-
proved the mode of conducting business. lie had a peculiar
mode of shutting his teeth, and people who did not know
him thought it was from had temper.
Mr. It.imshay here rose and said, that although he did
not wish to volunteer as a witness in his own cause, he was
ready to answer any question put to him.
This closed the ease for the defence. _ _

Mr. Monk then replied on the part of the memorialists.
He commenced by deprecating the violent attacks which
had been made by Scrjeant Wilkins on everybody, high
and low. lie was certainly surprised that the learned ear-
jeant had so virulently attacked the reporters, who were
performing a peaceful and useful duty, and who could not
make any answer. He had, however, made use of their
testimoey when it suited his purpose. He denied that the
press of Liverpool bad prevented Mr. Ramshay from per.
forming his duties. The learned counsel then censured the
selection of the county court for the dinner, and said he did
not think Serjeant Wilkins had justified the introduction
by Mr. Ramshay of the biographical account of his family.
After deicribiug at some length the scene in court when
Mr. Wbitty was present, he contended that there ought to
have been some warrant, writing, or authority for his
arrest. The attempt to arrest Mr. Whit y, under the cir-
cumstances, was utterly unauthorised; and the bailiffs
might have been tre.ited as trespassers, or even as Sir
George Stephen had advised.
The court here adjourned for a short time, after which
Mr. Malik proceeded to defend the witnesses on the part of
the memorial from the observations and attacks of Mr. Ser-
jeant Wilkins.
On the conclusion of the learned gentleman's address,
Mr. Fowler expre-sed his thanks, and that of Mr. Serjeant
Wilkins, to his lordship.
The Earl of Carlisle said be should give his decision with
as little delay as the importance of the subject warranted.
The inquiry then terminated a lithe before four o'clock.

'TIE GUILD OF LITERATURE AND ART.—The
amateur company of the Guild of Literature and Art com-
menced their performances in the provinces on Monday,
with Sir E. Battier Lytton's comedy of " Not so Bad as
we Seem ; or, Many Sides to a Character," before a crowded
end fashionable audience, at the Assembly Rooms, Bath.
The east was the same as at Devonshire-house, the per-
formers being Mr. Frank Stone A.K.A. Mr. Charles
Dickens, Mr. Robert Bell, Mr. Augustus Egg, A.K.A.,
Mr. Dadlealostello, Mr. John Forster, Mr. Peter Cunning-
ham, Mr. Douglas Jerrold, Mr. K. H. Horne, Mr. Charles
Knight, Mr. ark Lemon, Mr. Popham, Mr. Wilkie Col-
lins. at. The comedy was very well played, and the
making-up of all of the different characters was excellent.
The farce of "Mr. Nightingale's Diary" followed. The
performance was repeated on Wednesday, at Bristol, the
theatre, with all its appurtenances and appointments, hav-
ing been removed by Mr. Simian, and fitted up in the Vie-
torie-rooms. Notwithstanding that the theatre occupied a
considerable space, there were seats for upwards of twelve
hundred people. Every one of these was taken; and so
rapidly were they disposed of, that the amateurs were soli-
' cited to give a second performease in Bristol. To do this
was extremely inconvenient Y SNOW of them, owing to
' literary engagements ; but they eceserai. Everything
went off on Wednesday evening with aseilmation.
ROTA'. COLLEGE OF Susazosh.--The following
penthesen basins undespeee the astessary examinations,
were
winiteed seenbers et the Osage ea Pr loth inst.:—
Mears- E. It. hawse, Bat Olteselgoese, Doves ; J. E. Tol-
ima Boston; J. Collis, Absalom; J. W. Eastwood, Claes-
Wield ; W. E. Day, Bristol; J. M. Roche, Feraoy; and C.
Chihnell, Tuthill-street, Weassdaeter. At the same meet-
fag of the court Mr. J. W. Elliott peered his examination
ter naval surges.
LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN AND GREAT
WUTIZN COMPANI66.—In consequence of the contras-
paned lease of the Cheshire line to the Great Western,
amen. Stephenson and Locks have been instructed by the
Landon and North Western Company to survey a new line
to Birkenhead. It is proposed that it shall pass off from
the Chester and Holyhead line west of Chester. It will
therefore run to the west of the Chester Company's line
ben Chester to Birkenhead, and nearly parallel with it.
Is length it will be about the same as the erWas line.
The cost of It is alienated at half a rain er thereabouts.
The Shrewsbury sod Chester Company, en the ether band,
tiltthe pienentlen in yerhisent meet *swim of a bill
s to one of senewheee about he Lhneralea road
station, sad sus to Almon en the Meer or& Holyhead
line, between! and le aim The Aleut of this measure
is to give the Great Welton and *eh 111hrowsbury allies a
line to Ireind enfielybesil. ss wee Independent of the
London and North Western aril Chester and Holyhead W-
inne* as erosible. If this wen anis& the Armee to
Holyhead we the Great Werra awl ale the Lewis ern
honk Western (existing ranee) west* be awn the nom
These are the prepainnues der a awns peafflausestry wee
between the two grew seespislie.—Liesepsel Ckevaide.
FSTICSSIVE ism=OP Apirmaesr.D PEPPER.
—A suend crusade of the SEMI of the Wend Revenue
Downing against the to ides red resew of the on
rendes heeler been ben* to a dam and In upwards of
=siimbiantserea senues, haft et witellueseed pepper and the
hr mesh YbumeNtr. twee been nub bs the
shops of sine of the larger rime ht lends.. The
spurious
. esempened ernwis. as =ism known r
"P. D.,' labs of wimetwd seek dela, linseed,
rice and uneweens ether sabuthwhe ter , which,
belie wend up tnyelher, are veryt>raalt sldsbellen.
In two or these awe, an the Sane, side of the warner, the
offenders an irm the washer who wen Ind by the
' Inland Reran' Corriesisneus Is Nay Ism% in
varving from M. to 1001. Pines inhumane than =et:
to the knowledge of the eanniesloners, it appears that bat
a small proportion of real ppopppssrr finds its way to the con-
sumer, and that the poorer bMriwo are not exclusively the
places where this band upon the public is committed. Pro-
ccettiop will shortly be ccennested for the recovery of
penalties to a large amount.

—..aurtzas.—The lament-
sy.e te death of Lard William De

Blayaiere, 01 Be be Vali, Norwood, Surrey, aged 74,
were ors Friday is litigated before W. Carter, Esq. From
the evidence of Clarefino Brown, Mary Ann Shaw, Mr.
Street (tarpon), end ether wiggles, it appeared that the
deceased noblerner bed taken aphis reeidence in the locality
of Maw° 4 for above tea arathe post. Daring this period
be shanties and good gigs to the peer of the district had
bag in mowitinee with the awn he has invariablireszo:
Wed. His health had for loge date been very hadi
sad ea eta* of manioc bad eetestly
_albstodi his %h e
hies latellesis. As his theampanat did ast west to be
of a saisidel *anew be was sat wateitsit 11111 Minty as
would otherwise have bees amid aessesary. Oa Taseday
night leg be lonLhip mired to rest at an early bees% sod
awaking et about fear Vets* es the irds atseates,
he Mbed ass of his fensab semis to befog lan OM
of his gin* which was oosoodlooly dine. If wee then
aerobieged, bat his Isedship diseiralibat weistaftersais
Sebum aboakt be salted, sod duke the aim= of the
herb sena% it would seen that his 3M Iselni dor
pistol with a heavy charge of powder GM • imp igratity
of sir= shot. and before the valet seal bees asesd the
%pest of bran% created the atlas% Mama be tV man.
elm. ant IS several of the domed% maWS MMs Ind-
skip's oltatabn they found him Wog es the penal weber-
*/ in be blood. Immediately the ails of Mr. hoest,
of Norwood, surgeon, were aided kin _rogaieldea.boa
beim the snivel of that gentleness Ids MY* bad arond
le mist. The peel rasr.res emanates thawed that his
Whim avast boo bees a ware hum haw ; sad
this dreamier% bni puss& that woos
debility width bad se dopaired
_big imibOes nil ea to
urge his to commit selminea. The diseased lord
was • peer of Ireland, sad sassed the SAW la 1791, in
which he was actively engaged be swami years, remising
the rank of full general in 11141. Diis ma sal inseseser,
Lord John, a captain of the 3rd Wog Wig Balbionige is
the po nor of the celebrated mitt Aareles. Oa the
cone anon of the evidence the orriger summed op, and the
Jury returned a verdict of " Teorgessry lasenity."
DIPED,LAL SALT AND ALNALI COMPANT.—A
meeting in this getter was bald on Saborday, before
blaster in Chancery Tinaey, when the list of matributories
was higher sold d and instructions taken for the realisa-
tion of assets from the sale of the 's property. It
Is understood that the arrangsamis aching are such that
there will be a return disarm Wend of a call on the un-
fortunate shareholders, who were led %believe tag "soap"
could be made out of " dint."

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 17, 1851.

kal33 bitelitgence.

EQUITY COURTS.-EATUBDAL
Berne Tim Logos Juane= or Ares...
ATTOENET-OENZHAL O. MOILDOCH AND OTHERS.
. . •

Mr. Holt wu heard till the rising of the court in cond.
tuition of the argument for the defendants (the appellants)
in this part-heard ease.
Lord Justice Lord Cranworth, on rising for the day, in-
timated to the bar that the cause list fur each day would in
future be suspended in court as soon as possible after the
previous day's sitting. The same arrangement bad, he un-
derstood, been directed by the Lord Chancellor, and the
other equity judges in their respective courts.
Mr. Holt, on behalf of the bar, thanked their lordships
for the arrangement as a much more convenient one than
the practice hitherto observed, of withholding the publica-
tion of the lists till sir o'clock.

Simms, a t
XTIRS V. Pzi

o, limns vas Lois CZASICILLOIL
!NARITA/LI BEIATTAT.—Moar-
MAIN.

This ease, which was an appeal from a decree of Vice-
Chancellor Knight Bruce, was set down for judgment this
morning. The testator gave the residue of his personal
estate in trust to convert the same into money (except cer-
tain shares in the Northumberland and Durham District
Bank), and invest in securities, paying the interest to the
plaintiff fur life, and after her decease to convert the bank
shares into money, to be invested in government secu-
rities to stand in his name for ever, the dividend to be re-
ceived in equal portions by the Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge the Society for Propagating the
Gospel in Foreign Pa:is, the Church Missionary Society,
and the Church Building Society. The Master's report
with respect to the shares stated that the property of the
bank consisted among other things of certain freehold
lands, copyhold lands, and money due on mortgage of free-
hold or copyhold or leasehold lands, and that all the pro-
perty savoured of realty except as far as the shares were
altered or varied in respect of their nature and quality by a
deed of settlement, whereby the shares in the bank were
declared to be personal estate. The Vice-Chancellor held
that the shares were within the Mortmain Acts.

-
The Lord Chancellor was understood to say that property
et this kind had grown to so large an extent, and there had
bees to many conflicting decisions, that it seemed to him
"strongly important to put the matter in such a course
as to have a speedy settlement of all doubts. The cases
appeared to divide themselves into three classes. The first
Included cases of corporations; companies which were oor•
potations, but of a peculiar nature, where the individual
members had a right to a separate share in the profits.
With regard to these, it had been decided that shaves in this
kind of corporate property were not within the Mortmain
Act. There were two or three eases on the point, in one
et which, the case of the Chelsea Waterworks Company, the
court held that it did not come within that set. there
was this distinction between ordinary corporations and
these corporate companies; in general corporations the cor-
porator hail no specific share, and could not assign any in-
terest; but in this kind he had a separate interest, which
was capable of being assigned. The second class referred
to joint-stock companies established by act of parliament,
not incorporated. Here there was no distinction
between the interests of the members of a joint
stock company established by act of parliament,
and a company established by deed, except in so
far as specific enactments were made, as the insertion of
a clause to the effect that the interests of the
shareholders should lie deemed personal estate. There
was no distinction save this, that the enactments of
the act were binding, whatever might be their effect. This
was not one of these cases, and he need not now consider
what was the effect of a joint stock company established by
act of parliament. The present company was one eats•
blished by deed. The question here arose on the peculiar
nature of the property, but he had been unable to discover
any distinction between a partnership of 500 and one of two
or three persons. Difficulties might no doubt arise in con-
sequence of the increase of numbers, but this could not
affect the character of the property. I was said that the
legislature in passing the Mortmain Act (9 Cleo. 11., c. 36),
did not contemplate this kind of property. In Isis opinion
the act had no application. It was well in eases of construc-
tion of statutes to look to those cases decided soon after the
act ot legislation as possible. A case was decided sor 6 years
after the passing of that act. In " The Attorney-General
v. Weymsn" (2 Ambler), where the teatator directed his
estate to be sold, and out of the proceeds a certain sum
given to charities, the question arose whether that was
within the Mortmain Act. The Lord Chancellor in that
case remarked that the general words of the preamble of
the act to prevent property being inalienable had been re-
lied on, but his lordship thought that the intention of the
statute had been interpreted too strictly, and it was al-
ways held that the title of an act was no part there-
of. He (Lord Truro), in passing, would just remark
with reference to the provisions of the 36th chapter of
Magna Chlrta and the ith of Edward 1., that there had
been a lung and constant struggle between the clergy and
laity, the one trying to prevent alienations and the other to
prevent disinherison of heirs. Ile referred to that circum-
stance, as it might account for the generality of the words
of the 9th Geo. 11. It often happened that in enactments
to provide against a certain thing acts in themselves inno-
cent were declared to be unlawful, and penalties enacted.
The first duty therefore was to look to the language of a
statute to sec whether it plainly came within the object
sought to be attained by the act of legislation. The sta-
tute 29th Geo. li. pointed to the disherison of heirs under
the circumstance of advantage being taken of that state
• • -

of mind, whereby persons were less capable of resolution,
on a death-bed. Then as to the question of partnership, it
was to be considered whether there was any difference be-
tween this and an ordinary partnership. ft appeared by
the deed that the banking company were to make advances
on mortgage, and that the general body were to have the
control of the whole company at meetings to be called in a
particular manner. The land therefore appeased to be
subject at all times to the disposition of the general body,
or their managing partners, or, in other words, directors.
It seemed to him, therefore, to be important to consider
what was the effect of the deed, whether this was distinct
from an ordinary partnership, and next, what would be the
effect of the company having complete control over all their
property. From toe time the azt passed down to the
present day, cases were constantly occurring at intervals on
its construction, sod it seemed to him important, as well
for the sake of the general principle involved as fur the
interests of the parties, that they should have the opinion of
a court of law with regard to the construction of the act of
parliament on this important point. The property in this
Nee was of considerable value, amounting to about 6GO
shares ; and the cost of obtaining an opinion from a court
at law would not be great, sea from the present state of busi-
ness very little delay aced be incurred. At the same time
its was quite prepared, if the parties desired it, to give his
Minuet.
After sons deliberation, his lordship's suggestion was
assodod to by counsel for the parties to the suit.
His lordship specially. directed the attention of the bar
as the authorities bearing on this question given in Mr.
Evans's learned work the Collection of the Statutes.

RAVINES V. THE EA COUNTIES RAILWAY
COMPANY.

Mr. Mains concluded the argument for the defendants,
and Sir Fitzroy Kelly was partly heard in reply. The
further hearing of this cause was adjourned till Tuesday
morning.

Bkroas Tit Marra or rye Row.
ZOLIIIITA o. TYIIII.
Mr. Stuart replied in this ease, and
The Muter of the Rolls dererred his judgment.

Baroae
Ba►DBUYT •. THE I

It 'MUM&
SHEFFIELD, AND LIN.

COLNbMIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.

The plaintiff in this cue war the owner of cotton mills
which abutted on the Manchester, Ashton-under-Lyne, awl
Oldham Canal, between Loweatreet and Boond-street, in
Manchester. The defendants (the railway company) had
become by virtue of an act of parliament the owners of the
canal, which had been originally cut by a company in or
about the year 1791 under the provisions of acts of parlia-
ment which constituted the canal a public canal. There
was another defendant in the suit, Mr. Bowler, who, under
some arrangement with the company and with their sanc-
tion, had walled off a creek or piece of land covered with
very shallow water, and separated it from the canal at a
point situated at the bottom of Boond-street. The plain-
tiff's bill alleged that the creek so walled off was an integral
part of the canal, and charged that defendants intended to
fill up the ate and to build thereon, and claimed that he
bad a right of frontage upon the creek as part of the canal
immediately outside his mills in which there were windows
and a water doorway opening into the creek, and the bill
prayed for a declaration of the plaintiff's rights end an in-
junction.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Prior now moved for an injunction to
restrain the defendants from excluding the water of the
canal from the creek, or preventing the flow of the water
of the canal as it flowed before Whitsuntide, 1850, or to ob-
struct the water access over the canal to the north-east front
of the plaintiff's property. It appeared that the plaintiff's
title to the land and frontage was a deed of the 16th of May,
1840, by which the company conveyed the site of the front
of the plaintiff's mills, describing it as abutting on the
north-east on the canal.

•
Mr. Hallos and MT. G. L. Russell opposed the motion on
the ground that the creek in question was not a portion of
the canal. They contended that the admittal in the deed of
1840, was an ernr or inaccuracy, not binding the company.
It was agreed that the plaintiff's mills abutted on the canal
on the northern frontage, but there was great discrepancy
in the evidence, whether the creek on the north-east
frontage had ever been a part of the canal, or used as such.
The case of Blakernore and the olamorganshire Canal Com-
pany, 1 My. and K. 164, and 6 Tyr. 603, was cited.
The Vice-Chancellor, upon tho defendants undertaking
that the property should be continued in its present state,
directed the motion to stand over with liberty for the
plain,iff to bring such action as he might be advised at the
next Liverpool mains.
THI BUSINESS OF TIM COURT.
The Vice-Chancellor, at the rising of the court, addressed
Mr. Bacon, and said hat the Lord Chancellor and the
Lords Justices bad given directions that the muse paper of
each court should be prepared, and that the registers
should take measures for musing the court paper for each
court to be edited at the door of the office as soon as pos-
sible alter the court's rise, leaving it to each judge to do
what he may think most convenient is his court. His
Honour said he should give direction that the course should
be followed in his court.
Mr. bacon begged, on behalf of the bar, to thank his
I Honour for so useful a change. The plan suggested would
very much conduce to facilitate counsel in the despatch of
business. He knew that the solicitors would be still more
deeply indebted to the court for the change, as it would en-

able them to make preparations for the following day, '
which they have hitherto been frequently unable to make,
in consequence of the lateness of the hour at which du,
business of the ensuing day has been announced.

Bisnaz pcs.CiAnau.on Ns R. EIPDIRILIM

CAUSZ 17R;
- COURT.

OF TOE

Tho Vice-Chancellor, at the runes of the court, made
the announcement with respect to the publicatiou of cause
fiats, above reported in Vice-Chancellor Parker's Court.
Mr. Bethel) returned the thanks of the bar.

QUEEN'S BENCH-JUDGES' CHAMBERS.
SATURDAY.
arms NIL JUmcK Eats.
___

THE QUEEN ON THE PROSECUTION OF WM. PHELPS
HOLLAND V. THOMAS HELMSMEN. INDICTMENT FOR
new/intr.

In this case an indictment was preferred against the de-
fendant, a solicitor and banker, lately resident in London,
but for many yearn carrying on business at Godalming, in
Surrey, for perjury, alleged to have been committed by
him in an answer tiled in the Court of Chancery relative to
certain transactions between him and Wm. Phelps Rol-
land, the extensive brewer, of the same town. A true bill
was found by the grand jury, at the Middlesex Sessions,
on Tuesday last, and a judge's warrant, issued upon the
usual certificate.
The bail proposed were Mr. Holme and Mr. Frampton,
and the only question was the amount.
Mr. Binns, who appeared as agent to the solicitor for the
prosecution, submitted that the court could not accept at-
torneys as bail.
Mr. Justice Erle said that the rule did not apply in a
case of misdemeanour, and fixed the bail at 2001. The
usual recognisance' were entered into, and the defendant
discharged.

BAIL COURT.—BATURDAT.
Frrreass SUMO. —Banta Y. Jawrica Eats,

Tat QUEEN v. THE MAYOR AND A63ESSON OP HARTLE-

P00L..--MAN DAM VS.

Mr. Cole moved for a rule calling on the mayor and
assessor of the borowzb of Hartlepool to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue commanding them to place •
person called Dobiuy upon the burgess roll of the borough
as the occupier of a house, and he having been assessed to
the rates for upwards of three years.
Rule nisi grant( el.
.11-11r,011 AT NM PAM.
BALL V. MOCNTFoRD.—CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE.

This was an action to recover the sum of 56/. 101. 9d. fur
goods sold and delivered, for money lent, and on an account
stated. The defendant pleaded that exceptas to 361. 10s. he
was not inde ted, and then us to the sum of 36/. 10s. he
pleaded that be had accepted two bills, one fur 131 10s.
and the other for 211., and further, that at the time the
action was brought these bills had not arrived at maturity.
The plaintiff was a dealer in artificial flowers, in London-
wall, while the defendant was the proprietor of a fancy em-
porium at Greenwich; and the claim for goods sold and
delivered was for articles supplied by the plaintiff to the
defendant. The amount for goods supplied was 36'. 104. ;
and a further sum of 20/. was, as the plaintiff said, fur
money which had been lent to 'he defendant. This was
the plaintiff's version of the matter, and he was examined
and cross-examined at considerable length. The defendant,
on being called, contradicted the statement of the plaintiff
in every material point, and said that the bills had been
given to the plaintiff in payment of the account for goods,
and that the sum of 201., which had been received from the
plaintiff, was merely the payment of money to that amount
which he (defendant) had previously let him.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff ter the sum of
361. 10s., thereby deducting the 201.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-SATURDAY.

Anima, before Mr Justice Talfourd. In the course of the
trial it became necessary to prove that a person named
Joseph had died before another named Morgan, and the
prisoner swore that he had examined a paper which ho
tendered for that purpose, with the original will of Joseph
in the registry at Llandaff, and also that he examined a
memorandum at the foot with an entry in a book called the
"Act Book" in the dame registry. It appeared, how-
ever, that there wax no book Lept at LlandatE
which could properly be called an " act book"—
for the acts of the court instead of being catered
in a book were written across the wills them-
selves. The so called " net book" was a mere memo•
readmit of the daily business of the court; and the extract
from it put in by the prisoner wax do palpable not an " act"
of the court, that Mr. Justice *ralfouril, wfiilst offering to
admit it, handed it back to the learned counsel conducting
the cause, and suggested that it was not the proper evidence
to prove the poiut sought to be established. 'rho paper
was consequently withdrawn, and parole evidence was
given in its stead. The discrepancy which existed between
the document and any real "act" of the court at once sug-
gested a suspicion of perjury to the learned Judge, and on
inquiry it turned oat that Philpotta had neither been to
Llandaff, nor seen the will, and that the Extract from the
" act book" had been forwarded to him by post. Upon
this he was indicted fur perjury, and was tned at the last
Monmouth assizes, before Mr. Justice Erle.

Mr. Grey now Mldresseall the court in a lengthened speech
against the conviction on the ground thst the evidence of
the prisoner was not material to the issue. Two ingredients
must enter into the composition of perjury. Not only must
the thing sworn be false, but its matter must be something
by which the judge of fact, whether that was the judge or
the jury, might be misled. Now in this ease, the document
put in by the prisoner, had it even been a properly ex-
amined copy, would not have been admissible evidence,
and he submitted that Mr. Justice Talfourd had been wrong
in offering to receive it. He was hound to suppose that
judge's rating would he according to law, and therefore he
might assume that the document in question could never
by any chance have got to the jury. In conclusion, the
learned counsel said that whatever their lordships might
think of the inconvenience of tho law requiring the matter
of the false swearing to be relevant to the issue, tit order to
constitute the crime of perjury, he felt sure they would not
suffer that to interfere with their judgment in the present
Case.

The Lord Chief Justice said he was quite of opinion that
as the law stood at the time of the trial the conviction was
right. It was quite clear that the false sweariag was in a
judicial proceeding, and how could it then be said that it
was no. material ? The orcat question in the cause was
the date of Joseph's death, and the prisoner had offered in
evidence a copy of Joseph's will, and the act of the court
which should show that a probate hail been granted of it.
If that had been in evidence, though the fact of Joseph's
death had been proved by parole evidence, it would have
. .

corroborated that parole evidence, rod therefore it must
have been material. With respect to the learned coun-
sel's objection, that the judge woo wrong in otfering to
admit the document, that would be to make the
perjury conditional on the dcci•ion of the House of
Loris upon the bill of exceptions. He (Lord Campbell)
thought that the prisoner had given evidence that would
have let in the document, that that document was material,
and that the swearing was false. They had, therefore, all
the ingredients neeesNary to constitute the crime of perjury,
and the conviction ought to be affirmed.
Conviction affirmed accordingly, and judgment ordered
to be given at the next assizes.

THE QtEEN ON TIIE CONVICTION OE THOMAS JOHN-
BON AND CHAICLEs WILIOUT.—EXTRAOEDINAItIf CASE.

8117111011 IN DANCO.—DAFORI CAMP JIAPTICI JNNVIS AND lIY. Jurrics

MARSHALL T. THE YORK, NEWCASTLE, AHD BERWICK

RAILWAY COMPAI.iY.—Loar LI3.OOAGE.

The piarWitiii iiiiic;;;wasWirtiTerlySiilel. to Lord
Adolphus Vane, and as such travelled with him from Dar-
lington to London. During this journey he lost his port-
manteau, and ho brought this action to recover the value
of it. The trial took place at the sittings after last term in
MittHese:, before Chief Justice Jervis, when a verdict was
taken for the plaintiff, for 301., subject to the opinion of the
court upon a question of law. In the present term a rule
for a nonsuit was obtained, and this rule now came on for
argument.
Mr. Knowles, Q.C., and Mr. Hugh Hal. Q.C., showed
cause ; and Mr. llumfrey, Q. C., and Mr. Willes sup-
ported the rule.
The question raised was whether the plaintiff was entitled
to sue ; and the defendants contended that he was not, in-
asmuch as his fare had been paid by Lord Adolphus Vane.
The declaration alleged that the defendants carried the
plaintiff for hire, and then charged the duty to carry safely.
fhis duty, it was argued, would not arise, except hire was
paid, and it was submitted that no person could avail him-
self of the duty except he who paid the hire.
The Chief Justice was of opinion that the rule should be
made absolute. It bad been, in the first place, said
that, uno.er the circumstance' of the case, no ac-'
lion would lie at all by the plaintiff against the
defendants, whatever was the form of the de-
claration, for the loss sustained. But the admission that
had been made during the arguments, sad the authorities
that had been quoted, put the defendants into considerable
difficulty in the arguments, for it was admitted that if the
plaintiff, being a passenger in this very train, and under
the very same circumstances, instead of losing his portman-
teau had had his leg broken, the action would lie, and it
was said it would lie, because it was for personal suffering.
But in what respect was it, that, under these circumstances,
he could have an action for personal surf ring ? Not be-
cause the contract was made between him and the com-
pany, for Mr. Hill admitted that if there were a contract
between him and the company the action would also lie for
the loss of goods. It was, therefore, not by reason of any
contract; and it must be that a duty of the company, irre-
spective of any contract, would entitle the plaintiff to re-
cover
for personal suffering. This being so the court did not
see why he should not recover for property. But Mr. Hill
further contended that the action would not lie because of
the terms of the declaration, which, it was said, so tied up
the plaintiff, as to restrict him from going back to the ge-
neral liability. It was said that as the declaration alleged
that the plaintiff was carried for hire, it must be shown
that the hire was paid by the plaintiff to the defendants. If
the action were founded upon the contract that would be so,
but if upon the duty, as the company thought it was, the
action would lie whether the fare was paid by a stranger or
by the plaintiff.
Rule absolute.
isrrrisos at Neu Pam rK MinaLmx.—Bavou Ma. Arms

Cresway MID ♦ OLIMMO. JURY.
PRITCHARD V. GROVE—SLANDER.

The plaintiff in this cast is a master blacksmith in the
Waterloo-road, and the defendant is a carman in the same
neighbourhood. The action was to recover damages for
slanderous words spoken by the defendant of the plaintiff;
and the pleas were not guilty. and that the action had been
settled by giving the plaintiff a quantity of beer, but of this
plea no evidence was given.
Mr. Ilumfrcy, Q.C., and Mr. Joyce, were tot the plaintiff ;
and Mr. Prentice for the defendant.

_ _ ...... _
The plaintiff's wife died in July, last year, and a rumour
somehow got ►broad that her death was caused by Ins ill
usage. In consequence of this a post mortem examination
took place, at his request, and it was found that death
arose from natural causes. On the sth August the defen-
dant went to the plaintiff, and, among ether things, told
him that he wu a swindler ; that he never paid any one ;
that he had not paid his iron man; and that he had mur-
dered his wife. The fir►t part of this statement was heard
only by members of his own family ; but the accusation in
reference to his wife was heard by several neighbours.
The counsel for the defendant admitted that the plaintiff
was a most respectable man, and that there was not the
slightest truth in what his client had said in an angry mo-
ment. The fact, however, appeared to be that nobody
believed what had been said, and, therefore, no real injury
had been sustained. _ .

The jury consulted together for some time, and then
inquired of his lordship what amount of damages would
carry costa.
Mr. Justice Cresawell declined to answer this question,
and told them that they must decide independently of that
matter.

The jury again consulted, and at length found • verdict
for the plaintiff for 405., evidently thinking that this would
not give costs. They also said that they thought the action
ought not to have been brought in this court.
Mr. Justice Creswell said the County Courts had not yet
jurisdiction in cases of this kind.
Mr. Ilumfrey—Now, gentlemen, you may know that 40s.
will carry costs. (A laugh.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-SATUIIDAY.
SITTUIOII ID MUD:O.-BM/AZ THE LOAD CMIIII &MOD' M. MAROS
PAWED. MA. 8A ALI/1180D, AND MA. BARON PLAIT.

This morning the Lord Chief Baron delivered the de•
vision of the court in the following among other cues
BURY O. PETRIL.—JUDOIRENT.
_ _ _ _

In this cane the Lord Chief Baron said that the court
would grant a rule nisi for a new trial upon the point with
reference to the bankruptcy of Mr. Horroeks, who had
been in partnership with the defendant • but upon the
question of the partnership, and with regard to the way in
which it affected the action, there would be no rule.
Rule nisi granted.
CRAVEN V. 7HZ SUNDERLAND Doe= COMPANY.--
JUDOMINT.

The Lord Chief Baron said, in this case, the Court
thought that the reference which had been made had not
been sent to the referee to be finally decided. The action
had been brought to recover the amount of the plaintiB•s
bill for making the Sunderland Docks. The reference in
this case was like a refenrnce to the Muter to report, but
not to decide, leaving another tribunal to dispose of the
merits, and the decision of the referee was to be treated as
a derision subject to an appeal. The reference was simply to
advise and report, and nothing more, and there would,
therefore, be no rule for a new trial.

Rule refused.
SZLBT v. Tux EAST tLNOLIAN RAILW*Y CUMPANY.—

JUDOIIII4T.

The majority of theisurt;teM of opinion that there
ought to be no rule granted in this ease.
Rule refused.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.--SATURDAT.
COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.
Bennis bnii, Cam Jas. Ica Comm, Mii. Jurnot MAin.s,
Jaarrea TALI .UND. II& ILION Pali; Ma. DAWN FIAT?, AND
NIL ii/1110,1 %sans.
Tuz Quits ON THE PROSECUTION OF THOMAS GRIFFIN

In this case the two prisoners had been indicted at the
Peterborough quarter sessions for having stolen a banker's
cheque for 42f., four notes of 101. each, and 42 :.ova. It
appeared that the prosecutor was seated at his shop door at
Peterborough on the 214th of June last, being market day,
and that the prisoners, placing themselves near him, began
a conversation about the sale of some beasts and a pony.
They disagreed as to the price, Johnson asking 12f., and
Wright offering 401. The prosecutor said, " Split thu
intlerence." Johnson then stated that Wright should have
them, were it not that his (Johnson's) father would be
I angry, es Wright hail bought two cows over his head.
Wrignt offered to give up the cows. The prosecutor ag sin
interposed, and the prisoners appeared to conclude a bar-
gain that Wright should give Johnson 42/. for the beasts
' and the pony, and that a half-sovereign should be returned
provided that the prosecutor would take the money trout
Wright, and pay it to Johnson, as if he (th. prosecutor)
was the buyer, so that Johnson's father might believe him
to be the real purchaser. The prosecutor consented to act
as a go-between. The parties then entered his shop, and
I Wright counted out 42 sovereigns, 40 of which were passed
through the prosecutor', hands to Johnson, and the other
1 two laid upon the counter. Johnson laid down the 49
sovereigns upon the counter also, with un explanation that
his tattier " who was an austere mail '—(a laugh)—would
not be satisfied without a cheque upon a lanker,
and requested the prosecutor to draw one accordingly. Ile
(prosecutor) went round to his desk, leaving the prisoners
with the sovereigns, drew the cheque payable to 'I humus
Johnson or bearer for 421., returned and delivered it to
Johnsen. At this time he lost all thought of the nioncy,
,ind when he returned from his desk the sovereigns had dis-
appeared. Johnson said the prosecutor utust go with hint to
the bank to draw the money. The prosecutor consented and
Wright was to remain in the shop until they returned " to
finish the transaction." The prosecutor ;mil Johnson left
Wright alone at the shop door, and went to the bank
together. When the cheque was cashed, by desire of the
prosecutor, in four notes of 101. each and two sovereigns,
Johnson took the money and came out of the bank, the
prosecutor stopping fur a minute or two to give some
direction about his pass-book. Instead of returning
at once to Wright at the prosecutor's shop, Johnson requested
the prosecutor to accompany him to an inn' where he said
his father was, to satisfy him as to the business. They
went into the inn yard together, where Johnson called fur
his pony, at the mime time slipping a half-sovereign into the
prosecutor's hand, saying, " I will go and turn out the
beasts." lie then made off by the entrance of the inn yard,
leaving the prosecutor with the half-sovereign and the pony
(which the ostler delivered to him), instead of returning with
him to the shop where Wright was to remain to " finish tho
transaction" (as the prosecutor all along expected was to be
done), and to hand over the 42 sovereigns to him. The pro-
secutor then for the first time suspected that he had been
cheated. (A laugh.) Ile made haste home with the pony,
and found that Wright had tied, and the 42 sovereigns
also (laughter) nobody but prosecutor's daughter
having been in the shop. The pony, with the
bridle and saddle, was not worth more than sth. The pri-
soner Johnson was well dressed, like a farmer, and Wright
like a jobber; and the prosecutor swore that he believed
them to be respectable men engaged in a bond fide transac-
tion, and that he assisted in it purely (ruin good nature, and
was not to receive one penny for what he did. lie also
stated that he .hould have allowed Johnson to go to the
bank alone with the cheque, he remaining with Wright
and the sovereigns in the obey, had not Johnson requested him
to go to the bank with him. The prosecutor expressly
stated in his evidence that he expected Johnson was to
come back with him to Wright, and that he was to have
the 42 sovereigns from -Wright ; that he did not
expect Wright to "cut away," and did not con-
sider Johnson at liberty, to go off with the money be-
fore he (the prosecutor) had the sovereigns in exchange. It
was proved that during the same morning the prisoners at-
tempted to engage another party in a similar transaction,
and evidence wits given to show that the prisoners were act-
ing in concert, and were apprehended Ma gig together the
same evening about 20 miles from Peterborough, Wright
having 4.5 sovereigns found on him. 'the prisoners' courted
contended that these facts did not justify a conviction for lar-
ceny, and the chairman therefore put the following ques-
tions to the jury—lit. Did the prisoners throughout intend
to get the property of the prosecutor into their possession by
fraud and apply it to their own use ? 2nd. Did the prosecu-
tor intend to part with his property in the cheque and
change until Johnson had returned, and until the prose-
cutor receives' the 42 sovereigns ? 3rd. If they should find
that when tho prosecutor gave Johnson the cheque he
with his property in it, after the money
partedit
dbeen obtained for it from the bank, whose
property were the forty-two sovereigns left upon
the counter? The chairman directed the jury
that if they found ,the first question in the affirmative, and
the second In the negative, the prisoners were, in law,
guilty, of larceny of the cheque and chance; and further
that if they found the first two questiona in the affirmative,
land found also that the i 2 sovereigns left on the counter
became the property of the prosecutor when the cheque
I was delivered to Jetinson and cashed at the bank, and were
taken away by Wright, they were guilty of larceny of those
42 sovereigns. The jury found that the prisoners originally
intended to defraud followed by a general verdict of guilty.
The prisoners' counsel applied for a case fur the Court of
Criminal Appeal, upon which the chairman requested the
jury to give distinct answers to the questions above stated,
and they answered the first in the affirmative and the se-
cond in the negative; no reply to the third being thereupon
asked for.

Mr. Blies, Q.C., now submitted that the prosecutor had
parted with his property in the cheque entirely, and not
with the possession only. It had been dealt with precisely
as he had wished, and, in fact, nothing was done respecting
it invito domino. It was true that the language of the
second answer was somewhat inconsistent with this view,
but then it was also inconsistent with itself. It was asked,
whether the prosecutor intended to part with his property
in the cheque and change ? and this the jury had found in
the negative • but it was evident that the prosecutor did
intend to Part with his property us the cheque in
order that the change might be procured for it.
In the bank notes, the learned counsel contended, that tho
prosecutor never had any property ; and quoted several
cases to show that in order to constitute a larceny, it was
necessary that the property stolen should have been in the
actual possession, corporal or constructive, of the prosecu-
tor, otherwise it was a case of embezzlement. Oa the third
question submitted to the jury no verdict had been taken
at all.
_ _ _ .

PHILPOTTI.—PsoaoaT.
This ease arose out of en action of ejectment, " Doe dens.
Richards T. Griffiths," tried at a recent Monmouthshire

Mr. Mellor, Q.C., on the part of the crown, argued that
the moment the prisoner got possession of the cheque, or
change, with the animus furandi, or intention of theft, the
offence of larceny was completed.
Mr. Bliss replied, contending that Mr. Mellor's doctrine
could not be received, unless the ditinttion between lar-
ceny and obtaining under false pretences were abandoned.
The Court took time to consider, and adjourned until
this day (Monday).

EXCHEQUER JUDGES' CHAMBERS.
SATURDAY.
Bayou Mu. Ruoff MARTIN.
CRARAIULAII V. WITT.—THE LATI PLATS ROBBERT IN
THE STRAND. ---7::
This wu an action brought by the plaintiff, mtt. 4•••
4\
Charamcau, to recover 1581. 10a., supposed to be pa the
produce of the robbery at Masan. Clapham And Wi
11141
Strand, to which plaintiff was charges' with War a
---n

i-..- • j
V. V'• ,
'G' ~i
I‘. . :2;',.....v.,,. ...•''..' .1

1