The Sun.
London, England, 1864-08-24 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.---This Day,

SHERIFF'S COURT.

THE COMPENSATION MANIA,---SINGULAR POINT IN LAW

OF EJECTMENT.-MEACOCK Y. MOKLER,
This Was a writ of ejectment in which the plaintiff
sought to recover possession of certain premises, Mr Kemp
(instructed by Mr T. Beard) appearing for defendant.
Plaintiff formally proved that defendant had been a
tenant paying a weekly rentai, and that due notice to quit
had been given,
Mr Kemp inquired if there had no,`, been en agreement
Plaintiff—Yes, but it has expired.
His Honour directed plaintiff to prothice t, and it was
found to be unstaraped, bat the terms were s letting for a
twelvemonth, the rent to be paid weekly, and plaintiff said
there was no other agreement in existence.
Mr Kemp then urged that if defendtint bad occlipled
under this agreement and continued occupation without
any further agreement, the terms ci the present tenancy
mast be governed by the previous contract.
Hisllonour said that the agreement was =stamped, and
he could not look at it, but he was inclined to think that
where the rent was paid weekly the usual notice would be
sufficient.

lic.mp was anxious to have a case for the Court
abova. The point was of importance and might affect the
rights of defendant. It would seem that these premises were
repaired by the corporation, and they only wanted to get
defendant out in order to get fuller compensation for him-
self.
His Honour considered that if defendant was allowed to
remain ho wduld probably receive but small compensation
as a tenant under a tenant.

Mr Kemp urged that defendant vv,ul2 get something,
and therefore ought to have the full I,(,l:,_tit of the law.
Plaintiff said that the corporation had cettled with him,
and he should not be benefi,ed at all in that quarter by d.i-
fendant's turning out. If the rent was guaranteed defendant

could remain.
Defendant said that he h,a offered the re,.;t [Plaintiff—
Alter this action], and that plaintiff had dis;rairad exces-
sively, for which an action had bsen brought.
His Honour ultimately allowed the case to stand over for
defendant to stamp the agreement if necessary.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This ray.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

CAUTION TO CAB DRIVERS.—Wm. Henry Jay, pro-
prietor and driver of cab 11,684, appeared before Mr Tyr•
whitt to answer two complaints made by Mr Bernardo
Goldshede, of Oakley-square, Camden-tows—the first of
unlawfully refusing to carry him, end the second of ne-
glecting to deliver a ticket when required to do so.
Mr E, Dillon Lewis, from the office of Mr Edward Lewis,
of Great Marlborough-street, appeared for the complainant;
and a solicitor, whose name did not transpire, for the de-
fendant.

It appears that Mr Goldshede, who is suffering from
lameness and walks with a stick, got into the defendant's
cab at Oakley-square, Camden-town, and told him to drive
to Chelsea. The defendant proceeded on his journey, and
when near Bruton-street Mr Goldshede requested him to
drive faster. This defendant did for a short distance; but
on Mr Goldshede finding the defendant
was going out of
his way, and was not proceeding by the direct route, he
expostulated with him. The defendant then pulled up in
Bruton-street, and refused to carry Mr Goldshede any
further, and Mr Goldshede was obliged to walk to Picca-
dilly before he could get another cab, and through the de-
fendant's cmiluct nearly lost an important engagement.
After hearing the defendant's solicitor,
Mr Tyrwhitt fined the defendant 20s. and costs for re-
fusing to carry Mr Goldshede.
_

The complaint of not giving a ticket was then gone into,
and it appeared that when the defendant refused to carry
Mr Goldshede any further Mr Goldshed3 asked him for a
ticket, which for some time he refused, but subsequently
gave one which did not tally with the cab number.

The defendant's solicitors explained that the defendant
was the proprietor of other cabs, and had by mistake brought
out the tickets bearing the number of another of his cabs.
Mr Tyrwhitt said the defendant was boind to have the
proper tickets, but as the one given had found him, he
would only fine him ss. and costs.