The Express.
London, England, 1850-01-14 00:00:00

RAW )intelligence.

EQUITY COURTS.—SATURDAY.
Boon ens MAWS@ or re■ noun.
SALOMON@ O. LAING.—APPLICATION OP TEI FUNDS 07
A RAILWAY COMPANY PON ILLEGAL PURPOISLEL
The Master of the Bolls gave judgment in this case,
which was betted on demurrer, for want of equity and multi-
iartousneee fn December last. The bill was tiled by the
plaintiff, D►vid Salomon, on behalf of himself and all the
other ah ireholders in the London and Brighton end South
Coast Railway Company, against that company and the di-
rectors thereof, and also against the Direct London and
Portsmouth Railway Company. The object of the suit was
to have it declared that the purchase et 4,677 shares in the
capital of the Portsmouth Company by the directors of tne
Brighten and South Coast Company, which was effected in
the year 1846, for the purpose of completing the
amount of subscribed capital required by the Ports-
mouth Company, to enable them to entore the
compulsory powers of their set, was illegal, and to compel
the directors of the Brighton Company to repay to that cots-
pant the sum of 24,5541 , being the amount of depute which
they had paid on account of such shares. Tne bul also
sought to impeach an agreement entered into between the
directors of the two companies in 1849, whereby it wos ar-
ranged that the Portsmouth Company should ahandon all
their line except the portion of it between Epsom and Lea-
therhead, which they were to make ; and that the Br,gh•on
Company should pay the Portsmouth Company 20,0001.,
and that ea application should be made to parliament to
sanction a pureuese by the Brighton Company of the line
astween Epsom and Leatberhead for 60,000 C, and in the
meantime that that company should work it. And it
prayed that the directors of the Brighton Comosny o'ight
repay to that company the sum of 20,00 W. which
it was alleged that they had, in pursuance of such agreement,
paid ti the Portsmouth Company out of the Nane of the
Company--deommers were We I by the B•iphton
Cutup...y rod iu uirectors, and also by the Portsmouth
Company, OIA the ground that the plaintiff had not eh iwn
AST equity agairat them by his bill, luso also on the µrimed of
• multit.irio iseesS, it being alleged that the transivion r,sprct-
ing the putebase of the 4 677 shares, aid that rele, in 2 t•, the
purchase to [hobos between Epsom and Leathsrhea 1, wire
',palate and distinct, and were not so conrec,tl by •be
allegations in the bill as to justify their b,ii.g inciiitled in
the suit. lies lordship was ot optoion MA both the
Meningitis' were illegal, and that the dint, ors of
the Brighton Company hid no p.-,wt r to apply the
funds ut that company either capital or revenue, in pur-
chasing shares in the Portmouth Company, or in piing to
that company the 20,0001. paid in pursuance of the agree-
ment of 1849; and he overruled the demurrers for went of
trinity. But he was of opinion that the transactions in ques.
tiun, although they might be the result of one scheme, were
not so coneected by the bill as to make teem proprr ts be
included in one suit, and he allowed the demurrer tor multi-
fariousness.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-SATURDAY.
THE QV BEN T. HARDY -ARBITRATION IN ♦ CA•R

PERJURY.
The arguments in this case, which was pan heard en
Friday, were brought to a close to-day, the counsel in sup.
port cf the rule contending that there was no corruption in
such a reference, as the indictments were not made •be nth-
ject of arbitration, but only the matters in difICMOCS.
The court rook time to consider their judgment.
GAD6BY e. ECTALL —CRAM CON.
This case, which was an action for ceminal centre ration,
had been twice tried, and on both cessions vervii...s had
been returned for the defendant. A rule bad b.en again
obtained to set aside the second verdict, 'n the gr and that it
was against evidence. The evidence to prove the criminal
connection turned on the circumstances of the deferlant's
constantiy visiting the wife of the plaint,ff during the absence
of her husband, and also on his having been admitted to her
bedroom, and remaining for some time, once or twice, int-
mratiately alter her confinement, htsid• s other acts of
familiarity. A portrait of the defendant had be•tn fniinti by
the plaintiff in the possession of his wife, accompan.ed by a
letter containing strong expressions of affection for Mrs.
Gadsby, which was said to be in the handwriting of the
de.endant. It was not, however, signed, and the proof of
the handwriting was not complete. At the trial an
affidavit had been made by the plaintiff, in which he
swore that it was in the defendant's writing, hut
the defendant had made no affidavit in answer to this.
It was contended that there was not sullioient evidence
to wannest the jury in giving any other verdict than that
for the defendant.

Mr. Serjeant Shee showed cause against the rule, and
Mr. Hawkins was heard in support of it.
The Court was of opinion that, considering the rculiar
circumstances relating to the letter (without giving any
opinion as to what might be the effect of it), there ought to
be a new trial. There was no positive rule that where tw,
verdicts had been given in the same way a third new trial
should be refused as a matter of course, although it was not
usual for the court to persist in granting new trials under
such circumstances, as it might seem to be, in some degree,
invading the province of a jury, and therefore the exceptions
should be rare. In this case, however, the court thought
thr re was evidence which might go to convince a jury which
was not properly before them in the other trial. The rule,
therefore, would be absolute for a new tr.al, but on paymtut
of costs by the plaintiff.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-SATURDAY.
drrn.v. Ix BAvvo.
MACGREGOR V. KRILIY=LIARILITY OF RAILWAY CMG

KITTIENMX.—Tan WIXDIXO-CP ACTS.
Mr. Conic moved for a rub calling on the plaintiff to
show cause why the proceedings in this case should not be
stayed. It wee an action against the defendant, as a member
of the managing committee of the Miuland Grand Junction
Railway Company, to recover the amount of the plaintiff's
bill as solicitor of the company. A verdict for 3401.
had been recovered, and subsequently a petition was pre-
sented to the Court of Chancery for the purpose of
having the /Heirs of the company wound up under
the provisions of the 11 & 12 Vic., c. 45, which was passed
last session to enlarge the power' of the Court of Cnancery,
and further facilitate the winding up the affairs of joint
stock companies and other partnerships, unable to meet
their pecuniary engagements. That act empowered the
Court of Chancery to appoint an official manager to investi-
gate the affairs of the company, and prepare lists 01 the
" contributories." The third section enacted that the word
" contributory " should include " every member of a com-
pany, and also every other person liable to contribute to the
payment of any of the debts, liabilities, or losers thereof,
whether as heir, &c., or administrator of a deceased member,
eras a former Member of the same, or as heir, ac., 01 a former
member." Other sections empowered the Master to determine
who the contributories were, and apportion amongst them,
by means of a call, the sum necessary to sae raised to discharge
the liabilities of the company. The 73rd section provided
that after the appointment of an official manager, no creditor
or other person should have power to commence or to !no-
osed with any action against the company, or any person
representing it, or as • contributory thereof, until alter proof
of
his debt before the Master ; and that it should be lawful
tor any judge of the court in which such action was pending
to ceder that all further proceedings be stayed until such
proof shah have been made or exhibited before the Muter.
The affairs of the company were now under the control of
the Court of Chancery, and it was competent to the plaintid
to prove his debt in the manner pointed out by the statute
Instead of proceeding against an individual member.
Mr. Willes opposed the motion. This was not such n case
as the act of parliament contemplated. Tke plaintiff had
recovered a verdict and signed judgment before auy proceed-
lags were taken in Chancery. The maven, never wee
incorporated or even completely registered. In Wabash V.
Spoliswoode and other cases it was decided that mere sob-
teribene, to an undertaking of this sort, were not responsible
for debts incurred by the promoters. There were, here fore,
many members of the company who could not be made
liable by action for the plaintiff's demand. The defendant
was properly proceeded against as a member of the
elleanki.tet, but the plaintiff could not make the
whole company responsible. If the defendant paid
the sum Low sought to be recovered, he
mild afterwards prove that he had done so before the Master
who had power to make the "contributories" reimburse him.
The eat did not at all apply to this case, asd then were no
grounds what shown for interfering with the executor*
of the plaintiff's judgment.
Mr. Corrie said there was no controversy about the fact
that the debt had been incurred on behalf of the company.
If his learned friend's argument prevailed no company 'e af-
fairs could be wound up under this act. It would be altoge-
ther useless.
The court held that the proceedings should be stayed until
the plaintiff had proved his debt before the Master en woe-
dance with the 73rd section. The debt was incurred on
behalf of the oespacy, and the cue came fully within the
provisions of the ail.
A rule to Any the proceedings was accordingly slanted.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.--11ATIIRDST.
i IFOLS. M VMS sirwoot Oorsamei.
Is Si denewics.
Thi. was tte certificate meeting in the case of 13. rola
trick, stationrr, of lieergatiesermt. He was supported by
Mr. Lerman, sod opposed by Mr. Spero for ir• ewe. a.
The bannerol/net, esteadlog OM two yean sod • h prior
he ffenusbrr lest, 'bowed 41003 to tne maim of 7761. ;
Naas sheet IkX.
Tee heakeept, it appeared, had been is die tanks el Mr.
▪ laormaa. of Regestitreet, wish wimp he wasaboret
@storks iota partnership and borrowed 1,0001. ler that pur-
pose= Muth, 1847. 01 this paw cool. w 111. Tickler,
ba- the negotiation for • parnenhip going off he eon:fawned
basin.= ea hie own =coasts • etrionef, applying the
arastaiag 6001. to his ova pareses. The round of oppo
Milan was that the bankrupt bad aiserUmelyinearred a tisk-
lily of 5001.
Hu liosear the:split that would be euilieleatly vanished
by griming his a certificate of the third meas.
ESTILAUIDINAUT Cacaos Or CUILVIIION.
C. .I.ihas, hauituse mad Suture desk et Kirby-street awl
Gres. Quint arrest, he
op tot his bet rusainetion.
Halm= opposed he the assignees, sad lir. Lawisses for
ethr r neaten; Mr. Liaktaar eappArtei the bankrupt.
TAO report of the eisial swigs., stated that the books
led helm very kept, arid it Ilk been necessary
to tunas • espplmestery . H. owed to creditors, se-
m(n 44,11,1881. ; fishlike!, ; profits, 1.7321. •' ditto ea
eke side eihressem 2751. His mete were very wall, oaly
S9l, the both el hie prepettp baying been swept away by
Monies* te the animal al 0071. • good dabs,. 4091. • pi,
party Mid byeten, enders% 1401.; bade ripsaws, 3,h001.; d►
weal mod proposal, 4831.; loam and bad debts, 1.9241.
kw ease, N 41.;
of
bows, 4421. Hie capital mid aot be
esesetabedoes of sia pleas at which he carried sa Wise
the srek had wily hose tokaa is ose.
Sir. Lagrone* 014 le should rat hie opposition on the
fact stated in amaigoso's report. that Lo cash so-
COWS% had been furnished. TM era was a meat extraordinari
one. For a debt of about 3001., the bankrupt had, according
re own anbunt. glowed a =nitre officer to sweep away
props ny worth 5,0001. It was iscredible that all his property
void have beta absorbed la this way. Tine was besides
1,1001. to 1;1001. is cask assecinatted for. He had beta is
busiress 28 y. an as a Waikato broker, sad ft amid sot be
belt,red that he would allow skeriire °Mem to maks sash
kayos with his property. The sale occupied 15 days, sad
dar.ag all that mate he had takes so step. to reader justice
to Ws creditors.
Mr. Linklater admitted that the was was • very extra-
ocliravy ow, bat sid it was sot kat tree. The bankrupt
bad rendes= a detailed account, months ago, et all
Ids itemisations with Mr. Shames= the =airs taw,
and there had been so attempt es the pan of the crediton
to stow that there was =verve, or .as. presentation. The
pr party sold realised I,lroi. • proof that it mast have been
pre ty neatly of the value =dosed to it by the bankrupt-
-6.84.01. la January, 1108, be had a eopite.l of 3,5001 , inde-
pi :Went of • sum of 3,0001., whit= he received in 1844 Irene
the COCIMilli011•11 of Woofs avid Forest., the value of pre-
mises he had given up in Csathnstreet He had evidently
carried en a prosperous trade till 1848, and, but for Shan-
notes ineestion in November of that 'ear, he would have
bad more than enough to pay ail his debts. The first
es entire wee fit 401., whir& Kr. Shannon, who was coati-
dent of the bankrupt's solvency, paid out without 110011fit1
at that time not tven korting the beakrapt. He did
tht taste with other executions; until, in the following
Ina*, Shannon bevies then %winced swat 300 i., nu
frustums security, • hill of sale was gives for 7001., on the
utidersteud that Shannon should ply out several pending
eaecatioes. At the seam time tke baukrupt gave a promo-
e:r4 nets for 7001. Upon that proceedings lad been takes,
sLi, by the connivance of the he Arupt's attorney, be know.
kg nothing •-if the matter, judgment WA obtained and
ex: cation =tied. Hen= the bankrupt alleged that he had
be = the sink of • conspiracy. Shannon took the usual
=use of putting • man in pos•eseloo, for the purpose, as the
bank'spt suppe in, of paying oat ay *fictitious that might
be put in. la. rad of =Aug this, he put in an memos
himself, and salt the property, is • most n (kin' meaner,
to, I,*-tOOI. The bar krupt, es soon se he limier brhat was
duag, commankated milk his other creditors; sad there
was evidently co eollutien =Meek him and Shanties.
His Honour bald the account was ag inipmbable that so
rannal person could believe it for a moment. He should
sakturn the eximmtion sine die, and wettui recommeed
tiie nenkrupt to make a elm breast, by renderins a proper
cut aerostat.
31r. Libkleter Baked for protection.
dir. Lawrence ones= toe apiiheation.
h it Honour mid that, dietelierang then neonate, and
bbluvitg that thin !bed been • collusion between the
k•ok-upt slid the shendrs carer to *knot we property
it the erediton, he should not great any protection.
Had it been a solstice of eorreaiment, be did cos know that
he should not taws seat the rinkrupt to prison.

ucsoLvEn DEBTORS' COURT.—SATURDAT.
Lr 11111 MATSU or T. FL JOEMIONI—PRTITIONO 1.14D1R

after the trial at Croydon.
By Mr. Chambers—Oar firm Is Deis, Son, and Campbell.
That firm hes been in exegeses half • eintary. Altlimb
Fewest was the nominal pialatiff, our firm meted for the
Dublin and London Bank. I believe the day before the
trial Mr. Jades& • communication, stating that be wished
to settle the action. I had told Joel that Mr. Pullman had
told me that ff sack • bill was in existence it was a forgery,
and I dietinstly told leas we would hates to no terms unless
be gave a j at and handed over this bill, which be had
ressivos from.drierrest, sad I afterward, saw the hid in the
odes, with some other papers relating to the business. Mr.
rldhaMli was esbpainard by our firm, and It was our intes-
tine Se have examined him es a witness if the action of
" IMMO a. Joel' Lad beta promisded with. Nutwith-
-11101118 ra statement of Mr. Clemente we have proceeded
with the setim. We made inquiries and then we went on
with the action. Mr. Clements wrote his name twice in
Warwick-street, and fr.m the knowledge I have thus so
piled of his handwriting I have a strong belief that the ac
«pianos to this bill is the handwriting of the prosecutor.
Toe action at first was staid upon the question ot *scanty fur
Costs, as Forrest was out of the pantry, and then this in-
dictment was preferred. and we conWered it aevisable to
wait the moult before we went on. Mr. Humphreys and
Mr. Pullman informed ate that • warrant had been issued
for the apprehension of the prisoner, and I informed Mr.
Jones, his attorney, of the last, and of er this the prisoner
roads his appearance at the Bankruptcy Court, and was
taken into custody.
By Mr. Clarkson—The bill was in the same state as it Is
now, with • number of names erased at the back, when I first
saw it. I think I eau discern*. name of Forrest as one of
those that has been erased. There was no difficulty In ob-
taioieg the address of the prosecutor, and Mr. Humphries
iamediately agreed to accept proems for him. I did not gut
the signatures from Mr. Clements for the purprae of com-
parison. The action was commenced two days after the
Ceefor lead deelared :he acceptance to boa forgery. The
uirree he referrui to were made in the pray ous month of
September, the moment the bill came into our p,sees-
den. The inquires were made in consequence. of Me.
Pullman baying previously informed me that thd bill was
a forgery.
Mr. H. J. Reeves said—l am clerk to the firm of Dans,
Campbell, sad Co. On the 10th September, 1 beheve,
received this bill for 1,0001. from • person named Chignell,
and 1 made • copy of it. Ido not remember if the endorse-
ments were scratched out er not at that time. The Islam,
afterwards corrected himself, and said h•• could nut sum
positively, but he believed they were visible at the time he
copied the bell.
Mr. H. Chignell, messenger in the office of Messrs. D•vie
land Co., proved that iu August or September lest be saw
the prisoner at the office, and that he told him he wanted
to have • memorandum to be given to his muter.
He could not state that the bill now produced was the sane
document he so received, but whatever it was he gave it to
Mr. Reeves.
By Mr. Chambers— Minims wain the habit of receiving
hundreds of papers every day, and it was not Ilia mum to I
read them. Could not say whether it was a mem T 1111,11.21
or a bill of subs. gs.
By Mr. Clarkson—This was the only paper I e ever
received from the prisoner. He gave him a receipt tor it.
Mr. Jarman, clerk to Mr. Humphrey, 1101Citef .or the
proiecutioo, proved that he served a notice upon tee prisoner
to produce this receipt on Monday last.
By Mr. Chambers—Mr. Notherelift, a lithoerapher, was
called upon to examine this bill. Witruse bad not e+tettle
Mated with Messrs. Con and Greenwood, Messes. Areet
and Co., or Messrs. Bouverie and Co., about this bill. Mr.
Netherclift was in attendance yesterday, but he was not
subptensed for the prosecution.
Mr. Clarkson then called for the production of the receipt
given by the witness Chien/11, in order to show that it ri-
mmed to the bill now is questem.
Mr. Chambers submitted that the prisoner was not b tied
to produce such receipt. In the first place the Lotice rad
only been select upon him while he was a priener, and
having no opportunity to obtain it; and secondoe, eh::: being
a bankrupt, the whole of Lis papers were nets-arils ue the
hands of his assignees.
Mr. Justice Taltourd expressed an opinion that, eerier the
eimumstances, the prisoner was not bound to protium this
receipt; bee, as the only object of :ta prodaction was to
prove the utterlrg. be comtklesed it as unemareeery, la there
was ample evidence of that by the fact teat the bill bor. the
prisoner's endorsement, and was abroad in the world, which
was gaits sufficient prima facie evidence of uttering n Lis
The witaa. Chignon was then recalled, and he said that
hen received bet one pater from the plika.or, end
whatever that was he gave to Mr. Reeves.
The learned Judge said he thought this evidence was quite
sufficient for the jetty to be of opinion that it was the bill now
in question which the prisoner had so given.
air. J. G. Murdock stud—l am a partner in the banking
firm of Denverite sad Co , and wee formerly go .rdian to Mr.
Clement.. I have carefully examined the acestitance to the
bill of irultange that has been produced, and I behove it not
to be the handwriting of Mr. Clements. I first saw this bid
in November, 1649. It was shown to me by Mr. Campbell.
The arrangements respecter g this young gentleman's embit-
terments were made with my sanction by Mr. Pullman. I
never heard of such a bill being in existence uotil the occur-
rence of the trial at Croydon.
By Mr. Bellantine-1 have paid drafts of Mr. Clements
over the counter, but it would more usually be none by the
under, Mr. James, who is not now in attendance. I should
not have paid this bill if it had been presented over the coun-
ter. Ido not know whether the bill ha. been Mown to
my mishit r. I had beard Mr. Clements's statement before I
termed my opinion with regard to the handwriting. I en-
gaged Mr. Pullman to act to arrange the 'Sous of the pro.
Heater, and he was to receive five guineas per des while he
was engaged in Ireland upon the matter. When Mr. Camp-
bell showed me the bill I think I said it was like his hand-
writing, and after that she action proceeded.
By the Court—l have been Mr. Clements's guardian sines
the death of his father and mother. Before he went jute
the army he was at • sort of military college at ledge, and
he frequently corresponded with me. The purchasa and
sale of the commissions were effected with my sanction.
Mr. Campbell ro.called--The prisoner called at the all*
vier the bill was is my poseention and we had some sm.
lenelden about it, and asserted positively that it was •
rag genuine bid. end be could prove it.
The bill was than put la and read. It was in the fel
lowing terms
" leindon, sth August, 1847.
"Two mouths after date pay to my order, at Messrs. Cox
and Greenwood's, Craig's-court, the sum of one thousand
pounds sterling for value received.—Signed, Lewis Jon.."
And across the flee of the bill was wnven, " Accepted, J.
M. Clements. Lieut. 13:h Light Dragoons."
This closed the ease for the prosecution.
Mr. Chambers thea addressed the jury for the defence in a
speech of great power and eloquence. The principal points
he relied upon wen, that whereas the prisoner had all along
asserted the peahen.se of the bill, and had made two affi-
davits to that effect, every ma of the witnesses who were
called to prove the contrary had • strong bias, and were
deeply interested in proving that it was a raise instrument,
and thereby g rid of the liability in connexion with it;
and be u that this consideration Demme the more im-
portant for the emanderetion of the jury when they recol-
lected that independent witnesses from Meson. Con and Co.'s,
from Misers. Armit and Co.'r, and from Messrs. Houten. and
Co. nighties,. been called Merlons, their opinion whether
or not the seseptanee of this bill was in the handwriting of
the prosecutor. None of these wit/mere, however, had been
examined ; and not only were they not brought forward,
but Mr. Netherclift, a gentleman of great experience in such
matters, I. whom the bill had been shown, and who, they
had beard, was in attendance the whole of the previous day,
had also been left out of the ease; and he urged epos the
jury that the inevitable conclusion which must be come to
upon these farms was that these witnesses, if they had been
examined, would have given evidence in favour of the
genuineness of the bill, and he said the jury had a right to
0811111111 that suck was the case. He contended that the
account of the trametion given by the prisoner was a meet
reasonable one, tad bore the Mum of truth. What was the
position of the parties at thetas'. this hill was said to have
been given in' aly or thereabottereflll47 ? It woe priestly clam
that at that time the prosecutor owed Mr. Joel a lame sum of
gooney, and that the la=tter became aware that he was under
age, and also that he was about to lame the army and to go
away from Dublin, and what was more natural under them
'annuitant's. than that he should endeavour to obtain some-
thing I. the shape of • collateral asentity for his debt t It
=d that he had threatened to tabs proceeding, ageism
mea ter, to hare him held to bail upon an aavit that
be was about to leave the country, and he asked the jury
whether it was likely that Joel should have foreborse suck
proteedieg,s if the prosecutor had not stopped him in scans
way err other, and most likely by giving him this blank INS
captains to be filled up after became of sge, and which Joel.
being ignorant of the law, might havetneside red to be a valid
instminest. With regard le the delay th.t had taken plass
in prosording against the preseentor upon this seceptiama
be said it appeared to him that the statement of the poi
aw that the peomeatoe had ithstlaately evaded the
servile of weer had been sabstentially established, he
amai to the promentork had gone Se
Spain, nto Ems:, to W ises; own
madletterwillijacos,he and that he
had nosettled residues where he could be foued, and this
part of the ease for the maimatioa he smoldered had been
most sattafectorfly answered. The learned mussel then
made some ecommeate upeallie madast of the proseentor is
mamba( utiolos of jowolloey bon gm Omer fad Win

persons, sad breaking them up immediately and gelling
them, and he said that such conduct wee not oniy disgraceful
In a pianism and an officer holding her bleitsty's co=
mirk's, hut that, in an ordinary can, it such nets were laid
before a jury in support of • charge of felony in robbing the
tradesmen el sank articles, be win of opinion It would go
very tar indeed to induce them to return a verdict of guilty.
He WU that this prisoner had also, in his opinion,
has MOM meet harshly by the pnesrater by his not
elliseilmg him all this time to receive any potties of the large
sand mosey whisk he admitted he lied received from him,
rd Wee mall be eery little doubt that this had bees the
ors ef the prisoner, and that it bad driven him to beak.
Wifiey. As to that part of the cam in which it wee premed
, against the prisoner that in the amount he had remitted to
Pullman no mention was made of this bill of exchange, the
jury would recollect that, at the time the soment was retc
dared, sash an Instrument in the shape of a bill wee not in
existent*, sad that the blank acceptance wee a amildential
proceeding between the prosecutor and the priemair, and
that the undersheadiag was that the bill should net be filled
up until the firmer same of age, and that it was caly to be
used as a collateral security in the event of dm ether bills
sad debts not being paid. The horned ellineal then
commented upon the eiremastaases sosneeted with
the action spinet the promeutor upon this bill, sad
said that the fury would not forget that whoa the
eater's guardian first saw the bill he said the wee
very much like the handwriting of his ward, Asp giris
Mr. Campbell, of course, had no alternative but be so ea
with the action, and he urged upon the jury that ebb MOM
of this indictment was to get rid of that amiss, sad also at
the same time prevent the prisoner from obtaining any por-
tion of the just debt that Tes due to him. The learned
counsel haling commented at very great legal ups, these
and the other prints in the ease which be sonsiderml were
favourable to the prisoner he coachaded by stating that
although the prepereator had sworn positively to the writing,
the prisoner now, as he had always done,. persisted ia assert-
ing that the aeosptance was his assume *Wan' and
without reference to the result, or to say Whet it might
have upon the position or character of the promoter, he
submitted that from the facts in the case the prisoner was
proved to be apeeking the truth, and he called upon the jury
to Pay so by their verdict.
Mr. Justice TalMurd then summed up the ems with very
great cars and impartiality, particularly bringing to the
attention of the jury the whole of the eirewastaness that
were relied upon as being indicative of the innocence of the
rinser.
The Jury, after deliberating a quarter of an hour in the
box, expressed • with to retire, and they accordingly did so
at eight o'clock. They were more than an hour and a half
in deliberation, when they returned into court and smoothen
verdict, (Mang the prisoner Guilty of interim the fastest
meat in question knowing it to be forged.
TM prisoner, when the verdict was pronounced, begged to
he allowed to say a few words. In the first plate, he tendered
Lis thanksto his attorney and to Mr. Chambers Mr the able
manner in wrath they had defended him ; but he said at
the same time he was of opinion that it the wit-
nesses whom he had subpconsed had been examined, ha
innocence would have been established. He then declared
that es he hoped to stand before a higher tribunal than that
before which he was now placed, the acceptance to this bill
was written by the prosecutor.
Mr. Justice Talmud thea addressed the prisoner and said
that after a most patient and careful inquiry, which had
occupied two days, the jury had found him guilty of utter-
ing this instrument knowing it to be forced, and now that
tilt. verdict was returned, he had no hesitation in mobil( that
he concurred in that verdict. Everthiog that ingenuity
and tloquence could effect he had had the advantage of, and
he (the learned judge) certainly did not omit to cell to the
att. atria of the jury every circumstance that was relied
iiitoti as being is his favour, and after a serious deliberation
they had found him guilty, and he must repeat that he
nravarred in that verdict, and that the evidence and de-
m snout of the prosecutor carried complete conviction to his
mini, coupled with the other circumstances of thecae.
He then sentenced the prisoner to be transported for ten
The trial of Edw .rd Minn, the strckbroker, was poet.
ono; d to the next swim, and the court then adjourned to
11..uday, Feb. 4.