The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-25 00:00:00

POLAND.

FRANKFORT, JAN. 18.—The Journal de Frankfort,
paper devoted to the Russian interest, has the following
remarks. on the passage in the Address of the French
Chamber relative to the nationality of Poland
It may be asked what has Russia done to France ? No-
thins ; we think fit to attack it. Has it refused to re-
cognize the Government of July ? No. Has it for any
serious cause withdrawn its Ambassador or threatened
the Cabinet? It has not thought of it. Has it secretly
encouraged some legitimatist conspiracy of the South or of
La Vendee ? Not at all. Russia attends only to its own
affairs. Well, it is our pleasure to interfere in the drabs
of Russia, and on occasion of an address to Louis Phil-
Lippe we find means to insult the Emperor Nicholas.
Such is the reasoning of M. Odillon Barrot, and in an-
swer to a passage in the King's Speech, in which the
august Monarch expressed his satisfaction at seeing the
peace of Europe secured for a long time to come, M.
Rarrot proposes an amendment, stating that the peace of
Europe will never be firmly seeured,.till it
_is founded in
respect for the rights consecrated by,,treaties„ among
which France will always , place..suthe Ara ,an-
cient nationality of Poland. And this amendment is
adopted by 189 out of 370 members. If such a proceeding
gives us some uneasiness, it is for the interest of France
alone ; for what effect do you suppose will he produced
at St. Petersburgh by a phrase more or less of M. Odillon
Barrot and his cronies ? It is not necessary to be much of a
politician to guess that it will not be thought worthy of the
smallest attention. The fact is, that the phrase is directed
against the King, who is accused of governing by himself
and against his Ministers, to whom the Liberal papers have
latterly ascribed an inclination towards the northern Courts.
This inclination is by no means proved, but it is evident that
Louis Philippe will be the more sure of the esteem of Eu-
rope in proportion as the factions reproach him with their
inclinations and sympathies, which, in a Royal heart, will
always be considered as virtues. As for Russia, do not
trouble yourself about it. The question which concernyis
will never exist except on scraps of paper. The destiny of
Poland is irrevocably fixed. The tranquillity"of that coun-
try, united to the great empire, can no more be endangered
by your Liberals, as you have once done, by exciting a re-
bellion, the authors of which you afterwards abandoned to
their melancholy fate. The true friends of Poland are those
who say to it, Submit, confide in a Sovereign who, how-
ever calumniated, has not ceased to be just and generous,
and whose powerful will alone secures tl:e glorious destinies
of his people.'"

It has been calculated that no less a sum than five
millions of francs have been lost in Paris since 1830, by
unsuccessful attempts to establish periodical works. As
the booksellers have learned prudence from experience, they
seldom have any concern in such undertakings ; so that this
loss has mostly fallen upon shareholders, though it is true that
many an author, who hoped.to•secure the editorship, has sa-
crificed the whole of his little property in them.—Foreign
Qua; terly Review.
The Grand Duke Michael arrived at Berne on the
18th inst., with his suite, and alighted at the Hotel du
Faucon. The Avoyer de Tavel, and two members of the
Council of State, were deputed to wait on him with the
congratulations of the city.

Mr. KING reminded his Lordship that Lady East, the
wife of the late Sir Gilbert Hyde East, and now Mrs.
Merterra, liad, 'by his Lordship's construction of the will,
been held to take only a life in the residuary. property.
This property consisted of 95,000/. Bank Stock ; 18,000/.
Navy Five per. Cent. ; 8,000/. South Sea Stock, and
27,000/. Consols.. Out of this sum the testator had, how-
ever, directed legacies to a considerable amount to be paid,
and the qUeition remaining to be determined was, whether
these legacies were intended to by the testator to be paid
out of the dividends or out of the fund. The Lord Chan-
cellor took time to consider the, point, and expressed a wish
to see the.original will. . -

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Jay. 24.

EXPARTE NEWTON.

The ATT.ORNEY-GENERAL had been instructed to apply
to the Court in 'a matter which, as it concerned the liberty
of the subject, would meet with their Lordships' immediate
attention. He had to apply to them on behalf of a young
gentleman who had. been improperly arrested, and. who was
:now in the custody of the Marshal, and whom he moved
for a rule to show 'cause why his client should not be dis-
, ;charged from custody. Mr. Newton was a gentleman
now studying the law. He was a member of Lincoln's-inn.
Mr. Newton had been defrauded of money at play, and had
'brought an action against the parties under the statute of
Anne. That action stood for trial, but was referred to the
arbitration of a gentleman at the Bar—of Mr. Montague
Chambers. The arbitrator proceeded in the reference, and
had aripOinted the 7th of this month for hearing the parties.
The parties did attend accordingly. When before the arbi-
trator, the attorney for the defendant protested against the
arbitration proceeding, on the ground that the order had been
surreptitiously obtained, and he gave notice of the intention
to apply to the Court of Exchequer, where the action had
been commenced, to rescind the.order. To enable him to
make this application the arbitrator postponed the next meet-
ing to the 15th of February. The Court were aware that
a person attending an arbitrator who was acting under a
rule of Court was like a person attending a trial in the
Court itself,- he was privileged-from arrest during his at-
tendance, for the summons of the arbitrator was equal in
force and authority to . a subpoena from the Court. „ For
Mr. Newton's sake he was sorry to say that that, gentle-
man was in a state of utter destitution from the 6th to the
16th of January ; he bad not Money to pay his bill at the
Bull-and-Mouth, and he could not engage his place to re-
turn home. He had, besides, the misfortune to suffer from
a severe attack of the prevailing epidemic. On the 16th of
January he received a sum of 201., and with this money in
his pocket he was proceeding to the Bull-and-Mouth to
engage his place when he was arrested on two actions. He
(the Attorney-General) submitted that at that time Mr.
Newton was privileged from arrest.
Lord DENIIIAN—You must have a rule.—Rule granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JaN. 24.
WALL V. STEVENS.

This was an action on assumpsit brought to recover
1121. 165., the value of a hogshead of brandy and three
dozen of champagne, which was tried at Winchester be-
fore Mr. Baron Alderson. The defendant had pleaded
that the goods were sold to him upon an exp'ress agreement
for twelve months' credit, which period had not elapsed at
the time of the commencement of the suit. The cause of
action arose at Ryde, in the Isle of Wight ; and it ap-
peared that at the trial the principal witness for the defend-
ant was a waiter at the inn of which he (the defendant)
was proprietor ; and that witness- deposed to hearing the
agreement between the parties. The Jury found their ver-
dict for the plaintiff 801., but that the defendant was to
have his costs. The Learned Judge then interfered, and
said that he could not receive such a verdict as thdt ; if
they found for the plaintiff at all, they must find for the
full amount. A verdict was accordingly entered for 112/.
16s. ; and a rule midi for a new trial had been obtained.
Mr. CROWDER showed cause against the rule ; and Mr.
Ear.E supported the rule.
The COURT were of opinion that the rule must be
discharged.

PREROGATIVE COURT, JAN. 24.
INGE AND INGE V. MOORE.

This is a-suit relative to the will of the late Mrs. George
Moore, of Appleby Hall, in the county of Leicester. The
will is propounded by Mr. William and the Rev. George
Inge,o brothers of the deceased ; and is 'opposed by Mr.
George Moore, her husband, on whose behalf an allegation
was this day offered. The facts of the case have already
appeared.
The KING'S ADVOCATE appeared on the last Court day
on behalf of the Messrs. Inge, and opposed the admission
of the allegation. He stated that it was a most unusual
proceeding for a will to be opposed and a suit instituted by
reason of a partial insanity, or monomania. He was of
opinion that his learned friends on the other-side would find
great difficulty in proving that 'the deceased, who in- every
other point had acted with the greatest propriety, should
be insane quoad her husband. It was their duty to show
that this lady's conduct amounted to a legal insanity—that
she was not ruled by caprice, for female caprice would not be
sufficient to annul the will. The specific objections were
then pointed out to the Court, and the Learned Advocate
concluded by submitting that the article must either be to-
tally rejected or very generally reformed.

Dr. PHILLINtoni, on behalf of Mr. Moore, supported
the admissibility of the allegation.
The Learned JUDGE stated that, in consequence of the
objections set up by the Counsel for Messrs. Inge to some
parts of the allegations being valid, he would refer it back
to Counsel to be generally reformed.

CROFT V. DAY AND OTHERS.

This is a suit respecting the codicil to the will of the
late Charles Day, Esq., the well-known blacking manufac-
turer, formerly of Edgware and'of Harley House, in the
county of Middlesex, who died possessed of very large pro-
perty. The codicil alluded to appoints Mr. Wm. Croft,
by whom this suit is promoted, as excutor, and bequeaths
to him the sum of 5001., and is, together with the will, op-
posed by Rebecca Day, the relict of the deceased, Caro-
line Claggett, his only child, and all others entitled in dis-
tribution to the estate and effects of the said deceased in
case he had dial intestate. An allegation propounding
this codicil •was this ,day offered for admission on behalf of
the party promoting this suit.
The KING'S ADVOCATE, for Mrs. Day, supported the
admissibility of the allegation.
Dr. LuSrir NGToN, on the other side, opposed its admission.
The Learned JUDGE was of opinion that generally
speaking the 'subject was admissible; hut that a few altera-
tions were necessary, and he accordingly referred it back
to counsel to be generally reformed.

COUNTY COURT, KINGSOArE-STRIIET.

GAMBLING TRANSACTIONS.—Amid the vast number of
knotty questions That agitate this Court, those arising out
of gambling transactions formed a very prominent feature of
the day, and those whose business it was to Watch closely
into the morality and purity of the licensing system, would
have received some most beneficial hints from the observa-
tions which fell from the Learned Commissioner and the
Jury yesterday.

DANIM V. DUBIN&
The plaintiff in this case was a most' remarkable looking
person, and the celebrated Lawrence would have been sadly
puzzled had he attempted to classify him under any pecu-
liar species of the genus home ; for instance.:--he rejoiced
in a most stupid-looking squint, his nose had been carried
away in some sudden squall of fortune, and Lis mouth ap-
peared to have received an irrecoverable twist in some rabid
endeavour to bite off his left ear ; to complete his personal
beauties, one leg was shorter than the other by a foot, and
indeed be was nOt'only very ill-looking, but he looked very
ill indeed.

Mr. Commissioner DUROL,—Wlitlt is your demand of
the defendant ? Plaintiff—Just vat I shall tell you myself
directly—Oh, vat .von schampt this man rill. a be some
day !—(Laughter.) As Toma' Mooresay—
" He broke a' my pitcher, he spill/my water,
He kissa' my %sift., and he marry my daughter."
COMMISSIONER—Now just begood enough to state what
this sum of I Is. 6d. is for ? Plaintiff—All for gambling ;
first de von shillin go, and den de two ; de. two and de two
make four, and de two four make eight, and den de tree
and de half make just. 1 Is. 6d.

COMMISSIONER—And pray what game was this money
played for ? Plaintiff— Blind hookey, my Lord, and shove-
halfpenny—(Laughter.) •
COMMISSIONER—Swear the plaintiff.—(Here the plain-
tiff was swora.) Now; Sir, where did these gambling mat-
ters take place? Plaintiff—Sare, in my own house a', my
Lold—(Laughter)—and he stop'd there till all his clothes
was pawned and gone.
COMMISSIONER—No doubt of it ; you first get all his
money away, and nobody, knows better what to do with his
:lothes. Do you mean to say you keep a public-house ?
Plaintiff—l do, my Lord ; but if peoples will emnple, how
hall I help it ? Nut him only alone ! I have de summons
'gainst four for de same tin.

BROKEN GLASS.-:-A vast number of very stupid, but
probably very well-meaning landlords, arc constantly in the
habit of summoning individuals for broken squares of .glass-
after the' tenantcy has expired. In almost every case a
verdict is given in favour of the defendant, from the inabi-
lity of the plaintiff to prove whether the glass was all sound
on the defendant's entering the premises. A hulking-look-
ing ex-policeman summoned a poor woman for the value of
three squares of glass, 6s. ; whereupon the following very
knotty discussion took place :-
- Mr. DUBOIS (to the defendant)—Pray in what condition
was these windows when you took possession of the apart-
ments ? Were they broken or cracked.? Defendant—Why,'
Sir, two was broke, and one was cracked.
A Juryman—And pray don't you call a cracked window
a broken one ? Defendant—ln course I doesn't. Now
lookee year : a thing wots broke has, as a natteral conse-
quence, got a piece out on it, and wot aint broke, you know,
barn's have no piece out on it. I reglerly agrees as how
the vindeys was cracked, but they was never broked.--=
(Shouts of laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—Then you draw a very delicate distinc-
tion between cracked and broken? Defendant—V' to be
sure, and karn't you as has bin a sottin on that ere scat sich
.a while ? Now, frinstence, is a hegg broke wot's only
cracked, haye ? and if so be- as a hegg ain't nothin worser
for being cracked, vy how can a winder be ? I puts. it to
any body. and to that ere hintelligent and goodlooking jury.
—(COnsiderable laughter).
The Jury, after a short consultation, dismissed the case.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

On Monday Mr. Hicks, the Chairman of the Markets
Committee, attended at the justice-room for the purpose of
communicating with the Lord Mayor with reference to the
complaint made some days ago on the subject of the sale of
pigs in the neighbourhood orWapping. After a most clear
and satisfactory explanation, and a full investigation of all
the circumstances, the parties withdrew.
Mr. Baker, an extensive poulterer in Leadenhall-mar-
ket, was a few days ago summoned by a Mr. Ryland, who
resides in the neighbourhood of Whitechapel, for having in
his possession a drake, who had either wandered or been
stolen from the premises of the complainant about three
Weeks ago.—Mr,. Ryland said that the drake bad been
brought up on his premises from its very early youth, and
had constantly kept company with two ducks, which were
also his property. He was first informed of the absence
of the bird by the two female companions, who flew about
and gabbled intensely at their loss. As he had taken so
much trouble With the infancy of the bird; he determined
to look about every, nook and corner, and at last he spied
it amongst a number of foreign ducks in Mr. Baker's aviary
or duck depository.

Mr. Baker produced his duck-ledger to prove that he
had purchased the drake six months agO.
The LORD MAYOR said that unfortunately for a correct
adjudication in this ;Air, there was so exact a similarity,
existing in birds of this kind, that a person who was not con-
stantly in the habit of handling them could not distinguish.
The same might be said of a goose, although that was an
animal more frequently to be found in plenty.—(A laugh.)
Mr. Nobler—Perhaps your Lordship will direct an
officer to take the bird into the neighbourhood of his pre-
sumed habitation. If the two clucks with which he has, as
the complainant says, been so long associated see him, they
will (rive him a very affectionate reception.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Baker—l don't think that would be a criterion, for
ducks would give that sort of reception to any drake.—
(Laughter.)
Mr. Hobler—l am sure you are mistaken. Ducks are
a good deal more coy than you think. If a strange drake
were to invade their territories they would pluck him well
for his impertinence.—(Great laughter.)
The LORD •MAYon—lf they act so, all I can say is that
they exhibit , a good deal of ferninine propriety ; and it is
'an example worthy of being followed by all classes of ducks
and geese.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Ryland—The place in which I used to keep him is
a dark kitchen, and I'll be bound he'll waddle down to it'
the moment he is put down in the street.
An officer then, by' the direction of the Lord Mayor,.
took the drake to Whitechapel, and yesterday reported the
proceedings amidst great laughter. The bird, it appeared,
upon being placed on the ground, waddled directly to the
house of Mr. Ryland's sister, and after quacking four or
five times, turned round and waddled to. a dirty pool of
water, when the two ducks to which he had been said to be
so long a companion flew towards him with evident delight,
and after a long gabbling congratulation, waddled along
with hiM to the dark kitchen, where he had spent so many
happy hours in their society.
The LORD MAYOR—Then there is no doubt as to the
ownership ? Officer—Not the least, my Lord. A person
could actually almost understand their language. They all
gabbled and shook their tails like mad.

The LORD MAYOR—I am glad I was so lucky as t
select a person 5) well qualified to be an interpreter. I
dare say you would be as good a judge if the bird happened
to be a gander.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Hobler said that the two ducks had sustained the
reputation of well-conducted modest birds, notwithstand-
hlg the imputation so shamelessly cast upon them by Mr.
Baker.—(Great laughter.)