The Sun.
London, England, 1864-11-02 00:00:00

The Singular Claim of Property at Wigan

The borough magistrates at Wigan were occupied for
nearly six hours on Monday in hearing a case arising out
of the extraordinary seizure of the Manor-house, Scholes,
by two men acting as agents for one Horrocks, a grocer, at
Spenney Moor, Durham, the particulars of which have al-
ready appeared in our columns. Mr Hilton, the town clerk,
appeared in support of a summons charging Joseph Her-
rocks and Charles Rowe with having forcibly entered and
detained the Manor-house, Scholes, then in the occupation
of the executors of the late Joseph Burns, as tenants thereof.
The defendants were represented by Mr Trotter, of Bishop
Auckland, Durham, solicitor for the claimant of the pro-
perty. The first witness called was Thos. Swarbrick, who.
said ho was one of the executors of the late Joseph Burns.
Mr Trotter, learning that the will was not proved, at once
objected to the reception of the evidence of the witness as an
executor till the will was proved ; but this objection was
overruled. The evidence went to show that on the 12th
October the two defendants entered the house, stating that
they represented the real owner of the property, that they
were ejected by force, and that they re-entered immediately
afterwards by the back door, followed by a crowd who sup-
ported their claim, that there was much riotous conduct iL
the house till the representative of the owner departed,
and that since that period they had held possession by
forcible Means. In opening the case for the defence, Mr
Trotter raised the point that, inasmuch as in everything
the defendants did they were exercising a bona file claim
of right, the jurisdiction of the justices were ousted, and
in proof of this several authorities were quoted. In sup-
port of his assertion as to right, Mr Trotter said the pro-
perty had passed from the hands of his clients owing to cer-
tain forged wills, one of which was actually proved 10 years
before the testator died. There was a long discussion on
this point, and the magistrates, after retiring to consult,
decided that they had power to hear the case, as the sta-
tutes of Richatd 11. and Henry VI. under which the pro-
ceedings were taken, seemed especially to meet cases such
as the one they were then considering.—Mr Trotter then

proceeded to discuss the merits of the charge, and stated
that the men were in the house by permission of complain-
ant's co-executor on Burns's estate. He denied that there
had been any forcible entry, and, as a consequence, there
was not legally any forcible detainer. A great deal had been
said about the wroneul doings of his clients, and it was said
that Mr Taylor, the alleged owner of the property, was much
to be pitied ; but surely, if anyone was to be pitied it was
his client, whose family had by two gross acts of forgery
been kept out of the property for along time. Many per-

sons, no doubt, had bought some of the property not know-
ing these frets, and it would be hard on them, but he was
instructed that the owners of an immense quantity of this
Scholes land had bought it with their eyes open, knowing
what was hanging over it.—The Magistrates' Clerk (Mr

Part) said he had had to do with many titles in that district,
and never heard of it; and several of the leading solicitors
in the town who were in court made corroborative remarks
—Mr Trotter said the case had been tried at the Lancaster
Assizes in 1807, and a verdict had been obtained. He could
not understand why the parties had not taken possession.
He could prove that Burns had attorned tenant to his
clients ; but if he could show that Swarbrick's co-executor,
Prow, disowned these proceedings, there was an end of the
case. After some consideration, the magistrates proceeded
to the house of Prow, who was too ill to attend the court,
and he stated that the proceedings were taken without his
authority, and that when the defendants were repulsed
on the 12th of October, he pointed out to them that they
could re-enter at the back door. The Magistrates' Clerk
advised the justices at once to dismiss the case, and the
probeedings terminated,—The defendants were received
outside the court with a hearty cheer; and the police
evacuating the premises in dispute, they again entered, to
the evident delight of a large crowd of spectators. Yes-
terday's proceedings leave the inhabitants of the town
almost as much in the dark as ever as to the grounds of this
singular claim. The claimants appear to possess a brief held
by one of the junior counsel in a case tried at the Lancaster
assizes in 187, Roe v. Tabley, and the evidence adduced
shows, it is alleged, that a verdict was obtained in favour of
the ancestors of the defendants in the case tried yesterday,a
certain will under which the land was held being proved to
be forged. The statement that the Manor-house is only a
very small portion of the property claimed seems to be well
grounded, and should there really be more in the affair than
the leading solicitors in the town believe, no little litigation
may be expected.

A BRAVE LAD.—The Charleroi journals relate
the following instances of fortitude on the part of
a little boy only:eight years old, the son of a labourer named
Malhaux, living at Farcinnes, Belgium. One evening, three
weeks since, he was sent by his mother to fetch a loaf from
a baker's on the opposite side of the railway. On his re-
turn, when passing a level crossing about 150 paces from the
Farciennes station, he saw a train approaching, and in his
alarm stumbled and fell. He nevertheless had the presence
of mind to roll into the space between the rails and lie still.
Unhappily, the clearing iron caught his blouse and dragged
him along till the train stopped at the station, but the wheels
had meanwhile passed over one of his arms and cut it nearly
off. When liberated he exclaimed, looking at his mangled
limb, " Pray, do not tell mother I" and asked the by.
standers to fetch his loaf. It was found necessary to
amputate the arm, and chloroform having been applied
without producing insensibility, he bore the operation with
the utmost courage, and only asked once or twice if the
surgeons would soon have done. His arm is now healing.
and the little fellow has returned to school as gay and
cheerful as his companions.

JUST TIIE PEOPLE FOR A SEANCE.—A correspou-
cleat of the Bombay Gazette, in the central provinces,
relates an incident as having occurred at Reopen, which he
had obtained -from a highly intelligent native gentleman
of his acquaintance. He (the intelligent native) was with
a great concourse of people at a fair held near the town of
Raepore, and while sauntering with many other strangers
in the fair, one of them began bargaining with two women
of middle age for some very fine sugar-canes. The man
got angry, and took up one of them, when the woman seized
the other end, and a struggle ensued. The purchaser offered
a fair price, the seller demanded double, The crowd looked
on, and a good deal of abuse of the female relations on both
sides took place. At last a policeman came up, and called
out to the man to let go his hold of the sugar-cane. He re-
fused, saying " that when people come to the fair to sell,
they should be made to sell at reasonable prices, or be turned
out." I, said the informant, thought the man right, and
told the policeman so, and that if he took the part of the
woman we would take the man's part, and see fair play.
Without further ceremony the Peeler with a knife cut the
cane in two, in the middle, and pointing to both pieces,
" There (said he) you see the cause of my interference."
We looked and taw blood running from both pieces, and
forming a pool on the ground. The fact was the woman was
a sorceress of the very worst kind, and was drawing the
blood from the man through the cane to feed the abominable
devil from whom she derived her detestable powers; but for
the timely interference of the policeman he would have been

dead in another minute, for ho no sooner saw the blood
than he fainted. 11'3 had hardly any blood left in him, and
could not walk for ten days 1"