The Sun.
London, England, 1854-12-21 00:00:00

THE MILITIA.

On Tuesday the 24 (]ding's own) Staffordshire
Militia, Col. E. R. Littleton, mustered for permanent
The let Warwick Militia also came out for permanent
duty at Oxford.
duty at Warwick on Tuesday. The volunteers mustered
in considerable numbers.

Yesterday the usual notification was issued by Capt.
Sherson, the Adjutant of the regiment,'that the Royal
Berkshire Militia is to be embodied on Monday, the Ist
of January next, at Reading.
The Royal Bucks (King's Own) Regiment of Militia,
under the command of dolonel Lord Carrington, in con-
junction with two companies of the 94th Foot, are still
in garrison at Windsor, supplying the guard for Windsor
Castle and Frogmore. It is believed that they will remain
at Windsor throughout the winter.

LAW INTELLICIENCE.—Dec. 20.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
BIRCEI V. FOSTER .ALLEGED LIBEL.

This was an action for libel, to which the defendant
pleaded not' guilty, and a justification.
The plaintiff conducted his case in person ; the At-
torney-General, Mr. Edwin James, and Mr. Peters-
dorff represented the defendant.
The plaintiff in this action was the proprietor of a
newspaper published in Dublin, called the World, and
the defendant is the editor and publisher of the Exa-
miner newspaper. It appeared that the plaintiff had
brought an, action, which was tried in the courts of
law in Dublin, against the Earl of Clarendon, for
moneys alleged to be due in payment for his exertions
in writing articles in his paper in support of " law and
order," at a period when a considerable political agita-
tion was going on in Ireland. The facts en which
Birch founded his claim are so well known thatqt.ie,
unnecessary further to refer to them now, but it wile
sufficient to say that, in consequence of the facts whiab-
were elicted in the course of that trial, the defendant
published an article, reviewing all the matters, in the
Examiner, in which he severely condemned the conduct
of the plaintiff. This was the libellous article complained
of, for which the plaintiff now sought compensation in
damages. The plaintiff opened his case at considerable
length, and went into details as to the position which he
occupied in respect to Lord Clarendon.
Lord Palmerston, was then called, and was examined
as to the correspondence which had taken place with the
Irish. Executive with the object of showing that the arti-
cles in the World were not of the nature alleged. Mr.
Birch then proceeded to question Lord Palmerston on
the subject of the motion in the House of Commons
made by Lord Naas, but the Lord Chief-Justice ruled
that such questions could be put. The Earl of Claren-
don was next examined, and gave an account of the
various proceedings which had taken plabe between Mr.
Birch and himself, which have been so frequently laid
before the public in the actions which l!kir. Birch had
brought against the Irish Executives.
The Attorney plaintiff'sAtwrney
.
of the defendants, in a speech of remarkable ability,
Gcaesnee hraalv :addressed ee="d the Court on behalf 4
which occupied two hours in delivery. The various ar-
ticles published in the World newspaper were then put
in evidence. in support of the plea of justification, as
were also the indictments against -the plaintiff, on which
he had twice been committed to prison for 6 and 12
months for libels. In further support of the justifica-
tion, Mr. Robertson, Mr. Martin Burke, Mr. Christo-
pher Campion, Alderman Moyland, and Mr. Tyndall,
were called as witnesses.
Mr. Birch then replied on the case, entering into
much irrelevant matter, for which he was frequently
called to order by the learned judge.
Lord Campbell, in summing up, said it was a question
for the jury whether the article complained of -was a
malicious libel, or was a fair comment on the public acts
of the plaintiff. They would consider whether, the de-
fendant had, in his strictures, exceeded due bounds. As
his lordship was about to go over the evidence, •
The foreman intimated that they would not trouble
him, as they had already made up their minds to return
a verdict for the defendant.
Verdict for the defendant on both pleas.
The Court did not rise till a late hour.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
:Sittings at Guildhall, before Mr. Baron Martin and a

Common Jury.)
\VILLINGALE V. HOLLOWAY.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendant in this
case, after a consultation of five hours.
RANDALL V. THE 'WOOLWICH STEAM-PACKET COMPANY.
Counsel for the plaintiff,
Sergeant Shee and Peters-
dorff ; for the defendants, Mr. Hawkins.
This was an action for compensation for injuries re-
ceived on board a steamer, belongiug to the defendants.
the
On Sunday, the Dth of July last, the plaintiff, a boy
aged 15, went on board the Sylph, Gravesend packet, in
inten-
tion of going
cook-shop, and
down the river. The boat was crowded to
company of some lath of his o wn age, with the
excess' and Standing room was scarcely to be had.
of boiling
The party placed themselves in a corner near the
longing to the vessel that if they would remain there
till they got past Woolwich they should then be allowed
to get upoo. the paddle-boxes. There was a large caul-
dronwere told by one of the people be-
51°P, upon a sort of grate supported by three leggy.
When the order was iven to let go, the vessel was
obliged to turn astern ing order to get clear of some other
water standing at the door of the cook
craft. In doing so she grazed against a barge, and
lurched to such an extent that the cauldron canted, and
was precipitated with all its contents upon the plaintiff
and his friends. Nearly every member of the party was
snore or less scalded ; but the plaintiff was so horribly
injured that he was obliged to be immediately convoyed
to St. Thomas's Hospital. There he has been confined
to bed ever since, and will not be able to resume his
trade for some weeks yet. He was earning Is. a week
at the time he was disabled. t
It was attempted to be proved, in eVidence, that the
accident would never have happened but for the careless-
ness of one of the boys, who, it was alleged, placed his
foot on the cauldron in order to climb up to the
paddle-box.

The jury, however, found a ♦erdict for the plaintiff-
Damages 60/.

(Before a Special Jury.)
BOVILL V. num.
A verdict has been found for the plaintiff in this case.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goalburn.)
IN BE W. H. B. HAWEIN
Tho bankrupt was a chemist and druggist, of the
Strand. His debts are 2,2001. ; assets about 2701.
This was the certificate meeting. Thete was no oppo-
sition.

Hi; Honour said the bankrupt, being in a deficiency
of 1,400/. at the commencement of 1843, he ought then
to have placed himself in the hands of his creditors.
A. man in such a position ought not to increase debts
without telling the creditors that he had, as it were,
a leaden collar round his neck. A. the bankrupt had
kept satisfactory books, and creditors jAad borne favour-
able testimony to his conduct, the Mart would grant
an immediate certificate, but it would be one of the
third class.

' IN RE OVERBURY.
The bankrupt was a cloth manufactUrer of Nind and
Wootton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire His debts are
said to Le about 80,000/. ; assets about 14,0001. Mr.
J. C. Mills, of Stroud, and Mr. Clement Dresser, of
Basinghall-strcet, were now chosen assignees.
(Before Mr. Commissioner ronblauque.)
IN RE J. CLARK.
The bankrupt was a butcher in telvedere-road and
Hungerford-market. His debts are 1,3171. ; assets
about 201. This was the certificate meeting. Mr.
Lewis supported.
Mr. Bagley opposed. The bankrupt, he said, had
left his business for seven weeks, having previously made
with Mr. Stables, publican, of Westminster, an advan-
tageous arrangement. The bankrupt swore that he•
could not state a place at which he had slept during
this time, except that lie had been at Mortlake for a few
days, but he did not know at whose house. The credi-
tors were required to believe this after the bankrupt
4 had Abgcouded, if the bankrupt ahould obtain certi,