The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-26 00:00:00

SHEEP.

T. E. Pawlett, W. Sandy, J. Mayfield, J. Clarke, Long
Sutton; W. Lane, Northleach ; E. Handy, W. Game, T.
Horton, T. Mansell, Shrewsbury ; W. Matthews, Shrews .
bury; T. Horley, jun., P. W. Bowen, T. Danger, IV. Paull,
J. Merson, It. Eastwood, T. Brydon, J. Brydon, T. C.
Borthwick, It. Bollard, W. C. Hunter, Col. Pennant, M.P.,
Sir G. G. Montgomery, Bart., M.P. ; and F. Bond.
PIGS.

J. Dyson, J. Hickman, G. Mangles, M. Gavins, T,
Crisp, G. M. Sexton, W. Hewer, Sir R. G. Throckmorton,
Bart., W. B. Wainman, J. Parkinson.

FOREIGN STOCK.

Swiss—Heinrich Dolder, Adrien Ecoffey, J. B. Lussorf,
L. Gesellsechaft, J. F. de Treytorrans, B. Schneider, F. des
Schweizenschen. French—D. Roze, G. V. Garnod, C.
Lefebvre, A. C. Roblot, M. R. Bailleau, A. Gatinean.
Spanish—C. C. Suntherim, F. Homeyer. Saxon—C. A.
Gadegast, H. A. Steiger. Mrs. Rich, Auckland, New
Zealand. Various—Acclimatisation Society, Adelphi ; G.
Parfait, P. N. Godin, and H. J. Eluard.

LA TV INTELLIGENCE.—June 25.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
(Before Sir John Stuart.)
BAXENDALE V. THE WEST MIDLAND RAILWAY
COMPANY.

This was a demurrer to a bill filed by the plain-
tiffs, who are the well-known carriers, and which
was filed for the purpose of obtaining a declaration
that the company were bound to deliver at the Kid-
derminster and Witney stations all goods consigned
to Pickford and Co., or care of Pickford and Co.
at Kidderminster and Witney, whether by the
plaintiffs themselves or by other persons. The bill
also asked that it might be declared that the de-
fendants were bound to deduct from the sum charged
by
.them as a through rate for goods carried upon
their railway to the Kidderminster and Witney sta-
tions, and carted and delivered by them from these
stations, a reasonable sum for cartage on all goods
consigned to Pickford and Co., or care of Pickford
and Co., at Kidderminster and Witney, and to allow
the same to the plaintiffs. The bill further asked
for an injunction to restrain the company from re-
moving or permitting to be removed from the Kid-
derminster and Witney stations the goods which
might be hereafter consigned as aforesaid to Pick-
ford and. Company at Kidderminster and Witney,
or any of such goods, and from placing them or
permitting them to be placed upon any waggons
or carts except according to the order and direc-
tion of the plaintiffs' firm of Pickford and Co.,
with proper directions. That an account might be
taken by and under the direction of the Court of all
goods consigned to Pickford and Co., or to the care
of Pickford and Co., at Kidderminster and Witney,
which the company since the Ist January last, as
to Kidderminster, and since the 13th May as to
Witney, had refused or neglected to deliver to the
plaintiffs, and of all goods so consigned, which,
being under mark, the company had refused to de-
liver to the plaintiffs until they had first tendered
the same for acceptance by the plaintiffs at the place
of their business, and that the defendants might be
ordered to pay to the plaintiffs what they ought to
have deducted for cartage. The case made by the
bill was briefly this, that the railway company,
when goods were sent from Bristol addressed to the
care of Pickford and Co., with the name of the per.
son for whom they were intended, the company,
instead of delivering them to the plaintiffs' waggons
at the station, insisted on delivering them in the
town to the persons to whom they were addressed.
Secondly, that when goods were addressed to Pick-
ford themselves, the company irtsisted on carting the
goods to Pickford's place of business in the town ;
and on the plaintiffs refusing to receive them they
took them back to the station, where they subse-
quently delivered them to the plaintiffs.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Jessel appeared for the plain-
tiffs, and took a series of objections to the bill.
Mr. MalMs, Mr. Dickenson, and Mr. Bailey
appeared for the defendants, but were not called on.
The Vice-Chancellor, after going through the
various arguments, overruled the demurrer.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(After Term Nisi Prius Sittings, at Westminster,
before Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and a Special
Jury.)
PRICE V. CARVER.
The further hearing of this case was resumed
this morning. It was a patent case, for the in-
fringement of a patent for the manufacture of a
sewing-machine. The case presented no feature of
interest other than it was an illustration, according
to his lordship's remarks in summing up, of the
inexpediency and injustice of that branch of our
patent laws relative to foreign inventions. His
lordship also stated that he would not take another
patent cause at these sittings ; and that in future
patent causes from the manufacturing districts
should be sent back there for trial, or they should
stand at the bottom of the list. The time occupied
in trying patent causes was so great that it mate-
rially interfered with the other business of the
Court, and inflicted in many cases much loss and
great hardship on all the other suitors.

BAIL COURT.
(Sittings at Nisi Prins, before Mr. Justice Mellor

and a Common Jury.)
MARSHALL V. GOLDBY.
This was an action in trover and detenue to re-
cover three racehorses or their value, and also for
damages sustained by the loss of the sale of them,
and expenses for the recovery of their possession.
The defendant pleaded, first, that the horses were
not the plaintiff's property ; secondly, that he had
a lien on them; and as an equitable defence he
pleaded that the plaintiff's claim to the horses in
question was under a bill of sale from Charles
Arthur Chetwynd Talbot to secure to the plaintiff
the repayment of a loan of £1,000; that the plain-
tiff was solicitor to Captain Talbot; that ho ap-
propriated tha bill of sale, and that no sum of
money was paid to the plaintiff ; that the bill of
sale was made with his cognisance and for the par-
pow of protecting the horses from seizure by Cap-
tain Talbot's creditors ; andit hat the plaintiff agreed
to leave the horses with the said Captain Talbot,
whose property they were, and that the deten-
tion of the horses by the defendant was with
the authority of Captain Talbot. The plaintiff, it
appeared, had demurred to these pleas, and under
a judge's order he had obtained particulars of the
defendant's claim for training, &c., which amounted

to upwards of £l5O. The pleadings and facts
showed that the action was substantially defended
by Captain Talbot, who was a nephew of the Earl
of Shrewsbury. The plaintiff, who acted up to a
very recent period as Captain Talbot's solicitor
against the defendant, had been to his stables. The
plaintiff alleged that he had advanced £l,OOO to
Captain Talbot at £lO per colt. interest. The
money was to be paid on the Ist of June or on an
earlier day, and seven days' notice was to be given
for the day of payment. A notice had been left at
Captain Talbot's known place of business, 6, Lans-
down-lawn, Cheltenham, requiring it to be paid
within seven days, without appointing any specific
day, and in default the plaintiff was to proceed to
sell the horses or bring an action.
For the defence it was contended that the notice
was defective, and as to the other points leave was
given to move the Court above; the jury, how-
ever, were to assess the damages in the event of the
Court above deciding in favour of the plaintiff.
The jury assessed the horses at £2,000, and £lO
damages on the count for expenses.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before Lord
Chief Justice Erie and a Special Jury.)
THOMAS V. LORD GEORGE PAGET.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to
recover the sum of 1:60, deposited in the Piccadilly
Deposit Bank. The defendant pleaded saveral
pleas, denying his liability.
Mr. Sergeant Sfiee and Mr. Ogle were counsel
for the plaintiff; Mr. Bovill, Q.C., Mr. Hawkins,
Q.C., and Mr. Garth, for the defendant.
This case arose out of the failure of the Picca-
dilly Deposit Bank, which has recently been so
often before the public. The plaintiff was a female
servant at Bath, and had deposited the sum of X6O
in the Deposit Bank, and had received interest upon
that amount. She now claimed that sum as a de-
positor, and the questions raised were whether the
defendant, Lord George Paget, was a director, and
whether the plantiff was a depositor or had invested
her money, and thus become a shareholder, and
liable as such.

After the case had been opened by Mr. Sergeant
Shee, Mr. Bovill proposed that it should be referred
to some gentleman who should shape the facts into
a special case for the opinion of the Court.
A great deal of discussion took place between the
learned counsel on both sides relative to its being
referred.

Ultimately it was agreed that Mr. Garth and Mr.
Ogle should attend before Mr. Turner, the barrister,
who should draw up and shape the facts into a spe-
cial case.

A verdict was then taken for the plaintiff subjec
to a special case.

POLICE IN TELLIGEN Juno 25.

GUILDHALL.—" THE BOOT IS ON THE OTHER
LEG."—John Baker, a potman at the Angel pub-
lic-house in Farringdon street, was charged before
Mr. Alderman Wilson, with assaulting Mrs.
Richardson under the following circumstances :
Mr. Beard conducted the defence.

A great many witnesses were examined for the
complainant, to show that she and her landlady
were out together, when she (complainant) was
suddenly taken ill, and obliged to enter the nearest
publice-house where she could sit down. They
accordingly went into the Angel in Farringdon-
street, and soon after the complainant became very
sick, in consequence of which the barman ordered
them both out of the house. They said they were
quite sober at the time, and refused to leave; upon
which the potman pushed complainant against the
door and she fell down. When she got up he
knocked her down again, and afterwards struck her
in the face.

Other witnesses deposed to seeing the complainant
pushed out of the house by Mr. Winstone, the land-
lord, on which occasion she fell, and on regaining
her legs she was again pushed down and remained
for some time insensible until she was conveyed to
the hospital.
Mr. Beard said the facts of the case were briefly
these—The complainant and her landlady entered
Mr. Winstone's house, and it was not until after
they had been served with some ale, which was
afterwards exchanged for some gin, that it was
observed they were drank. There was a gentleman
in front of the bar, and while drinking with him
the women hung upon him one on each shoulder, in
a very unbecoming manner, and it was in conse-
quence of that, and their conduct in other respects,
that Mr. Winstone was induced to order them out
of the house. They refused to go, and no more
violence was used than was absolutely necessary to
get rid of the drunken women.
Several witnesses were then called for the defence,
and their evidence entirely negatived that given by
the complainant and her witnesses.
Alderman Wilson said if the complainant had not
been drunk she would not have conducted herself
in the disreputable manner it appeared she had, and
the landlord did perfectly right in turning out such
a drunken lot of women. With regard to the charge
of assault, he thought such a charge ought to have
been prererrea Dy the potmau
plainant. Under these circumstances he dismissed
the charge.

SOUTH WARK.—CAUTION TO OMNIBUS PRO-
PRIETORS.-Mr. Thomas Tilling, the extensive om-
nibus proprietor, was summoned betore Mr. Bur-
chain, by order of the Commissioners of Police, for
unlawfully neglecting to keep distinctly painted
inside one of hiti omnibuses a table of fates to be
demanded of each passenger. _

Inspector Clatworthy, an officer specially ap-
pointed by the Commissioners of Police to examine
the hackney and metrorolitan stage carriages in
this district, said that on the 14th inst. he saw one
of the defendant's omnibuses in High-street, Bo-
rough. It ran to the Exhibition and Charing-
cross. On examining the vehicle he found that the
table'of fares was not fixed on the omnibus accord-
ing to the Act' of Patliament. On the door was
painted " London - bridge to Charing-cross, 3d.;
and from Charing-cross to the Exhibition, 3d."
Over that was painted on slides, " To Charing-
cross and the Exhibition, Gd."
Mr. Burcham—Were both exhibited to the pub-
lic at the same time ?
Inspect or Clat worthy—No, Sir. The slide was so
contrived as to cover the original table of fares, and
could be removed at the pleasure ot the conductor.
Your worship is aware that the act of Parliament
is explicit on the point that the table ot fares shall
be prominently fixed on the door of every metro-
politan stage carriage. As soon as I called the at-
tention of Mr. Tilling to it he had the slide removed,
and now the table of fares was painted plain and
very prominently.
Mr. Burcham observed that such a system of
allowing slides over the original table of fares was
likely to encourage frauds on the public, as omnibus'
conductors could play their tricks as they thought
-proper.
Mr. Tilling here said that he had 13 omnibuses,
City the majority of which ran from the to Camber-
well and Peckham. He had only one thatranto
the Exhibition, and the old Camberwell farest being
on the door, he had slides made to fix
h
efaereeusretohCishwareinregh-icpross
thata thndt
eh
ree
was
of
He proper
He could
fraud or to mislead the public on his
the p a
rt.
fares, Ha es
twashe
compelled to make a difference in
traffic was all one way, and they came back almost
every journey empty.
Mr. Burcham—But you have no right to have
two rates of fares on your omnibus,
Mr. Tilling said that he had not actually two
rates of fare, as the slides covered the original table
when running in another direction. He had per-
manently altered it now to the satisfaction of the
commissioners.

Mr. Clatworthy said that was true ; and he must
add, that Mr. Tilling was a highly respectable gen-
tleman, always willing to accommodate the public
with good vehicles at cheap fares.
Mr. Burcham observed that he understood the
defendant was a respectable man, but still the sys-
tem of slides gave the conductors and others every
encouragement to defraud the public. The defen-
dant in this instance must pay the costs; and he
hoped it would act as a warning to other omnibus
proprietors to have the table of fares permanently
and prominently painted on their vehicles. It was
of the utmost importance that it should be so, espe-
cially during the opening of the International Ex-
hibition.

Mr. Tilling, on leaving the court, assured his
worship that it should not occur again.

LAMBETIL—COMMITTAL OF TWO NOTORIOUS
SIIOPLIFTERS.—Ann Page, alias Johanna Driscol,
and Ann Newman, two notorious shoplifters and
thieves, were brought np on remand and final exa-
mination before Mr. Elliott, ou a charge of stealing
a valuable piece of silk from the shop of Mr. Alex.
Griffin, a draper, in Church-street, Camberwell.
From the evidence adduced on the former exami-
nation it appeared that on the evening of Tuesday
week the prisoners entered the shop or Mr. Griffin,
and were shown a variety of articles, but left with-
out purchasing anything, and immediately after a
piece of silk was missing. They were in conse-
quence followed, and taken with the property on
the person of the prisoner Page. Theywere remanded
to give the constable in the case an opportunity of
inquiring into their former character, and yester-
day the officer reported to the magistrate that the
address they gave were false, but there were two
constables present to speak to their former offences.
John Emery, a City sergeant, 11, was here sworn,
and said ho knew the prisoner Page, as she called
herself, but whose real name was Johanna Driscol,

for some years a member of a gang of desperate
thieves and shoplifters who infest the neighbour-
hood of Golden-lane, Barbican, and the vicinity 01
St. Luke's, and knew, of his own knowledge,
of her
having been frequently convicted of felony, and sell'
tenced to various terms of imprisonment. On oneoccasion she was charged at Guildhall with robbing'
a gentleman, with great violence, and had it nOL,
been that the gentleman was much intoxicated ill
the time, and could not speak. with accuracy as t°
what took place, she no doubt would have been
sentenced to penal servitude. A
Police-constable John Read, 202 M, said he was
present when the prisoner Newman and another
female were tried for shoplifting, when her compa-
nion was sentenced to three years, and herself to
six months' hard labour.
A Barrister who attended for the prisoners, andA
whose name did not transpire, said. his clients well,'
plead guilty to the charge, and hoped his worebt
would give them another chance by dealing with
them under the Criminal Justices Act.
Mr. Elliott told him that he had not the power
to do so. The prisoners having before been con'
victed of felony, he was obliged to send them for trial
The prisoners, who during the examination en'
ducted themselves in a most insolent manner by
making faces at and abusing the witnesses, were
then fully committed for trial.

MARYLEBONE.—ASSAULT UPON A LICENSED
VICTUALLER.—On Tuesday a man named John
Barham was brought before Mr. Mansfield, upon
the following charge, preferred against him by
Mr. Benjamin Dellar, landlord or the Vine Inn'
Fitzroy-terrace, Kentish-town.
It appeared from the evidence that on the pre-
vious night, between 11 and 12 o'clock, the prisoner,
and some companions went to the house and had
some brandy and water and ale ; when payment
was applied for it was refused, and prisoner used
towards complainant language of so abusive a un-
ture that he was compelled to eject him from the
premises. When outside thereof he continued hie
abuse, and while en the step of the door gave cow'
plainant two very severe blows, from the effects 01
which he was still suffering. Sergeant Butcher,
37 S, came up and conveyed him (prisoner) to the
station-house.
Mr Mansfield inflicted a fine of 405., in default of
payment a month's imprisonment with hard labour
in the House of Correction.