The Sun.
London, England, 1836-03-03 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

•
NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YORr, MARCH 1.
CROWN COURT.—The only case in this Court to-day
which excited any interest, was the trial of William
Hodgson, a notorious poacher, and who was acquitted a
short time ago (the evidence not being sufficiently strong)
on suspicion of being concerned in the Kexby murder,
which has excited so much attention in Yorkshire.
The charge against the prisoner was for having, on the
29th of December last, entered grounds in the township
of Shipton, in the North Riding, armed with a gun, for
the purpose of destroying game, and violently assaulting
George Lund.
The evidence being imperfect, his Lordship directed the
Jury to acquit the prisoner.
'We believe he will be indicted for the common assault.
NISI PRIUS.—ASSAULT AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT BY

CHURCHWARDENS.

AKED V. ROBINSON AND OTHERS.

This was an action for assault and false imprisonment
The details were uninteresting. The Jury found a ver
dict for the plointiff—Damages .5/.

DROWN AND OTHERS V. ELLISON.
This was an action brought by Messrs. Brown, Janson,
Burr, and Co., bankers, at Leeds, against Mr. Benjamin
Ellison,"of Birkinshaw, near the same place, for the balance
Of a banking account. The balance sought to be recovered
was 6191. On the part of the defendant it was contended,
first, that a bill of exchange which had been returned dis-
honoured, amounting, with costs, to about 561., ought to
be deduCted from that balance, as more than six weeks had
elapsed after it became due before it was presented to the
defendant.

Lord DENMAN, upon the whole, was of opinion that the
plaintiffs had not proved sufficient to enable them to charge
the defendant with this bill ; and upon that point there was
a verdict in favour of the plaintiff.
Having disposed of this subordinate part of the case, we
shall now state the facts in this important case. The de-
fendant had kept a banking account at the plaintiffs' many
years, and did so in 1824. At the close of 1825 there
appeared a balance in favour of tke defendant of 18s. 6d.
In 1826 and 1827 the balance fluctuated, sometimes
in favour of, and sometimes against, the defendant ;
but after that time the balance became permanent
against the defendant, and in 1829 it exceeded
5001. A number of letters were put in, and read, from
the defendant, lamenting, and admitting, the balance ;
thanking
the house for its forbearance, and promising to
take effectual measures for paying it off. The defendant
had what is called a pass-book, in which all payments on
both sides were entered, and which was usually in the cus-
tody of the defendant. A great mass of books and vouchers
were produced in Court. The pass-book was also pro-
duced by the defendant. In the beginning of January,
1834, the defendant, as far as appeared in evidence, first
complained that there was an error of no less—kiiim than
1,0001. in the account of the plaiitiff, who had neglected to
give him credit for the sum of 1,0001. paid by him into the
bank on the 28th of October, 1835. The plaintiffs denied
that there was any such error, and expressed their readi-
ness to have their books examined by any respectable ac-
countant, and Mr. James, of Leeds, made a long examina-
tion, without finding any traces of the payment of the
1,0001. The learned Counsel mainly relied on an erasure
in the pass-book in the year 1825, when, under the date of
the 28th of October, there appeared an entry of three
ciphers, the figure 1 having evidently been erased in the
same, but in the hand-writing of a different clerk there was
an entry of 1,2801. to the credit of the defendant.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintitT--Damages

Mr. Baron GURNVY here desired Kedge to go and touch
those prisoners whom he had seen at Jourdan's house.
Witness—l have seen them all.

Mr: Baron GURNEY—You have not given the same ac-
count then to-day as you did before the Magistrates, for you
then said you had never seen Mott.
Mrs. Harriet Rudd identified Jourdan as the person
who had taken her house, No. 4, East-lane, under the
name of Leary.
John Cawley Riches, residing in East-lane, also identified
the persons of Jourdan, Sullivan, and Mott, in consequence
of having seen them repeatedly at No. 4, East-lane.
Mrs. Mary Godfrey, at whose house Huey resided, in
Trinity-terrace, also identified Jourdan, Sullivan, and Seale,
as having visited Huey on the 27th of November. Sulli-
van and Jourdan went out by themselves, and Seale re-
mained, and afterwards went out with Huey. The re-
mainder of the evidence of this witness corroborated the
testimony given by Huey.
James Jordan, a watchman, at the Custom House,
proved seeing Jourdan and Sullivan repeatedly before the
robbery, both inside and outside of the building ; and he
had also conveyed, just before the offence was committed,
a message from Huey to Mott, when the former came to the
latter in the east cellar. Since the robbery he had seen
Jourdan and Sullivan about the Custom House. -
Mr. Baron GURNEY—Gentlemen of the Jury, I find
there are as many al one hundred and forty witnesses on
the back of the bill, and therefore it will be in vain for our
attempting to close this case to-night. From the extreme
I attention which you have bestowed, it would be wrong in
me to detain you any longer, and I shall adjourn the further
proceedings until to-morrow (this day.) At the same time,
I am extremely sorry to inform you, that the law makes it
imperative for you to remain together, and to hold no con-
versation with any other persons until the termination of
the trial. Under these circumstances, you will have to be
locked up.
The Jury, who did not appear to relish this piece of in-
formation, were then conducted by one of the yeomen of
the Court to the London Coffee-house.
The Court was crowded to excess during the whole of
the proceedings, which appeared to excite considerable
interest.