The Sun.
London, England, 1837-09-18 00:00:00

MISCELLANEOUS.

4,810 Edit'. and Was. Un. Cana1...501. sh. all pd 221.
Ditto Allocated ...9431. sla. all pd 65!.
5,400 5 per oent. Edinb.:Joirit Stock Water... .25/. sh. all pd 041
Carron Iron Company 250/. sh. all pd 45/.
2,0005 h 15 per cent. Shotts Iron Foundery 50/. sh 381. pd 4411,
10,000 3 per ctnt. Edinburgh & lAith Glass `2o/. sh. 1131. pal 8/,
4,5(0 10 par cent. Edilibuigh Coal Gas ~/ sh. all pit 53,/
4,!',0 10 NI- r^ut Yq,-•,. • -,
A• 14 , .:,i: ! ~r.
. ,
ry.Lro 71 per ceht. Lett!a (..;oa, (..., ,
~i s,,. .o)iisi 4biii..
1,206
Edinburgh cod Dalkeith Railway...so •
3,000 5 Per cent. Equitable I.43aa'eompany...Bsl. ib. Pir, pd W.

LONDON SESSIONS.-SATURDA.Y.

SIR PHILIP SYDNEY V. THE TRUSTEES OF THE METROPOLI-
TAN SUSPENION BRIDGE COMPANY.
Mr. RYLAND moved in this case for an attachment
against certain funds belonging to the Metropolitan Suspen-
sion Bridge Company, with a view to recover the sum of
1,3611. 12s. 10d., which that Company were indebted to
his client. It was ascertained, and was not denied by the
party on the opposite side, that a considerable sum of money
belonging to the Company was in the hands of the London
and Westminster Bank, and the object of Sir Philip's ap-
plication to the Court was to obtain an order of attachment
against the funds of the Company in the keeping of that
establishment, in order that he might by that means be
enabled to enforce payment of his claim. The trustees of
the Company were five in number, all of whom, with the
exception of a Mr. Anderson, were in the office at the time
the debt was contracted. The order of attachment could
consequently be issued as against them individually,
Mr. GURNER, for the defendants, contended that the
Court had not the power to issue an order of attachment
against the property of any Corporation such as that
forming the Metropolitan Suspension Bridge Company.
There were no precedents to show that such a thing had
ever been done by a Lord Mayor's Court. But, besides,
there was an informality in the present application, inas-
much as the name of Mr. Anderson, who was a trustee at
the time at which. the debt was said to have been contracted,
had not been included in the list of responsible parties.
The RECORDER said the case was one of difficulty as well
as one of importance. He thought the name of Mr. An-
derson ought to have been included as one of the parties
against whom the application was made. He could hardly
undertake to give a final decision on the subject at that
time. The few precedents which he knew as bearing on
the arise were adverse to the motion ; for in no instance
could ha find the right of attaching the property of a Cor-
poration recognised. That was his opinion as a Judge,
presiding in that Court ; but, as a private individual, he
should say, that the property of a Corporation, as well as
of individuals, ought to be attachable ; otherwise, indivi-
duals might at any time be deprived of their just and lawful
claims. He felt the difficulty of the case, and would,
therefore, in the meantime give a verdict for the plaintiff,
subject to the question being made a special case, and the
verdict not to take effect until the -case was finally decided.
His LORDtHIP ordered the officers to afford facility to
the Counsel on either side to search fir precedents in the
records of the Court.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.

On Saturday Edward Bate:, a painter, was charged
with feloniously delivering a threatening letter to Mr. Bag-
shaw, the Deputy Chairman of the Northern and Eastern
Railway Company.

Mr. BODKIN stated the case, commencing with the pri-
soner having threatened the lives of Mr. Rowcroft, the
Secretary, and others, for which he was conveyed to the
Mansion House, and sent to prison for two months, for the
want of sureties to keep the peace. It now appeared that
the irritation of his mind had not subsided during his im-
prisonment, and indeed be had written thence, demanding
1501. as the price of his forlbearance—the prisoner having
purchased a number of shares which had since considerably
fallen in value, and which, when sold by Mr. Rowcroft, left
the prisoner that gentleman's debtor. The Company had
not exhibited articles of the peace against the prisoner,
who, on his discharge, wrote the threatening letter in
question, for which he was again given into custody. The
prisoner said if he were not out on bail he would shoot
Mr. Rowcroft ; but he would keep his word if he pledged
his honour to his sureties to be quiet. They might have
safely admitted him to bail ; but the Directors admitted he
had a claim on them by sending him 20/. by the Under-
Secretary. Mr. Bagshaw said that transaction was a pri-
vate act of Mr. Masterman on learning the distress of the
prisoner. _ _ .

After some conversation the prisoner said that to pro-
secute him would be a cold-blooded and deliberate murder.
Mr. Alderman VENABLES said that if the prisoner had
received the provocation he believed he had he had no
right to take the law into his own hands. If the Directors
of any Company were to behave dishonestly they would
soon be corrected by the public reprobation, and in one
way or other by the law. He felt pity for a man who had
lost all his property, and perhaps destroyed his future pros-
pects, by an unfortunate adventure ; but it was not to he
borne that every unlucky speculator should turn upon the
Directors, and say, " I'll shoot you through the head if you
do not pay the money I have lost." This sort of treatment
must be repressed.
The case then proceeded.
Mr. Bagshaw proved the delivery of the letter, and
that it was intended for him and the other Directors. A
clerk identified the prisoner's hand-writing, and Forrester
produced the pistol found on the prisoner.
This completed the evidence, and the prisoner was com-
mitted for trill. He laboured under great excitement. He
stated he had paid 365/. for his shares.