The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-03 00:00:00

THE SUN,

LONDON, TUESDAY

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICE• CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Aug. 2.
(Before Sir GEORGE TURNER.)
MILKER V, HARRISON.

This was a motion for a perpetual injunction to re-
strain the defendant from infringing the plaintiff's patent
for making iron safes, on the ground that aftEr two trials
at law the fact of infringement bad been established in
the plaintiff'. favour.
Mr. ROLT supported tho motion, which was submitted
to by Mr. bhebbeare for the defendant.
(Before Sir JANES PARKER.)
BUSINESS CF THE COURT.

The following paper was plac,d in the court to-day.—
Vice-Chancellor Parker's Court, August 2, 1852.
" The Lords Justices will hear on Wednesday and
Thursday next toy motions, claiins, or short cause's, be-
longing to this branch of the court, the titles of which
shad be given to the registrar on Tuesday (August 3),
by the plaintiff, or party moving.
" In cases in which orders are taken on affidavit of
course, one clear day's notice that the matter will be
heard before the Lords Justices muit be given."
The VICE-CHANCELLOR stated that 'the Lords Jus-
tices would also hear petitions, which, with the other
business, would greatly relieve the pressure upon the
Court at the close of the sittings.

PERCIVAL V. CANEY.

In this env the Lord Justice Knight Bruce, when
Vies-Chancellor, had made a. decree for the defendants
to transfer and pay to Me plaintiff, Me 3. Susannah Per-
cival, a sum of otook and cash:
The defendants appealed against that decree to the•
late Lord Chancellor Truro, who dismissed their appeal
with costs. Pending the appeal the stock and cash had
been brought into court.
Mr. -RUSSELL (with whom was Mr. W. Cooper) now
nPlitlti to have the stock and cash transferred and paid
ou!t,o -the plaintiff.
. ppeat •ahoufd be made
1 thel.Lretll" opposed
the
application, and asked that
,i,.,
___ °eel:. and cash might be retained in court pending
'louse of Lords.
the defendants intended to make to the
'l's' °I Lords. .
tier) of the
Hi
8 II"olm declined to restrain the pteceedinp,s
under the eeereo eourt
that All application to restrain a decree
cree of the Lnrd Chancel:l.
branch el the court We'
tlon, directing, however;
the•, he cOnsidered that had
decree had become the . de-
that iithee granted
shouldptdeacerlryeaenPt decree;
tLabbnaaed: delivered out for ten days, ,

Sur-rey
BOMB CIRCUIT.—(I:4I7orI4-I,NACugE. o•
ASSIZE INiE/7"----,-------
:el,-,
The corarni!.sion for 'the Coith-t.
c'Z'o'cl_e,d with in both
illrthe calendar
gat opened
on Sa!urday, and businus wa3 'Ygl
courts this.„ rtwrniog zt tpu o'clock.
Jervia pre;ided on the Ctvi! Side, an: 'et Chliltifj-uLu:t)ice
in the Crown Court. • o or. Justice Mania
CROWN COURT—( Mr. Justice
years old, vraa indicted
Thomas Shanks, a little urchin, titased
to he only nine
th g - Y
~0 •
Western Rs,ilway, and thereby endangering ~, Lth.
throwing a stone at a train travelling upon feloniously
of thepas2enger4 travelling therein. b LUe safety
• No counsel being ergaged by the company to pr
cat° the Court directed the depositions to be bande-
hir:ChArkson. Mr. Robinson defended the prisoner. to
mel._'4oPPeared from the evidence of a sergeant of the
"_ r politan Police, named DalPy, that'on the after-
"en of 2Gth July he saw the prisoner and several other
P.. 0 h standing it 14 boys a •
nning on a briega over the railway at

, o rf
said
ihi h
Wandsworth, and he observed him stoop down and pick
up a stone and thr.-Av it at a train that was passim;.
ahe stone struck the wheel of one of the carriages, and
upon the constable immediately going up to the prisoner
and rtAtillo. him bow he dared to throw anything at the
tanii
be b'egan to cry, and begged to be forgiven, and
o should not have done it, only Bill Walker, one
companions, had "hey" ono first, and then he
he p another.
rs"
. Ronmsorr, in addressing the jury for the prisoner,
said he could not deny that it was a very improper act
on his part to throw a stone at a railway train; but he
said it appeared to him that the proceeding of the pri-
soner was merely a boyish aet of mischief', and that the
evidence would not justify the jary in convicting him of
an offence for which he might be transported for life.
The prisoner might have barn dealt with summarily,
and this, it occurred to him, would have been the proper
course, and no doubt if he had received a good flogging
he would have richly deserved it, hut he contended that
under the circumstances the prisoner ought not to be
convicted of the very serious offence impaled to him by
the present indictment.
The Learned JUDGE having brit fly addressed the
jury, they at once returned a verdict of Not Guilty,
and the prisoner was ordered to be delivered up to his
friends.

William Smith surrendered to take his trial upon an
indictment for misdemeanour. Another person, named
Everett, was included in the indictment, but he did not
surrender to take his trial, and the recognisances of him-
self and his bail were consequently estreated.
Mr. E. James,
the prosecution; Mr.
Locke was counsel for the de-
fendant. QC ~ and Mr. Hawkins conducted

The charge against the defendant was of a novel cha-
racter. The indictment was framed under a statute
passed in the thirteenth year of the reign of Queen Eli-
sebeth, the object of which was to prevent the practice
of fraudulent deeds of 'sale and conveyances of property
being made use of to defeat legal claims. The charge
against the defendants was, that they had unlawfully
conspired together to utter certain fraudulent deeds
by which the defendant Smith conveyed sway property
belonging to n
of the indictment from getting possession of it in satis-
im, with intent to prevent the prosecutor
faction of a judgment he had obtained against Smith.
The circumstances of the case were of a very singular
character; but as they have been repeatedly alluded
to in the course of the different proceedings that have
taken place in connexion with the matter, it
will not be necessary to do more than to give a
narrative of the facts that appeared in evidence upon the
present occasion. The prosecutor. Mr. William Cole 1
Mackley, it appeared, had purchased in 1849 a piece of
land at Wandsworth, called West-hill-grove, for build-
ing purposes,
ac with the defendant
and a number of houses were erected by
him, and others were in the course of erection upon this
land, when he became
acquainted
Smith, who lived at Wandsworth, end who had the re-
putation of being a :man of property, and upon his
making a representation that he would get the prosecu-
tor a better roadway to his property than he then pos.
seated; Mr. Mackley consented to sell him a small por-
tion of his land for 411. It appeared pretty plain, from
what afterwards occurred, that Smith had no other ob
ject in getting possession of the piece of land than to
use it as a means of extorting money from the prosecu-
tor, for, very
soon after it came into his possession, be
commenced making the most extraordinary use of it. Ho
placed a large number of poles all over the ground, upon
which he burg effigies of different notorious
people, among others, those of Mr. and Mrs.
Manning, likewise a number of old pots and
and kettles, large bells,
flags, and a great many ether
extraordinary matters, the effect of which was to create
such a nuisence as to seriously damage the property
of the prosecutor. He, in consequence of the injury and
annoyance he thus sustained, brought an actin against
Smith at the Spring Assizes for this county in 1851,
and the above feces being proved, the jury returned a
verdict for the plaintiff, with 5001. damages. Very soon
efter this verdict had been given against him, Smith got
himself made a bankrupt, but the commissioner, upon
the fates laid before him, eventually annulled the fiat of
bankruptcy, on the ground that he was not a trader. An
endeavour oven then made by the plaintiff in the action
to get hold of Smith's property in satisfaction of his
damages and costs, but upon his atterapting to do so,
deeds were produced to show that he had sold all the
property he possessed to different parties, and it was
made to appear by one of the instruments that the piece
of land which Smith had purchased of the plaintlf bad
been conveyed to a person named Everett, the other de-
fendant in the present indictment, in consideration of the
sum of 46/, having been paid by him to Smi,h. At the
last Spring Assizes as action of ejectment was brought
by Mr. Ilackley epeeist Everett, to recover possession
of this
to it upon the deed referred to. 'I he jury, however,
to
of ground; and tha latter founded his title
found a verdict for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Justice
Coleridge, who tried the case, ordered all the documents
to be impounded, and the present indictment was sub-
sequently preferred against Smith and Everett under
the statute above referred to. In order to show that the
&oda of conveyance of the property had merely been
concocted to defeat the judgment that had originally
been obtained against Smith, it was proved that the
deed by which the piece of land had been conveyed to
Everett had been concocted at a public-house on the
very morning of the trial; that no solicitor was tem-
ployed; and that when Smith was examined as a witness
at the trial of ejectment against Everett, he stated that
he got the deed drawn up at a copyist's, but he did not
know his name or where he lived. It also appeared
that when one of the other parties, to whom another
portion of Smith's property was alleged to have been
convoyed, was applied to, he at once admitted that it
was not a genuine transaction, and gave up possession.
It likewise appeared that on several occasions Smith had
stated his determination to prevent the plaintiff from
getting hold of any of his property, and said thit
although
had got a verdict, the verdict was all he
should
Mr. LodaE, on behalf of the defendant, endeavoured
to show that he had really disposed of the property in
suer
be
r get.
order to raise money to pay the expenses of the action
the prosecutor had brought against him; and he re-
minded the jury that he had a perfectright to sell every-
thing he possessed if be chose to do so, in order to de-
fajudgment the plaintiff had obtained, and that
theyet
thecould not convict him under this statute unless they
were satisfied that the deeds were a sham and a fraud
altogether, and that the defendant never did, in point
of filet, part with the possession of any of the property
named in the instruments.
Mr. Justice MAIILE summed up the case,
to the jury the nature of the charge against the defend-
explaining
stanot'
out, and after they had deliberated a short time in the
box they expressed a wish to retire.
a
Mr. LOCXE took some technical objections to the in-
they returned into court, and
crave a verdict of Guilty.
hourde e judgmentadan t, whichw a
s
called
alover-ruledled u p t o
fraudulent transactit to It was clear that he had fol-
n
lowed been convicted of a most
lbdoyi welfitne receive
nhi
d: t inbl Court,
op i latt' I )masrio laras
sentence.l
el
most 'd said
spiteful the
h 8 and malicious determination to
annoy the prosecutor, Who
appeared to have committed
all other offence against him than to endeavour to
ru p he had laid to extort an exor-
bitant sum for the piece of land ha had purchased. Ho
had been convicted nyder a statute which directed a
certain punishment to be ieflicted fur the offence, and '
he tggle out of the trap
had now nothing to do but to pronounce that punish-
ment, which was that he be imprisoned for one half-
without bail or mainprize. ,
year

bbtwhi
fe.agibvvmaorrr.tbvv,
411 BETH.
et°i'llt with beingo,person
re.
POLICE INTELLIGENCE.JLaAmes
Armstrong, two well dressed
beforeo. f w
ayMe
valuable
Elliott,
gold the
' Ann Pearson and
Tuesday last he met the
persons, wero placed at
accessory to the fact,
The prosecutor, who is tt merchant iii the City, de.
posed
oioatirstimectdir,
taitten:::ecrtagol
irenetdl
ta.t.w.tnstieett
r.hrenewri
female prisoner is tee Welworth-road between 11 and
12 o'clock, and on her importuning him a good deal he
treated har at the Bluecoat Boy public-house, in the
eval,orth-road. ()cleaving thet house she pressed him
'
to
accompany her to a house tv.hcle the pointed out, but
he refused, and at thie time he observed that t 770 m
ono _ ~
.I,,cm the male prisoner, was following, anti closely
watching thence In a few minutes the woman startedj
from him and ran away, and instantly he-discovered that
iris
watch was gone, arid had been removed from the
swivel of his guard chain. He was about to folio
the woman, when the second man, who was not in cuw
,tody, Mae up to him, and placing
is, hand familiar's;
-on .his shoulder mad, ' The best thg you can do .-
:to come back and apologise to my friend for the insult's
you hove offered him.' Upon which he replied, o Te:
heat
thing
_,,,,. can do is to keep your hands off, else 1
tiivety
B.)ouoini place you in the custody of the police'
'The peraon to whom the second man alluded es his
'f need was the male prisoner, and witness was quite
satisfied as to his identity, as well as that of the woman
The prisoners declared he was
quite wrong; hat i 5
-*
far as regarded the woreao, Mr. Roundtree, the landlord
of the Btuccoat Boy, clearly identified her as bale, the
person who was in company with the prosecutor at hie
house on the night of the robbery.
'rho constable who apprehended the prisoners on sa.
turday night said, the male prisoner, who refused to give
his addrese, cautioned him to be careful of what he was
about, as ho was a resptctable man, and a Perfect
stranger to the woman. On searching him he found on
his parson a duplicate for a valuable Geneva watch and
guard chain, pledged on the 26th June for 2/. lOs , and
11. 7s. 6d. in cash. Since then ho found that the male f
and feteale prisoners bed been living together fur some
time as man and wife, and the landlady of the house was
Preset-At tce prove the fact. '
The prisoners were remanded to a future day.
.
WOBSELIP-STREA7.
Two mcn named George Todd and Alfred lereeon,
ware charged before Mr. D'Eyocourt with au assault of
a highly. aggravated character, upon two young women,
named Mary Anne Skinner and Susannah Groom.
The first complainant stated that she, was passing
through Victoria- park at an eat ly hour ot the preceding
morning, accempanied by two other young women, when
they were overtaken by the prisoners and several other
men, who requested them to accompany them, and in.
vited them to partake of some coffee. They declined
the invitation. and were hurrying on to avoid further
molestation, when they were suddenly surrounded by
tho whole party, and the prisoner Todd eersd hold of
witness and endeavoured to throw her to the ground.
She screamed loudly for assietauce, and struggled sZre-
nuously to release herself from him; but after striking
her a violent blow on the face, which knocked out nee of
her teeth,
the prisoner eur...ceeclfd in throwina her
heavily upon the ground, and instantly commenced a
similar attack upon the gErl Groom, whom they also
thing to the ground, anti were in the act of subjecting 1
her to the most flagrant ill-treatment, when a policeman. i
Who had been attracted by their cries, fortunately Made.