The Sun.
London, England, 1837-11-27 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT-(THIS DAY).

This being the first day of the sittings after Michaelmas
Term, a great number of town and country solicitors were
sworn in.

His LORDSHIP then proceeded with short causes, which pos-
sessed no feature of public interest.
The Court at its rising will adjourn to the first seal, which
is fixed for Saturday next.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

Sittings at Nisi Prius.
(Before Mr. Justice VAtiGIIAN and a Common Jury.)
BARRETT V. GARRETT.

The plaintiff in this case is an ironmonger and patent stove
manufacturer in Tottenham-court-road, and the defendant is
proprietor of wine-vaults, in Clare-street and Houghton-street,
Clare-market. This action was brought to recover damages
for work done, in fitting up stoves, with descending flues,
boilers, &c., for warming wine, in the shops of the two wine-
vaults. The price agreed for the stoves and appendages was
paid into Court by the defendant, but the plaintiff came to
trial for a further claim of 131. 17s. for putting up the stoves.
The defence was, that the plaintiff had specially agreed with
the defendant to fit up the stoves, and put them in complete
working order, one for 18 guineas and the other for 16, with
two guineas for pipes ; and these sums were paid into Court—
the plaintiff's case being, that these were merely the prices of
the articles, and, when agreed upon, were not understood to
include the cost of fitting up.
For the plaintiff, three respectable ironmongers proved that
the charges were the regular prices of tie trade; and that
eighteen and sixteen guineas paid for the two stoves, would
not cover the expense of fitting up.
For the defendant, it was proved that when the bargain was
being made, Mr. Barrett said that he would " complete the
stoves, and put them all ready for action," for the sum speci-
fied ; and the question for the Jury was, whether those words
were meant to comprehend the setting and fitting up of the
stoves, or referred only to the completion of each stove in it-
self, without fitting up or extras.

The Jury having deliberated about twenty minutes, returned
a verdict for the plaintiff in the whole amount.

EXCHEQUER COURT.-("THIS DAY.)

WHERRY AND WIFE V. FORD.

Mr. KELLY stated that the plaintiffs brought this action in
order to recover compensation in damages for certain slander-
ous words spoken of the female plaintiff, which imputed felony
to her. Mr. and Mrs. Whebby kept a lodging house for
sailors in Ratcliffe-highway, and in July, 1835, a sailor named
Johnson lived with them. He was indebted to them in a sum
of 231., for which they arrested him, and kept him confined in
Maidstone Gaol for seven weeks, when be was released, and
again went to reside in the same house. He had been steward in
the vessel commanded by defendant, who owed him some wages,
in part payment of which he gave him a silver watch. Johnson
wanted money, and an arrangement was made (of what na-
ture did not appear), by which the watch was again to come
into the defendant's possession. Not having it returned for
some time, he (Ford) went to the house kept by the plaintiff,
where lie knew Johnson resided ; and, after some conversa-
tion (the beginning of it was not given in evidence), he said
to Mrs. Whebby, " Are you aware you are committing a
felony. You are a swindler, and I will go immediately to the
Lord Mayor and send an officer for you," which, it was al-
leged, had such an effect up-on her as to cause a miscarriage.
Such was the case made out for the plaintiff.
Mr. PETERWORF addressed the jury, and contended that
the words, if spoken, were spoken bona fide, and not in a
slanderous sense—that the case was most obscure, and appa-
rently loft so purposely by the plaintiff. He (the defendant)
was unable to lay the whole of the details before the jury, as
he had not been able to find Draper, who was then his mate,
and who accompanied him on the occasion, but who was then
on a voyage. If the jury thought the verdict must be for the
the plaintiff, then he was certain they must think it a case for
mere nominal damages. His Learned Friend had been in-
structed to exaggerate the case, for they must well know
that a lodging-house-keeper for sailors was not so very sensi-
tive as to be frightened with a threat such as had been proved.
The Learned JUDGE (Baron Gurney) summed up, and the
Jury immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Damages, one shilling.
This verdict does not carry costs.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

The Sessions were opened to-day with the usual formalities
by the Lord Mayor, Alderman Pirie, Sir C. Marshall, the
Recorder, and the other civic authorities. The Commission
having been read, and the Grand Jury sworn.
The RECORDER said, that although a shorter period than
usual had elapsed since the termination of the last Sessions,
the calendar contained, up to Saturday, no less than 200 cases
for trial. There was nothing, however, in these cases that
required from him any lengthen td observations. Amongst the
offences in the calendar there was a charge of murder; and
five persons were charged with wounding maliciously. In
three instances out of the five the weapon with which the
wound was inflicted was a knife—a species of offence which,
he regretted to say, was much on the increase. By the esta-
blishment of the Central Criminal Court a much greater ex-
tent was added to the jurisdiction of the City of London,
and this accounted in some measure for the apparent
increase. It could not be attributed to the recent
alterations which had taken place in the Criminal Law of the
country during the reign of his late Majesty, and which were'
still further being ameliorated under the auspicious reign of
her present Majesty, and he presumed it arose from the vigil-
ance of the police, which was so efficiently constituted as to
render it nearly impossible for offences of this nature to escape
detection. In nearly all these cases the offence was not done
in the commission of a robbery, but from a vindictive feeling.
There was also a case of arson on the calendar which would
require their mature consideration. From the depositions the
house appeared to have been on fire twice on the same day, at
least in one instance the furniture was on fire, and on the
other the wainscot. Should the evidence show the firing of
the wainscot to have been dono maliciously, it would be their
duty to find a true bill. The other cases were of an ordinary
description, and did not require that he should detain them by
any further observation.
The common jury panel was then called over.

Among those who Claimed exemption was %f John Richards,
late Member for Knaresborough. Another person also ex-
cused himself on the ground that he was deaf.
The RECORDER (possibly the old adage " none are so deaf
as those who will not hear" occurred to his Lordship's mind)
—asked him if he was very deaf ? A friend answered for him,
he was so deaf that, being a tailor, he was forced to employ
another man to take the measure for him.—( Laughter. )
The RECORDER seemed to think this sufficient evidence that
his deafness was bona fide, and allowed the exemption.
Jeltn Bell, Charles Hardy, David Dooley, Benjamin Ev-
ans, and Thomas Gratwich, were indicted for stealing 18 feet
of lead, from the property of Robert Galloway, on the 23d
October last, in the parish of Woolwich. It appearing from
the statement of Mr. Adolphus (for the prosecution), that
the prisoners had acted under a mistaken impression with regard
to the property in the premises, which they claimed to be
theirs by right of juncture, the Recorder directed them to
be acquitted. Mr. Adolphus stated, that there existed a prac-
tice which had become common of late, amongst a
class of low rascally attornies, of pretending .to give a
title to premises and thus inducing persons in the si-
tuation of the prisoners to strip the houses of every thing
valuable, and even to pull them down, in order to sell the
materials.
John Pullen was indicted for a misdemeanor, to which be
pleaded Not Guilty. There being no evidence offered for the
prosecution, the prisoner was acquitted.

SALFORD ELECTION PETlTlON.—Considering
the proceedings which took place in Salford, immediately prior
to and during the election—considering the public-houses
opened by Mr. Garnett 's friends, and the crowds of drunken
en and women rolling about the streets, and vociferating
the name—certainly not of Mr. Brotherton, but of his
opponent—coupled with that of the liquor which they had im-
bibed, and which we believe is now generally known through-
out the borough as " Garnett's elixir ;"—considering these
things, we say, the charge against Mr. Brotherton and his
friends, of treating the voters, is rather extraordinary.—Man-
cheater Guardian.
On Wednesday last a young man named Robert
Young, a kt.ollian, belonging to llorikwearmoutb, Lll over-
board from the Content steamer, in this port, amongst the
machinery just as it was set in motion, and was instantly
crushed to dcath,—Sunderland Herald.