The Sun.
London, England, 1863-02-25 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before the Lord
Chief Baron and a Special Jury.)

BEVAN V. THE COUNTESS OF WALDEGRAVE.

Mr. Karslake, Q.C., the Hon. G. Denman, Q.C.,
and Mr. E. V. Millen were counsel for the plain-
tiff; Mr. Montague Smith, Q.C., Mr. Coleridge,
Q.C., Mr. Henry James, Q.C., and Mr. C. Brown
(Chancery Bar) appeared for the defendant.
This was an action against the Countess of Wal-
degrave, in her representative capacity as admini-
stratrix of the late earl, her husband, to recover a
sum of £1,500,

The plaintiff was formerly the solicitor of Lord
Waldegrave, but ceased to be so in the year 1842,
when a Mr. Pearson, an attorney, and a Dr. Daniel
investigated the accounts between his lordship and
the plaintiff, and determined that the former should
pay to the latter a sum of £2,200. Instead of a
payment being made in cash, Lord and Lady Wal-
degrave assigned to the plaintiff the next presenta-
tion of the living of Borley, in Essex, by deed,
which covenanted among other things that if the
plaintiff should be prevented, from any cause, from
presenting on the next vacancy he should be paid
£1,500. In addition to the deed the plaintiff re-
ceived the celebrated silver bell by Cellini, which
was valued at £350, and his lordship's promissory
note for £650, making altogether an equivalent to
£2,500. On the death of the late incumbent of
Borley, the presentation not falling into the hands
of the plaintiff, he brought the present action for a
breach of the covenant.
For the defence it was stated that the deed had
been given up by the plaintiff to the defendant. In
the accounts between the late Earl and the plaintiff
a bill of exchange for £1,160, which was then out-
standing, had not been included. This was drawn
by the plaintiff, accepted by the late lord, and en-
dorsed to Mr. Lahee, who discounted it, giving value
for it to the plaintiff. Mr. Lahee brought an action
against Lord Waldegrave on the bill, the plaintiff
being also liable. In consideration of Lady Wal-
degrave paying the amount to Lahee, the plaintiff
gave up to her ladyship the deed granting the pre-
sentation. In the settlement of accounts between
Pearson, Daniel, and the plaintiff, the latter had
omitted his liability upon the bill, having, in fact,
received the money and not paid it over to Lord
Waldegrave.
A great deal of documentary evidence was put in
on either side during the trial, and it is unneces-
sary to hamper the facts of the case with it now.
Mr. Beavan was called and said—l was solicitor
to the late Lord Waldegravc from 1838 to 1842,
and was intimately acquainted with him down to
the time of his marriage with the Countess.
He
was always in embarrassed cireuntstances,. an.
advanced him moneys for the purpose of paying out
executions. All these transactions are contained in
a deed of release of 1845. In 1840 his lordship went
to Scotland. There were at that time some e
popreoe-
ceedings pending relative to an assault
in which Capt. Duff and others were implicated. on
rencejiavnendalreyt,telrBs4flr,orrm LeoooridvoWd aaldleetgavteraonilmohsitmdfariolym.
I
Edinburgh (he was then married) depicting in
strong terms their pecuniary difficulties and urging
for money to get them out of this " horrible hole."
gt
stuhmatthoigsedteobutst
Were £l,OOO,
Lord Lady waidegraanvde
'he
eromteu
stth
he naysea
Waldegrave also wrote upon the same subject.
ythina
of Edinburgh. I received' another letter for advice
as to their coming to live in town and where to go,
as there were very few taverns at which he was not
known, and he should be surrounded by friends,

...4d.
STAMPED ....sd.

creditors, cads, &c. Lord Waldegrave came to town
in March, 1841, and proceedings for the assault
upon the police were continued and came on for trial
at the Queen's Bench, and, under the advice of his
counsel, he pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to six
months' imprisonment, with a fine of £2OO. The
imprisonment Lord Waldegrave underwent. I ad-
vanced the money for the fine.
Mr. Karslake read the deed of release executed
between the witness and Lord Waldegrave on the
settlement of accounts between them.
Mr. Montague Smith cross examined the plaintiff,
who said—When Lady Waldegrave was sued upon
st
ahied Xtlh,alt6Ot
hbei ldl ,e herwl lady ys
mine,ip sbsolicitor,eriNs_r .
seda,rn.s oi
end,
that Lord Waldegrave had the money, and the fact
never was contested. At the time of the trial for
the assault on the police Lord Waldegrave screened
other parties more culpable than himself, as he said
he would suffer any privation rather than give up
their names. I first heard of the death of the in.
eumbent of Borley in 1862, but I had previously
tried to sell the presentation.
The evidence on both sides having been concluded,
Mr. M. Smith summed up the defendant's evi.
deuce.
Mr. Karslake replied upon the whole case.
His Lordship summed up, and the jury found for
the defendant.
Several points of law are reserved for future dis-
cussion.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS—Feb. 24.

(Before the Assistant-Judge.)
CONVICTION OF NOTORIOUS FELONS.

John Barker, aged 49, and William Davis, 26,
were indicted for feloniously receiving four tab:e-
cloths, and other articles, the property of George
Wallace, welt knowing the same to have been stolen.
Mr. Orridge prosecuted; Mr. Cooper defended
Barker ; Davis was undefended.
Evidence having been adduced, his lordship
summed up, and the jury found the prisoners guilty.
Mr. Orridge said that Davis was a ticket-of-leave
man, he having been tried at the Westminster
Sessions on the 14th of August, 1857, and sentenced
to be kept in penal servitude, which sentence was
not yet expired.
George Lockyer, the prison officer, proved that
since Davis had been liberated with a ticket-of-
leave he had been twice convicted, and sentenced
on each occasion to he imprisoned for three months.
The Assistant-Judge said he should like to know
if anything was known as to Barker.
Inspector Defter, of the S division, said he had
known him for 10 years, and had seen him re-
peatedly in the company of thieves, coiners, and
burglars of the worst description. He was connected
with the thieves engaged in Lord Foley's robbery,
and with Greene and another, who were convicted
of burglary and assaulting an old lady at Padding-
ton-green, and sentenced to be kept to penal servi-
tude for life. His house had been watched for
years as a place where stolen goods were received.
The Assistant-Judge sentenced each of the pri-
soners to 10 years' penal servitude.
A JUVENILE CRIMINAL.
Henry Spinks, 12, was indicted for stealing 10
boxes, an egg cup, and other articles, of the value
of 175., the property of the justices of the peace for
the county of Middlesex.
He pleaded guilty.
The prisoner was tried in this court, convicted,
and sentenced to be kept in Feltham Reformatory
for three years. Before that period had expired he
absconded from the school, but subsequently re-
turned and stole the articles in question.
Captain Brooks, superintendent of Feltham In-
dustrial School, said the term for which prisoner
was sent there was not expired by six months, but
he had broken out and had got away. After he left
he stole some tools, and having drilled holes with a
bit round a panel, he was able to push it through.
He committed offences frequently while he was in
the school. In June he broke into the housekeeper's
room, and stole several articles from a closet under
very aggravated circumstances. In October he ab-
sconded, taking with him several articles of clothing,
and in December last he was punished for stealing
a pair of boots from the shoemaker's shop. In con-
sequence of his very bad character, they would not
receive him back into the reformatory.
The Assistant Judge sentenced the prisoner to be
kept in penal servitude for three years, which sen-
tence would be accompanied by a recommendation
that he should be sent to Parkhurst Prison, where
the discipline is more rigid than in a reformatory.
(Before Mr. Payne.)
ASSAULT UPON A CHILD.

John Johnson, 44, was indicted for unlawfully
and indecently assaulting Mary Ann Johnson, his
own child, 11 years of age. •
•
He was found guilty.
Mr. Payne sentenced him to be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for two years.
AN "INCORRIGIBLE THIEF.
Henry Jackson, 28, was indicted for stealing an
umbrella.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
andrde
nsentenced
robbery. t o sixi Witness
tnmonths'ess was
pre-
sent Birch, a police-constable, said he knew him
as James Peck, and he was convicted in this court
im-
prisonment:
sent at the sessions of this court in 1852, when he
months'
imprisonment tried, convicted, and sentenced to 12
imprisonment for stealing linen off a line.
in
18470 r
IfBo4rB ia
Mr. Payne sentenced the prisoner
to be kept in
penal servitude for ten years.