The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-01 00:00:00

PRIVY COUNCIL.-(THIS DAY.)

The Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
met to-day, at eleven o'clock, at the Council Chamber, White-
hall. The Lords present were Lord Lyndhurst, Lord
Brougham, Mr. Justice Vaughan, Mr. Justice Bosanquct, and
the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty.
IN THE MATTER OF I:OI.T.MAN'S PATENT.
The case was specially appointed for to-day. It came be-
fore their Lordships upon the petition of Mr. G. Kollman,
the organist to her Majesty, praying for an extension of his
patent, granted in the year 1825, for an improved construc-
tion in pia,,ofortes. That improvement consisted, in
the first place, in placing the hammers and mecha-
nism above the strings, by which a much finer tone
was produced by an alteration in the sounding-board, and by
an entirely new
plan of tuning. The grounds upon which
the application was made were—first, the utility and supe.
riority of the invention ; and secondly, that Mr. kollinan, in-
stead of having made a profit, had suffered a loss of nearly
3,000/., in consequence of the workmen he had(employed prov-
ing totally incompetent to the work they had professed they
could perform.

Dr. Ure, who was examined at some length, stated that the
invention was a most valuable one, and a complete reform in
the manufacture of pianofortes.
Lord LYNDHURST—That is, it makes more noise.--.
( Laughter.)
Dr. Ure---The sound, my Lord, is certainly much greater,
but it is more pure, and wholly free from corruption.—(ln-
creased laughter.)
After several witnesses had been examined as to the loss
sustained by the patentee, and their Lordships had examined
the construction of the instrument, and ascertained its supe-
riority of tone by the performance upon it of Mr. Kollman,
Lord LYNDIIURST observed that,
in his opinion, the peti-
tioner had made out a case for the extension of the patent for
seven years.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who appesred for the Crown,
offered no opposition to the extension of the patent conceiv-
ing it to be a valuable improvement in the construction of
pianofortes.
Lord BROUGHAM hoped that Mr. Kollman, in the next seven
years rsonld find that the public would appreciate more the
the value of the invention than they had done during
last fourteen. He must, however, recollect that he had a
great monopoly to contend against; he had the whole musical
world in concord among themselves, and in discord with him.
—(Laughter.) Their Lordships then ordered the patent to
be extended for seven years.
This being the only case on the paper, their Lordships then
adjourned.

The further arguments on the petition of the Sergeants-at-
Law against the throwing open of the Court of Common Pleas
will be proceeded with to morrow.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

The Master of the Rolls sat this morning at his Court in
Rolls-yard, Chancery-lane, for the purpose of swearing in so-
licitors and taking short causes. 75 solicitors took the usual
oaths ; and his Lordship, after disposing of a few short causes,
rose at ten minutes after twelve o'clock.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

The Court sat in Banco to.dav under the I,rovisions of Lord
Denman's Act. The Banco Sittings will continue for five
days, four of which will be devoted to the Special Paper, and
the other (to-morrow) to the Crown Paper.
The cases argued this morning, which were demurrers to
pleas of ejectment, contained nothing of the least public interest.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

EXTRAORDINARY CA°E.-DYER V. lIAZLEWOOD.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the de-
fendant. in whose service he had formerly lived, for defama-
tion and false imprisonment, under circumstances of no ordi-
nary character.

It appeared on the evidence for the plaintiff, that he had
lived in the service of Mr. Hazlewood, a gentleman of fortune
residing at Siougham-hall, Sussex, and a magistrate of the
county. Mr. Hazlewood had his house broken into, and lost
a quantity of plate and other articles. He had front the first,
it would seem, suspected that Dyer was privy to the robbery,
and had stated that such was the case to several persons at
different times. Dyer having left his service, and gone to
reside in London, Mr. Hazlewood procured a search-warrant,
and went to Dyer's lodgings, where he found nothing which
he could lay claim to but a hammer and a chisel, the former
of which the owner of the house declared belonged to him.
Shortly afterwards Mr. Hazlewood had Dyer brought up to
Bow-street office on the charge of burglary ; and in his
information stated that on a Saturday evening, after his
family had united in prayer, and retired to rest, he
had observed, before going to bed himself, that some plated
candlesticks and a box of plate, which he had lost, were
safe, and that the doors were secured. At six o'clock on
Sunday morning, Dyer came up to his bed-room, and told
that the house had been broken into, and the candlesticks and
other things stolen. Mr. Hazlewood observed that it was
lucky the thieves had not found the plate-box, to which Dyer
rejoined that it was. When Mr. Hazlewood came down,
however, he found that the plate-box was gone. Dyer re-
marked that he did not observe that before.

A solicitor attended for Dyer at Bow street, and cross-
examined Mr. Hazlewood, who stated the value of the plate
to be a hundred pounds, but admitted afterwards, that he
could not swear that the tea-pot, the principle article, was
worth fifty shillings ; and on the solicitor submitting that there
was no evidence against Dyer, Mr. Hazlewood declared his
belief that he (the solicitor) was an accomplice.--( Laughter. )
Mr. Twyford, the sitting magistrate, said there was no
evidence to commit Dyer, who was thereupon discharged, pre-
viously, however, having been confined in Clerkenwe.l prison.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE and Mr. CLARKSON appeared for the
plaintiff; Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD and Mr. PETERSDOFF for
the defendant.

It was past one o'clock when the evidence for the plaintiff
clo.;ed.

Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD then addressed the July for the
defence, with feelings of considerable anxiety he said, the
more so, as the defendant was a gentleman who had practised
some years at the Chancery Bar, now retired on his fortune.
That he had sustained a serious loss was quite evident ; and
the circumstances clearly proved, that throughout he had been
actuated by a bona fide suspicion of the plaintiff. He had
expressed no suspicion till a police-officer from London had
come down, and from examination thought he had reason
for suspecting Dyer; and it would be most injurious to the
interests of justice that a gentleman, who from honest, how-
ever erroneous suspicion, prosecuted, in the regular course of
law, a person for a robbery which he had sustained—should,
if the charge was afterwards found groundless and mistaken,
be subjected to an action. Who, under such circumstances,
would prosecute a felon ? There could, in this case, be no
idea for a moment entertained that the defe❑dant was ac-
tuated by any malicious motive; and to sustain the present
action it was necessary that the prosecution should be
" without reasonable and probable cause."