The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-10 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.IO
(Westminster Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr.
PLATT and Special Jurors.) rliej
Verdicts were agreed to by the consent of thersia
in the following Revenue cases:—" Attorney-Gene; fog
Smith," for 1001.; " Attorney-General v. Lowest
1001.; "Attorney-General v. Brown," for 1001.

ATTORNEY GENERAL V. BIRD.
This was an intormation to recover 'penalties I°l
smuggling a quantity of tobacco at Plymouth. if
The facts alleged in the information were clesro,
proved, and at the conclusitm of the case for the CroW4
Mr. Martin, who aeared for the defendant, abandoo'
the defence, and the jury found a verdict for 1601. 10/.

SHERIFFSc......I7—rIS DA S(')
(Bet ore Mr. Under-Sheriff BuacHELL.) ht SO
A LARGE DEBT.—This was an action brougP
recover the sum of 6631. 3s. Bd., for money lent. 001
The defendant suffered judgment to go by default,
a verdict was given for the amount.

PALMER V. HAYWARD.
OP
WRITING TOO "LARGE."—ThiS Was an IICOOh•,1
bill of exchange for 161. 3s. Bd.
Defendant denied bis acceptance.
of di'
A witness was called to prove the handwriting
boll
feadant, and said that he believed it to be so, but 11°00
signed his name " very large "—a great deal larger
lie usually wrote.
1, off
The Learned UNDER-SHERIFF said it was for ta,pcs
to say, whether any doubt arose through the differ°
in the size of the letters.
The jury found for the plaintiff "usual chargesIt
TAYLOR V. SHIEL,
I It ill
The plaintiff is a bootmaker, and defendant a ardef
her Majesty's Mint. The action was brought to rec:01(1.
181. on a bill of exchange, and 161. for goods 'OO
The acceptance was proved, but the delivery off 21.
different articles was only proved to the amount °
19,. 2d.
d l
The witness said the charges were those us-
charged.
LI
The UNDER-SHERIFF said the charges usualiyeba Of
were unreasonable. It was not a question whether e
rt
not they were " usual," but whether they were
sonable. '
The witness said that they were of the two rat
unreasonable, being rather under price. lye The Learned UNDER-SHERIFF said that was oi.--
„,40
case, according to the evidence of witnesses.
The jury found for 20/. 19s. 2d. and interest on the
GOOCH V. SHOREDITCH.
PLEADINGS FOR THE ;„ POOR.—The plaintiff A- ow
action is a bookseller, in Great Ruseell•streett
sought to recover 2001. advanced on a fourth share '-
work called the " Pleadings for the Poor."
I er Mr. CORRIE, for the plaintiff, said that a
dery-
had TbO
had been put in by defendant, and overruled. pi
simple question was, therefore, as to amount, 813
the demurrer was frivolous, he hoped the jury We
give interest at the rate of Si. per cent.
I
The UNDER-SHERIFF told the jury they cow.-
A girl
any amount of interest, not exceeding the 5/ per °"t,
The jury found for the amount claimed and inter°

CRIMINAL UU
LD COUI?7'.
—(THIS DO')
(Before Mr. Justice O
COLTMAN and Mr. Justice 11)5#
TESON.)
James Mills, 23, a private in the Fusilier GuardS,
indicted for feloniously uttering an order for the oe.th
very of goods, well knowing it to be forged, and
..hl/10.
intent to defraud Charles James. Mr. O'Brien Ply"
cu ted.
0 1$
It appeared from the evidence that the prosecutor 1e
grocer and cheet,emonger in the New-cut, and eds:,;ll
25th of April, the prisoner, who was in his mil"iecl
dress, went to his shop and said that he had been del the
by the commanding officer to engage him to stIPPlf
left fl ink battalion of the Fusilier Guards with groee
rpl
and he then gave him an order for a large quantitlthe
goods of different descriptions, and at the request 01 ot
prose-tutor the prisoner put his name to the POthe
upon which the list of articles were written, and left or
shop. In about three quarters of an hour beitlt
.r
turned, and said that there was some mistake "off
regard to the other order, but he had 13,0a5
brought him the proper order, signed by Serge;d
Wlntosh, who had authority to order the g
required for the regiment, and he then produeeu
order, apparently, signed by that person. The Prosiire
cutor then took the prisoner to a public-house, to bre.
him some refreshment, and the latter told im ;nth*
member that it was through him he had obtaineud be
order, and asked him to give him something, on
sin
handed the prisoner a half.erown. The prisoner ago
went away, but came back in a short time, and said $
he had given the half-crown to the cooks of the
ment, and he wanted another half-crown for bin3„6,til
The prosecutor declined to give any more money 'op•
he was paid for the goods ; and at this moment ash
e urt
man to another grocer in the neighbourhood, %,°3 pri'
and told him his master wished to see him. The e.
soner upon hearing this ran off, and it turned out, -lhe
inquiry, that the whole translation was a trick °nds
part of the prisoner either to get possession of then oot
or else a bonus for introducing so good a trade, 02 bed
several other grocers in the same neighbourhood
been served in a similar manner. safteinl;
The prisoner made no defence, and the jut,' '*-1,02$
returned a verdict of Guilty, he was sentenced to be ,`
to hard labour for six months.

YORK, THURSDAY MORNING.— (Br ELscTitrc
-
TELEGRA PH.) —An inquest was held yesterday
noon, at the Burtonstone Arms, Clifton, before ,"-
Wood, the coroner, on the body of Mr. Nic ols°ll
which was discovered in the river Ouse on Tuesdfi,
fi
night. It appeared frana the evidence that the decease
.
was last seen at nine o'clock on Tuesday evening, "t ton
ing by the side of the river, and when found at lult,
o'clock was in a standing position in the water, c1,.0
dead. The jury returned a vet d'ct of "Found drownea
The recent news from Hungary teach us yerilft
plainly that when the Vienna papers speak of the 10
" victory" of the Imperial troops they just loan. Pa
" reverse."—Puppet Show.

understanding between the counsel, and not by any
rule or: regulation of the House that that course WV
to be followed.
Sir F. KELLY said, he had the honour to sPPetirt
before their Lordships in support of the writ of eat!,
in the case of William Smith O'Brien and others. ;It
was a writ of error upon the judgment of the C°lloo
of Queen's Bench. There were four ( bjections ,a
which he submitted that the judgment sh°111:
be reversed. The first objection Was, there
by the caption it did not appear that
ed
was any jurisdiction in the three Leallt:d
Judges, before whom the prisoners were tried trod
convicted, and that, on the contrary, upon the rea
legal construction of that instrument, it aplefftwi,.
that those Learned Judges had no juriewc-ot
The second objection, which was, perhaps, them ri,
important, was that the plea pleaded by the led,
soners, to which the Attorney-General demur
Llo
was held bad en the demurrer, and the demurrer "bt,
allowed. The effect of that plea was to claim a rif,
on the part of the prisoners, to have a copy of the indict
81;
ment delivered to them a certain time before the tri
and he (Sir F. Kelly) contended that that deniurla
ought to have been overruled. Thirdly, he shelly
submit that by an Irish Act of Parliament, coinreltif
called Poyning's Act, the offence of levying
ere
against the Queen, with which the prisoners vi 0f
charged, was not an offence within the meaningwo
the statute of Edward the Third, upon which he To,
indicted, that offence having been committed in :bit
land. He had to submit that the indictment je
os
respect was informal and insufficient, and thet
ed,
that ground the judgment should be reverse,
Fourthly, there was a point in regard to a cheellentbe
on the part of the prisoners to one e` ble
jurors ; but he would not for the present trqec.
their Lordships with any observations on that (Po.
tion. First, then, he had to submit to their P°oo
ships that the caption not only showed that therefore
no jurisdiction in those three Learned Judges bOlB
whom the prisoners were tried, but that the the
caption taken together, and considered ur, °bets
principles of true legal construction, showed trt of
was no jurisdiction. He contended, in suPrftile
this proposition, that as in the commission e:e4;001
persons were appointed to try the appellants, Wit to
specifying that a certain number of them Were
form a quorum, or be empowered to try the prise"ny
the three Judges who tried the prisoners being 1-0,
a portion of those authorised by the conuniss;e°ll
could not act without the others, and therefore flop,
they had not, under the commission, any jurisdic-he
With respect to the second objection—namely, tit,
ther a copy of the indictment and a list of the Pek
nesses should have been delivered to the prisoll
"tie
before the provisions of the statute of Anne, ten "tie
before the trial, the Learned Counsel referred to
statute of Edward 111., which defined whe.t,.tel
treason, and the Act of William 111., which ch."-, ot
a copy of the indictment to be given to the prls:
a certain time before the trial, and the statilleol
Anne, which directed that a list of the witnesses of
a copy of the indictment should be delivered to to
prisoner at the same time, ten days before iv
trial. All these were English Acts of 04
liament. Then came the 36th George tot
which made certain offences treason, del
were not treason before ; for instance, dit
compassing to levy war against the Queen -Ito
also declared to be treason those offences whie, "ee
already treason before ; as for example, the I'o,
passing the death of the Queen. By the 57 Ge°„nit
that Act was perpetuated, and by the 4th seebwoce
was declared that all persons indicted for any °, toe 0,
made treason by that Act or declared to be tre-sed
should have the benefit of the Acts of Willhulithst
Anne. A question might have arisen whether be
Act applied to Ireland after the union, but he 'the
F. Kelly) contended that that was set at rest hitioi
11th Victoria, cap. 12, which, after repealing' rilicti
offences within the preceding Acts, except those w'ro.
related to the Queen's death, declared that all alga
visions of the former Acts should extend to Relent' pis
contended that the prisoner had been put 111?°11t, tbs
trial without having any of the privileges whic"
law allowed him.
.„01
The Learned Counsel was pursuing the argil'
when we went to press.
With
The small space on each side the bar was Bile-were
a number of well-dressed people, some of wholn,:tbst
ladies; and a lady, an aunt of the prisoner, teg-,,iei
with a little boy whom we took to be his son, occur
one of the reserved seats.