The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-26 00:00:00

NOVEL AND IMPORTANT QUESTION AS TO LEGAL

_ --
DOCUMENTS.-IIIRIISSELL V. JACKSON. --
In this case Mr. Cobham appeared on behalf of the plain-
tiff to ask for a renewed certificate from this court of the
original judgment, to be forwarded to the Southwark Court,
to enable the plaintiff to continue the proceedings in that
district, but, unfortunately, the certificate was lost, and the
officials considered that they could not issue a second sum-
mons, but on application to his honour leave was given to
apply. Mr. Cobham urged that as the lost certificate could
not by any means be usedtto the prejudice of any one; an-
other might be granted on payment of the costs, as a new
certificate would simply revive the right of the plaintiff
Defendant had had the benefit of the delay.
His Honour conferred with Mr. Osgood, the chief clerk
and Mr. Ackman, the chief bailiff, and on referring to the
Act of Parliament he expressed his regret that he eould not
interfere—one order had been granted, and the Court had
no power to grant a second. The decision does not absolve
the plaintiff from his liability, but the proceedings must be
begun again.

POLICE-THIS DAY.

GUILDHALL.

CHARGE AGAINST A HUSBAND.-_A dirty looking man,
named Hiscock, appeared to answer a summons charging
him with ill-treating his wife.

Caroline Hiscock, a poor woman, evidently in very bad
health, said the prisoner was her husband, and the cause
of her appearing against him was that he was in the habit,
and had been ever since March last, of grossly ill-treating
her. The assault of which she had present to complain of
was committed on her in consequence of her interfering to
prevent the prisoner from indecently Washing his daughter, a
girl of 14 years of age. He used to get some water in a pie-
dish, and then was the lower part of her body in a most in-
decent manner. He had taken the girl away from her
home, and she did not know where he had placed her.
When she asked him what had become of the girl, he told
her he had ,promised her a situation, and if she wanted to
know more she would have to " rip him up." She went in
bodily fear of him, as he had threatened to swing on the
gallows for her.

Alderman Besley—What have you to, say to the extra-
ordinary charge of washing your daughter ?

Complainant—lt is not the first time, sir; he has done
the same thing with other and older children.
Prisoner—l washed them for the benefit of their health.
I'm too good a father to 'em, that I am. When I lived at
Barnet there was'nt a family there that was up to mine for
health.

Alderman Desley—But why do you ill use your wife, she
seems very unwell.

Prisonser—l didn't do anything to her, she says I gave
her a black eye, but it don't seem like it to look at her.
Why she looks like she does at present is because she's
been to all the hospitals in London.
Alderman Besley—That is still a greater reason why you
should not illtreat her. Where have have you placed your
daughter.

Prisoner—lv'e got her a situation to wait on an invalid
lady in Northampton-street, Curtain-road, but I don't
think she'll be strong enough for the place. As to quarrel-
ing with my wife, why most men do that; so that's
nothing. I love my children too much—that's my fault.
Alderman Beeley—l shall remand this case, in order
that your daughter and the other children may attend this
court and answer some questions I shall put to them.
The complainant—Oh, thank you, sir; that is just what
I wanted.

The poor woman, who had been compelled to sit during
.he whole of the case, then with difficulty left the court.

WESTMINSTER.

-----
A LADY'S " LARK."—Miss Ellen Summers, s fashion-
ably-attired young woman, was charged with knocking
and ringing at doors without lawful excuse.
William Watts, 253 B, said that a little before one this
morning he was on duty in 0 vington-square, when he saw
the defendant in company with another lady and two gen-
tlemen. She suddenly left them, and going to 3, 0 ving-
ton-terrace, knocked violently at the street door. She left
there and then went to 9, Ovington-terrace, where she also
knocked loudly. She then went to 17 and 29 Ovington-
square, and rung the bells violently. Witness then went
up and took her into custody.
Mr. Arnold—Did she say anything ?
Witness, yes, air. When I asked her why she had been
knocking and ringing at the doors, she replied that she
had done it for " a lark."
Mr. Arnold—Was she sober?
Witness—She was not intoxicated, but she had taken
something.

Mr. Arnold (to defendant j- have you to say to
this ?

Defendant--I am really very sorry, sir, for what I have
lone.

Mr. Arnold—This sort of thing might have been very
amusing to you, and probably was ; but in all likelihood
was not very agreeable to those who, by your conduct,
were disturbed in their night's rest.
Policeman—l have seen the proprietors of three of the
houses out of the four at which she knocked and rung, and
have learned that three of them were not only disturbed
but alarmed at the knocking.
Prisoner —I am very sorry.

Mr. Arnold—You are fined 205., and in default committed
for 14 days.