The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-16 00:00:00

LATEST FROM PARIS.

---
A Second Edition of the Morning Post coataills
the following by Submarine Telegraph : •
PARIS, SATuituKL..
TheMoniteur publishes an amnesty for 137 P 017:
cal prisoners, amongst whom are several notam"
physicians, lawyers, and teachers.
MADRID, APRIL 12. f
Future 'Ministry—Egana (principal confidant °f
Queen Dowager Christina), Cacee, and San Lint
The Cabinet is not expected to be of long dam,
ti on.

The crisis still continues.
Catalania is quiet.

VIENNA, APRIL 15'
The French fleet arrived on the 4th April a
Salamina.

• CONSTANTINOPLE, APRIL 4.
News without any material change.
Rodichif expected.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THM DAY•)

(Sittings in Banco.)
THE NEW QUEEN'S COUNSEL.
Mr. Merewether, having been appointed coll.A.ligelo
learned in the law, was requested by the Court to I,*"
his seat within the bar, which he did accordingly.

WRITS OF ERROR.
The Master having read a new rule of court, requir;73,
that on the first paper day of each term, a list of cis,,
in which writs of error had been filed should be laid
fore the court,
Lord Campbell said the object of the rule was to Pret:
vent abuses which had arisen under the Act of Parliaolev,
which allowed writs of error to be brought in certaip cap "-„
and enabled defendants, who were imprisoned or seie
tenced to imprisonment, to be admitted to bail Whif
those writs were in operation. He was sorry to
that this had been an instrument of very great follut
The practice had been to bring writs of error Nvit°
any reasonable cause ; then the defendant, after beicirl'
0,
admitted to bail, never surrendered, but some fro3l
lent and corrupt negotiation was entered into beto'eir
him and the prosecutor, and then the prosecutor, in co
sideration of a sum of money, omitted to join in err°r
whereupon judgment was given to reverse the Pcir
'lll3 went pronounced against the defendant.
had been done on various occasions and front
return made to the two houses of Parliament, it grs
appeared that in hardly any instance since the act is.j,
passed, had the defendant, who was admitted to
surrendered. The object of the present rule was, tbe:
fore, to aid the bill now before Parliament for the P.
vention of such abuses, the Master being now requi"l!
on the first paper of every term to wake out a list
the cases in which writs of error had been issued,4
that the court would have under its view what had totp
place upon these writs, and would be in a positionto
adopt such steps as they might think necessary for
prevention of such abuses in future.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.—EXPARTE BOLT. Aft,
Sir Frederick Thesiger said he was instructed by 'ii
Rolt, one of her Majesty's counsel, to apply fora
to show cause why a criminal information should ea"tho
filed against Mr. J. M. Clayton, an attorney in to,
county of York. Mr. Clayton, who was personally ir
known to Mr. Rolt, in the month of January last
stituted a suit in the Court of Chancery by filing a ;1130
for the specific performance of an agreement entered 'Ai
by the clerk of Mr. Clayton, as his agent, with a Per d
named Illingworth, respecting the lease to the latter 0
some lands and buildings. Affidavits were put Woo
both sides—the defendant, Illingworth, alleging 61
he was induced to sign the agreement withouti3,ll
contents of it being made known to him. Mr. ill/
was retained as counsel for the defendant ; and aft
whole circumstances were laid before him, it aPP•„sti
quite evident to him that the suit could have been 1;41
tuted for no substantial benefit, and that it was ad li!
improper, useless, and vexatious proceeding ; art otil'
considered that, as Mr. Clayton was a solicitor, it 6 i4l
have been brought only with the object of obtai,
costs. The case was heard before Vice-Chancellorlli
on the 15th of February, and Mr. Rolt then took 011
sion to give expression to these opinions, which
strictly warranted by the facts disclosed in the affiulooo
The results was, that the Vice-Chancellor dial:ea:oo/1
the bill, expressing at the same time his 1,i,,a, i
that it was an unprecedented and improper pro.W"ifo
Shortly after the case was disposed of, Mr. Roltreee,„,/
a letter from Mr. Clayton, complaining of the 34tle
tions he had made, denying on his honour as a gtbeo
man their truth, and demanding afull retractationei 030
from the learned counsel. Mr. Rolt replied on theti;i4
Feb., saying he was not conscious of stating anYfiiii,
beyond the scope of his professional duty, and do Iv"
any correspondence on the subject. This breo
another letter from Mr. Clayton on the Ist IVI-011ejs °I ,
which he said he had placed the matter in the IP; of/
a friend, adding that in taking this course he would p., it'
the satisfaction of knowing he had done every tb,i'v
his power in moderation to induce him to grant ' foie:
partition which he thought no gentleman should refill/
Upon the receipt of this, Mr. Rolt consulted one ° oel,
friends at the bar, one of her. Majesty's °bud
who thought that as he had only acted in the , 0 0
discharge of his duty, it would be impossible for fi..011/,
make any apology, and that he ought to Ake--".nd
to be involved in a quarrel. Subsequently a frle 01
Mr. Clayton, a person named Hopkins, called aid
e
chambers of Mr. Rolt and required an friend and
ler,l
him, but he adopted the advice of his
„ Inie_ll .., deg-
fused to give any, whereupon Mr. Hopkins riy re
him to name his friend. Mr. Rolt very prOPeA tot,
plied, that if he was troubled any further in the iii lid
the only friend he would refer to would be the KlOOl
magistrate. It appeared that on three several on 0
afterwards, Mr. Clayton himself called at the ellarnjei/
but he did not see Mr. Rolt, he being then engagee
the Court of Chancery. On the 10th of March, Mr. ct,V'
however, received another letter from Mr. Clayton),. ,e)
from Pontefract, and this contained the libel which
complained of. It was to the following effect :---
toil
" I have called three times a your chambers, es y° fit)
no doubt, aware, for the purpose of having an intervi"„io
you, my object being to tell you, that you are a lierg"ji
coward ; and I now beg to assure you that I can . Pt,
language sufficiently strong to convey to your in:o,o ioo;
the thorough and unqualified contempt that I feel farf alTherefore, you can have no doubt as to the object o{
letter."
Rol''
The learned counsel stated, in conclusion, that "sol'E'
munication had been sent to Mr. Clayton of gr•
or
intention to make this application to the Court, in
Co
that he might have an opportunity of taking a "
which would render it unnecessary.