The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-17 00:00:00

them ; and accepted bills of exchange drawn upon them
at 21 days' sight ; therefore, although they were not called
hankers, they were bankers to all intents and purposes.
The Learned Gentleman proceeded to press the inconve-
nience that must result to the mercantile world from the
construction of the case which was contended for by the
plaintiffs ; and also to argue that the act of Anne did not
refer to a modern negotiable bill of, exchange. In illus-
tration of the latter proposition, he proposed to call the
attention of the Court to a sealed bill of the date of the
reign of Queen Anne, which he had obtained from the
Bodleian library, when

Mr. MAULIS objected to the production of documents
which were not proved or referred to in the case.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL submitted that he might re-
fer to contemporaneous documents to explain the meaning
of a passage in an act of Parliament.
After some discussion on this point the further argu-
ment of the case was adjourned till to-morrow morning,
when the Learned Counsel on both sides will be prepared
either to withhold documents of this description from the
attention of the Court, or to discuss the legal propriety of
referring to them in argument.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

LAMBETH- STREET.

Yesterday Henry Murray, a young man with a most
care-worn aspect, applied to the presiding Magistrates,
Messrs. HARDWICK and HALSWELL, for their advice, under
the following somewhat singular circumstances :
The applicant, on the 19th day of September, 1815,
was married by banns, in the parish church of Christ
Church, Spitalfields, to a young woman named Elizabeth
Smith. After living together for about four months his
wife returned to the house of her mother in consequence of
his being at the time out of employment, and though he
had used every means in his power to prevail upon her to
return it was all to no purpose. Some days ago, after a
lengthened correspondence with his wife, he received a
letter. The applicant here handed to Mr. Hardwick, of
which the following is a copy :
" October 31st, 183 G.

" Sir—l am requested by Mrs. Ann Gutch to inform
you that your claim upon her daughter as your wife is now
invalidated, by reason of her name not having been duly
registered as required by law. It has been necessary that
she should be re-christened, by which she has received the
name of Hannah Ann Gregory, in exchange for her late
name of Elizabeth. You are hereby given to understand
that she is your wife no longer, and she is now at liberty to
wed whomsoever she pleases. Caution is hereby given you
that should any disturbance, molestation, or interruption
take place on your part, magisterial interference will be
immediately resorted to.
" N.B. For the purpose of ascertaining the validity of
the said christening, apply to the vestry of the parish of
St. Ann, Limehouse. Yours, &c.

" CHARLES CLEMENTS.

" I beg leave to add that the annulled certificate of your
marriage is hereby returned, being of no avail whatever."
The applicant, in consequence of the receipt of this letter
proceeded to Limehouse Church, and there ascertained
from the Rev. Mr. Williams that not only the christeninr,
alluded to had taken place there, but on the same day the'
banns had been put up for the marriage of his (applicant's)
wife with another man ; and by the advice of the Rev. Mr.
Williams he came before their worships.
Mr. HARDWIGK—What do you want us to do for you?
We cannot restore to you your wife ; what is it you re-
quire ? Applicant—l want to know if I can prosecute
my wife if she should get merried in my absence, as I am
about going to sea ; and if I did whether or not the ex-
penses would fall on myself?
Mr. HARDWICK—What was the name the female went
by when you got married to her ? Applicant—Elizabeth
Smith, your Worship.
Mr. HARDWICK—Was that her real name ? Applicant
—Yes, Sir ; her father was a Custom House officer, but
her mother got married a second time.

Mr. HARDWICK remarked that it would form a strange
era in the laws and customs of the country if the mere
circumstance or ceremony of a second christening was to
have all the force of a legal divorce in separating wife from
husband, or husband from wife, and to screen the parties
from legal consequences.
Mr. HALswELL here asked who Mr. Clements, the writer
_ _

of the letter, was ; and the applicant replied that he was
brother to the young man to whom his wife was about to
get married.
Mr. HAL!WELL concurred with Mr. HARDWICK as to
the wife's liability to be indicted for bigamy if she married
again, and told the applicant that the expense of the prose-
cution would be paid by the county.
The application, from its novelty, excited a good deal of
laughter among all present, except the applicant, who
seemed very dolorous indeed.