The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-14 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sir,--Well :knowing your columns are always open to
the cause of humanity, truth, and justice, I am, from a
sense of duty (as a Guardian) I owe to the destitute and
afflicted poor, bpund to solicit a place in your valuable
journal for the following, unvarnished tale of a poor, desti-
tute, and afflicted man, Roger Cohen; aged .48 years, who
arrived in London from Cornwall about three weeks ago,
who, being quite destitute, made his way on Thursday
night last, the 7th inst., to the Houseless Asylum in Play
House-yard ; he, being ill, was refused admittance, but
supplied with sixpence from the Committee, to get lodg-
ing where he could: he made inquiry of a policeman on
duty where he could get a lodging, who informed him that
he would not be enabled to get a lodging that time of
night (near twelve o'clock), but seeing the poor man was
ill, took him to the station house in Featherstone-street,
there finding he was very ill, was then taken to the
relieving overseer of the parish of St. Luke, between
twelve and one o'clock in the night, who immediately gave
an order for him to be taken to the workhouse, which was
done, and the parish doctor sent for. His assistant was
soon in attendance, who did, and ordered to be done, every
thing the poor man's case required—his toes all frost-
bitten last winter and gone, while in Cornwall, and his
feet now in almost a mortified state, with violent sore
throat, &c., and nearly starved. Every care is now taken
of him for his comfort.

Allow me, Sir, to make a few remarks on this House-
less Asylum as to the manner it is conducted, as I have
stated in my former letters that the Society take in the
hale and hearty, and reject the affl cted and diseased, who,
of all the poor creatures in existence, stand most in noed of
nightly shelter. I ask, how can these benevolent gentlemen
who compose the Committee screw up their benevolent
minds to turn away a poor, destitute, afflicted fellow-crea-
ture from their asylum, with a few pence to go and perish
in the streets, or in some poor, dirty, damp lodging-house,
if not picked up by the police, and thrown A burden on
the parish of St. Luke ; is there any justice or humanity
in so doing? At a time the Society have funds in hand to
the amount of somewhere about 10,0001. at their disposal,
and further subscriptions pouring in upon them, as may be
seen by the Times paper a few days ago. I was at the Asylum
nearly two hours last night, and saw some of the Committee ;
I told them the Ayslum was a complete nuisance as now
conducted ; one gentleman admitted it, but what was to
be done ? He hoped the proper authorities would inter-
fere and shut it up--the fact is, if they admit the afflicted
and diseased, they will have more patients than any in.
firmary or hospital in London. Therefore I have no hesi-
tation in saying, although the Society, when first estab-
lished, was, from the purest motives and benevolent inten-
tions, it is a failure, which I firmly believe many members
of the Committee are ready to admit, there being many
evils they cannot surmount.

Your's, respectfully,
RICHARD WARD,
Guardian of the Poor

27, Banner-street, Feb. 10.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, FEB. 13.

FRITH V. WALKER.
Mr. PLATT and Mr. PETERSHORFF appeared for the plaintiff; and
Mr. HUMPHREY for the defendant.

It appeared that the defendant who is a bricklayer, had en-
tered into a contract to erect certain buildings for the London
and Birmingham Railway Company, and that he employed the
plaintiff, who is a stone-mason, to lay the base of a chimney, for
which he had contracted to pay 751. The plaintiff called his
brother, who proved the contract, and that the whole of the work
had been done, except the weathering. It was begun in November
1837, and continued until January 1838, when the severe frost set
in. All the witnesses said that the particular stone they were work-
ing was as easily and as well worked in frost as not; but when the
plaintiff's servants were witbin an hour or two of finishing, the de.
fendant drove them off. The plaintiff had brought his action in the
Sheriff's Court for a balance of 151. 165., having received 501, on
account, and he obtained a verdict. The defendant applied to the
Court, and had that verdict set side. The plaintiff now sought to
recover a balance of 291. 125., the extras being made up for charges
for taking in an iron rim and the weathering.
For the defendant Mr. Fox, the engineer to the Railway Com-
pity, was called, who stated that a dispute arose between the par-

tics, who waited on him in his office, and placed the account,
amounting to 701. 1 es., before him. He knew the work, and said
the charges were exorbitant- He asked then whether they in.
tended to abide by his decision; fur, if they did not, he should de-
cline giving any opinion. They both assented; and he reduced the
bill to 651. 16s. as being, in his judgment, fair between the parties.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said if the defendant had intended to rely
upon the evidence of Mr. Fox, he ought to have pleaded the new
contract. By the pleadings the only question the Jury had to deter-
mine was, whether there had been a contract binding upon both
parties, that the work should be performed for 75/. The extras he
thought did not very cle irly appear, but the whole question was one
for their consideration.
The Jury found for the plaintiff; damages 24/. 53.