The Sun.
London, England, 1862-04-23 00:00:00

LAW---THIS DAY.

Share Railways.

Closing
Price.

Business dont'

100 Atlantic & SCLawrenee
~,. j Bom.,Baroda&Cent Ind
"A' j Gu. 5 per cent.
203 Buffalo and LaKe Huron
200 Do. New
10 Do. Preference .... • •
100 1 Bullalo,Brant,&Godrich
6 p. et. bds.
July 1,. 1 1872
100 Do. do. 1873
100 Do. do. June 1, 18:4
5 Clcut ta. ec,S. Ea stn. (Li , ;
20 Cape Town & Dock Scrip
173 Demerara,
stock Eastn. Bengal gu. 6 p 0
stock East Indian, Rm. 5 P. C.
20 Do. do. G- Ext.. • -
stock Grand Trunk of Canada
100 Do. 6 per cent. Pref
100 Do. 2d Pref. 6 per et
100 Do. 6 per et. Debentr
100 Do. 7 per cent. 1862 .
100 Do. dr 1867

THE CASE OF MR, F. W. WINDHAM.
Loßns JUSTICES' COURT (THIS DAY).
Their lordships this morning delivered judgment in the
petition presented by Mr. F. W. Windham, praying that
the promoters of the suit of the late legal proceedings
against him might be called upon to pay the costs incurred.
Lord Justice Knight Bruce said the petition they now
had to dispose of was one presented by Mr. William Fre-
derickiWindham, who had been alleged to be a person of un-'
,sound mindi but by a verdict of a jury he had been found
not so. Mr. Windham was the only child of a deceased
gentleman formerly resident in Norfolk, and the mother of
the petitioner it appeared had contracted a second marriage
during Mr. Wm. Fredk. Windham's minority. The young
gentleman appears to have uncles and aunts maternally and
paternally, and he appears to have been a personof eccentric
habits. With respect to the early training of Mr. Windham
the Court considered that he had not been judiciously
brought up. In the latter part of the August of last year
he went through the ceremony of marriage under circum-
stances which it was not necessary to describe. Imprudent
would be too weak an expression; for a marriage so start-
ling appeared to be impossible or incredible. In the fol-
lowing November 15 persons, all connected with Mr. W. F.
Windham, including three gentlemen who were the
guardians of the young man, applied for a commission to
inquire into the state of mind of Mr. Windham. That
application was opposed on his part, but at the same time
it was prayed that if the commission was granted it might
be tried before a jury. After considering the affidavit that
had been placed before them, the Court thought it right to
grant the prayer of the petition, and accordingly the in-
quiry was ordered. Previous to that step the Court had
directed that a medical gentleman should see Mr. Wind-
ham on its behalf, one of whom the Court was in the habit
of consulting and referring to in cases of such a character,
and the report of the gentlemen was such as to render an
interview between Mr. Windham and their lordships
wholly superfluous. It would have been inconsistent to
their lordship., and to society, if the inquiry had been
refused. Inquiry having been decided, a long trial took
place before a jury, during which 48 witnesses were ex-
amined on the part of the original petitioners, and 91 on the
part of Mr. Windham. That number appeared to be ex-
cessive, but' the Court could not say it was too small, and
after Mr. Windham had appeared in person before the
Master in Lunacy and the jury for examination, the result
arrived at was a verdict that he was not a person of un-
sound mind. The verdict was signed by 15 of the jury-
men, more than a sufficient number to make it a legal verdict,
but in accordance with a communication addressed to the
Master by the Court, a statement was received by which it
was found that seven of the jury dissented from the finding.
The main object of the present pnceeding was to charge
the original petitioners, or some of them, with the costs of
that inquiry. The application was based, not only on the
verdict, but on the ground that at that inquiry the peti-
tioners had brought forward evidence documentary and
oral, exaggerated and inaccurate, which they either knew
or might have asserted to be so. The petitioner did not
pet
i
tailol endegr
se, ma
nadl i eit
ao
pr
pbeaadr
efda ittoh
tohne tchoenpr
ta rtthoaft
not h es
no r original
feel-
ing had been made out, neither did the Court see
any reason to censure the original petitioners
for that which took place during the long and
painful inquiry, nor did the Court see any ground
for blaming the original petitioners, that they did not bring
forward more evidence. The facts then and now undis.
puted, in the opinion of the Court, were more than suffi•
cient to render it their plain and inevitable duty to direct
the inquiry; and if they had hesitated to do so, the Court
would, in his opinion, 'have greatly erred. With regard to
the verdict he would say nothing, but he was satisfied that
if, upon the day of making the application for the commis-
sion, there bad been before the Court the whole of the evi •
dence adduced at the trial, he would not have been less
strongly convinced than he was that it was the duty of the
Court to make the order. Assuming, however, that the
verdict of the jury was right, he was of opinion that in all
the facts now before them, the presentation of the ori-
ginal petition and its prosecution hero and before a jury
were -acts pet fectly consistent with the petitioner's duty,
legal and moral, towards Mr. W. F. Windham and also to
society. As to General Windham not being called, he
considered that circumstance quite immaterial, considering
what the other evidence was before the Court. His lord-
ship considered the present demand for costs without foun-
dation ; but it must be remembered that if Mr. Windham
had incurred a heavy expanse in resisting the pro-
ceedings, although the jury had found him to
be a person of, sound mind, it must be
considered that his own acts and conduct were the
cause of those proceedings which were painful to himself
and also to others. He was convinced that every one of the
22 gentlemen that composed the jury were only animated
with the desire to do their duty. He would conclude his
remarks by saying that the whole conduct of the Master
during the progression of the trial, cruelly painful and
wearisome, was characterised by judgment and sound dis-

68 70-
101 i 104
6 6d

8! 9}
83 86
82 85
81 81
5 r
1. p

104 102
10 g 4 109,1
24 25
70 74
61 63
90 45
45 IS
37 10
37 40
1014 1021
pr p
101 102
14 14
4
102 101
93 95
03 95
1014 102 i
94 96
91 93

. AO
Do. do. 1872. ..
'Gt.lndiaPenin.gua.sp.c.
Do. New gua. 5 p. c...
Gt. South.of India (Lim
guaranteed 5 per cent.
IGt. W. of Canada Shares
Do. New
Do. 8 p.c.

'73 wlth't opt.

.. Lop,
Jo. 5i p. c. do. '77 do. .
Do. • 1878
Hadras guar., 5 p. c.
Do. 4 p. c. Extension
Do.4h do
Melb.Corp. 8 p. o. Bnds
?iewßrunswick ac Canda
Ry.d:Land(Lim.)g.t3pc
Class A. Capital Share
Do. do. Land do

5 7

Do. do. B Capital -do. ..
Do. do. Land do. ......
1
Scande .....• .• • • zi.'
Do. Punjaub • e, g
5
Do. Do. -•.• • - ,
Do. Indus. St. Flo. 5,21
Trinidad (Lim.) Scrip..

4 6
103
_lO4

20i if 13
20i
69 100
0

Prisoner—l was tipsy, and am very sorry.

The constable—He was not drunk.

_ .
Theprisoner was then committed for trial.

THAMES, THIS DAY.

cretion.
The petition of Mr. IVindham was therefore dismissed,
each party having to pay their own casts.
Lord Justice Turner also gave his judgment which was
the same in effect.
Mr. Bacon said great expense had been incurred by:the
notice that the evidence before the jury would be used be-
fore their lordships, and counter affidavits were therefore
necessary. He asked for costs on their part of the

•
petition.
Lord Justice Turner thought the learned gentleman
ought not to press the point.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

FORD V. LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY.

Mr. Bovill said this was an action tried at Guildhall. It
arose out of the accident on the South-Western Railway,
near Merton, when, on account of the injuries sustained by
the plaintiff, the jury gave him £1,500 damages. He had
now, on the part of the railway company, to move for a
new trail.

The Court refused to disturb the verdict.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
LINDSAY V. LEATHLEY.I

Mr. Bovill said he had to move in a case which was tried
before the Lord Chief Justice, at Guildhall. The learned
gentleman was informed that as his lordship had been called
away to Italy by the illness of his sister, the application
must stand over, with others, which had been tried before
his lordship until next week.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)
PARRY V. BLAND.

This was an action to recover commission under the fol-
lowing curious circumstances :—Plaintiff is an attorney,
and in the course of his professional career had a client who
had availed himself of the benefits to be derived from the
jurisdiction of the Court of Bankruptcy. The plaintiff and
defendant, who is an accountant, then agreed together that
if he (the plaintiff) obtained defendant the "job," to make
out the bankrupt's accounts, he (the defendant) would
allow the plaintiff ene-lourth of the amount. Accordingly
the plaintiff did get defendant the job, and the bill, amount
ing to £22 10s., plaintiff sought to recover £5 12s, 6d.

His Honour expressed considerable surprise at an attorney
making such a bargain with an accountant, and Mr. Parry
said it was a matter of every day occurrence. In fact, as
countants and auctioneers were now sending oiroulars to
attorneys upon this very subject
Mr. Abrahams (for defendant) protested against such a
statement. The profession generally, and the great body
of accountants of standing set their faces against such
bargains.

Hia Honour (to the plaintiff)—The bankrupt was your
client.

Plaintiff—He was.

His Honour—And, of course, you would recommend
that the bill should be paid.
Plaintiff—lt could be taxed.
His Honour—lt will be a very nice thing for clients to
know of such bargains.

StlN,' LONDON, WEDNESDAI EVENING, APRIL 23, 1862

POLICE---THIS DAY.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET, THIS DAY.

In answer to a question by Mr. Woolrych, the witness
said that her sister had been convicted of some offence, and
Mrs. Finn "chucked her sister in her face." .

Police-sergeant Cox, No. 45 K, and other witnesses said
they saw the prisoner rush out of his house, seize the
woman Cummings by the hair of the head, kick her and
jump upon her.

Mr. Woorych sentenced him to six months' imprisonmen
and hard labour.

GAROTTING A COMMERCIAL TRAVELLER.—Wm. Lee, a
tailor, of 6, Hanover-place, Hanover-square, was charged
before Mr. Tyrwhitt with assaulting, by garotting, Mr.
George Heywood (commercial traveller to a City house),
of 34, Upper Barnsbury-street, Islington,
Mr. George Heywood said yesterday evening, about nine
o'clock, I was passing along Argyll-place, intending to
make a call in Oxford•street and then take an omnibus
home, when the prisoner, who had a companion with him,
suddely put his arm round my neck and gripped me with a
similar pressure to that used by horsedealers when trying
the wind of a horse. The prisoner held me very tightly,
causing me a deal of suffering. I got the prisoner's hand
from my throat, and then the prisoner's companion pulled
the prisoner away from me, and they walked off till they
got to Oxford-street. I felt quite unnerved, and did not
call for assistance till they got to Oxford-street, when, as
they commenced running, I called "Police" and gave an
alarm, and the prisoner was secured by two gentlemen.
The Chief Clerk—Was any attempt made on your
pockets ?

Mr. Heywood—l cannot say. I was nearly suffocated,
and cannot say whether the prisoner did anything with his
other hand while he had his arm round my throat. The
grip the pr soner gave me was in the centre of my throat,
The Chief Clerk—Did you miss anything ?
Mr. Heywood—l did not.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—Was it done suddenly?
Mr. Heywood-ii-Yes, momentarily. The prisoner came
up to me unawares.

Frederick Buckingham, 328 A, said about a quarter..
past nine last night I was in Oxford-street when the pro-
se,mtor came up to me out of breath, and said the prisoner,
who was being held by two gentlemen, had attempted to
garotte him in Argyll-place_ I asked the prisoner why he
had done it, and he said he knew nothing of the affair, and
then abused the prosecutor, and said he only wanted to get
up a charge.

Barns, the gaoler—The prisoner is a drunken, idle tailor,
and has been charged with assaults here.

Mr. Tyrwhitt— It is a most dangerous thing, and I shall
send the case to the sessions. I shall mark these assaults
with all the severity I can.

Mr. Heywood—l feel it my duty to press the case, as
',here have been so many of these cases lately.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—l quite agree with you, sir,

AC GRAVATED ASSAULT.—John Finn, a very big man,
about 40 years of age, who is better known by the soubri-
quet of Paddy Finn, was brought before Mr, Woolrych,
charged with assaulting a young woman named Mary Ann
Cunmings, the wife of Joseph Cummings, of Queen-street,
Rotherhithe.

It appears d from the evidence of the complainant, who
carried a fine child in her arms, that it was christened yes-
terday, and in the evening she was passing down Old
Gravel-lane, Ratcliff-highway, on her way to the Thames
Tunnel, and saw the prisoner, his wife, and others having
a row there. Mrs. Finn " chucked her sister in her face,"
and said there goes one of your -, and the prisoner
immediately seized her by the hair of her hea3, dragged
her some distance, and then struck her a violent
blow on her head with his fist and knocked her
down, and, when she was down, kicked her and jumped
upon her, and she was rendered insensible by this treat-
ment.