The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-26 00:00:00

TitURSDAY AVENIN

LAW INTELLIGENCE:

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Feb. 25.
(Before Sir J. PARKER.)

IN THE MATTER OF THE JoINT-STOCK COMPANIES'
WINDING•UP ACTS, 1848 AND 1849, AND OF THE
EASTERN C )UNTIES AND SOUTH END RAILWAY COM-
PANY, EX PARTECAUSTON.

Mr. Kauss and Mr. ROXBURGH moved to dileharge
an order of the Master, by which the name of Mr. Caus.
ton had been placed on the list of contributories of the
above company. It appeared from the statement of the
Learned Counsel that Mr. Causton had been secretary to
the above company, which was one of the various rail-
way projects which failed in the year 184 S ; that the
company was to consist of 22,000 shares, all of which
were allotted; and that Mr. Causton had applied for 50
shares, but that he had not had any allotted to him, on
account of their having been all previously allotted to
other persons. Mr. Causton had, however, signed the
subscription contract, in common with about 14 or 15
allottees of shares, to whom the deposits which they
paid in respect of their shares (about 500 in number)
had been returned by the directors. The official ma-
nager claimed to have Mr. Causton's name placed on the
list of contributories on the ground of his having exe-
cuted the subscription contract, but it was contended,
on Mr. Causton's behalf, that he had executed the deed
only because he had been desired to do so by the di-
rectors, and not as a shareholder, and that even if he
had executed it in the latter capacity, he had done so on
the faith of its being executed by all who had under-
taken to do it. It was insisted that the deed was in fact
a nullity, and had been always treated as such by the
directors.
Mr. Daniel and Mr. Wordsworth, of the common law
bar, appeared for the official manager, but they were not
called upon to address the Court.

E[ia noNona said he thought Mr. Causton was bound
by the deed which ho had executed. There was nothing
alleged to induce him to treat it as void on the ground
of fraud. The motion, therefore, must be refused, and
with costs.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 25.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Lord CAMPBELL and a

Special Jury.)
THE QUEEN v KINCAID AND ANOTHER.
Mr jfaorlage Q.e.
Crown;
Mr. Hawkins, and Mr. Parry ap-
peared Sir A. E. ockburn, Mr. Cham-
bers, Q.C., Mr. Huddlestone, and Mr. Combe, for Kin-
caid; and Mr. Crowder, Q.C., Mr. Collier, and Mr.
Prentice for the other defendant, Were.
The defendants Charles Henry Kincaid and Nicholas
Were were indicted for conspiring, by means of fraud and
sham sale, to cheat the creditors of a Mrs. Kincaid, and
also for conspiring to hinder the course of justice by
making a false affidavit in Doctors'-commons. There
was another set of counts, which charged a conspiracy
to defraud Archibald Mowatt, who was entitled to
one-third the estate of Mrs. Kincaid. The deceased
Mrs. Kincaid was the lessee of a house known as
Simpson's Chophouse and Coffeehouse in Cornhill.
She died on the 2d of October,
1851, leaving three
children, the defendant C. 11. Kincaid, who had for-
merly been in practice as an attorney; Mary Ann Kin-
caid, living with her at the time of her death; and
another daughter married to Mr. Mowatt. The charge
against the son was that he conspired with the other
defendant, Were, an attorney at Plymouth, to defraud
the creditors of Mrs. Kincaid, and also his sister Mrs.
Mowatt, by getting administration of the effects of his
deceased mother, and disposing of the same to Were at a
much smaller sum than the property was worth. Mrs.
Kincaid was entitled to the lease of the chophouse for an
unexpired term of 14 years, and, the takings being stated
to be about 201. a-day, the lease, goodwill, and furniture
were estimated to be worth from 4,000/. to 6,0001. On
Mrs. Kincaid's death, which took place on the 2d of Oc-
tober, 1851, Mrs. Mowatt wrote to the defendant Were,
at Plymouth, to inquire whether he had not made a will
for the late Mrs. Kincaid, and on the 4th of October re-
ceived an answer stating that he had prepared such a
will, and that after seeing it executed in the presence of
two witnesses he left it in her custody. Search was
then made for this will, but it was not found; but
another will, in the handwriting of Were, was found in
Miss M. A. Kincaid's dressing-case, which, however, had
no signature. On the mother's death the defendant C.
H. Kincaid came home from Paris to his mother's
house, where his sister M. A. Kincaid was residing,
and required all the keys to •be given up to him,
which was done accordingly. The deceased died very
much in debt, to the extent of several thousand pounds,
and the creditors, it was alleged, were defrauded by the
defendants in the following manner:—Kincaid made an
affidavit at Doctors'-commons that he was the natural
and only child of the deceased, though he had two sisters
living, and one was residing in the house with him at the
time, and thus obtained letters of administration to the
estate of his mother. This affidavit was made on the
loth of October. The defendant Were and another per-
son, named Dunwick, were the sureties in the adminis-
tration bond. The defendant Kincaid then employed
Messrs. Blake and Poole, who convened the creditors of
Mrs. Kincaid to a meeting on the 20th of October, to
receive a statement of the effects of the deceased. On
that day the creditors met, but, instead of receiving a
statement, they were informed that the property had
been sold to the defendant Were for the sum of 1,8001.,
and that the proceeds had been applied to paying off
7761. sine upon a mortgage upon the premises, and one
or two other claims upon the deceased, the principal part
of which was a claim of 6381. alleged to be due to Dun-
wick. It appeared, however, that Dunwick was not
paid. A lease of the property was then granted for one
year to the sister, Miss Kincaid, at a rent of 30s. a day,
and the defendant Kincaid continued in the house and
carried on the business.
Kincaid's defence was, that the false statement in the
affidavit was a mistake made either by the proctor or the
defendant, and that, so far from being guilty of any in-
tention to defraud, the defendant had done all he could
to protect the interest of his sick sister, who, but for
his assistance, would have been wholly unprovided for.
Witnesses were called who proved that the mortgage
was paid, and that Dunwick had a large claim upon the
deceased as a judgment creditor.
Wero's defence was, that he was altogether innocent
of any participation in any fraudulent act of his client, if
such
cu committed;htea
and as to the will, he had
simplexe
a mistake which arose from the fact that he
had drawn it up in regular form with the attestation
executed,
been
a mistake when he said he saw it duly
clause.
Witnesses were called who spoke highly of the cha-
racter of both the defendants. Among the rest, Lord
gAhlr.Bnite charactere4 the banker of Devonport,
of Mr. Were, who had been
and
dri known as a most respectable attorney.
AuPDELL having summed up the evidence,
spokeEbrin gt too n
the
forLmoradneyy y
The jury retired, and, on their return into court, stated
that though they could,.
ek
had a
claim
as
judgment creditor,
not but regard the sale of the
property fors I,u Dunwick
as most unwarrantable and censur-
able, yet, s
they found both defendants Not guilty.
The Court sat till nearly nine o'clock.
8u

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Feb. 25.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the Chief Baron and
Special Juries.)
'WELCH v. FAWCETT.
Mr. k. James and Mr. D. Power were counsel for
the plaintiff; the Attorney-General and Mr. Ferrer ap-
peared for the defendant.
The
brity, having eructed the Town-hall at Birmingham and
plaintiff is an architect of great provincial cele-
the hospital at Liverpool, besides other important works,
and this was an action in which he sought to recover 200
guineas as his commission, at the rate of If per cent., on
the contemplated expenditure of the defendant in the
erection of certain houses on the Craven-hill estate,
Bayswater. It appeared that the defendant, who is a
gentleman of property residing in the neighbourhood of
Craven-hill, entered into a negotiation with the lessee of
of the estate for the lease of certain building ground,
and during its progress was introduced to the
plaintiff, who stated his terms for the prepara•
tion of plans and superintendence of the erections to be
2 per cent. on the outlay, and 1/ for the plans and
preliminary trouble if the plans were not carried out.
After this the plaintiff proceeded to prepare the ground-
plans and elevatioa of 20 houses, and the question was,
whether, the negotiation having ultimately been broken
off, the defendant was liable to pay the 1 per cent.
commission on the ground that he bad
given express in-
structions to the plaintiff to proceed, or whether the
Plaintiff was to be considered to have embarked rather
precipitately in his work, so a; to disentitle him from
recovering its value from the defendant. The plaintiff
arid the defendant were both examined, as well as other
witnesses, and at
the conclusion of the reply for the
plaintiff,
The CHIEF BARON left it to the jury to decide be-
tween the parties. In so doing his Lordship took oc-
casion to remark that the admission of parties to
the witness-box seemed to him to be the logical and
necessary consequence of the previous alterations in
the law of evidence, and while it might be admitted
to have been both necessary and proper, it certainly
rendered the duty of a juryman more difficult, for the
parties were generally diametrically opposed to each
other in their recollection and construction of facts. The
change also necessarily led to increased litigation, for
where new witnesses and means of proof were intro-
duced, new actions must spring up, and cases were
brought into court which but for the new law would
never have been thought of. Wit bout saying that this
was such a case,
it was clear that the jury had a diffi-
cult task before them when called upon to decide be-
tween the plaintiff and the defendant, and ho would add,
that as the result of his experience of the working of
this Act, he
had come to the opinion that it would be
highly desirable, if not absolutely necessary, that a fur-
ther change in the law should be made by extending the
operation of the Statute of Frauds, now limited to con-
tracts to the value of 101., to every species of contract,
so that all parties should be compelled to reduce their
transactions into writing, about which there could not
afterwards arise any question.
The jury, at the close of the summing up, found a
verdict for the defendant.
VINENTS v. ZCLUETA.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Mr. Iloggins, and Mr. Bsrstor,rs.
were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Bramwell, Mr.,,,pliteint,.
dorff, and Mr. Aspland were counsel for the de.l; Cuba,
The plaintiff is a Spanish merchant residineily
8,0001,
and this was an action brought to recover
nalents of
as the balance duo to him on certain eolsua g
The ques-
merchant, copper ore to the defendant, who is ..,805:,3. ques-
merchant, carrying on an extensive bustieong
ions between the parties turned on
id not bo interest-
nee and accounts current, which
would
was taken for
ing to the public, and eventually a ve
the plaintiff for 3,4201. 59. 7d. correspond-

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Feb. 25.
(Before Mr. Coramissionor FONIILANQI7E,)
IN BB BENNETT.
The bankrupt, J. Bennett, applied for his certificate.
Mr. Ilunsom supported the application. Ile said the
bankrupt w4a MO Wilder WOOIWICII, and had

ho►lt c,,nsidereble number of small housrs, and
the LilurP took place, two years and u half ug,,, there
was groat depreciation in the value of property of
that descr►ption. The case Was different now,
sa one house, which was formerly valued at
2001., had sold for 201. more. The expenditure
of tho bankrupt had been very moderate inde,d,
as in two years and a half the total expenses were
only 227/. Finding he could not go on, he came to the
court on his own petition. The dividend would be re-
spectable, and he thought this a case deserving a certi-
ficate of a high class.

In reply to the COMMISSIONER,
Mr. PEARCE, for the assignees, said they did not oiler
any opposition.
His HONOUR said this was a better case than builders'
oases generally were, but he did not think it was a case
entirely of unavoidable loss. The certificate would be
of the second class. He would remark that the accounts
were considerably better than small builders' usually
were. _

An immediate certificate of the second class was
granted

IN RE BESWICK.

This was also a certificate sitting in the matter of M.
Beswick, wine and porter merchant, Norwich.
A certificate iu this case was granted without opposi-
tion. The bankruptcy took place prior to classification.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS and Mr. Justice

CROMPTON.)

Henry Woolf'', 29, and Isaac Lyons, 29, described as
dealers, were indicted under the Bankrupt Law Conso-
lidation Act for misdemeanour, in having unlawfully
obtained goods upon credit three months before their
bankruptcy, under the pretence that they required such
goods for the purpose of carrying on their trade, with
intent to defraud.

Mr. Ballantine and Mr. Bagley were counsel for the
prosecution; Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Huddlestone were
counsel for the defendants.

The circumstances connected with the charge were
fully detailed in the report of the trial last session, when
the defendants were indicted for a similar offence and
acquitted. It appeared upon that occasion that the de-
fendants had set up in business as umbrella and parasol
manufacturers in June or July, 1850, having at that
time not more than 300/. capital, and that they became
bankrupts in November, 1851, the amount of their debts
being 5,4001., and the assets not much more than 1,5001,
and it was represented that a sum of 3,0001. was totally
unaccounted for. The prosecutors of the former indict.
ment were Messrs. Ellis and Everington, and it was
shown that on the 27th of September the defendants had
obtained silks from them to the amount of 7001., which
were disposed of two days afterwards at a considerable
reduction on the cost price, and that the defendants bad
also for a long period been in the habit of pawning the
silks they obtained ostensibly for the purposes of their
business. The prosecutors of the present indictment
were Messrs. Foote, wholesale silk merchants in
Spital-square, a❑d the evidence in support of the
charge went to show that during the months of Sep
tember and October, prior to the bankruptcy, the defen-
dants obtained silk to the amount of 700/. from Messrs.
Foote, the greater part of which appeared to have
been pawned by them almost immediately afterwards,
and when they failed they were indebted to the proseen-
tors to the amount of 2,3001. In order to show the frau-
dulent intention of the defendants, evidence was given
that they had made false representations to the prose-
cutors with regard to the amount of their capital, and
also as to the state of their affairs when they took stock
in July; and it was likewise proved that they had ob-
tained a large quantity of silk from Mr. Pawson, a
warehouseman in St. Paul's Churchyard, which was also
pawned •ery soon after it came into their hands. It
appeared, however, in cross-examination, that the deal-
ings of the defendants with Mr. Foote had been of a very
extensive character, and that they had paid him between
4,0001. and 5,000/. for goods during the fourteen months
they were in business, and that they had employed so
many as thirty or forty persons in their manufactory up
to the very moment of their bankruptcy, and that they
had supplied goods to a very considerable amount to
Messrs. Ellis and Everington during September and
October, and that they had also made large payments
to Messrs. Foote for several months before their
bankruptcy, and nearly up to the time of its taking
place, and had reduced the extent of their original
debt to a very considerable amount. It was also eli-
cited, as on the former trial, that after the bankrupts
had signed a declaration of insolvency Mr. Foote, who
was appointed the trade assignee, had sold the whole of
their stock by private tender at a reduction of 45 per
cent. upon the price at which the goods had been in-
voiced to the defendants, so that property of the nominal
value of 1,800/. did not realize much more than 1,0004
It likewise appeared with regard to the goods that bad
beet obtained from Messrs. Pawson, that a portion of
the silk had actually been made up into parasols and
umbrellas, and that upon various occasions the defen-
dants had redeemed silk which they had pledged, and
had used in their business afterwards.

Mr. CLARKSON addressed the jury with considerable
warmth on the part of the defendants, who, he said, he
considered had been very harshly dealt with in
being compelled to go through the ordeal of a
second trial, when the whole of the facts were fully
gone into on the former occasion, and the jury had ex-
pressed their opinion that there was no foundation for
the charge that was made against them. He
contended that there was not the slightest pretence
for saying that the defendants had obtained these
goods by the false representation that they required them
for the purposes of their trade, but, on the contrary, all
the evidence in the case went to show that they were
carrying on their business honestly, and that it was only
owing to a temporary pressure that they felt themselves
compelled to raise money upon the goods they had pur-
chased. He said it appeared to him that all that could
be alleged against the defendants was that they had
been unfortunate, but he trusted the jury would not
lend themselves to this attempt to render them amen-
able to
the provisions of a highly penal Act of Par-
liament, merely because they were not able to pay their
debts.
Mr. Justice WILLIAAIS having summed up, and ex-
plained to the jury the points upon which they were
required to give their decision, they deliberated for
about a quarter of an hour, and then returned a verdict
of Not Guilty.

Mr. BAGLEY said there was another indictment
against the defendants, having reference to the goods
obtained from Mr. Pawson, but, after the verdict that
had just been given, ho did not feel that he ought to pro-
ceed with it.
A verdict of Not Guilty was accordingly taken, and
the defendants were ordered to be at once discharged.
The trial lasted nearly the %tole day, and was not
concluded until half-past seven o'clock.

NEW COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)
James Kimber, an effeminate looking youth, with col-
lar turned down in the Byronic style, surrendered to
take his trial for feloniously shooting at William Crutch-
ley, with intent to kill and murder him. There were
six other counts in the indictment, varying the form in
which the offence was charged.
Mr. Ballantine and Mr. Robinson prosecuted; and Mr.
Bodkin defended.
The Learned Counsel having stated the case, called
William Crutchley, a lad 14 years of age, who stated
that the prisoner was an acquaintance of his. Witness
lived with his parents in Ampthill-place, Rotherhithe,
and was a clerk in the London Dczki. Prisoner also
lived with his friends, and was a teacher at a school.
On the evening of the 13th of January the prisoner
called upon him at his father's house and asked him to
accompany him to the house of a mutual friend named
Stubbing. He did so; and when Stubbing came out pri-
soner said to witness, " Now, am I liar?" Witness
said, " If I have said so, you have often called me
one, and I have not thought anything about it." He
then put something into my face twice, and I saw
it was a pistol. Witness was much frightened and stood
still, and prisoner a third time put it to his face, hold-
ing him by the collar all the time, and at last fired it.
Witness felt a sharp pain oa his cheek and nearly
fainted; they then all three ran different ways, and wit-
ness was ultimately taken to the doctor's. His face was
very sore, and one of his eyes was still weak from the
effects of it.

Cross-examined I know Miss Frances ElLvsboth
Payne. I go to her father's house to learn drawing
with her brother. I have not paid her any attention.
I am only 14, and have not begun to look after the girls
yet,—(Laughter.)
John Lambert, a smith, said he was in the Plough-
road on the night in question, and saw them all there,
and from their mysterious appearance he thought they
were going to rob his master's place —(Laughter)—sed
watched them. Saw the pistol, and then they all ran
away.
Mr. BoDitm—And then you ran away ?
Witness
of
—I did.—(Ecreased laughter.) s
Thomas Stubbing, another youth about 14 y
and
e r
age, corroborated the statement of the pirecutor
amid much merriment added that the
pwadding of the
his aim at the prosecutor, and that the risoner missed
pistol had hit him in the eye.
was about to raffle
It was also proved that the
a boy about 13 years of age,
a members, and had a day
pitisotel was the property
it.of
vent
tuciet The prisoner had got him _
or two before, borrowed itdt°olaht:rw tthoe°atffbeesirrs had nd
them to join the raffle, an
back to him. u, ntoardwahs,abdystchaeremeleydiiceissl
The injury dontootboetbhuetptrroisveical
evidence, proved
any traces.
wn where the would-be assassin had
It was saw
of, but it appeared that some days sub-
n: t sho
concealed
rsgave himself up to the police.
Mr.
sequenitlYo
BINSON said he proposed to call Miss Payne to
the prisoner intentions.
show t this the prisoner became exceedingly agitated, and
sceneu that followed savoured very strongly of the
Luriesque. At first Miss Payne was not to be found, upon
which she, not having been before the magistrate, was
called upon her iubpcana. At length Miss Payne, a
genteel-looking girl, about 16, made her appearance,
and upon getting into the witness-box fainted. During
this, the prisoner, who had drawn a large white hand-
kerchief from: his pocket, began to blubber most lustily
and rushing wildly about the dock, called on his
"dear Fanny" not to bear false evidence against him.
Quiet having been restored, Miss Payne said that sho
knew both youths, and a week before Christmas bad
persuaded prisoner to make up a quarrel he had with
prosecutor. He said he had, but only to get what he
could out of him, and that day week she would hear of
a serious quarrel. The prisoner then said he would give
him another week, and then kill him. Prisoner had,
said he would punch Master Crutchley's—
(Roars of laughter.)
most Mr. BODKIN, for the defence, in a head. '
humoroused
speech, ridiculed the importance that bad been attached
to tho.aff§ir by the ptosceution, and coteuded that the

FEBRUARY MI

Their Lordships procea3 tomorrow morning to New.
castle.

MIDLANI ClRCUlT.—Northampton, Feb. 25.
(Before Mr. Justice MAULE and a Common Jury.)

EALEB v. WILCOX.

most probable history of it wait, that prisoner having the
pistol loaded for the put pos(, of trying it. had been
vaPouriug about whin it to alarm the lior boy, and that
it had gone off by
accident.
The RECORDER, summed up. and
The jury Acquitted him.
The RECORDER—Now, take care; don't you go
flourishing about with pistols and make a fool of your.
; and wait until you have a little hair on your chin
before you make love to young ladies.
The prisoner then joined his friends and was led out
of court in an hysterical state.
In the coarse of the day the grand jury were dis-
charged. They presented a memorial, praying for the
abolition of the grand jury system.

THIRD COURT.
(Before the COMMON-SERGEANT.)
Thomas Connor, 24. cabman, and William Watts, 24,
labourer, were indicted for stealing a banknote for 101.,
and 101. in moneys, the property of James Ritchie, from
his person.
Mr. Trevethan Spicer prosecuted, and Mr. Birnie de-
fended Watts.
It appeared that the prosecutor, who is a draper's
assistant at present out of a situation, and a friend named
Jones, a sharebroker, residing in Angel-terrace, Isling-
ton, were out together early on the morning of the 28th
of January, and about half-past 3 they were at the
White Hart, in the Strand. Both parties were the worse
for liquor, and Mr. Jones then wished to go home, but
Ritchie refused, and finally Mr. Jones got into a cab and
left, and before leaving gave back to prosecutor his
pocketbook and the money in question, which he had
taken from him for security. Prosecutor put the book
and the money into his inside breast coat pocket. Mr.
Jones then left him, and went away in the cab. Prose-
cutor again went into the public-house, followed by the
two prisoners, who had been witnesses of what had
passed. Shortly afterwards Watts went and fetched
a cab from the rank facing Somerset-house, in the
Strand, and upon the driver coming up to the
White Hart the presecutor got in and Watts got on
the box, but the cab driver did not see Connor, though
the police on duty, to whom the prisoners were known,
saw him slip into the cab. The prosecutor told the cab-
man to drive them as far as St. Paul's. He drove them
as far as Watling-street, when Watts got down from the
box, and Connor from inside, and they told the cabman
that the gentleman inside would pay, and they then
walked away. The cabman instantly got down from the
box and looked inside the cab, and found the prosecutor
in the cab in a stupined state, and after some trouble
aroused him. Prosecutor seemed somewhat surprised,
and asked where his two friends were; the cabman said
they were gone. Prosecutor then felt in his coat pocket,
and said that he had been robbed. They then went to a
friend of the prosecutor's, and thence to the principal
police stations, and there gave information of the rob-
bery, and the prisoners were subsequently apprehended
at their lodgings in Seven Dials, where they both lived
in the same room. None of the money was found, but
it was proved that on the day after the robbery the pri-
soner Connor bought two new hats, one for himself and
another for Watts, Connor paying for both.
Mr. BIRNIE contended that Watts, who had been a
potboy at the White Hart, and was in the habit of
fetching cabs, had not done more than was consistent
with innocence.

The jury Acquitted Watta and found Connor Guilty.
The police proved that Connor was a known and des-
perate thief, but up to this time had escaped conviction,
he having been no less than six times in custody for
similar felonies.

The prisoner was ordered to be transported for seven
year'.
James Logie, 45, dealer, who bad been convicted of
forging and uttering a bill of exchange, was brought up
for sentence,

The COMMON-SERGEANT told the prisoner that a few
years ago his life would have paid the penalty of his
offence. lie was transported for seven years.
William Southwell, 28, mariner, was indicted for un-
lawfully assaulting James Harman Crisp, and attempt-
ing to drown him in the river Thames.
The facts of this case have beea so very recently be-
fore the public that it is unnecessary to repeat them.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty of an assault.
The COMMON-SERGEANT said that under those cir-
cumstances he should order the prisoner to be imprisoned
for one month, and kept to hard labour.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN Cll?CUlT.—Carlisle, Feb. 24.
In the Ntei Prius Court one special jury caul° re-
mained to be tried this morning. There not being suf-
ficient special jurymen present, and both tides retasing
to pray a tales, the record was withdrawn.
Mr. Justice Cresswell then tried one or two larceny
cases. _

In the Crown Court a charge of rape by a boy, as-
sisted by four other boys, on a woman at leant 35 years
of age,
the particulars of which are unfit for publica-
tion, and two or three trivial larceny cases, occupied the
Court till the afternoon, when the business of the as-
sizes terminated.

This was an action for obstructing a right of way.
Mr Sergeant Miller and Mr. Flood appeared for the
plaintiff; and Mr. Humfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Hayes for
defendant.

The plaintiff was a shoemaker at Towcester, occupy-
ing a house in Tranter's-row, a place only accessible
from the High-street by a lane, along which the right
of way iu question was claimed. The defendant was
the owner and occupier of a house at the entrance of
the lane from High-street, and he had erected against
the side of his house a lean-to, which considerably nar-
rowed the passage, and that was the obstruction of
which the plaintiff complained. The plaintiff's wife
carried on the business of a laundress, and in conse-
quence of the obstruction the passage of trucks very
Cully laden was prevented, and persons carrying buckets
of water were obliged to enter sideways. Still, it was
admitted that higher up the lane, and nearer the
plaintiff's house, there was a part of it as narrow as the
entrance left by the defendant's encroachment; and the
defendant relied upon sumo evidence of interruptions for
the purpose of showing that there was, in fact, no right
of way over the whole width of the lane.
Thejury, however, after retiring for a short time,
found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 15.; and the
Learned Judge certified that the action was brought to
try a right.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTIcE, after attending Divine ser-
vice, proceeded to charge the grand jury; and was after-
wards during the rest of the day engaged in trying pri-
soners, but none of the cases disposed of were of a serious
character.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.
Alfred Harper was charged with uttering a counter-
feit sovereign, knowing it to be bad.
Miss Catherine West, a milliner and dressmaker, of
64, Barbican, said the prisoner entered her shop to pur-
chase some trifling article that came to 6d., and paid for
it with a good sovereign. She gave him the change,
when he immediately found fault with his purchase and
demanded his money back. She asked him to return the
change, which ho demurred to, and she then gave him
back the sovereign. She saw him pass it from one hand
to the other, and then, not having returned the change,
he suddenly altered his mind, and said he would keep
the article he had purchased, and throw down a sove-
reign, which witness tested with her teeth and found
counterfeit. Directly prisoner saw her place it between
her teeth he ran away; she followed, and he was stopped
near Carthusian-street and brought back, when he gave
the whole of the change to the witness.
The
hihoemffirceelratsievaerctho the edthnehaprrgise.oner, but found nothing
upon
A witness, who stopped prisoner and •
something away, said prisoner threatened him
appear appear against him.
her a few days
reign to
as having passed a bad half-soul
nded for the so•
was accordingly zone hsihmo throwld Ie
The prisoner was identified by awornan at the station
previous, and he
licitor to the Mint to attensd
foreigner, was placed at
Francis de Paule Ullmann,
harged with stealing four
the bar, before Mr. Henry,
BO IV- 7arßdEc_orse.eute.
en disappea
from St. James Palace, the property of
tshileTveGhreulapadrrdilses:i3errigh3adde. left some papersec efor
othweapiterounstaslidoof
l
afterwards, awakened the suspicion of the
taChnoecl
eodiningshortly
ordoomn ,
foran danhad
wbeere.n dui ts
dt
servants of the Guard mess, who found the plate missing
afterissing
m
fro the dining room. Constable Swanson, C 62,
several weeks inquiry, succeeded in tracing the pri-
soner to a house in Whitechapel, where he found him in
bed. The missing property was not discovered, found a gold ring concealed i the
in
oneoftbnuo pri-
said it was a case of strong suspicion,
I is, on ndme sniubi
Nod
n et sdr.
the prisoner for further examination.
Carlo Antonio Grimaldi and Luiyi le Guardia were
charged with having a die in their possession to
coun-
terfeit half-sovereigns,
Mr. Itcng
was proved
t that Guardia had called at the shop of
faoaretnhgereaxveeroointioWn yocfht-hstreet, Strand, and
to call for it afterwards. During the intervalaMppro.inCtoinng.
given an order
quest gave information of the circumstance w the Mint
authorities, but engraved the die and delivered it to
the prisoner, who was watched by the police, and ap•
prehended after he had joined Grimaldi in the street.
They were both remanded for further inquiry.
WORSHIP-STREET.
with the following
Anne Murray, a nsiddle-aged woman, was placed at
the
brutalbaroutrage
uponElhaemr tn
idiotil 1 , charged
ter.
angh
The prisoner and her husband lived in a place called
Eastman's-buildings, Old Montague-street, Whitechapel,
and it appeared from the evidence of one of their neigh-
bours that both of them had been for a long time past in
a girl of fifteen, and for no other reason, as it
the habit of most cruelly treating their unfortunate
seemed,daughter,
han that she was an idiot and perfectly help-
less. On Saturday evening the prisoner :and three or
four acquaintances of hers were drinking together in
for some reason which
did the
nhootu ssep
po
ef
at
rh
the for mp
re rs ,0
nwe hen,r
cninenced such a violent
attack upon the poor girl that, to escape from
her cruelty, she rushed into the street. This,
however, did
not avail her, for the prisoner pur-
sued her in a state of furious drunkenness, renewed the
attack upon her, struck her to the ground with a violent
blow in the face, and as soon as she had fallen kicked
her with such brutality about the body and head that
the flesh of the unfortunate creature's forehead was laid
theop nnenwtnoangreat length and depth, the blood poured from
in great profusion, and she was so stunned
and timeless tea to be inottpable of rising The prisoner