The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICE- CHANCEL!, OR' ,S COURT, JaY. 21.
KINNER6' COMP' lIV V. Hush SOCIETY.
In this case a motion hail been made before the Loco
CHANct.u.os. by the Skinners' Company for an injunction
and receiver, which was intended to decide the question as
to the right of the Skinners' Company. to share in certain
benefits bestowed by Richard I. in the province of Ulster.
The argument of Counsel lasted six clays, and the fraction
of other days. Forty companies were interested in the
question, amongst which was the city of London ; they
each appeared by one. Counsel, except the city of London,
which appeared by two. The LORD CHANcELLor. dismissed
the motion with costs. The city of London, amongst the
rest, then claimed costs, which were; allowed, except the
costs of copies of documents, and a reference was made to
the Master to ascertain the costs. - The Master did not
allow for copies of documents, but allowed for the ob-
servations usually made by attorneys at the end of
Counsel's briefs, in which observations were contained
copies of the documents. This the Skinners' Company
complained of, and also that the city of London ought not
to have had two Counsel, and that their fees were too large,
being 150 guineas to the senior Counsel, and SO guineas to
the junior.
Mr. Wmanm, for the Skinners' Company, contended
that the rights of the City of London were not of suffi-
cient importance to require two Counsel, and that the fees
were far too large.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL, on the other side, contended
that the City of London had a visitorial right over the
Irish Society, which latter Society had a visitorial right
over the Societies of Coleraine and Londonderry, conse-
quently over nearly the whole province of Ulster, and this
was consequently a case of great importance ; that he
(Sir C. Wetherell), who was Counsel for the City of Lon-
don, had to read through, in the first instance, a folio
volume before he even looked at his briefs, the very sight of
which made his head ache ; and there was altogether as
much to read as in an edition of the " Life of the Duke of
°monde?'
The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought, considering the rights
of the City of London, that two Counsel were not too
much, and that, considering the chaotic mass of papers,
the Counsel had been rather under thao over paid.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JAN. 21.
KNIGIIT V. PERRY.
Mr. AUSTEN moved for a rule to show cause why the
verdict in this case should not be set aside, and a new trial
had, on the ground generally that the verdict was against
evidence. This was an action for the infringement of a
patent, tried here before the Lord Chief Justice, during
the sittings after the last Term, when a verdict was re-
turned for the defendant. The plaintiff, Mr. Knight, was
the assignee of a patent taken out by Dr. Arnott, in 1834,
for an improvement in the manufacture of steel pens, the
principle of which was described in the specification to be
the introduction of a longitudinal elasticity. The trial oc-
cupied two days, and he (Mr. Austen) contended that the
general tenor of the evidence was clearly in favour of the
plaintiff.—Judgment deferred.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, .14. v. 21.
THE KING V. HART.

The Judges assembled to hear the point raised by the
prisoner's Counsel in this case argued.
Mr. CURWOOD, for the prisoner, contended that the con-
viction in this case was bad, and that judgment should be
arrested. The question was, whether if a person having
authority to draw a bill of exchange, in excess of that au-
thority increases the sum to a larger amount, he by doing
so is guilty of forgery or not. The paper in question at
the time was a mere blank, and the act of the prisoner in
altering it, thereby exceeding his authority, was only a
fraud, and not a forgery. A mere sum in figures at the
corner of a bill of exchange is no part of the bill itself,
and he was informed it had been so decided at nisi Arius
by the Lord Chief Baron. By no construction of law, he
contended, could this paper be considered as a bill of ex-
change.
Lord A BINGER—You consider the figures in the corner
as a mere direction.
Mr. Ctmwoon—Exactly so, my Lord. The prisoner in
this case had not been guilty of forgery. He did not ap-
ply a false signature to a bill of exchange ; he had merely
applied a true signature to a bill of greater amount, and
this excess of authority is only a fraud.
The Court was then cleared, and, after remaining for
some time in consultation,
Lord DENMAN said they were satisfied with the manner
in which Mr. Curwood had argued the case, and would not
require any further assistance from Counsel. The judg-
ment would be pronounced at the next Sessions of the Cen-
tral Criminal Court.

ADMIRALTY COURT, JAN. 21.
THE LIMA.--WAGES.
This suit for wages is promoted by Mr. Thomas Stephen-
son, the chief mate of the brig Lima, against Captain Few-
son, the master and sole owner of that vessel. The brig
was about to enter on a voyage from the port of London
to any port of Central America and back to any port of
Great Britain, and Stephenson was engaged in the capa-
city of chief mate for that voyage. He signed the skip's
articles on the 30th of December, 1834, and was to receive
4/. 10s. per month till the conclusion of the voyage. The
ship sailed on the 2lst of January, 1835, and reached a
port in Central America about June in the same year,
where she deposited a small part of her cargo. Thence she
proceeded onwards, with the intention of going to Libertan,
another port on the same coast, but inadvertently passed it,
and on the 7th of September despatched in the jolly-boat
Stephenson, a sailor of the name of Prior, and two others,
to discover it ; in which expedition they were capsized, and
t‘s o of them drowned, but Stephenson and Prior swam to
shore, and were saved. The master of the vessel asserted
that Stephenson, contrary to his strict orders, had attempted
to reach the shore, instead of communicating with the na-
tives by means of a speaking-trumpet, with which he had
been provided, laid all the blame of the accident to him, and
shortly afterwards disrated him, and turned him before the
mast. He did his duty as foremast-man for some days, till
the master, wishing to get entirely rid of him, offered him
his wages, deducting, however, 15/. for the less of the jolly-
boat. This he refused. The suit is brought to obtain the
whole amount of wages due.
Dr. ADDAMS, on behalf of Mr. Stephenson, contended
that he was entitled to the whole amount of wages.

Dr. BURNABY appeared for Captain Fewson, the master
and sole owner of the brig.
The Learned JUDGE postponed, his decision until Monday.

MIDDLESEX COUNTY COURT.

KINGSGATE-STREET.

DANIEL LAMBERT AND THE LIVING SKELETON.--
There is far more in the art and mystery of manufacturing
and baking bread than most people imagine, and the tech-
nical terms of the craft are enough to puzzle even the
learned Pierce Egan. A very fat baker, weighing 22
stone, accompanied by his very long and remarkably lean
brother, was summoned by a pealfnaker, named Robson, for
the sum of Bs. The case altogether bothered the brains of
both Commissioners and Jury.
COMMISSIONER—Pray how was this debt contracted?
Plaintiff—Why, Sir, there was a "scuffling pole," two
shillings, and then there was twelve pounds of stuff, just
makes eight shillings.—( Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—What do you call a scuffling polo?
Plaintiff—Oh, Sir, its a long pole, with a lot of rags at the
end ; what they cleans out the oven with arter its hotted.
CommissioNen—And what do you mean by " stuff'?"
Plaintiff—Oh, that's jest what 1 karn't tall—that's a
secret of the trade ; you may as well ask me what " fruit
means.
CCMMISSIONER—WeII, I'm sure you will be kind
enough to inform me.—( Laughter.)
Plaintiff—ln course. Why bakers always calls taters
fruit, and the 'tother thing ye know they calls stuff.
COMMISSIONER—I can assure you that, unless you think
proper to explain what you mean by " stuff," as you call
it, the Jury w►ll have nothing to do w►th you.
Plaintiff—Why, Sir, you eats it yourself every morning
for break fas t—(Laughter)—all on you—every one here eats
it.—(Considerable astonishment was evinced among the
auditory.)
A Juryman—We cannot be trifled with in this manner.
If you do not think proper to let us know what "stuff" is
we shall dismiss the case.

Plaintiff—Well then, I'll tell you—it's nothin' but ground
alum and salt mixed.

Defendant—Now I've cotched yer. I've told yer a
hundred times as how you 'dulterated the hallum with the
salt. I wonder you aint ashamed to look me in the face.
—(Shouts of laughter.)
Plaintiff—And I wonder how you can look that there
good-looking Commissioner and that there hintelligcnt
Jury in the face—don't you pvzen 'em every day, yer waga-
bun, haye ?—can yer haunser that ? Defendant—Don't
you sell it, and cheat us by putten salt in it ? Plaintiff—
And don't you sell it agin in your nasty bread ?—( Laughter.)
Defendant—good helium won't hurt nobody.
Plaintiff—No ; not if nobody don't eat it ; but I should
just like to know how many of 'ure customers has got the
" flenzie" (influenza).
COMMISSIONER—ReaIIy, gentlemen, this is a most enter-
taining specimen of " diamond cutting diamond." The
Jury appear to think the " stuff" item is so abominable that
they dismiss it altogether. The only question, therefore,
remaining is the value of the scuffle pole. Does the de-
fendant object to pay 2s. for that ? Defendant—Yes, I
does. The pole want half long long enough to go to the
head of my oven. I've got a reg'lar hobjection to every
think—(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—This appears to be not only a scuffling
affair, but a shuffling one ; and (turning to the Jury) I must
leave it, gentlemen, in your hands. Instead of doing their

best for each other and for society, they fully bear out the
observation of Erasmus—" Honzo homini ant Dens ant
lupus." The human race appear born to prey upon each
other.
The case was, after a short consultation, dismissed.
THE DEMON AND THE TALLY MEN.—Mr. liurkitt, a
performer in the " Demon" line at Covent-garden Tit:nitre,"
was summoned by a " tally marine store keeper" for the ba-
lance of a bill amounting to 11. Bs. He had paid some
portion during the season of last year, and the present ap-
plication was for the remainder.
Mr. Coiumissioder De eolS—Pray what line do you say
the defendant is in ? Plaintiff—ln the demon line, Sir ;
he plays the devils and sich like in all the " meller-dram-
mers"—(Laughter)—and I understand he gets a matter of
five-and-thirty shillings a week ; he's considered a reg'ler
varmint, Sir, at playing demons, and yet all as he's offered
me is 6s. a month.
CONIMISSIONEP.—Upon my word, I must say I think he's
a very geoduatured demon to make such an offer.—(Laugh-
ter.) A Juryman (to the plaintiff)—You must surely be
well aware, Mr. Tallymau, that individuals in the defend-
ant's situation are not only proverbially poor, but they are
proverbially shufflers—they belong to that class of creditors
who vociferate, " Vy, I did pay," and, of course, ought not
to be credited. You did wrong in trusting him.
It was eventually discovered that an overcharge of several
shillings had-been made by the collector ; and the Jury,
after very indignantly expressing their opinions upon the
shuffling manner in which the tally-system is invariably car-
ried on, decided that the defendant should pay the balance
at the rate of 4s. per month.
AN EXTRAORDINARY GOMA—A very soft-looking
ginger-bread-cake manufacturer was summoned by a quaint
and quiet looking old inhabitant of Ealing for 75., the value
of a goose which the said defendant had most wantonly
driven over, " scranched" his head, broke his wings and one
of his legs. " A fellow feeling make us wond'rous kind,"
and certainly never did one goose so pathetically lament the
demise of another.
Co MMISSIONER. (to plaintiff)—Be good enough to explain
this matter ; where and when did it happen ? Plaintiff—
Just about three weeks ago, Sur, the defendant was
adriving doan our lane, and zo ye zee he com'd up within
eleven inches of 4my gyate poaste, and zo rau'd over my
goose, and, my Lord, tw'or a goose of mortal walley to me ;
and I wor a sitting in my parlour, and plainly heard the
poor bird cry out.—( Laughter.)
CommrssiosEn—What ! after its head had been under
the wheel of the cart ? Plaintiff—Ee's, Zur, as plain as
that their wig on top of yer head !
Really this is a most extraordinary goose. Pray, what
became of it ?—Plaintiff—Oh, Sir, 'n hangs up at 'tome this
werry minute, and a werry fine goose it wor ; and worst of
all 'twor a laying goose—(laughter)—but I fears now it's
nayther fit to ate nor any thing else—it's com'd to life as a
body may say !—(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—What do you say about this shocking
accident, Mr. Baker ? Defendant—(very. innocently)—
Sir, I was driving up this 'ear lane wery quietly, and I seed
this 'ear goose in company with three others, a talking,
right in the middle of the road.—(Laughter.) I sing'd
out to 'em to git out of my way, but I 'spose they was so
engaged they didn't hear me, and so one on 'em gets under
my near wheel ; but as to what he (the plaintiff) says about
hearing on him cry out, why he never said a word, and no-
body know'd nothing about it, not till I come down the
lane again. I'll be on my horth as how the bird never
spoke a word arter my wheel went over it.—(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—Very safe, indeed: but what do you
propose to pay " now" in recomßence for this man's pet
goose? Defendant—l sharn't object to nothing unrea-
sonable, not providing I has the goose. I dare say it's
werry good, only he wants to set me against it.
The plaintiff vociferously clamoured for seven shillings,
but Mr. Commissioner Dubois and the Jury, after due
consideration, awarded the sum of three shillings, the
high-conditioned" and truly lively goose, to be given up to
he gander of the defendant.

WESTMINSTER COURT OF REQUESTS.
THE JIM Citow MANlA.—William Wagner summoned
Mr. Roberts, a woollen-draper, for 175., which he alleged
was due to him for his services for the same number of
days as an indoor shopman. The defendant acknowledged
that Wagner had earned that sum, but that he had broken
glass and crockery ware to precisely the same amount.
" The fact is, Gentlemen," continued Mr. Roberts, " the
young man is so intoxicated with the humours of Jim
Crow, that during the time he was with me it was nothing
but' Turn about, and wheel about, and do just so !" all day,
except when he was eating his breakfast and dinner, and I
assure you his victuals was more than he was worth, songs
and all into the bargain. In his evolutions he was con-
tinually knocking against something or other, and every
article that was not harder or thicker than his own skull,
was sure to be smashed to pieces. Before he was a fortnight
in my house he made a hole with the side of his bead in
the two best squares in my window.—(Laughter.) If I
were to charge him for all the blacking he used, it would
come to ss.
COMMISSIONER—Five shillings' worth of blacking in 17
days ! Surely you don't want us to understand that he
buttered his bread with it ?—(Laughter.)
Mr. Roberts—l wish he had, Sir.—(Laughter.) Every
time he could get to the kitchen he had the pot and black-
ing brushes, paintinghis face for the character, as he called
it ; and every time he was called up he washed it off again ;
so that between rubbing it in and scrubbing it out, he con-
sumed more than all the boots and shoes in my house, and
at last his cheeks looked like a pair of old saucepans.—
( Laughter.)
Plaintiff—That's false.—(Renewed laughter.) Look at
me, my Lord, and you will see that he arn't telling the truth.
Besides he fendered (tendered) me 4s. 6d. when I was a
going, and I wouldn't take it. He's a winding you up, Gen-
tlemen.—(Laughter.)
Defendant—Well, I'll tell you what I'll do : give me 55.,
and I'll forgive you the whole damage.
Plaintiff—l wish you may get it.
The COMMISSIONER reprimanded the young man for his
flippancy, but added that as Mr. Roberts had, according to
his own admission, tendered 4s. 6d. to the plaintiff when
dismissing him, the latter was certainly entitled to that sum.
The defendant paid the money, and the plaintiff turned
about and jumped out of the Court.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOTV-STREET.

On Saturday James Hance, a man of very gentlemanly
appearance, was placed at the bar before Mr. MlNsmat.
and Mr. FARRANT, a county magistrate, for examination,
charged with having conspired with another person, not in
custody, to obtain from Edward Honywood, Esq.,' Ensign
in the 88th Foot, three acceptances to blank bill stamps,
with an intention to convert them into hills of exchange,
and to cheat him of the money for which they were drawn ;
and also with obtaining from Mr. Honywood a bill stamp
of the value of 12s. Gd., by means of false pretences, with
intent to defraud him thereof.
Mr. CLARKSON, the barrister, and Mr. HUMPHRIES, the
attorney, appeared to conduct the case for the prosecution ;
and Mr. C. PHILLIPS and Mr. ELKINS, an attorney, ap-
peared on behalf of the prisoner.
Mr. Frederick Dufour, solicitor, bad been occasional],
concerned in his professional capacity for the late Mr. Day,
the eminent blacking merchant, of Holborn, previously to
his death ; and among other things he was entrusted with
money for him to lay out. On the 25th or 26th of August
he received the bill produced from a person named John
Gardiner. It was for a thousand pounds, in the following
form

" 1,000/. " London, Aug. 25, 1836.
" Three months after date pay to my order the sum of
one thousand pounds, for value received.
" JonN GARDINER.
" To E. Honywood, Esq., 88th Regt., 57, Portland place.
The bill was in the handwriting of Gardiner, whom the
witness knew, and was also indorsed by him. It purported
to be " accepted, payable at Messrs. Cox and Co.'s,
Craig's-Court—E. Honywood, Ensign 88th Foot." Wit-
ness had known Gardiner before ; he was a money-agent,
residing at Fallow Lodge, Finchley. Before this transac-
tion he had in May received two other bills for 500/. each
from Mr. Gardiner, which purported also to be accepted
by Ensign Honeywood, and which were drawn also by
Gardiner. The latter brought him all three bills for the
purpose of being discounted, and witness on the same days
or nearly so, on which they were brought, gave him the
money for them.
Mr. Clarkson—What money did you pay him for
them ? Witness—l have no objection, in my capacity of
solicitor acting for Mr. Day, to answer that question, but
as an executor to the estate I did not know whether I
should be justified in doing so.
Mr. MINSHULL—I do not see that you can refuse to
answer the question. You are not here acting in any situ-
ation as a solicitor in the affair, but merely as a witness.
Mr. Clarkson—Now you cannot entertain any further
objection. What did you give for the bill for 1,000/. ?
,;The witness gave a check for 1,000/. on his bankers, but
120/. was afterwards returned. The 5001. bills were dis-
counted at the same ratio.
Mr. Clarkson—Did Gardiner say anything with regard
to the position in life of the acceptor of the bill. Witness—
He said that he was entitled to 30,000/. on his mother's
marriage settlement, and that he was in the army, as well as
that he had other considerable expectations besides, under
a will which would soon be realised.
Mr. Clarkson—After you had discounted the bills what
did you do with them ? Witness—l handed the 1,0001.
bill over to Mrs. Claggett, the daughter of Mr. Day, at
Edgeware, a day or two after I received it. I believe
had given the 5001. bills to Mr. Day himself. Mrs.
Claggett was in the habit of keeping Mr. Day's accounts in
such matters.

Mr. CLARE-_,oN—ls the letter now produced in Mr.
Gardiner's handwring ? Witness--It is.
The letter was now put in and read. It was addressed
to " Edward Honywood, Esq., 38th Regiment, Winchester,
or elsewhere," and then re-directed to Ports Mouth, and
was in the following terms :
" Fallow Lodge, Finchley. Oct. 28,1836.
" beg respectfully to call your attention to the
circu:nstance (7f two bills of exchange accepted by yourself
remaining in my hands over due. Expecting the favour
of your immediate reply,
" 1 have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient Servant,
"JOHN GARDINER."

Tine witness then continued also to state that lie had
known the prisoner at the bar during a period of eight or
nine months only, and had seen him in company with
Gardiner. He had also seen him write his signature to
several bills, and had had a correspondence with him, on
which he had acted. He could not speak positively to
his handwriting, however ; but on examining the letter pro-
duced, signed by him, he believed it to be written by him
It was as follows :

" 3, Leicester-place, Nov. 11, 1836.
" Dear Sir—The gentleman who holds your bills and
his solicitor have called on me to-day with your letter, in
which you havo denied your hand-writing. I have, in jus-
tice to myself, been compelled to show them the whole of
your correspondence with me, with which yours of the Gth
have been compared. It has placed me in so unpleasant a
situation that I am compelled to decline any further inter-
ference ; but must beg you will, without hesitation, remove
the impression your letter is calculated to make.--I remain,
dear Sir,

" JAMES HANCE."
" To Edwd. Honywood, Esq., 38th Regt., &c."
The witness then continued to state that he had known
Gardiner for five or six years, and had had many transac-
tions with him on the subject of bills. Witness had been
concerned as attorney for him in putting in bail for him to
an indictment in the Court of King's Bench fora conspiracy
with other persons. Hance was one of the bail.
Mr. Clarkson asked the witness a great variety of other
questions, which, however, did not tend materially to throw
any light upon the matter under investigation.
Mr. Edward Honywood was next examined. He was
Ensign in the 88th Regiment of Foot, and was one of the
younger sons of the late Sir John Honywood, Bart. In
May he was desirous of raising the sum of 200/., and,
seeing an advertisement in the papers, he answered it. The
advertisement was to the following effect :
" Money immediately at command for good security, both
real and personal. Sums from 1,000/. to 25,000/. are ready
for investment, either by mortgage on freehold, by annuity
on any leasehold, life interests, and funded property, and
also on the personal security of persons of known condition
and fortune.—Address (confidentially) by letter only, post
paid, Mr. Savage, 38, Haymarket."
He in consequence addressed a letter to Mr. Savage,
and in reply received a note, signed James Hance, request-
ing an interview on the following morning, at twelve o'clock,
at No. 3, Leicester-place, Leicester-square. Witness had
destroyed all the letters which passed in the early part of
the transaction, but he recollected that the contents of this
were such as he had described.
Mr. Clarkson—Did you in consequence go to Leicester-
place ? Witness— I did.
Mr. CLARKSON—Whom did you see? Relate what
passed. Witness—l saw the prisoner, who represented
himself as Mr. Hance, and who demanded to know my
business. I informed him that I was desirous of borrowing
200/., and that my name was Honywood. A conversation
then took place as to who I was, and I informed him of my
position in life.
Mr. CLARasoN—Did he say any thing about security?
Witness—He asked me what security I would give for the
money, and I told him that my father had left me 3,000/.,
and as soon as that was paid to me I would repay him. He
then said that he would advance me 100/. directly, and drew
a check on Messrs. Drummonds, the bankers, for that
amount, which he gave to me. He then produced to me
a blank stamp, which he requested me to accept, and I
did so.
Mr. CLARKSON—Did he say any thing about the filling-
up of the bills ? Witness—He did ;he gave me a second
stamp for a similar purpose, and he then told me that he
would have to apply to two parties, probably, to raise the
money ; and that two bills would therefore be necessary ;
and he said that he would fill up the bills for me.
Mr. CLARKSON—Did you present the check for pay-
ment ? Witness—l did the same afternoon, and received
the money.
Mr. CLARKSO N—Did you afterwards hear from the pri-
soner Witness—l did ; and on my going to him he told
me that his servant had accidentally destroyed one of the
acceptances I had given him, and he therefore requested
that I would give him another. He handed me a stamp,
on which I wrote a third acceptance, and then went away.
Mr. CLAessoN—Did.you afterwards call at his house
frequently ? Witness—l did, to know whether he had
procured for me the other one hundred pounds, but he al-
ways made excuses, saying that the parties were not settled

to give the money.
Mr. CLARxsoN—Did you, in fact, ever receive the se-
cond one hundred pounds ? Witness—Never ; I rejoined
my regiment at Portsmouth in the month of September,
and received another letter from Hance in the end of that
month, or the beginning of October. That is one of the
letters which I also destroyed.
Mr. CLARKSON—Can you describe its contents? Wit-
ness—The prisoner said that my bill was due, but that if
I wished to renew it I must send him up another ac-
ceptance on a 12s. 6d. bill stamp, and I did so, this mak-
ing the fourth acceptance which I had given to him.
Cross-examined by Mr. Phillips—l am positive that

Hance did not fill up the bills in my presence.
Ballard, the officer, was then called, and deposed to
his having apprehended the prisoner in Ely-place, Hol-
born, on Wednesday afternoon, when he found upon him
a great many papers, &c. Other evidence was adduced,
after which
Mr. MSNSHULL felt it his duty to hold the prisoner to
bail, and he should call upon him to put in sureties, himself
in 1001., and two housekeepers in 5001. each, and to give
48 hours notice of bail ; but he said that if the bail which
he should offer before the expiration of that time would
satisfy Mr. Humphreys, the solicitor for the prosecution, he
could have no objection to discharge him before the expira-
tion of the full term of notice.
The parties were then bound over to prosecute, and the
prisoner removed from the bar.