The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-07 00:00:00

LA W INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, DEC. G.
RUNNING DOWN AT SEA, AND LOSS OF LIFE.-DOWELL

V. THE GENERAL STEAM NAVIGATION COMPANY.
This was an action brought to recover damages to an
amount exceeding 2,0001. against the defendants, for
the loss of the collier brig Harewood, run down on the
night of the 4th October steam-vessel at he mouth of the
Thames, by the Trident, , owing to the
alleged negligence of the defendants' servants, according
to the plaintiff's case. Six of the lives of the crew un-
fortunately perished on the occasion, and the only lives
saved were those of Captain Graham, and a member of
the crew, named Mason.
The defendants pleaded "Not Guilty."
Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Bramwell, Q.C.,
and Mr. Bovill, appeared for the plaintiff ; Sir F. Thesi-
ger, Q.C.,Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Q.C., Mr. Knowles, Q.C.,
and Mr. Wilkin, conducted the case for the. defence.
The case occupied the Court from an early hour of the
sitting up to six o'clock, and had not then terminated.
The evidence for 'the plaintiff was closed, but that for the
defendants was only taken in part, when the Court rose.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS—DEc. 6.
CLEGG V. MOSS.
This was an action to recover damages for an assault,
and the defendant pleaded—not guilty.
Mr. Serjeant Thomas and Mr. Hawkins were for the
plaintiff ; and Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., for the defendant.
It was stated that both the plaintiff and the defendant
in this action were betting men ; and the dispute in
question arose out of some betting transactions.
The plaintiff was called as a witness, and said he had,
some time ago, given the defendant 11. to lay out for him
upon the horse Haco, which was to run for the Cesare-
witch, and which horse won. Thereupon the plaintiff
gave a person named Scales an order upon the defendant
for 305., the amount of another debt. On the evening
of the 13th October last, the plaintiff was playing at
cribbage in a public-house in Newgate-market, and the
defendant came in. The plaintiff said, " Well, Moss,
we have brought it off at last ;" and the defendant re-
plied, "What do you mean, you b— scoundrel ; how
dare you make use of my name ?" This was in refer-
• ence to the order given to Scales, and the plaintiff re-
plied that he had not made use of the defendant's name,
inasmuch as the defendant owed him 351. or 401. upon
the Cesarewitch.
The defendant then knocked the plaintiff out of his
chair, and also knocked two artificial teeth out of his
head—(a laugh)—and gave him several blows beside.
Cross-examined—Witness got his living by betting,
and he had kept a betting,office on Snow-hill ; but that
he gave up, because he lost more than he could pay.
He had paid all he could, and even now, paid regularly
as he could afford it. He had been in trouble for bigamy;
and he would tell them how that was. He had left a
wife for adultery, and had taken another, for virtue, and
had had 12 months for it ; and he should not mind hav-
ing 12 months again for another wife like her. (A.
laugh.) The betting-office was in the name of Newby,
Clegg, and Co. Newby was anybody you like—nobody;
and the Co. was nobody ; Clegg being the man. (A
laugh.) He remembered the Oaks of 1853, and he
had received 4/. upon that race ; and he might have
received 141. or 341., but not 4001. He had paid every
man in respect of that race, except a man named Ben-
bow, whom he did not know that he had seen since ; and
who had certainly never asked him for the money. He gave
Benbow his address on the race-course, but he wrote by
mistake, " Richmond-terrace," instead of Richmond-
street, Southwark." Benbow called at the terrace, so
the gentleman whe lived there told plaintiff, and plaintiff
told the gentleman, to tell Benbow where to find plain-
tiff. He had received 41. of Benbow, and had to pay
him that and 61. besides. He had not paid him, because
he had not seen him ; and would pay him when he did
see him.
Benbow was called to stand forward, and he went
with alacrity up to the witness box where plaintiff was,
but did not succeed in getting his money. Plaintiff had
never knocked a man, named Harris down, for asking
for his money. There had been a warrant, and they
might know all about it by enquiring at the Mansion-
house. The man's name was Harrison, and the matter
had been settled amongst themselves.

John Dorrell, a coffeehouse-keeper in Smithfield, was
playing at cards with the plaintiff when the row began.
Plaintiff was not struck whilst in his chair ; but the de-
fendant squared at him, and he got up. They both
"tried for the fall," and they both fell together.
Mr. O'Malley said the best course, after this evidence,
would be to withdraw a juror.
Mr. Serjeant Thomas, however, said he had a witness,
named Ravin, "a gentleman of great respectability,"
who knew all about it, and whom he should like to
examine.

Mr. Havill was accordingly called, and said he was a
" betting-man."
Mr. Serjeant Thomas— Did you see the assault in
question ?
Witness—No ; I was not in the house when it occured.
The parties then agreed to withdraw a juror; and so
the matter was disposed of.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC. 6.
PERCIVAIhL V. DUDGEON.

Mr. Macaulay, with Mr. Willes, conducted the case
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Iceating and Mr. Honeyman
were counsel for the defendant.

It appeared that a person of the name of Manning
was riding a valuable grey horse, in June last, which
horse was the property of the plaintiff, a horse-dealer,
carrying on business in St. Martin's-lane. The Brougham
of the defendant was in a line of carriages, out of which
the driver suddenly pulled, as they were passing up St.
Martin's-lane, and came in collision with the plaintiff's
horse, striking him near the hind hock. The blow drove
the horse on the pavement, and as he was trying to
regain the carriage-way, he slipped about, and thereby
injured his back severely. Prior to this event, the
plaintiff had as much as 501. offered for him, but he had
declined to take less than 65 guineas. A month after
the accident, the plaintiff had only been able to obtain
about 151. for the animal. The bill of the veterinary
surgeon, for attendance and treatment of the horse,
amounted to 161. odd.

On behalf of the defendant it was set up, that the
accident had been caused by the rider suddenly spurring
the horse, whilst the driver of the Brougham stated his
carriage never touched the horse.
The evidence for each party was of a contradictory
character.

The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages,
48/. Bs. 9d.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Dec. 6,

(Before Mr. Sergeant Adams, Assistant-Judge.)
Mary Hall, 25, was tried on two indictments for
stealing a purse, containing a sovereign and other
moneys, from the person of Eliza Adams, and a purse
containing two sovereigns and other moneys from the
person of Elizabeth Patteson.
Mr. O'Brien prosecuted, and Mr. Parry appeared for
the prisoner.

The facts of these two cases were very short. Each
of the robberies were committed in an omnibus within a
day or two. The prisoner was very respectably dressed
—so much so that the prosecutrix in the second case,
although she had observed the motion of her, hand, hesi-
tated to charge her with the theft.
The jury found her guilty in both cases,
Mr. Parry urged that the prisoners was not known to
been led
the
the officers, and, as he was instructed, she had
into this by more guilty persons. He hoped,
under
circumstances, the Court would not feel compelled to
pass an extreme sentence upon the prisoner.
The Assistant-Judge said the prisoner had been con-
victed on clear evidence of two very serious offences,
committed, one on the 14th and one on the 16th of the
same month. It was evidently a trade with her—omni-
bus robberies ; which were now so frequent and sys-
tematic, that the Court felt it to be its duty to pass a
severe sentence in all such cases. It was only expert
hands who took to picking pockets in omnibuses, and
apparent respectability was brought to aid them in their
depredations. He then sentenced the prisoner to four
years' penal servitude.
William Taylor, a wretched-looking boy, 13 years of
age, was convicted of stealing a loaf of bread, the pro-
perty of James Gedder. Two years ago he was sen-
tenced to two month's imprisonment for stealing sweet-
meats.

The boy, crying, said he had no parents, his father
being dead and his mother in the workhouse. Singe he
came out of prison he had tried to live by selling water-
cresses for his brother, but could not.
The Assistant-Judge regretted that this was a case
which could not be sent to Redhill, as it did not contain
all that was required in cases sent to that institution.
He hoped and trusted that ere long the country would
be relieved of the stain fixed upon it by the present
state of the law with regard to criminals like the
wretched boy at the bar.
A juryman asked why the parish the boy belonged to
did not do something for him ?
The Assistant-Judge said the reason of that was, that
the moment a boy was convicted, so absurd was the law,
Parish was relieved from all further charge of him.
At Present we did all we could to encourage parishes
and Parents to desert children. The parents of a pri-
soner Were obliged to keep him before he was convicted,
but not alt
same position. Instead and the parish was placed in the
Instead of this the law ought to compel
his parish to
they would be ook after him after conviction, and then
Was it not dreadful more
careful about his getting into prison.
to look at the present case ? What
could the Court dol
oNothing but send him to prison,
with recommendation ; but this was a great
expense to the Goverrimrenrtt
or his parents. Tilinsot any to the parish of a
prisoner a
b.vvas not a case in which
he could take that course—
erely stealing a bit of
priesdonhim to mercy, and
bread. The jury had recommeLln
though he had been before in
was two years
itand he shoull
He then sentenced
ago, and for stealing sweetmeats,
only give him a slight punishment. H
the prisoner to one months hard labour.