The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-23 00:00:00

x.:TENING, MARCH 23, 1854.

Royal Farmer s, 500 ; 'Westminster, 500 ; Globe, 1,250 ;
Atlas, 500 ; 'County, 1,000 ; Royal Insurance, 2,000 ;;
Liverpool and London, 500 ; London Assurance Cor-
poration, 500 ; Pelican, 2,000 ; Phoenix, 3,000 ; Norwich
Fire, 1,500 ; Norwich Life, I,soo—in all, 17,250 copies.
Fifty-five offices took no copies. The remainder were dis-
posed of in ths usual way at the office. He also sent a
number of copies of the Post Magazine of the sth No-
vember to the shareholders of the Unity. The insurance
offices were in the habit of taking a number of copies of
the Post Maaaz,ine, sometimes so many as three or four
thousand. Re did not knew whether his publisher ap-
plied to the company for permission to publish their
advertisement. He gave them no special instructions,
but it was customary to send a circular to all the in-
surance offices. In one at his publications he said that
he grid the company had had their "first innings," and
that he should be " stumped out" if he had not got the
first blow or the second. The publication of the Monitor
was to prevent him from being " stumped out." He
was not aware that the publication was anticipated two
or three days, in order that it might be IwAly ;bl7 distri-
bution at a meeting of the share.e4tieee. •
Re-ex rtlirtP4-e-l'he eotnpanies'he had mentioned took
the number of copies he stated of their own accord. He
made no application, and had no communication what-
ever with them upon the subject. Thirty-two of the old
offices did not take any copies.
This closed the case for the plaintiff.
TI10;er then proceeded to address the jury
on behalf of the defendant in a speech of great power
and ability. Ile expressed his surprise that his learned
friend should have closed the case far his client so
suddenly, and that he had not, at all events, put his
publisher into the witness-box, as, after what had
occurred during the trial of the cause, it was evident
that he could have given very important evidence
which ought to have come to the knowledge of the
jury. He admitted to the fullest extent the right of
the press to comment upon the conduct of public com-
panies and of cautioning the public against them, where
they were conducted in an unsafe and improper manner,
and he said that if it were done in a bona fide rasmner
no one had a right to Complain ; but he should submit
to the jury that this had not been the conduct of the
plaintiff, and he believed he should satisfy them from
his own printed papers that he had been systemati-
cally engaged in slandering individuals, and he should
then ask them whether the defendant was not justified
in making use of strong expressions in reply to such a
person. Sir Frederick then read portions of the dif-
ferent publications that had been put in, and said it was
clear that in the first instance the plaintiff had called
the respectable gentlemen who were the directors of
this company swindlers, and he evidently intended to
hold the company up to the public as a bubble company,
and that the only consequence that could result from
any connection with it would be loss and ruin. All,
therefore, that had been done by the company had
been done in self-defence, and Mr. Hartnoll had him-
self alone to blame. What did he complain of ? The
principal charge against him was that he was a hireling
writer, and that he had made false statements wilfully,
to the prejudice of the company. With respect to one
important matter, namely, the paying up of the deposits,
it was admitted that he had stated that which was not
true, and when he spoke of a state of things existing in
1853 which referred to the previous year, it appeared to
him that he must have known that he was committing a
wilful deception. The charges he made against the
company were of the most serious description, and he
was not satisfied with merely publishing them in his
Post iliagazine, but he had suddenly brought out this new
periodical ; and so determined was he in his efforts to
injure the company, that the publication was hastened
in order that it might be ready for delivery to the share-
holders at their meeting. It appeared to him that the com-
pany had no alternative but to give some explanation,
and If they did make use of hard words, the defendant
was alone to blame. Sir Frederick then referred to the
distribution of the seventeen thousand copies of the
Monitor to the different insurance offices that bad been
named, and he said that as the price of the publication
was two-pence, the plaintiff must have received no less
than 1431. 15s. for those copies alone, and he asked
them as reasonable men whether they could entertain
the slightest doubt that the object was to injure and to
ruin, if possible, the new company. He then commented
upon the contents of the pamphlet containing the alleged
libel, and concluded by expressing his opinion that the
jury would think that, under the circumstan,ces, and
taking into consideration the fact that, except the
plaintiff's attorney, no one else but the shareholders had
been provided with a copy of it, they would consider it
was a privileged communication, and that the defendant
was quite justified in issuing it.
Mr. Baron Alderson then summed up, and the jury
almost immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff,
with is. damages.

I, MIDLAND CIIWVIT.—LEICESTIit, MARCH 20.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Lord Chief Justice Jervis.)
James Bull, aged 19, was indicted for feloniously
attempting to strangle Ann Clarke, with intent to mur-
der her, at Misterton, on the 13th of August last.
The prosecutrix, a middle-aged woman of respectable
appearance, and the prisoner were in the same service,
the former as housekeeper, and the latter as farm ser-
vant. For some time before the night in question the
prisoner had made overtures to the prosecutrix by say-
ing to her frequently that people said that he was to
marry the housekeeper ; but she had never given him
any encouragement or permitted any familiarities be-
tween them, regarding, as she said, all advances of
the kind by him towards a woman of her age as an
insult. On the night in question he, being undressed,
rushed into her mesa with a rope, which he suc-
ceeded in twisting round her neck, and endeavoured
to tie to the bedpost ; but she struggled violently, and
used her hands and nails upon him with some effect.
She also was bruised as well as hurt by the tightening,
of the cord round her neck. When she found re-
sistance in vain, she cried out that she would have him,
and then released his hold. He was in a state of ex-
treme excitement, and almost as soon as the _struggle
was over began crying. He said afterwards to the con-
stable, "If she had had me, it would not have hap-
pened,"
Mr. O'Brien contended that the intent to murder was
not made out by the evidence, which indicated rather
that the prisoner's only object was to frighten the pro-
secutrix into compliance with his wishes.
The learned Judge, however, did not adopt this view
of the case, and commented upon the strong resemblance
which this bore in its circumstances to Hatto's case at
Aylesbury, begging them, at the same time, not to
allow that case at all to influence their decision, but to
judge of the prisoner's intention by his acts,
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sen-
tenced to be transported for 15 years.

stables, and Bow, 383 S, were also upon the watch.
Witness, upon a signal being given by Perdrian, entered
the house alluded to, and on asking him what the parcel
contained, he replied that there was in it a quantity of
ribbons which he had from Mr. Jenkins, whose address
he did not remember, but he lived somewhere between
St. Alban's and Dunstable, and within the last year he
first met him at Windsor. He further said that he had
been trying to sell the ribbons. Witness examined the
parcel and found therein a very large number of rolls of
ribbons, which he believed had been abstracted from a
hamper on its transit from Derby to London.
Henry Stone, in the employ of Messrs. Chaplin and
Horne, carriers, who have extensive premises at the.eam-
den-town station, stated that on the 12th inst., the cords
which had been tied round a hamper il;\ a truck had been cut, and the lid untied. Thera was vacant space in the i
said hamper which had is iii. black silk ribbons. It was 1
consigned to Mr. hadfard, Noble-street, Cheapside and
when weighed at the station it was 521bs weight sliort.
4oshua Gregory, assistant to Mr. Radford, said that
the hamper arrived at his employer's promises on the
13th inst., and that goods were raised from it to the
value of 471. Os. sd.
Perdrian (the companys officer) stated that seeing a
large open space In the hamper, he reported tc, the
proper nuthori+-*Les that he thought there had beer, a rob.
bery. He (witness) went into the public-li.ense men.
tion`2.-U. by Mr. Bedford, and sat down by' the prisoner,
.our, took from
whs, in the course of a quarter of an 1,
cb.f. •Which be tore off
his pocket some bills, the headings
and threw in fragments upon t'.) de floor after which he
packed up the papers and pat them into his pocket.
Prisoner then went to th. tar, and in a low tone spoke
to the landlord, of whom he shillings, requested the loan of a few
call or Baying
nt that he would leave the parcel, and
had fit moraing. The parcel which prisoner
with him wc:ighecl 511bs. There was nothing in it
but ribbons,
Bow, ass s, corroborated a portion of the foregoing
evident)°, and said that upon searching the prisoner at
the Albany-street station-house, he found upon him two
bilis with the heading wanting. The items in them
were " black silk ribbons," and the words, " bought of
John Kirby, 40, King-street, Camden-town," were en-
graved thereon. When at the station, just before the
charge was entered in the book by the inspector on
duty, witness heard prisoner say "its a very bad job."
The prisoner \vas remanded.

LA.-MBETII.-111r. Elliot granted a summons on the
application of Mr. Day, vestry clerk of the parish of
St. George the Martyr, against a Mr. Drewell, of Hat-
field-place, Westminster-road, for unlawfully exposing
fireworks for sale. It was in the parish above-named
that a terrible and fatal explosion lately took place, and
the vestry clerk has received orders from the parochial
authorities to prosecute those who may be found ex-
posing the neighbourhood to a similar calamity.

WANDSWORTH.—Mr. Alfred Wright, residing at
No. 6, Churton-street, Pimlico, was summoned at the
instance of Mr. Thomas Bent, of the A division of police,
who is employed upon the London and South-Western
Railway, for having, on the 9th inst., ridden in a first-
class carriage from Esher to Kingston station, without
having a ticket, with the intent to avoid payment
thereof.
Mr. Godson, the superintendent of the passenger
traffic on the South-Western Railway, appeared in sup-
port of the summons on behalf of the company.
The defendant pleaded that he had no intention of de-
frauding the company.
William Gibbons, a travelling inspector upon the line,
deposed that on the day in question he was riding in
a first-class carriage of the 7.45 p.m. up train, from
Godalming, when, on stopping at the Esther station,
the guard put the defendant and another gentleman into
the same carriage with witness, as they were short of
second class carriages, and told them to change on
arriving at the Kingston station as they would then find
room in the second class carriages. After the train had
started from Esher, the defendant said to the other gen-
tleman that he had no ticket. When they stopped at Kingston, the deferKlaut got out of the carriage,
leaving
his luggage behinrl him, and ran into the station. The
other gentleman also alighted and entered a second class
carriage. Witness followed into the station unobserved
and saw the defendant receive a second class ticket from
that station, and not from Esher, to Vauxhall. Witness
hastened back to the carriage, and was seated before
the defendant returned. He then got into the carriage
again and travelled all the way to Vauxhall in the first
class. The defendant got out at that station and de-
livered his ticket up to the collector at the door, and
would have passed on but witness stopped him and de-
manded from him the fare for riding in a first class car-
riage from Esher to Kingston, and also the excess for
riding in a first class carriage with a second class ticket
from Kingston to Vauxhall, which he refused to pay.
Mr. Godson said they had a great many cases where
they were victimised in a similar manner, and it was
only when they could detect the parties as in the pre-
sent instance, that they could bring the matter before
the public as an example to others, and for their pro-
tection.

Mr. Beadon observed that the case only showed to
him what he had always thought, that it was most es-
sential for railway companies to employ travelling in-
spectors.
The defendant, in answer to the summons, said that
he had no time to get a ticket at Esher, and at Kingston
station he thought he could not get a ticket there for
riding from Esher to Vauxhall, and so he took a ticket
from Kingston. If he had known he could have had
one, he certainly would have got it.
Mr..Beadon thought there vras another point the de-
fendant had to answer, and that was, why he did not
pay the excess when it was demanded of him at Vaux-
hall.
The defendant explained, as a reason, that he thought
he ought to consider the matter before he did so, as he
expected to be called before the railway authorities.
Mr. Beadon was surprised that he should suppose
that, when by paying the demand the matter would be
settled. The defendant had acted very wrong, and bad
set a very bad example. He find him 40s. and 4s.
costs.
The money was immediately paid.