The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-14 00:00:00

'zZO

h S

. 2

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

ROLLS' COURT, Nor. 13.
The Court was occupied the whole of the day with
a case of Hayes v. Haward, which related merely to
partnership accounts.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nor 13.
(Sittings in Banco.)
THE QUEEN V. THE INHABITANTS OF THE PARISH

or FORDHAM.
This was an appeal against a rate for the relief of
the poor made upon the inhabitants of the parish of
Fordham. The Justices at Sessions quashed the rate
on the ground of informality, subject to the decision of
the Court above.

Mr. GREENING and Mr. BYLES appeared in sup-
port of the order of Sessions, and Mr. ANDRYWII in
support of the rate. The question in the case was
whether the rate had been made in conformity with the
provisions of the Act of Parliament, which was argued
at considerable length.
Lord DENMAN said in this case there were two rates,
one made on the 3d of July, and the other on the 21st
of August, both of which had been quashed on appeal
to the Sessions. It appeared to him, on a review of all
the argument, that the Sessions had done wrong in
quashing the first rate on the ground.of informality, the
Act clearly not contemplating that a rate should be
void for non. compliance with the minute details to which
the attention of the Court had been directed. The
Court, therefore, was of opinion that the order of :Ses-
sions as to the first rate must be reversed, and as to
the second rate, that it be confirmed.

BAIL COURT, Nor. 13.
(Before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE.)
THE QUEEN V. WATFS.
In this case a rule for a criminal inrormation was
granted a few days ago by the full Court, and
Sir F. POLLOCK now applied for an enlargement of
the rule. The affidavit stated that the application was
not made for delay, but for the bona fide purpose of
obtaining such affidavits as the defendant believed
would enable him to discharge the rule.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—What is the rule ?
Sir F. PoLLocir said it related to some transactions
which took place on board a vessel, and it was necessary
to obtain affidavits from persons residing at Portsmouth,
and others engaged in the naval service elsewhere.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—When do you wish to en-
large it to.
Sir F. POLLOCK did not wish to enlarge it beyond
the present term without making another application
to the Court. He believed the defendant would be able
to procure the affidavits in time to bring on the matter
the lastiday but one before the end of term, and he pro-
posed to file the affidavits the day before.
His LORDSHIP granted the application.
THE QUEEN V. HAMMOND—CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
Sir W. FOLLETT moved for a rule to show came why
a criminal information should not be filed against Robert
Hammond, Esq., one of the Magistrates of the county
of Buckingham, and a Captain in her Majesty's Navy.
He made the application on behalf of Mr. James Smith,
who resided at Maidenhead. It appeared that some
time ago a sale took place of effects belonging to a per.
son named Cape!, and that Mr. Smith authorised the
auctioneer to purchase lot 105, which consisted of a
statue and a cast. The auctioneer's clerk, afterwards,
by mistake, sold it to Mr. Hammond, to whom applica-
tion was made for the return of the statue. Mr. Ham-
mond refused, and an action was commenced, in conse-
quence of which the figure was given up, and Mr.
Hammond ultimately paid the costs. Some time after.
wards an anonymous letter was received by Mr.
Smith, purporting to come from " Diana, the
image"—(Laughter)—stating that he was "a d—d,
confounded, stinking, pettifogging lawyer, and no gen-
tleman," and regretting her misfortune to belong to
such a blackguard.—(Laughter.) A second letter from
the fair correspondent of Mr. Smith, described him as
the " dirty, stinking, quintessence of a pole cat."—
(Roars of laughter.) Mr. Smith suspected the letter
to have come from Mr. Hammond, but of this a distinct
denial took place, and, on the 9th of September, Mr,
Smith received a letter from Mr. Hammond to the JO
lowing effect :

" [should not have taken the trouble to write, had
I not been informed that you accused me of writing
certain anonymous letters, which I feel bound to repel ;
and, to show that I have not the slightest wish to con-
ceal my opinion of you, I tell you you are a liar and a
blackguard, and a mean, dirty scoundrel, and would
suffer your nose to be pulled round the street any day
for a sovereign."

Mr. Smith believed the letter was intended to provoke
a breach of the peace, and therefore made the present
application.—Rule granted.
THE QUEEN V. JOSEPH JOPINSON.--CRIMINAL IN-
FORMATION.
Sir W. FOLLETT applied on behalf of a gentleman
named Henry Lawson, for a criminal information
against the defendant for charging him and his family
with larceny. The charge arose out of certain proceed-
ings under the will of Mr. Bland, of Liverpool, of
which they were the joint trustees, along with another
party.—Rule granted.

COMMON PLEAS, Nor. 13.
POZANSKI V. LAWSON THE " TIMES")--RIGHT OF
FOREIGNTRS TO FIRING ACTIONS OF LIBEL IN THIS

COUNTRY.

Mr. SMITH appeared to argue a demurrer to the
plea of defendant in this case. It was an action for
libel against the Times. The declaration stated that
plaintiff was a " dragoman," or interpreter, at the
Ottoman Court, with which the British Court had
been some time, and was now at peace. That more-
over he was one of five dragomans selected for employ-
ment by Lord Ponsoaby, our Ambassador at Constan-
tinople—that the office of interpreter at the British
Enabassage is one of trust and emolument—that the
plaintiff was chief of the five—and that in this capacity
he had been slandered by defendant. The plea was
that at the time of the grievances complained of, and
at the present time, plaintiff was and is resident
at Constantinople, out of the dominion of this
country—that he had never been naturalized, or
made a denizen in this country—that he had
never been subject to the laws or to the Crown
of Great Britain, and that he owed no allegiance to
our Lady the Queen—and moreover that he was not
a merchant trading to this country. The Learned
Counsel contended that it would be very unjust to allow
foreigners to be slandered with impunity in this country,
and proceeded to argue that there was no authority for
such a doctrine; he cited a case so early as Edward VI.,
where it was said that an alien might maintain actions
personal in the Courts of this country.
Lord Chief Justice TYNDAL—But in that case the
plaintiff might have been a merchant trading to this
country, and that is excluded by the form of the plea.
Mr. SMITH said he would only then cite it to show
that generally alienage was not a bar to personal actions
in this country. And he trusted that their Lordships
would not restrain and confine this liberty by any strict
limitations, but continue it liberally. There were many
cases to show that in cases of this kind, the benefit of a
doubt should be given to a plaintiff, and that a plea of
such a nature was considered odious.

When Mr. Smith had finished, the COURT called on
defendant's counsel.

Mr. HUMPHREYS said he was with Mr. Platt who
unfortunately was engaged in a cause in the Exchequer.
At ter some discussion, it was agreed to by the Court
to take another case in the meantime.

Mr. PLATT in the course of the day atgued for the
plea of alienage on behalf of the defendant. But after
a long and elaborate address of the Learned Gen-
tleman, _

The COURT considered that plea bad, and gave
udgment for the plaintiff.

ARCHES COURT, Nov. 12.
(Before Sir H. JENNER.)
CHURCH-RATEi.--THE OFFICE OF JUDGE PROMOTED
BY THE SUIT OF VICAT AND HAWES, JUN., CRURCH-
WARDENS OP THE PARISH OF CHRISTCHURCIS.

SURREY, V. APSLEY PELLATT.
This is a cause of substraction of Church-rates,
which came before the Court in the first Session of
the present term, upon the question of the admissibi-
lity of the libel, when Dr. Addams appeared on behalf
of the promoters of the suit, and the defendant, Mr.
Pellatt, attended personally. Various objections were
then urged to the legalityof the rate, and also to his being
charged with its payment, because, under the general
law, the occupier of a house is liable to pay the rates,
whereas he was charged as the owner or landlord of
the houses for which he was rated, and also that a com-
position alleged in the libel to have been made him un-
der the provisions of a local Act of Parliament, 51st
Geo. 111. c. 32, was void as regarded Church-rates,
because the Act in question had no reference to rates
imposed for the maintenance and repair of the church,
but only to those to which were levied for the relief of
the poor, and other such general purposes of the pa-
rish. Upon these points the Learned Judge, Sir Her-
bert Jenner, reserved his opinion.
The LEARNED JUDGE this day proceeded to givejudg-
ment. After stating the preliminary proceedings upon
which the question came before the Court, he said
sthtaattutte 51 Geo.besecond alrltil.,
eleci.n3t2l: which was a private and
libel turned upon the
local Act, and which was not, therefore, included in
the statutes at large, and with a copy of which the
Court had not been supplied until the cause came on
for argument. It had in consequence become neces-
sary that the Court should consider the effect of its
clauses, and as no sufficient opportunity had been af-
forded him of doing so in Court, he had been com-

COOPER V WICKIIAII.
This is a criminal proceeding, in the form of arti-
cles promoted by the Rector of the parish of Shepton
Mallett, against Mr. F. Cooper, for violation of his
duty as Churchwarden, in having voted against a rate
of twopence in the pound for the necessary repairs of
the Church, and in supporting a resolution condemna-
tory of any rates for the maintenance of a church. The
proceedings were originally commenced in the Consis-
tory Court of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, and a
libel was there opened pleading the notice and meet-
ing of the Vestry, the motion for a rate of 2d. in the
pound, and the proposal of the following resolution—
" That Church-rates are bad in principle, unjust in'
practice, and totally uncalled for at the present time,
and that therefore the meeting adjourn all consideration
of the question unto this day twelvemonths."
The allegation also pleads that Mr. Cooper, in
neglect of his duties as churchwarden, voted in favour,
of the resolution, which was, on a division, carried by a'
majority of 37 ; the numbers being, in favour of the
rate, 198 ; in favour of the resolution, 235. The alle-
gation was admitted in the court of Bath and Wells,
and an appeal as to its admissibility had been carried into
this (the superior) Court on behalf of Mr. Cooper, the
party cited. The question now came on for hearing.
Dr. Addams and Dr. Curteis appeared for Mr.
Cooper; Dr. Haggard and Dr. Jenner on the other
side.

The Court, observing the course of the arguments,
adjourned the discussion that fresh information might be
obtained as to the amount which would be produced by
a rate of twopence in the pound, and also as to the man-
ner in which the motions were put at the meeting of the
vestry. Under these circumstances we defer our report
of the arguments.

COUNTY COURT OF REQUESTS.

polled to reserve his judgment. The first article in
the libel pleaded the making of the Church-rate at a
vestry meeting of the churchwardens and parishioners
of the parish, duly assembled by virtue of notice
given, and that at the meetine, which took place on the
21st of June, it was agreed that a rate of 2d. in the
pound should be assessed. Some objections were made
to the admissibility of the libel by Mr. Pellatt, founded
on observations and on circumstances alleged to have
taken place, which were not properly brought before
the Court, and which, therefore, could not be taken
into consideration. The second article was, that Mr.
Pellatt, at the time and before the making of the rate,
was the landlord and owner of certain houses, and
then the Act was referred to, in order to justify
the Churchwardens in having assessed him as land-
lord and not as ocupier of those houses. Now, an
objection was taken to this, that the Act did not
apply to Church-rates at all, and that Mr. Pellatt was
not therefore bound by a composition which he had
made with the Churchwardens for the payment of rates
under the provisions of that Act. The great question
was this—whether, as landlord or owner, Mr. Pellatt
was liable to pay the rates, or whether they ought not
to have been assessed on the occupier, and not on the
landlord. There could be no doubt that, by the general
law, the occupiers were the proper persons to be rated,
and not the landlord or owner ; and the question would
be whether, under the circumstances stated, Mr. Pellatt
was liable, under any engagement of his own, to pay the
rates, and whether, under the Act of Parliament, the
rate was properly laid on him. He (the Learned Judge)
had looked carefully through the Act, and he could
not find that it applied to Church-rates. Its provisions
certainly had no reference to Church-rates; but they
were confined to those rates which were made for
the relief of the poor and for the general purposes
of the parish, and certain commissioners were
appointed for objects which were pointed out.
It was clear, therefore, that so for as the Act went
Church-rates were not included within its provisions.
It was intituled, " An Act for better assessing and col-
lecting the poor and other rates in the parish of Christ-
church, Surrey, for better regulating the poor thereof,
and for cleansing, watching, lighting, and otherwise im-
proving the streets, lanes, and other public passages
and places in the said parish, and for other purposes
relating thereto," and in its recitals and provisoes
nothing was contained which went to extend its ob-
jects beyond those referred to in the title. It applied
to all rates which it mentioned specifically, but there
was nothing in it with respect to Church-rates, and un-
doubtedly they were not comprehended within its in
tent and meaning. Besides, if they had been, that Court
would not have had jurisdiction, because the rates im-
posed under its provisions, were directed to be reco-
vered in a particular way before a Justice. The second
article in the libel, therefore, was not such as to render
Mr. Pellatt liable for the rates which had been assessed
upon him in respect of these houses, of which he was
not the occupier, but was the landlord or owner. But
it might be for the Court to consider the question
of the houses themselves, for it was intended no doubt
by the articles to show that they were within theAct.ln the
articles it was said that before and at the time of
making the rate Mr. Pellatt was landlord and owner of
one house let to weekly tenants, and of two houses let
to yearly tenants, and that these three houses were
under the yearly value of 2001. ; and then it was also
said that he was landlord and owner of six houses let
to weekly tenants, and that for these houses Mr.
Pellatt had, at some time or other (for the time was not
named) proposed or agreed to compound as well for
the Church•rates as for the other rates due from these
houses, and that a certain composition was made. He
saw clearly enough, from the manner in which this was
alleged, that the parties supposed themselves entitled
to proceed under the provisions of the Local Act of
Parliament, and the particular sections which had re-
ference to this part of the subject were those from the
59th to the 63d inclusive. The 59th section was, that
when the annual value of any house in the parish should
not exceed 201., the landlord should make a composi-
tion with the commissioners for such rates as might
be assessed upon it ; and again it was also provided
that when the houses should be let to weekly or
monthly tenants, or when the rent should be payable
at periods shorter than quarterly, then the landlord
should be assessed, and not the occupier, and he was
required to make a composition for the rates. Now,
applying this to the houses for which Mr. Pellatt had
been rated, it was evident that the assessment had been
made with reference to the Act of Parliament. But
the Act, as he before said, did not apply to Church-
rates,and this circumstance could have no effect,therefore,
upon the question. Then it was alleged that a compo-
sition had been made in reference to the rates, and he
must say that he thought that if such a composition had
been made in reference to the other rates, it would re-
main in force, and it was not necessary to make a new
composition for every fresh rate. But the composition
was alleged in very loose terms, and he was of opinion
that there was nothing stated in the articles which could
in any way bind Mr. Pellatt to consent any longer to
the proposition which he was alleged to have made. The
Court, therefore, thought that Mr. Pellatt being impro-
perly assessed in respect of houses of which he was the
owner and not the occupier, the amount claimed
of him in respect of them must be deducted from
the general account charged against him ; but at
the same time, as he was himself the occupier of
two of the houses for which the rates were assessed,
the claim for them must remain, and the Court could
not reject the articles as altogether bad. The Court
would therefore refer back the libel to be amended as
to this point, and also as to the other parts to which he
had referred, and which were necessary to be altered
with regard to this case. The Court might, upon
grounds hereafter shown by Mr. Pellatt, declare the
rate to be invalid ; but they could not, in the present
stage of the proceedings, come to that conclusion. Ile
understood that a case of the same description had oc-
curred before the Consistorial Court of Rochester, in
which the same point was in some degree involved ;
but that the Learned Judge had there refused to say
any thing upon the subject, because the point did not
appear upon the libel. The present case was of a dif-
ferent character, for here the objection arose upon the
face of the libel.
Mr. PELLATT hoped that the Court would award
him the costs under the circumstances.
Sir H. JENNER, however, said that that was an ap.
plication which he could not at present entertain, bu
which must await the final result of the cause.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.
Two boys, named John Cook and Thomas Dell, et ho
are well known to the police, were charged on suspicion
with breaking and entering the Duke of York public-
house, Shire-lane, Temple-bar, and stealing therefrom,
the sum of 31. 10s., with other monies, the property of
Mr. George Faulkner, the landlord.
It appeared from the evidence, that, on Saturday
night, some thieves entered the shop by a back window
and plundered the till, taking with them a quantity of
money,which lay on the shelf in the bar. On Tuesday sight,
about seven o'clock, the prisoners were observed in the
passage by the servant, and the prisoner Dell pointed
up to the window, saying to the other, " that's the place
where we had the game on Sunday morning. Informa-
tion being given to the prosecutor that they were lurking
about the premises, he went into the yard to make
search, and finding one of them in the water-closet, and
the other crouched up in another part of the yard, he
took them into custody.
Mr. Faulkner said that he had reason to suppose the
prisoners formed part of a gang of thieves who are con-
stantly seen after nightfall watching to enter and con-
ceal themselves in houses until the inmates retire to
rest, and if they were remanded a further discovery might
be made.
The prisoners denied the charge, and they were or-
dered to be brought up again in a week.
James Levy, having the appearance of a porter, was
charged by a man named Holmes, describing himself as
a musician, residing in Great Wild-street, Lincoln's-inn-
fields, with stabbing him in the temple with a knife.
It appeared that the prisoner's wife not finding mat-
ters go on as she wished at home, placed herself and her
children under the protection of the prosecutor, who is
a cripple, unable to move unless by the help of crutches,
and he is continually annoyed by his threats. Last
night while the prosecutor was amusing the children
with a fantasia on the violin, he heard a gentle tap at
his parlour door, and on his calling out " walk in," the
prisoner opened the door, drew a tremendous knife,
and rushing at the prosecutor he inflicted a severe wound
in his head, threatening to do for him, until be was
ejected from the room.

The prisoner said he had only gone to see his wife
who had deserted him for the cripple, and took his chil-
dren from him, but h denied committing the assault.
Mr. TWYFORD ordered him to be fully committed on
the capital charge.

Mr. Bailey, a solicitor, of Basinghall-street, City, at-
tended on behalf of a lady named Latour, whose con-
nection with the defendant had given rise to the present
proceedings.
The complainant, Mr. Thomas Battersby, No. 23,
Dorset-place, New-road, deposed that on the same
morning, between five and six o'clock, he heard a loud
knocking at the door, and on opening it he beheld the
defendant, who said he wanted to see his children. He
forced himself in, and he (complainant) was violently
assaulted by him and abused in the passage. A con-
stable came in, and he was given into custody.
Mr. Conn—Have you any children of his at 'your
house ? Complainant—A Mrs. Latour has occupied
apartments at my dwelling for about three months, and
she has two children with her. She referred me to a
very respectable lady in St. James's-square as to her
character and connections, and I was perfectly satisfied.
Mr. Bailey here stated that the defendant and Mrs.
Latour had lived together for some years ; and that, as
the means of the former had latterly become very limited,
the connection was looked upon by both as unsatisfac-
tory ; and during his (defendant's) absence from Clif-
Mr. Paley, the barrister, presented himself before ton, at which place they had been residing together, she
Mr. Sergeant HEATH, in the novel predicament of ( Mrs. Latour) thought proper to separate from him,
counsel in his own case, to defend an action for 10s., and, coming to London with the children, took lodgings
being the balance of a bill of' 21. claimed by a labouring in Ju
mvn-street. He found her out, and, on his visit-
man named Saunders. ing her:was very violent both in manner and language.
The plaintiff had been employed by Mr Paley to con- Terms were agreed upon by mutual friends, and it was
vert half a ivine cask into a water-tub, and so to adapt arranged that a separation should be immediately effected
the tub to a movable machine that it would between the parties, which was carried into effect. After
serve to convey the water required for the due refresh- this she went to the complainant's residence, and the
ment of the flowers and shrubs round his grounds and nurse had from time to time taken the children to see
green-house, at prince's.cross. The job was executed, the defendant, who, not satisfied with that, had gone to
he received 30s. on ac- the complainant's house, and had there conducted him-
the charge of 9/, was made ;
count, and the balance of 10s. was withheld on the self in such a way as to render it necessary for Mrs. La-
groundThus situated, ho was obliged tour to come forward in the present instance, with the
of exorbitancy.
to resort to this Court.
view of receiving protection from the Court.
The objection to the amount, Mr. Paley said, arose Mr. Coon—ls Mrs. Latour a married woman ? Mr,
from inquiries he had made on the subject of the charge Bailey—She is, Sir, but has left her husband, who has
for such a piece of machinery. He was lucky enough obtained a decree from the Ecclesiastical Court for has
to with a wheelwright in his neia
to meet libourhood, a per- divorce. An action against the defendant was also
feet judge of such matters, who would prove that 255. I brought for trim. con., and Mr. Latour, the complainant
was the fair charge for the job.
Well, ' therein, had a verdict of 1,5001. awarded in his favour.
plaintiffs
Mr. Sergeant HEATH, " show Defendant did not deny having gone to the house in
the Jury how you justify the charge of 21. you have question for the purpose of seeing his children, who he
made?'
, understood were about to be removed by the mother.
The plaintiff instantly proceeded to specify the variou , The complainant refused to admit him up stairs, and he
materials he had used, and their cost. Gudgeons, certainly did apply to him the epithets of coward and
thimbles, tires, plates, screws, wheel, timber, painting, unfeeling wretch. It was not true that he committed

+ha
ving one cask, cleansing another, with a host of et-
ceteras, were all enumerated ; and, according to the
plaintiff's conscientious belief, with the addition of his
work and skill, the charge he had made of 21. was just
and reasonable.
" It is not the value of the 10s. which dictates my
resistance to this person's demand," observed Mr.
Paley, " it is because, from the best evidence I have
been able to collect, I am strongly of opinion that the
charge of 21. is an imposition."
The wheelwright came forward—He had inspected
the water-cask, and his estimate for such another job
was 7s for the iron work, and a guinea for timber and
labour.
" That, I suppose, would be your charge," said Mr.
Sergeant HEATH, " to a tradesman or a mechanic, who
had to get a profit on the job. But now suppose a
gentleman ordered' such a machine of ou, would you
not make a difference in your charge ?" " Why," said
the wheelwright, evading a direct reply, " I should like
to have a good price for my labour."
" Suppose now, for instance, you had used a pair
of gudgeons, what would be your price for them."
Wheelwright—Eightpence a piece.
Mr. Sergeant HEATH—Recollect they are to be fur-
nished to a gentleman.
Wheelwright—Fourpence more in that case.
" Then," said the Learned Sergeant, looking at the
bill, the plaintiff has made exactly the same charge.
Now for a couple of iron thimbles, how much ?"
Wheelwright Sixpence each, and fourpence for
screws.
Mr. Sergeant HEATH—Is that the gentleman's price ?
Wheelwright—Twopence more for a gentleman.
Mr. Sergeant HEATH—WeII, you are within two-'
pence of what the plaintiff has charged.
" But," interposed the learned defendant, who with
the tact of a true lawyer, saw that his case was fast
sailing to the north,' " this man is ready to swear he
will make a cask and barrow for 28s.
" He may say so," replied Mr. Sergeant HEATH,
" for he may, perhaps, want a cheap job—or he may
be a bad judge. Let us try him."
The LEARNED SERGEANT took up his pen. Mr.
Paley pulled out his gold pencil-case and prepared to
figure. Item by item was duly put down at the wheel-
wright's own prices.
Cocker's arithmetic was beating the Learned Barris-
ter rapidly out of Court.
" Why," said Mr. Sergeant HEATI, pausing, " we
have already got nine shillings for iron work, and twenty-
three shillings for wood and work. 'We have not done
yet. You see, Mr. Paley, your witness must evidently
have made a mistake in his calculation. If you can
convince the Jury to the contrary—and lam sure no
one can address a Jury with more ability—the Court is
quite ready to hear you."
Mr. Paley, in his address, proceeded to show that
though " gudgeons" had been used to the barrow, he
was not " flat fish" enough himself to submit to im-
position ; that though " thimbles" had been relied on to
swell the amount of the charge, he was determined to go
" stitch through" with the matter. " Screws" had also
been plentifully supplied, but he was not going to retaliate
by attempting to " screw" the plaintiff if the charge was a
just one, The Learned Gentleman's owu reasons for ob-
jecting to the bill were, that he did not choose to be
" laughed at for a fool," by paying an exorbitant de-
mand. The wheelbarrow water-cask was defective, in-
asmuch as it would not swing with sufficient celerity,
and the machine was made so large that it could not be
drawn down a particular locality. Now as the wheel-
wright had proved that he could make a machine as
good as the one in dispute, with all its good qualities,
and none of its defective ones, for 285., he thought he
was entitled to ask the Jury to reduce the plaintiff's
demand.
Mr. Sergeant HEATH, in a few words, disposed of the
summing up. The witness, on the part of the defence,
had broken down, and the Jury were to decide upon
the amount due to the plaintiff.
The three Jurors put their heads together. Two of
them must have possessed a remarkable development
of the bump of humguffinism (vide any professsor of
bumpology), and returned a verdict of ss.
.‘‘ And who is to pay the costs ?" inquired Mr. Paley.
suppose you had been suing in the Court of
Qiieen's Bench for 1001, and you proved a tender of
only 501. while the Jury gave 70/., could you have any
doubt as to who was liable to the costs ?"
Mr. Paley smiled good-humouredly, put down the
amount and costs, and left the Court.

EDTION.

1
any assault upon complainant's person. ____
Defendant
further stated that when Mrs. Latour left Clifton, she
did so without communicating to him her intention ;
and that all he wanted was to have under his care
the children, whom he was, notwithstanding that his cir-
cumstances were not so good now as they formerly were
before his father's death, still able to bring up in as
good way as any gentleman could desire.
Mr. CoDD said he could come to no decision about
the children ; that matter must be settled in another
way ; all that he had in the present instance to do was
to bind the defendant over to keep the peace.
He was then required to enter into his own recog-
nizoncPs in 2001., and to find two sureties in the sum
of 1001. each.

siiVLRITIES TO WIVITLOVETT,

TO THE .EDI7'OR OF HE SUN
- ~

SlR—The " reputed severities" practised towards
the Chartist prisoners in the different prisons, espe-
e'ally those in Wales, have been repeatedly adverted
to in your paper. Perhaps, Sir, you will allow me to
aequaint you and your readers with the. present dietary
of the noble-minded and truly virtuous William Lovett,
now in Warwick Gaol, presuming you can have no ob-
jection to know the truth. I beg to state, that my
friend Lovett had been for a long time previous to his
trial in a very delicate state of health, and
.that he,s
been confined to his bed in the infirmary
&lice his an..
prisonment ; judge, then, of the severity of those who
are his keepers—the Secretary of State and the Go-
vernor of his residence--when ou learn that in no
day of the week has he animal food, or aught as a fair
substitute ; but, that there may be no charge of exag-
geration, here follows the dietary
:-Bread, one poLand a halt daily ; three pints of gruel (alias
?•kiily);
soup, Sundays and Wednesdays; and five days in the
week one pound of potatoes each day. All " excellent"
no doubt.

Of the soup it is on!y necessary to that a spoon-
ful of each serving has been quite sufficient!
, Once in three months an interview xilh his wife for
one hour, a turnkey being witness ; no letters but
such as going out or coming in pass through the
Governor's hands ; no newspapers of any description,
books, but such as have passed the ordeal of a
salaried chaplai►n's inspection ! These, Sir, are not
" reputed" but real " severities ;" and such deeds as
cause many hearts to ardently pray for the end of a
system, the marked characteristic of which is, that
there is "one law for the rich, and another for the
poor." I am, Sir, your's respectftPlv,
JOHN CLEAVE,
No. 1, Shoe lane, Fleet-street, Nov. 12th, 1839."
[Mr. Cleave will see that we have made two or
three slight alterations in this Letter.]
ST PANCRAS LITERARY AND
SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION.

A lecture on the Nervous System and Phreno-
logy, was delivered to the members of this Institu-
tion, on Friday evening, by W. Jones, Esq. (Sur-
geon to the Skin Infirmary, es:c.)
The Lecturer demonstrated the gradual develop-
ment of the nervous system, from the simple ani-
malcula to the intellectual man. In man, he ob-
served, the nervous system comprises two distinct
systems, mutually dependent on each other, yet
mutually capable of having their reciprocal action
suspended during a limited period. These two
systems are the centre spinal, formed by the brain,
spinal marrow, and nerves emanating therefrom,
and the sympathetic, or ganglionic system, formed
by a double chain of nervous masses lodged on
either side of the spinal column within the body,
and giving off nerves in every direction. To the
former he referred voluntary sensation, motion,
reason, intellect, and the faculties of the mind : to
the latter involuntary sensation, impulse, and pas-
sion. The latter presided over all the phenomena
which can influence the existence of the individual,
was ever on the alert, and in the moment of danger
immediately gave notice to its fellow labourer;, the
former judged of the danger, and regulated the
motions of the individual, so as to shun or avoid it.
The involuntary system, closely allied with the
twin sisters Pleasure and Pain, gave rise to that
instinctive selfishness, self-love, or love of life,
which uncontrolled gives origin to all our passions,
and is alike capable of inducing the most exalted
pride or the most submissive modesty. The sym-
pathetic system was more developed in woman than
in man, because to her was allotted the province of
supplying life to a new being previous to its inde-
pendent existence ; and under the influence of this
over-abundant system her sensibility is more exqui-
site, her passions more acute, her judgments more
prompt—she seems to be rather a creature of im-
pulse than of reflection.

- The Lecturer illustrated his discourse with a
numerous selection of very effective drawings, and
interspersed it with some curious anecdotes show-
ing the influence of preternatural development of
particular portions of the brain, and the powerful
influence of the passions on the mind of man.

- • •
• r
11 47 71
Jr- ,
„In .
K\IN,
• 47'A 4 t
1 " "; 4001iL •
• csaf—
•=. eio,, DI. -v) '-"4?
tr7p,
T 4