The Sun.
London, England, 1862-08-15 00:00:00

TliEl SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVE NING, AUGUST 15, 1862.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,

HOME CIRCUIT.—GUILDFORD, Aug. 14.
:Before Mr. Baron Bramwell and a Common Jury.)

HAND V. SMITH.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine and Mr. Pearce were
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Garth and Mr. Inderwick
for the defendant.

The plaintiff in this action was an attorney in
Coleman-street, and he brought it against the de-
fendant in order to recover damages for a breach
of agreement that he had made relative to
the hire of some apartments in Regent-street.
The declaration alleged that the defendant had
agreed to let the plaintiff the apartments in ques-
tion in his house in Regent-street, for a period of
three years, and to provide him with proper attend-
ance, and also the use of a bath-room, and that he
had neglected to do so.
From the evidence of the plaintiff, it appeared
that in the beginning of 1860 he made an arrange-
ment to occupy certain apartments in a house of
which the defendant was the lessee,
in Regent-
street, and in which house he himself also lived,
and he furnished the apartments and provided a
bath-room. Before the arrangement was completed
he represented that he told the defendant that a
lady was in the habit of visiting him, and he wished
to know whether this would make any difference ;
and the defendant, according to his statement, re-
plied that he was himself a bachelor, and plaintiff
was a widower, and therefore he should not offer
comfortablya n y objection. f 0
r,
some Everything
time,
the lady visited plaintiff
without any objection being made, and the parties
were on friendly terms ; but it seemed that in 1861
the defendant married, and left the house in Regent-
street, and a young lady named Kent took posses-
subijuercntisthoed all
as sortsa sitting of
posses-
sion of that portion of the house he had before lived
in. From this time, according to plaintiff's evidence,
he was
room,annoyance,an hisd
he
e was
bath-
room was
unable to use it, and it appeared that upon one oc-
casion when he attempted to force his way into this
bath-room, two policemen were sent for by Miss
Kent, and he was given in charge. It was also al-
leged that upon one occasion a lump of fat was
found stuck upon a wineglass that was sent up for
his use, and that when friends came to visit him no
one answered the door, and the present action was
brought to recover damages for these alleged
breaches of the agreement that had been entered
into by the defendant.
The Plaintiff, upon being cross-examined by Mr.
Garth, said he was quite sure he told the defendant
that ladies were in the habit of visiting him, and
that he made no objection. A lady used to come
occasionally and stay with him all night, and Miss
Kent objected to bring the lady's breakfast in the
morning, and said she was only bound to provide
him with it, and objected to his being visited by
the lady he referred to.
Some evidence was then given relating to the
plaintiff being deprived of the use of his bath-room,
and also to show that some gentlemen who had
called to see him had rung the bell two or three
times, and it was not answered, and they were
obliged to go away.
Mr. Garth, in addressing the jury for the defen-
dant, said he was surprised that a jury should have
been troubled to decide a case like this, which he
could not help describing as one of the most trum-
pery character, and which ought never to have been
brought into a court of justice. He said he should
prove that the defendant never sanctioned the pro-
ceeding referred to by the defendant, and when he
had let a portion of the house to Miss Kent, who
was a most respectable young lady, she would not,
of course, submit to such conduct, and she was per-
fectly justified in refusing to wait upon the person
in question, and he contended that this was no
breach of the defendant's agreement.
The defendant was then called as a witness, and
he denied that tne conversation mentioned by the
plaintiff, relating to the visits of the lady in ques-
tion, at all events in the sense represented by him,
ever took place; and Miss Kent also stated that
upon the plaintiff saying that he was occasionally
visited by a lady, she distinctly asked him the ques-
tion, whether the lady was such a one as he should
introduce to his own children ? And he replied
" Certainly." Other evidence was also given to
show that the plaintiff was always attended to pro-
perly, and that the only objection that was made
was to wait upon the lady,whose presence was com-
plained of.
Baron Bramwell, in summing up,said it appeared
to him that such a case as this might have been
very well arranged without being brought into a
court of justice, but as it was before them they must
deal with it, and the jury must decide the amount of
damage the plaintiff had sustained.
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff. Damages £5.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin and a Special Jury.)
THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. BUCHANAN AN

ANOTHER.

This was an action to recover £6O for demurrage

upon a vessel called the Nueva Engracia.
Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Garth were for the
plaintiffs, and Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., and Mr. Horace
Lloyd were for the defendants.
The plaintiffs in this action are ship-brokers,
carrying on business in Leadenhall-street, and the
defendants are engineers in Bucklersbury, and
they have extensive works at Aberdeen. It ap-
peared that in the spring of the year they were
shipping a quantity of machinery to Manilla, and a
Spanish vessel, called the Nueva Engracia, was en-
gaged for that purpose, and a portion of the ma-
chinery was placed on board ; but it seemed there
was some delay in the final completion of the work,
and it was intimated the vessel could not be de-

•
tained beyond the 4th of May, and as the defend-
ants were very anxious that the machinery should
be sent out in the present season, negotiations took
place between the plaintiffs, who were the agents
for th 6 vessel, and the defendants, and ultimately
an agreement was drawn up fixing certain rates to
be paid for demurrage if the vessel were detained
after the 28th of April. Eventually, it appeared
that the vessel sailed without the machinery, and the
defendants then resisted the payment of the claim
for demurrage, upon the ground that the agreement
had not been acted up to, and that the vessel had

sailed three days before the period had expired; and
they also commenced legal proceedings against the
plaintiffs for the loss they had sustained by reason
of the machinery not being shipped. The agreement
that was the basis of the undertaking between the
parties was merely written on a piece of paper in
pencil, and the defence that was set up to the pre-
sent action was that this paper had been altered ;
and there was a good deal of severe cross-exami-
nation of both the defendants upon this point, the
plaintiffs, of course, speaking most positively to the
fact that the paper was in the precise condition in
which they received it.
Mr. Bovill, when the defendant's case was nearly
completed, held a consultation with Mr. Hawkins
and the parties in the action, and he shortly after
wards addressed his lordship, and said he believed
that both parties were now satisfied that there had
been some mistake, and that some other paper had
been copied instead of the original agreement, and
this had led to the misunderstanding. It had, there-
fore, been arranged that all imputations should be
withdrawn on both sides—that all further litigation
in reference to the transaction should cease, and the
defendants would consent to a verdict for the
amount claimed.

Mr. Baron Martin said it was a very satisfactory
termination of the case; and the jury then re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-Aug. 8.

BOW-STREET.—ALLEGED ROBBERY IN A CAB.
—Aaron Hughes, a man of very respectable appear-
ance, was charged before Mr. Hall with stealing a
gold watch, chain, and appendages, valued at £24,
the property of Mr. Geo. Henry Garret, proprietor
of the Bull and Gate tavern, Kentish Town.
Mr. G. Lewis appeared for the defendant.
The prosecutor stated that after spending the
evening at the Woolwich-gardens, he proceeded in
a cab from the Shoreditch Station to Holborn,
where he stopped to have a glass of brandy and
soda-water, at about two o'clock in the morning,
leaving his cab at the door. The prisoner entered
the tavern shortly afterwards, and they got into
conversation and drank together for about an hour.
The prisoner said he lived in Clarendon-square, and
would avail himself of witness's cab to ride as far
as the Euston-road with him. They got into the
cab together and during the journey witness missed
his gold watch, which he remembered to have seen
just before getting into the cab. He at once accused
the prisoner of taking it. He replied, " Yes; it is
all right. I have got it." Witness expostulated
with him for having taken it, and he replied, .‘ The
girl had it, and if I had not taken it from her hand
you would have lost it." Witness told him that
nobody could have taken it but himself, and de-
manded its immediate return. He then gave it up,
but a portion of the chain (which had been broken
a
ut
the spring) and the appendages, consisting of
Thl4lo7fds, keys, a guinea, &c.—a portion of
mite
The valaud very highly—were still missing.
abo tTalteer declared that he knew nothing at all
and finding t:-_at he persisted in the
and afterwilv fitness gave the prisoner into custody,
other part off' saw saw a police-constable take the
the pocket of tZ:hain and the appendages from
In cross.exarnizsoner at the police-station.
He had
drunk. :enelvitness denied that he was
quantity of brandy ana'so%nking a considerable
affected him in the least. but it had not
sation with a female Whoa he aiat been in con'
his watch and chain quite ~,not know, but he
~4%, lifter that. He!

might have fallen asleep in the cab during the ride
with the prisoner to the Euston-road.
Police-constable Burgess, 83 E, corroborated the
evidence. The prisoner expressed his willingness
to be searched. Both the prosecutor and prisoner
had been drinking, but neither of them could be
said to be drunk.
Mr. Lewis, for the defence, said his client was a
gentleman, having a house in
and holding an appointment of
considerable imrortance in the Post-office service,
He had to accompany the trains carrying the mail-
nirleton respectable-s :
r,
bags and assist in sorting the letters ; and this would
u a
account for his being out so late, When the prose-
cutor complained of losing his watch the prisoner
found it on the seat, and he declares that he did not
, know the chain and appendages were in his pocket.
IThey must have dropped in as they sat side by side
in the cab.

- Prisoner—He was fast asleep when the cab got
to Euston -road.

Mr. Hall—That fact will hardly help you. It
rather shows the opportunity which was afforded
you of taking the property.
Prisoner—But I might have got out of the cab
without his knowing it. lam as innocent as an
unborn child. I have been eight years in the
Post-office service.

Mr. Hall said the case was a very clear one.
Although both parties had been drinking, the con-
stable said they both knew what they were about.
The case must certainly go for trial.
Mr. Lewis hoped bail would be accepted,
Mr. Hall—No, Mr. Lewis. You know what has
been said about bail lately. You can apply to the
judge.
Mr. Lewis—Can he have the money found upon
him ?
In answer to the magistrate the prosecutor said
he lost a sovereign and three half sovereigns, and it
appeared that a sovereign and two half sovereigns
were found on the prisoner : but the prosecutor
did not wish to press this against him, consequently
the money was given to the prisoner.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—REFRESHMENT
HOUSES.—Abraham Belasco, the keeper of a re-
freshment-house, 6, Panton-street, was put to the
bar before Mr. Tyrwhitt, having been apprehended
on a warrant, charged with unlawfully permitting
prostitutes to assemble in his house.
Mr. Edward Lewis was for the defendant.
Inspector "Walker, C division, said about 12
o'clock at night, about a fortnight back, he visited
the defendant's house, and found 16 prostitutes and
10 men there.
Mr. Tyrwhitt inquired how the inspector knew
the women were prostitutes?
The Inspector said he had seen them all welkin&
the streets and frequenting brothels. He called the
attention of the defendant to the women, and he
said they were waiting for their suppers. Ho visited
the house several times afterwards, up to 3 o'clock,
and found women and men there. Some of the
women were there when he made his first visit. He
pointed out this circumstance to the defendant, who
said he did not think the women were those he had
seen when he first came, but they should leave di-
rectly. There was no drunkenness or disorder in
the house at any period of the visits. There was a
poison stationed outside, who gave notice of the
approach of the police by ringing a bell. This of
course gave time to clear away evidence of disorder
or drunkenness, if any existed. All the women
were well dressed.
Mr. Edward Lewis said there was a second case
against the defendant; if it was taken one address
on his part would suffice.
Inspector Draper, C division, proved that he
visited the house on a subsequent occasion, and
found a number of prostitutes there. He spoke to
the defendant, who said those who had not ordered
refreshments should go. He went again the same
night, and found nine prostitutes and nine men, but
he could not say if any of the women were in the
house on his first visit. The women were having
either coffee or lemonade. He spoke to the defen-
dant, who said all the women had ordered some-
thing. He paid a third visit, and found eight pro-
stitutes in the room, but could not say if they were
there before. Spoke to the defendant again about
having prostitutes in his house, and he replied
"We are just going to close." The house was
not closed until past four o'clock. Every time he
visited the house he hoard a bell ring, in order to
give notice of his approach. The men, as well as
the women, were taking refreshments.
Police-constable 307 A, to a question by Mr.
Lewis, said he had seen nearly 100 prostitutes come
out of the Argyll Rooms within an hour, some ac-
companied by gentlemen.
Mr. E. Lewis would start by saying that when
the act was framed it was never contemplated that
convictions should take place in cases similar to
those now before the Court. It was true that the
Court of Queen's Bench had affirmed decisions of
the magistrate at this court, but the cases on which
the appeals had been founded were different, for in
the appeal case of Hannant and Belasco it was
proved there were more than 100 prostitutes as-
sembled in the house and none taking refreshment,
while in this case net more than 22 were present,
and all were taking refreshment. In the second ap-
peal case, Hannant and Barton, there were about
90 prostitutes collected, some of whom were there
for a considerable time.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—There is another case, which
states that's. magistrate might or might not con-
vict, according to his discretion. Had that case been
upset ?
Mr. Lewis—lt had not. The case referred to was
the Liverpool case, in which the magistrate, Mr.
Mansfield, had refused to convict, in which refusal
he was supported by Mr. Justice Erle and Lord
Campbell, who held that a keeper of a refreshment
house ought not to he convicted merely because he
served prostitutes with refreshment. If it was
not shown that the women were there for purposes
of prostitution, it was in the discretion of the magi-
strate to convict or not, as he might think fit. The
whole question had been repeatedly argued at that
court, and magistrates—among them the present
sitting magistrate—had refused to convict.
Mr. Tyrwhitt said, in the case sent by Mr. Knox
to the Queen's Bench, the question put to the judges
was th is—Was it right to convict on the evidence
before him? The judges answered in the affirmative.
In the other case where the magistrate had refused
to convict, the question put was this—Was the ma-
gistrate bound to convict ? Tne judges held that he
was not, it was a matter for the magistrate's discre-
tion. But ell cases must rest on their own merits. He
should look over the evidence with great care, and see
how far the cases recently before the Queen's Bench
bore on the cases before him. As far as dancing-
houses were concerned, there could be very little
doubt that women resorted to them to practice
their avocation, but, in the case of refreshment-
houses, women might certainly go there for mere
purposes 'of refreshment. There was a distinction
here which might fairly be pleaded, though cer-
tainly both places could be equally used for immo-
ral purposes, and be did not see that the question of
numbers made much difference. He would give the
whole matter careful consideration, and make up
his mind how far the two cases of appeal were to
operate on his final decision.
The defendant then entered into sureties to ap-
pear next week.

WESTMINSTER.—RIOT AND OUTRAGES BY
THE POLICE.—Police-constables J. Brundle, 195 B,
and George Sin nett,26o B, were charged with being
drunk, and committing a series of outrages.
William Turner, of 5, Ebury Farm-row, Pimlico,
of !pea!
whahl teaedigwht on Wednesdayasenvelopedina
nbiagnhdtagle,wsaasidg—oiAn
going
into Prince's-row, Pimlico, where I saw a mob and
the two defendants. Brundle came up to me and
showed fight, when I told him to go home like a
good mln.
Mr. Arnold—What do you mean by showing
fight ?
Compluinant—lie came up to me with his fists
doubled.

Mr, Arnold—Were the defendants in uniform ?
Complainant—They were, but not on duty, as
they had nothing
Mr. Arnold--Was there any disturbance ?
Complainant—None .but what they caused them-
selves before this.
Mr. Arnold—What next occurred ?
round their wrists.
Complainant—Brundle drew his truncheon and
hit me a violent blow on the head, which rendered
me senseless.
I was taken to the hospital and had
my wound dressed.
Mr. Arnold-- Were you doing anything at the
time he struck you?
Complainant—Nothin
Mr. Arg.
"d—llid he say anything
to you before
he struck you ?
Complainant—Not a word ; he was hitting right
and left at all about him.
Mr. Arnold—He said nothing to you ?
C9mPlainant—Nothing that I could understand
as spoken to me. He was using bad language.
In cress.e
, zarninatim by Mr. Smyth witness said
he..d id not Know whether Brundle had been knocked
down by anybody. Did not see anything thrown
at defendants. Heard one of the defendants say to
the other, ~ Let's have a row."
By Mr. Arnold—Brundle was very drunk. I
never had any dispute with the police. I was
never in a police court before to-day. I saw an'
other policeman there. I think he was the police-
man on duty. is
...4.0 was trying to get the two de-
fendants away. I was quite sober.
Mary Ann Boxall, of 9, Clifford's-row, Pimlico,
after detailing a conversation she had with Mrs.
Ball, her landlady, said—We were standing in
Clifford's-row, when the defendants came close
to uP, and Brundle took hold of my landlady and

hugged her in a very indecent manner. She re-
sisted, and would not allow him to cuddle her. She
lifted her hand and smacked him. He then let go
of her, and kicked her two or three times, calling
her bad names. The people.eried " Shame," and I
said " You're a vagabond, to treat a woman like
that." He took hold of me, and chucked me on the
other side of the road, I fell on the ground; he
made a kick at me, but I happened to roll over at
the moment and did not get much hurt by it. I tried
to get up, but he pushed me down again ; a crowd
collected and I got away. He then went to last
witness and struck him with his truncheon.
old—D id the defendant Sinnett do any-
Mr. Atli
thing ?
Complainant—He laid hold of Mrs. Ball. De-
fendants quite staggered, they were so tips'.
Brundle was like a madman.
Mr. Arnold'—as there a great disturbance ?
Complainant—There was a great riot; Brundle
was striking at every one,
In cross-examination complainant said—l saw
no one illusing the police. The people were run-
ning away from them. Brundle was knocking
every one down, men, women, and children. He
was acting like a man out of his senses.
By Mr. Arnold—l do not know either of the de-
fendants. I never had a dispute of any kind with
them. I would not come here, especially in my
present state, to tell a falsehood against any man.
I am in the family way and near my confinement.
Francis Brandon, 40, Queen-street, Chelsea, la-
bourer—l was standing at my street door last night,
talking to some friends, when Sinnett came up and
struck me a violent blow with his fist in the face,
Mr. Arnold—Was he in uniform at the time ?
Complainant—lle was.
Mr. Arnold—Did he say anything to you before
he struck you ?
Complainant—Not a word.
Mr. Arnold—Was there a crowd?
Complainant—Yes, 400 or 500 people.
Mr. Arnold—He struck you in the face you say ?
Complainant—Yes, a violent blow right across
the nose.
Mr. Arnold—Had you seen him before ?
Complainant—Yes, five or ten minutes before.
Air. Arnold—What was he doing then?
Complainant—Running about like a madman.
111 r. Arnold—Had you said anything to him pre-
vious to his striking you ?
Complainant—Nothing whatever.
Nothing in defendants' favour was elicited in
cross-examination. Witness said people were flying
in all directions to get out of the constables' way,
and the mob were crying out " Shame." The im-
proper conduct spoken of was going on for a quar-
ter of an hour.

There were several other witnesses to be exa-
mined, and as the time had arrived for the rising
of the Court,
Mr. Arnold said it would be necessary to adjourn
the further investigation of the case. He then in-
quired the condition of the defendants when
brought to the station.
Inspector Howard said they were both drunk.
In answer to further inquiry, Brundle had been
in the force fifteen months and Sinnett three months.
Mr. Arnold remanded them till Tuesday, and
said he would take sureties iu £2O each for their
appearance.
They were locked up.

THE BRITISH COLUMBIA OVERLAND
TBANSI7 COMPANY.

Mr. James Henson, the secretary to the British 1
Columbia Overland Transit Company, of 6, Cop-
thall-court, Throgmorton-street, was summoned be-
fore Alderman Finnis, at the Guildhall, yesterday,
to answer a charge of obtaining a sum of £42, by
means of false representations, with intent to de-
fraud Mr. Henry Isaac Collingwood.
Mr. Philbrick, instructed by Messrs. Prichard
and Collette, the solicitors to the company, con-
ducted the defence.
Mr. Harris said—l appear to-day on behalf o
Mr. Collingwood only, but there are in reality 33
persons in all preferring similar complaints, and
in order to arrive at the precise nature of the
charge it will be necessary to give a brief history
of the matter, commencing in the early part of
April last. In that month advertisements made
their appearance in the public papers, holding forth
that the British Columbia Overland Transit Com-
pany was an established fact; that a board of di-
rectors, bankers, brokers, and officers had been
appointed ; and that the arrangements for carrying
out the company's object, which was that of con-
veying passengers by a short route to British Co-
lumbia, via Canada, in six weeks, for £42 were
nearly completed, and that no application for a pas-
sage would be received after the 17th May. Ships
were advertised for to meet the requirements of
the company, and considerable discussion arose
among newspaper correspondents with regard to
the practicability of the undertaking ; but it was
ultimately stated that the secretary's explanation
had shown that the journey could be accomplished,
the result of which was that my client, Mr. Col-
lingwood, and 32 other gentlemen took passage for
Canada, thence to be forwarded to their destination
in British Columbia. The impracticability of the
scheme has been mooted in Parliament, and what
seems most extraordinary is that the company have
been noticed in tae money article of the Times, of
May 23, to the following effect :
" Various communications have been received ex-
pressing doubts whether a project which has been
published by a British Columbia Overland Transit
Company, for the conveyance of passengers to the
gold fields of British Columbia across Canada to the
Rocky Mountains in five weeks, may not result in
severe disappointment and suffering to the parties
who may be tempted to engage in it, and a complaint
has been made in the Scotsman that the scheme has
been widely advertised in the North in a manner
that may entice many emigrants, without the names
of any responsible persons being given, either as pro-
jectors or directors. This is a case,' it is observed,
in which there is a special need to know under
whose encouragement and responsibility the affair
is undertaken and recommended.' On that point,
however, there has in London, at all events, been
no reserve, the company, when it was introduced
on the 4th of April last, with a proposed capital of
half a million, and power to increase it to a million,
having presented the following list :—Board of
Directors.—The Hon. F. H. Fit zhardinge Berkeley,
I ALP., Victoria-squ ire, Director City Insurance
t Company ; Frederick Mangles, Esq., Gresham-
house, Oid Broad-street ; Edward Loder, Esq., 23,
Laurence Pountney-lane, and 19, St. George's-
street, Westminster, Director Colonisation Assur-
ance Corporation; Thomas Southgate, Esq. (South-
gate and Mitchell). Yates-street, Victoria, Vancou-
ver's Island ; H. Edgecumbe Nicholls, Esq., Sum-
merseat, Bootle, Liverpool; Henry Penton Jadis,
Esq., Board of Trade ; Robert Green, Esq. (R.
Green and Co.), 24, Mortimer-street, Cavendish-
square, and Milton Lodge, Notting-hill ;S. Gam-
, bots, Esq., Yates -street, Victoria, Vancouver's
Island ; D. Brodie Campbell, Esq., Bury-street, St.
James's ; Samuel Starkey, Esti., New Broad-street,
E.C., and Denmark-hill ; Alex. Thurburn, Esq.,
Penge, Surrey, Director of South Wales Railway.
Company; Edward Langley, Esq.. (Langley Bro-
thers), Yates-street, Victoria, Vancouver's Island ;
Fredk. Carden Walker, Esq., 33, St. James's-square,
Pall-mall; N. J. Fenner, Esq. (firm of N. J. Fen-
ner, Millwall), Crooms-hill, Blackheath ; Charles
Barnard, Esq., Margaretting, Essex, Secretary,
James Henson, Esq.
The whole of those correspond with the
list in the prospectus, and if such a paper as
the 7iines could be so imposed upon, could
it be wondered at that Mr. Collingwood and
his fellow-passengers were deceived. On the
17th of May the payment of the passage money
was completed, and it is upon the receipt then
given by the defendant that I rely to establish a
charge of false pretences. On the 29th of May
I the passengers proceeded to Glasgow, and thence by
steamer to Quebec, and all went well until they
reac'ted St. Paul's, where they were to have met an
emigrant escort train, for the purposes of commenc-
ing the overland transit portion of the journey.
They found, however, that no provision was made
by the company of any kind whatever either to for-
ward them to British Columbia, to send them home
again, or even to supply their necessities while de-
tained at St. Paul's. The consequence was that
several who had the means returned, and others
who had not were left encamped under canvas out
in the wilds some miles from St. Paul's in a most
deplorable condition. The company's agent in
Canada had no funds, and the firm who could have
I forwarded the party to George Town and Red River
declined to
accept the u thietny's drafts. Under
(
these circumstances Mr. n,lollingwood was deputed
and furnished with powers of attorney from his
fellow Passengers to return and seek redress for the
non-performance of the contract by the company ;
but on arriving iu this country he found the offices
shut up, and the company gone, no one knew where.
He then applied to the solicitors, and ascertained
hat their names and those of many of the directors
had been esed without, their authority. It was,
however, duo
•
, lug his name had been used, he at once repudiated,
in the most public manner, all connexion with the
company. On the other hand, a member of Parlia-
ment, when the subject was discussed in the House
of Commons,
omitted to disavow the position as-
signed him
in the company's advertisements and
prospectuses. The company was originally held
forth as one of limited liability, but it afterwards
dropped the word " and has never even
been registered. The word " company" has also
been omitted in the name 0,4 the receipt ; but that
I. shall show is only part of the trick by -which these
gentlemen have been defrauded, for although they