The Express.
London, England, 1847-08-12 00:00:00

I did, fur I should have a good hand-full of mono."
Tb us wan. however, that appearance. justified the belief
that the horse died by accident. He was suhject to ♦ diususe
galled the fret," which caused him to lick and plunge,
and it would seem that he had been suit:ring from that
disease on tic night of the 2;th of November. On the fol-
lowing !morning, a ladder in the stable was found broken,
.sd a long nail by which it wu Axed to the wall was ob-
served to be covered with blood and hair. The horse
wee then alive, and a wound was discovered in
hi hesd which c irresponded with the nail. It wu
evident that the story told by Care wu a false one.
He had not alcpt on his uncle's premises, hut under a straw-
wow, at a neighbeuring farm, and as to Healing and Comp-
tea, they hal slept at their own homes on the night In
qeestion. The r:sult of the trial at the assizes at Taunton
wee, that Belding and Compton were acquitted, and when
the verdet was returned, Mr. Justice Creswell ordered the
prisoner Cave, and his uncle, Thomas White, to be commit-
ted for perjury.
Numerous witnesses were called to establish these facts,
sad Mr. Slade (Mr. Stone and Mr. Hodge* with him) ad-
dressed the jury for the prisoner. Evidence was then ad-
duced o prove that at nine o'clock on the night of Nov.
27 the horse was safe in thy stable, and that on the following
morning at an early hour he was found in a dying state.
The nary who made a post modem examination of the
horse stated that he found in its stomach a large nail such as
had been described ; and a veterinary surgeon wu called to
rove that it was quite possible to introduce a hard substance
ef that nature down the animal's throat during its lifetime.
Is ad, ~ion to this evidence, a Mr. Hill made a statement,
to the effect that he would not believe the witness Francis
ea his uath, as ho had been guilty of obtaining money from
loisruelf and others under false pretences.
The jury, without hesitation, returned a verdict of Guilty ;
and the prisoner was sentenced to seven years' transport..
tier. The trial c:rarnenced at 9 o'clock in the morning, and
did not terminate until 7 in the evening.
Tl.•onsas Itlite was then indicted upsn a charge of per
jury, arising out of the same circumstances. The cue for
the prosecution having closed, the court adjourned at half-
pat ten o'clock until to-morrow (Wednesday) morning.
We defer our report of White's case until its completion.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Laneaeven.
C,vo Sm.—Before Mr. labs Wiegman.
ArT!ON •OAiNNT TWO MAOISTRATRa TOR FALSE 111-
PaIsoNinINT.—BARON P. FFARINOTON AND ANOTRZR.—
Yr. Cowling opened the pleading•.—Mr. Martin stated the
are. The learned counsel stated that the plaintiff was a
labourer, and the defendants were magistrates of the county
of Lanemaer, and the action was brought for false imprison-
anent. The defendant did not seek for vindictive damages,
the object of the prosecution being simply to have the
opinion of his lordship upon an important point—a point
involr:tig no less than the rights of the members of religions
oximunities, not belonging to the establishment, to have
possession of their own places of worship. The transaction
which formed the groundwork of the present trial took
place on the 15th of March, 1846, at the Roman ca-
tlaolic chapel, Brindle. The clergyman who officiated
there was a gentleman of the name of Smith, and he
had officiated there for a period of 17 years. The property
of the chapel was invested in trustees, and Mr. Smith was
one of them. The mode in which he obtained his

remuneration (n his service was the same u that which
pro vs i led in all dissenting places of worship. Pews were
Lt to such persons as chose to take them, and in addition to
that, there were sesta for the use of which those who did not

ococupy pews were charged a penny a time. Two men
were statasned at the door with plates to collect the money,
and never, but in the instance in question, was the
payment refused. This arrangement had existed for
centuou, and until the late unhappy affair, the w-
ithal/re of which he would shortly detail, no dis-
pute had ever arisen. A gentleman, formerly resi-
&ait in Lancaster, Mr. Eastwood, had married a niece
of au old gentleman of the name of Heatley. Mr.
Heathy died in 1840 and left • large property to a Mr.
Sherburne, a Roman catholic priest, residing somewhere in
the Fylde. Mr. Eastwood attempted to set aside the will,
bat its validity was established in a court of justice ;
bat in 1845 that gentleman refused to pay the penny,
and insisted upon his right to go into the church without
yielding to the demand. Mr. Smith, the priest, conceiving
that he was well advised, determined to prevent him from
going in, and accordingly notice was given from the pulpit
that no one would be permitted to go ut without such pay-
ment. Mr. Eastwood insisted upon going in, when be was
prevented by two men stationed in the chapel for the pur-
pose. Mr. t astwood then brought up the men before the
magistrates, on the charge of assault, but the magistrates took
the right course of procedure. They stated that it appeared
to them to be • controversy involving a question of
religious arrangement, 'trod they bound over the com-
plainant to prosecute at the next quarter sessiocs. Mr.
Eestwood was allowed to go in without payment till the
nut quarter sessions ; but when they came, and no indict-
ment was preferred, Mr. Smith, naturally thinking that he
was conviaced that the was in the wrong, and would not on
that account try the question, again ordered the demand to
be made upon him, and it was in the resistance of this de-
mand that the assault of being imprisoned, for which his
client appeared in that Court, was committed. Mr. Smith,
in order to prevent any intrusion, had had • bar placed
acv ss the chapel, which he (the learned counsel) thought a
judicious prteeeding under the circumstance,. Mr. East-
wood prevented himself with his wife and two sans, and was
denied access. His two sons then jumped over tit, rail, and
he remained till the communion service, when he stooped
underneath, sad broke the bar in two. He afterwards took
out a summons against Baron and the other man who
was appointed to receive the penny, and the use
came before the justices in petty sessions at Chorley,
who convicted the defendant for the assault. There
were four justices on the bench, and among them the two
defendants in the present action; and though the opinion
of two barristers, Mr. Seger and Mr. Cowling, was set be-
fore Om, intimating that the cue was not one that be-
longed to their jurisdiction, they came to the conclusion that
they had to deal only with the assault, and fined his clients
five pounds each, with imprisonment in default of the m-
ilieu:. The law of the case is this. If the matter in ques-
tion was one in which the magistrates had the right of ad-
judica• ing, not even his lordship on the bench could inter-
bre. An appeal might be made to the quarter Stf3:oCll, and
there was tho only remedy. But if the complaint involved
a question of disputed title, then the magistrates had no
power, and were liable to punishment for interfering.
The magistrates were fully warranted. Mr. Seger was one
of the same religious faith as Mr. Eastwood, and could not
be supposed to have any undue bias; and Mr. Cowling
was notoriously one of the ablest lawyer' of his day ;
and yet, in the face of all this, they proceeded with the guts-
boo of assault, and sentenced Berm and the other to pay
M. No doubt existed oldie right of a man to make what
arrangements be pleases with his own place of worship. Mr.
Smith had perfect authority to exclude any one whom ha
chose. It was competent to him to give cr withhold his as-
sent for admission to any part of the building. He (Mr. M.),
was speaking now of dissenting places of worship. The
house was his. It was assigned to him by contract. He did
not wish to make any improper or profane allusion, but the
right was analogous to the right of occupying • seat in a
theatre or a stand at a race. The learned counsel then
cited a case tried at the York Assizes, in 1844. A rule had been
established at Doncaster that no one who had been a defaulter
should he admitted to the Grand Stand. A person who was in
this condition had paid a guinea for his ticket, and refused to
leave, when he was removed by Leadbetter, whose name was
familiar to all of them, and for that assault the officer was
brought into court. Lord Eglinton was the steward, and the
decision of the judge was that his lordship was for the time
the owner of the Grand Stand. and could frame such regula-
tions as he thought proper. To make a right binding, it was
ruled, it must be confirmed by deed. The ticket did not give
a grant, and was revocable at the direction of the owner.
The case of his client, he submitted, was exactly analogous,
and it was on that account that he had instituted a parallel.
Be knew that the idea prevailed thst a place of worship
was open for all comers; but though it was regarded
by law that the doors should be open, the statute did
not extend to this length. It was well known that
in the time of the Stuarts, a very great jealousy cadged
of conventicles, and many acts agatest them were passed.
Among other provisions was one that the doors should
be open, but that, he humbly apprehended, w..a a mere
police regulation, and did not in the slightest degree affect
any of the internal regulations. The learned counsel con-
cluded by repeating that his client did not seek for vin-
dictive damages. The object was to have the ophian of his
lordship upon an important right, end he confidently sub-
mitted that his view of the ease would be confirmed.—
The Rev. Mr. Smith, examined by Mr. Cowling : Am the
Roman catholic priest at Brindle. The chapel at that place
is a very old one. I have been the priest there 18 years. I
reside in a house net: the chapel. They both belong to me.
I receive the revenuer of the chapel for myself. The pews
are let half.yesrly. There are also benches for the use of
which each one pays • penny during the service. There is
also a place for the poor, where nothing is paid. This
has been the practice ever since I was there. There was
never any opposition till lately. I had an assist :nt till
1843, and, natil the assistant came, there was only one
service. In October, 1843, I began with a second morn-
ing service. The assistant was paid by each one
giving a penny who came to the early morning service.
That service took place at hall-past eight. The penny
was paid by those who occupied the pew, and benches alike.
Mr. East. nod attended the chapel, and it was announced in
his presence that a penny would be required. This penny
was for the extra expense incurred. The penny was gene-
rally paid by the congregation. Mr. Eastwood and his
family were the only parties who objected. I ordered a bar,
in consequence, to be placed across the seats: it was out up
and fastened by a hinge. This was put up on the 14th of
March, 1840. I know the plaintiff, Peter Baron. He was
stationed there to assist in enforcing the payment of the
penny. Mr. E. came to the early service on March 15,
along with Mrs. E., two sons, and a person named Baldwin.
The bar was broken by Mr. Eastwood and liis party. Baron
was summoned before the magistrates at Chotlev, on March
24,1845. The magistrates present were the Rev. Mr. Baldwin,
• Mears. Masters, Ffarington, Sylvester, Cron, and. another.
Mr. Eastwood charged the plaintiff with committing au
assault. Mr. Eastwood gave evidence on oath. The plaintiff
Baron stated that no further assault was committed than
was necessary to hinder him from going up without paying.
The magistrates refur d to go into the question when 'fisted
that I was outer of the chapel. Mr. Yates, the solicitor,
told them if they adjudicated on the result they would be
adjudicating on a question of title, for if there was any
assault it was committed in maintenance of a right. They
repeated that they would not adjudicate on that point, but
en the assault They then retired to consult. Or their
return they said to me We shall Ene Earon, William
Jackson, and Cornelius 51Mooes, the men whom Mr. East-
wood charged, five pounds each—in default cf payment to
be imprisoned two mouths." Baton did aor /airy the 51.
immediately, and he was given over to thiripioEor.
NNW/ was afterwards paid, and he was disehee-- •

examined by the Attorney-General : The it. was paid within
an hour and a half after. There were six magistrates pre-
sent. They all of them retired to consult, and when they
came back, Mr. Masten said what I have stated. The doors of
the chapel always coatinuedopen. The communion had begun
when the obstruction took place. —Don't the canons of your
church authorise any one to approach the altar while the
communion is being administered ?—By Mr. Martin : Are
the canons in writing ? —Mr. Knowles Written or not
written, they are the law of Rome.—Mr. Martin • We do not
acknowledge the canons of the church of Rome in a court of
justice, and they cannot affect the question of general right.-
1 Mr. Knowles They have something to do with this in- '
dividual case and chapel .—Cross.examination resumed: Is
Mr. E. in communion . He does not communicate with our
church.—ls he excommunicated ? lie has not been escorts- 1
marketed. I am not aware that he has done anything to
deprive him legally of the right of approaching the comma-
nion.—Re-examined by Mr. Martin It is a private chapel
of my own.—Mr. Yates, the solicitor, deposed to his having
taken the opinion of Mr. Seger and Mr. Cowling, and sub- I
mined both the case and the opinion before the magistrates
for perusal. Mr. Walker and Mr. Ffarington both read the
opinions.—Miss Mary Brewer deposed to being attesting
witness to the execution of the deed which conveyed from
Vincent Glover the chapel to the Rev. Mr. Smith and two
others, as joint tenants in fee.—Mr. Knowles here said that
the only question for his lordship to decide was, whether he
thought this case came within the proviso of the act 9. Geo.
IV., c. 21, s. 27, cited by his learned friend on the other side. The
learned judge said that he thought it did. Mr. Knowles
said he anticipated that view from his lordship.—A verdict
was then entered, by consent, for IL., with leave to move for
• nonsuit.
GAITSKILL AND OTHERS T. GARDNEII.—Mr. Atherton
opened the pleadings.—Mr. Martin stated the cue. The
learned counsel Bald the plaintiffs in this cue were the ad-
ministrators of the late Rev. J. Dawes, of Ambleside, in the
county of Westmorland, and the defendant was an attorney,
residing at Bonnets, and the act on was to recover certain
sums of money, which he had in his possession, belonging to
the administrators. Mr. Dawes was a bachelor, and he
be:cud had risen from humble circumstances. He

had, in the course of a long life, come into pos-
seasian of considerable property, and under the in-
fluence of feelings which were too common among per-
sons similarly circumstanced, avoided carefully all
mention of his relation*, so that it was not known who they
were, and he died intestate. After hie death, Mr. Gardner,
it appeared, bad made himself very active in the matter, and
bad succeeded in inducing a person of the name of Jack-
son to enter upon the landed property, under the plea that he was heir-at-law; and a few aye after the death of
Mr. Dawes, the same party took out letters of administration,
in virtue of which ho proceeded to dispose of all his goods.
Among other acts, he took possession of his house, out of
which he removed the party who was in occupation, and
sold it. The real heir-at-law was a person of the name of
Gaitakell, and upon his learning the death of Mr. Dawes, he
awed a notice to be amt to Mr. Jackson, forbidding him
to proceed any further in interfering with the property, and
a revocation was made of the letter of administration, Mr.
Gardner was waited upon by a party with the notice, and he
expressed his willingness to accept it, but he showed himself
hard to ba persuaded, and he obtained some money which he
refused to give up, and the action was brought for the pur-
pose of recovering the money so received by Mr. Gardner
during the interval between the grant of the letters of admi-
nistratica to Mr. Gardner and the present time. It was
sought by this action to compel the payment of the balance
which Mr. Gardner had in hand. His client, though entitled
to the whole amount, was willing to allow for a fair legal ex-
penditure incurred by Mr. Gardner: he did not wish to go for
his strict right, but would be satisfied with the balance. In the
first place, a sum of 271. Bs. was found in deceased's house,
and the sale of his effects fetched 701. or 8(1. At the time
of his death, there was • large sum in his name in the bank
at Kendal, and Mr.Gardnerobtained from Jackson a cheque,
and bad 2001. transferred to himself. There were farther
rums of 601., 301., and sums of smaller amount, reaching in
all to about 4001., and the question was,whether or not the de-
fendant was bound to pay up that money. It would, he ap-
prehended, be entirely a question for his lsrdahip. An
action of ejectment had been tried at the Appleby assizes
mat ear, and the result had established the claim of the
real heir-at-law, a minor, and if Mr. Gardner was wise, he
(the learned counsel) begged to recommend him to band
ever the money.
A long conversation ensued between the judge and the
I counsel on each side, in the course of which, Mr. Baines,
who appeared for the defendant, said there were several
very important points of law involved, and that was the
reason why his client retained the money.—lt was ulti-
mately sgreed to refer the cage to Mr. Addison, who
should be required to raise the points of law wished for
by the defendant —On the announcement of this ar-
rangement, Mr. Baines said that he had a word to
say in behalf of his client, upon whose character Mr.
Martin had reflected in his cpening address. Mr. Gardner
was a highly respectable professional gentleman, and the
son of a former member of that circuit, of whom his
lordship might have heard, even if he had not been per-
sonally acquainted with him. He (Mr. B) was anxious
that his client should go away without impu'aticn on his
character. So far from Mr. Gardner having persuaded
Jackson to take out letters of administration, he had been
applied to twice by Mr. Jackson, to whom he had acted as
solicitor; and it was solely in that capacity, and believing
Mr. Jackson to be in the nght, that he had taken the part
he had done. Mr. Jackson had acted without any solicitation
from Mr. Gardner, and Mr. Gardner'e only anxiety was that
justice should be dime. Mr. Martin said he had spoken in
conformity with his instructions. He had no personal know-
ledge of the merits of the case. and in what he had said, had
been guided by no private feeling against Mr. Gardner.

POLICE.—YESTERDAY.
MANSION.HOUSE.—Bttt DISCOUSTING.—John Bull
was finally examined, charged with having, under false pre-
tences, obtained two acceptances of John Alexander, draper,
of Koko. The first examination was reported in our paper
of Aug. 9. The prisoner had obtained two acceptances for
2001. each from Mr. Alexander, having applied for the
second, in consequence, as he said, of some irregularity in
the firm, which rendered it unavailable as an instrument to
be discounted.—Mr. A. Adam., drug and general broker, of
6, Great St. Helen's, proved receiving a bill accepted by Mr.
Alexander from the prisoner, as security for some Otto of
roses. Witnees remarked that the indorsements on the bill
were not as they were usually made in London, to which he
replied that they were as they were usually made in Stet-
land.—Croes-examiaed by Mr. Wolff, for the prisoner: The
prisoner said at first that he did not wish the bill to ;be dis-
counted, but afterwards he gave leave to hare it discounted,
provided I should get the full value. I said there was a
difficulty about the indorsement, and that if he would get
another bill from Mr. Alexander done in the usual way I
I would undertake to return the one deposited with me.—
Jacob Anvil said he received a bill for 2001., with the
prisoner's indorsement on it, in May last, accepted by Mr.
John Alexander, of Kelso. 'I nought it was payable to John
Bull. He received it from Mr. Ascoli, of Nichola.equare, in
the Hackney-road. Was applied to by Mr. Ascoli to discount
it. Told him he had no money, but had some pictures.
The priesner came and looked at the pictures with Mr. Aecoli,
and witness subsequently received the bill from Mr. Ascoli,
and paid it to Mr. Watt, of Bartlett's- buildings.—The
prisoner was then committed to Newgate.
CHARGE OF ErFINSIVB EKBZZZLEKEICT. William
Henry Thompson was finally examined, charged with
having embezzled his employer's property to a considerable
amount, and with having stolen a cheque for 351.—
Mr. H. B. Parsons, clerk to Messrs. H. and J. Johnston and
Co., of 15, Bush-lane, said he received the cheque signed
W. H. Thompson," and the letter with the same signature,
and in exchange drew the cheque for 501. on Smith, Payne
and Smith, and signed by Mr. Butler. one of the firm.—Mr.
J. P. Judd, a partner in the firm of Nathaniel Johnston
mud others, said that on the 13th Jane, 1846, the prisoner
was in the merrier of that firm, and had been so for six years
previously. His duty was to receive monies, and to enter
them in the cash-book. They had cash transactions with
H. and J. Johnston and Co., of Bush-lane, and for the pur-
poses of business, when witness was out of town, it was
occasionally his duty to use a letter of credit given him
on that house. It was also occasionally his duty to write a
cheque to enable them to send a ceuntercheque. The letter
without date, and the cheque, dated June 13, were in the
prisoner's handwriting. The cheque of the 13th of June,
1846, drawn by H. and J. Johnston and Co., in favour
of Nathaniel Johnston and Sons, on Smith, Payne and Smith,
had never been entered in the books. Oa Friday, the 12th
of June, 1846, witness had a coaversatien with the priaouer,
and told him to come on the following Monday morning,
not being satisfied with the way in which he had made up
the honker,' books. He did not come, and witness never
saw him after that day, till he was apprehended. The
amount of the prisoner's deficiencies were, to the best of his
belief, upwards of 9001.—The Lord Mayer said he was per-
feetly satisfied with what he had heard, and would commit
the prisoner for trial. The next case against the prisoner
was one of robbery.—Mr. W. B. Butler, clerk to Messrs.
Greenwood and Butler, of 110, Fenchurch-street, said that
on the 13th of June, 1946, he took th_ cheque produced for
35/. 13s. to the house of Nathaniel Johnston and Sons, snd
paid it to a clerk there, not the prisoner.—Mr. T. Whitlock,
clerk to Nathaniel Johnston and Sony, said, on the 13th of
June, 1946, he received the cheque produced from the last
witness, and gave it to Mr. C. Thompson, the prisoner's
brotSer.—Mr. B. Morris, cashier to Sapte and Co., Lombard-
street, bankers, said that in June, 1346, the prisoner kept
an account at their house, and en the 13th of that month the
cheque produced for 351. 13s. was brought to witness, and
paid in on the prisoner's account. Had no doubt that the
prisoner was the person who paid it in.—Mr. Judd, partner
in the house of the prosecutors, said, in June, 1846, they had
en account with Greenwood and Butler; neither the cheque
produced, nor the amount, was entered in their books. If
the prisoner had received it, it was his duty to enter it in
his cash-book.—The prisoner was committed on this charge
also.

BOW-STREET.—FORORIITES ne A CLERK TN THE
INCOME-TAX-orrice.—Willians Gates, chief clerk in the
become-tax-ofges, at Somerset-house, was finally examined,
charged with committing seseral forgeries, with intent to
defraud the income and property tax commissioners. The
lint charge, and the only one upon which the prisoner hu
been hitherto examined, was for forging an order and re-
ceipt for 1371., purporting to be signed by the commissioners
for special dolma under the income and property tax, and
by If r. Lsmford, solicitor to the Drapers' Company, on be-
half of the charity connected with that company, claiming ex-
emption. The particulars of this cue appeared in our paper
of Aurust 6, and the evidence haring been repeated,
the prisoner was fully committed for trial on that charge.—
With regard to the second charge, Mr. Darwell, solicitor to
the Salford and Stanley Barn Charity in Lancuhire7 deposed
that the printed form produced, purporting to be signed by
him, for the receipt of 78!. 191.. from the commissioners to
-.AT returned, the charity being 'lf
e had

• claim, but not for this sum, nor for dividends to which the 1
sum had reference ; nor had he authorised any one to do so
on his behalf. He had never received the money.—Mr.
John Durran , register of claims in the special commissioners'
department, stated that he had carefully searched his re-
gister,
and could not find any entry having reference to the
order. Claims had been made by the charity, but they had
no reference to dividends nor to the sum mentioned in it. He
was well acquainted with the writing of the prisoner, having
seen it daily since May, 1844. The body of the order was
undoubtedly in the handwriting of the pisoner, and
the &limitere, though feigned, he certainly believed to be
also in his handwriting.—Mr. Henry King stated that he
paid the order produced to the prisoner on the 2nd of Sept.,
1846, by a 501. note, No. 57,154; a 201. note, No. 57,053; and
the rest in gold and silver. Wittier received the money from
Mr. Rem, another clerk in the office. The prisoner gave
him the order.—Mr. Joseph Bines Gibbs, of the firm of
Gibbs and Co., Pell-mell, said the prisoner came to his shop
on the 3rd of September, and he gave him change for a
note, part in • cheque for 401. He had no doubt about it, as
the name "Gates " was on the counterfoil. He could not
tell the amount of the note, or the number of it; it was not
his practice to keep the amounts or the numbers of notes;
he, however, usually wrote his name and the date on them.
Gave the balance of the note in cash. He had cashed notes ,
for the prisoner frequently. A note was handed to the wit- 1
nee, and he at once identified his name upon it. He had no '
doubt about receiving it from the prisoner. He could net
positively swear that the rote produced was the note re-
ceived from the prisoner. The note bore the number 57,158.
The prisoner was committed for trial on this charge.—The
next was a charge of forging a receipt, signed e' Benjamin
Hurst," for the return of 931. ss. to the Christian Faith So-
ciety.—Mr. William Rea, clerk in the income and property
tax-office, deposed that he paid the amount to the prisoner
on the 26th of July, 1846, on his presenting the order pro-
duced, which was marked for payment, and purported to be
signed by the secretary. Witness inquired it Benjamin
Hurst was in the office to receive the money, and on prisoner
replying in the affirmative, he handed him the money. Witness
followed him into the other rcom, end seeing no person pre-
sent except another clerk, he requested the prisoner would
return him the notes, that he might take their numbers,
which he did. He subsequently asked for the order and re-
ceipt, which were also given up, the prisoner saying that Mr.
Hurst would call on witness the following day, which he did
not, nor any person from him.—Mr. -William King
stated that he save the money paid to the prisoner on the
26th of July. He subsequently endorsed the receipt.—
Mr. Christopher Hodgson, treasurer to the society, said
the order had reference to property poisoned by the society
at Boroughbridge. There was no person of the name of
Benjamin Hurst connected with the society. A person
named William Hunt was appointed the agent for the
estate of the satiety at Boroughbridge, in Yorkshire, in Feb-
ruary, 1847, but he bad no authority whatever to make any
claim to the commissioner. on behalf of the society.A
claim for a return of money, with respect to dividends, was
made by him in 1843, and the amount, 271 tte. 41, was paid
on the 12th of August in the same year. No claim had
since been made with his knowledge and commie—By Mr.
Jardine: Knew no one of the name of Benjamin Hunt, at
Boroughbridge, at which place he had several times
visited. Mr. Timm, solicitor to the Commissioners of
Stamps, said be had made diligent kepi ' , but
he could not find any one bearing that name.—
Mr. Durrant, clerk to the Bank of England, at the income-
tax-office, said he heed searched the register, and he could
find no claim made by a person named Benjamin Hurst. He
found the claim alluded to by Mr. Hodgson for dividends on
the 27th of January, 1843. No claim for dividends had been
made since, neither by that nor any other society bearing a
similar title. He had searched the books of the Bank of
England at Somerset-house, and he found that the funds of
the society bad been discharged from the payment of pro-
perty and income tax since the dividend of July, 1843. The
body of the order was filled up by the prisoner. Believed
the signature to be in the prisoner's handwriting.—Mr.
Matthewson, a cheese-factor, who bad resided at Borough-
bridge, for twenty years, and was assessor of the incense
tax in that locality, proved that no one of the name
.of
Benjamin Hurst resided there or in the neighbourhood.
This completed the emu. Mr. Seaman, the prisoner's soli-
citor, said he bad no questions to ask the witnesses, and the
prisoner was then fully committed to take his trial. He
merely nodded and retired.
_M A RLBOROUGH -STRE ET. —TH z Rao Rey-reamer

ROMANCE CONCLUDED.—Mademoiselle Esther De
• young French girl of very considerable personal attractions,
dressed in showy ball costumed la Franewise, was sum-
moned before Mr. Bingham by Jules Check, for detain's''s.
volume of the "Memoirs of the Countess of Wolfeabutesi.'•
—The defendant is sister to Leona* De Villain, who ass
peered at this court under circumstance* which were
lately detailed in this paper.—The complainant, whose
age and appearance were a counterpart of his friend Ellans,
who, it will be recollected, dated his love epistles Ikea the
" office of the commander-in-chief," proceeded be rants
that in the course of his visits, he had lent
moiselle De Villas the volume in question. The meg
to this by the defendant—who darted looks of merrisseellind I
scorn at her quondam admirer—was, that the book, smug
other love tokens, had been given to her by the com-
plainant. Bhe further stated, that a liaison of the most
intimate description had occurred between them.—The com-
plainant, lifting up his eyes, swore by the "tomb of his
father" that nothing beyond innocent friendship had
passed. He begged to be permitted to read a statement
of the whole of the circumstances for the purpose of show-
ing how he and his friend had been choused out of their
money and property by the two girls, who had since proved
themselves neither so innocent nor high born as they had
appeared in the first instance. The MS., which would ham
made a respectable volume, was here produced and real.
It commenced " Statement of Jules Check, of Great Pal-
, teney-street," and went on to my that, while walking dews
' Regent-street with his friend, one Sunday evening, sear the
Quadrant, they met two well-dressed and very good-
s
young ladies. They followed these young ladies, anitl7lria
rag they were French, walked with them till they came M
their residence in Foley-place, the door of which wee opened
by a servant in livery. After some letters had bow ea-
changed, complainant and friend obtained permindem
to call, which they afterwards did. They were shows
into the drawing-room by the butler, who said his
young mistresses were at their toilette, but would
be down directly. They came down dressed superbly,
in the French fashion, received them with great politeness,
and altogether made the visit so pleasant as to induce com-
plainant to beg permission to send for wine. Port and sherry
were too strong, and a bottle of French wine was procureel,
for which, said the complainant, "they charged me
a sovereign." Told the young ladies, on taking leave
(the young ladies having let them into the secret of their
distinguished birth, their mother being the Countess De
Villars, and their family estate the Castle of the " Isle " of
Bonn), that the wine was deer and bad, and that be (com-
plainant) would send them some better wine. Called the
next evening ; had another bottle of French wine, and paid
another sovereign. This time complainant was shown
a letter signed " your mother, the Countess De
Villas." Believed all the young ladies said ; had a third
bottle of French wine (another pound); and on taking his
leave had his cane detained by Esther, and that of his friend
by Lsoline. Called the next evening, found the young
ladies very dull: implored them to disclose the cause.
Learned that the cause was the neglect of a lady, to whom
they bad leat 2,0001., in not repaying the money; and that
they feared their valuable property at the Custom-house
would be lost, for want of • sum of 3-51. to pay duty. Agreed
with his friend to raise the money. Did raise it, and want
with the young ladies to the Custom-house to release their
valuables. Complainant's friend told the young ladies be
had an uncle in the Horse Guards. At the russet Cl the
young ladle, took them over the bunding, but did set
stop many Minutes there. Had a bottle of ehampotise
(pound the founts). Next day, sent the young ladies six
bottles of hermitage and three bottles of chambertin. Beat,
also, his portrait with a letter. The reply, which cases is after the payment of the 3.5/. and the receipt Cl
the portrait, was in French, and in substance as MOVE:
Mr rEnzaizia. Mon Fan, o, me also the ine.h.m.
main *man of Meeks • few line. espromin ay
dmy malmadsof aster you. M ofs
net at find eight teas
Ism Y mealed—it le is mpsrleneins the and aerie calms of
se& as mallateass le smile to feelleie Now nary atatiler
*teal webs indeicetywa. Oestrous Mead, sae alisseMet of
whaeteae ame le my aid t Itbtus tbest Wag herb are UmMt
to appeeleassmbstbar. ft soured that vim Ss day moo liat
,me girt sitow Ilmaimes Warm of WOW, ber
end of no MU seseser her tavewie spew rot=
I Min a the Madam Alia Am you do.
valailbrimma has WO at ate. At tab ssstt theashla of 79u
AI hark sal Ibis letter will mom to yea se must et all the
luillwima which I am_ !gals af. tsar pertrait!
—Ole* amine le us been, and ease Ns sa the vela et Jew
dame! Ah II en tan at tannest I via I wen well rid sr Al
CulairAme; ad esee Saturday—or .tea earaerrwe, V were
petedde—the wt Cl my lows shouldbe EMI year kind*
wawa I less sae Sham, and whota have lead wee wen
this Sok yeas sot wisest all yours. Sas% 4=ilrll,o
Ida my bort, a Ain allardox on par
rolnra Mywell think of me often.— blue De VILLAS'.
Up to this period all went smoothly, and without nerkion.
A note directed to his friend, which was shown to him (com-
plainant), soliciting 261., aroused the first suspicion. A
similar note, directed to himself, for the same object, In-
creased the suspicion. A watch on the movements of the
young " countesses" was kept, and the result was, accord-
ing to the manuscript, that himself and friend became per-
fectly satisfied that the young ladies were certainly not
better than they should be, and that they had been diddled
out of their cash, and sundries of considerable value. They
Milled on the young ladies to restore their property the
ring ladies laughed in their faces, and complainant's friend
resorted to a magistrate, with what mimeo need not here be
told. The complainant handed to Mr. Bingham a whole
bundle of love epistles. Mr. Bingham said he need
not reed these letters, as Mademoiselle Esther De Villan
bad placed the answers in his bends, and complainant's
letters appeared to be counterpart., in style and warmth,
to the lady's letters.—The complainant said he was only
anxious to have the whole mater tulle explained to
show how egregiously his friend end Witold!' had been
duped.—The defendant retorted the charge. The com-
plainant had introduced himself under a false name and
address.—The complainant admitted this to be true ; but he
had afterwards given his correct name and address.—Mr.
Bingham said, as the complainant was a foreigner, and unac-
quainted with the rules to be observed in an English court of
justice, he had been permitted to read the long history or
novel which he had brought with him, and to travel into all
manner of matters not immediately connected with the
question before the mutt, which was simply whether a book
had been lent or given to the defendant. The complainant's
case resembled closely the case of his friend, which had been
recently beard and decided by Mr. Hardwick. In Mr.
Hsrdwtck's decision he entirely acquiesced, and as his col-
league had refused to interfere under the peculiar circum-
stances of the case, he should adopt a similar course, and
make no order with respect to the book. It appeared to be
a case of mutual deception, and he should dismiss the sum-
mons aceordingly.
SOUTHWARK: