The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-17 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDOIN, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 17, 186 a,

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day).

SHOREDITCH COUNTY COURT.
(Before Mr. Dasent and a Jury.)
RAILWAY CROSSING GATES AND STRAYING CATTLE.-IM-
PORTANT CASE.-THURGOOD V. THE' GREAT EASTERN

RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action to recover .£35 damages, the value
of a mare, belonging to the plaintiff, which was killed by
an express train on the line belonging to the company.
Mr. Shaw (instructed by Mr. France, of Ponder's-end)
appeared for the plaintiff Mr. Barnard (instructed by Mr.
Ashley, of Charles-square, Hoxton) representing the
company.
Mr. Shaw, in opening the case to the jury, said that his
client was a market-gardener, of Ponder's-end, and he
owned a mare worth £35. Close to the field in which the
mare was kept was a railway crossing called the Duck Lees
crossing, and hero the defendants had put up a gate, but in
consequence of the insecurity of the fastening plaintiff's
mare went through and strayed upon the line on February
24 last, it being subsequently run over and killed by the
Norwich express train. For the loss of this animal the
present action was brought, and the learned counsel urged
that defendants would be clearly liable if it could be shown
that proper care had not been taken to put up a gate with
a proper catch to it.
Plaintiff said that the catch on the gate was very inse-
cure, and he had found it open on more than one occasion.
Amongst the witnesses a man named Wallis deposed
that it was no person's duty to keep the gate closed.
Mr. Barnard submitted that there was no case to go to
the jury.
Mr. Shaw urged that plaintiff had made out a case. He
quoted sec. 10 of 5 and 6 Vic., cap. 55, an act for the
regulation of railways, and contended that defendants were
bound to put up a gate which fastened itself if opened for
any purpose.
Mr. Barnard then pointed out that plaintiff had not
taken proper care of his own horse, which was a trespasser
on the defendants' line. He argued that the defendants
were only bound to put up a gate with a catch, and it would
be proved, if necessary, that a very secure gate had been
erected. The learned counsel referred the Court to
several cases.

His Honour ruled that there was no case for the jury,
and that the company were not bound to put a gate which
was self-fastening, it being sufficient that a gate to be
fastened by hand should be erected.
Plaintiff nonsuited, with costs.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
The name of the solicitor who appeared for the plaintiffyesterday was given as Leverson, instead of M. H.
Levirton.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE -OF PICKING POCKETS.

Nicando Cantelli, an Italian, and William Bodkin were
charged before Mr. Tyrwhitt with attempting to pick
pockets in Regent-street.
A little boy proved seeing the prisoners together in
Regent-street, and that Bodkin put his hand into several
ladies' pockets, the other prisoner covering Bodkin.
Police-constable Fitsch, 335 A, said that while on the
way to the station Bodkin said to the prisoner in French
" Don't say anything." The prisoners were then re
manded.

The following day a gentleman applied to the magistrate
to have Cantelli relieved from custody, as undoubtedly
there was some mistake, Cantelli being the son of a gentle-
man of high position in Florence, and having only come to
this country for pleasure, and having plenty of money at
his command. The application not being made to the
magistrate who first heard the case (Mr. Tyrwhitt) the
request was not complied with, and therefore Cantelli
remained in custody.
Mr. Sleigh, the barrister, instructed by Messrs. Humphrey
and Morgan, now attended for Cantelli, and said he would
be would be able to convince the magistrate of the mistake
which had been made in the case. Cantelli was a gentle-
man who was sent to this country by his parents to see
London, being furnished with a letter of credit upon the
banking house of Messrs. Krauetler and Melville. He
(Mr. Sleigh) would state how he became acquainted with
the other priscner, for undoubtedly in his company he was.
Cantelli, being unable to speak English, wandered about in
search of lodgings, and seeing a notice of a room to let in
Regent-street, Westminster, took the room, and there, un-
fortunately for him, the other prisoner was lodging.
Bodkin being acquainted with the French language,
they the more speedily became acquainted, and on
the day in question Bodkin asked Cantelli to take a walk
with him, and they went to Regent-street, and there what-
ever Bodkin did Cantelli was wholly innocent of. The
matter had been placed in the hands of Mr. East, the
Italian Consul General, who, having made strict in-
quiries and seen documents in Cantelli's possession as well
as the letter of credit, was convinced that Cantelli was
innocent, and had sent his secretary to the court to prove
the prisoner's respectability. Under these circumstances
he (Mr. Sleigh) felt no doubt the magistrate would dis-
charge him, as it would, no doubt, be a lesson to theyoung
man in future as to how he formed acquaintances with
strangers.
The secretary to the Italian Consul-General was then
called, and said that the Consul-General, as well as him-
self, were entirely convinced of Cantelli's innocence and
respectability; that his father occupied a high position in
France ; and that the young man could be in no want o.
money.

Mr: Tyrwhitt said he could well understand the case. A
foreigner, unacquainted with our language, had the misfor-
tune to go to a house like the one in question, and there
became acquainted with a person, and then all the rest fol-
lowed as a matter of course. The case showed the impru-
dence of hastily making acquaintances. He should dis-
charge Cantelli, and remand the other prisoner for a week,
the more especially so as the officer said he had no doubt
he was known.