The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-17 00:00:00

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTA'RSALL'S.
o
thinginitt‘irei
yesterdayafternoon's(uotationoi
the bel-
m ET JULY STAKES.
sto agst Lord Exeter's Beiram (taken)
stq agst Lord Jersey's colt
ti tq agst Duke of Rutland's Barossa colt (taken)
su,siNn vhesisch calls for any
r4or ti_
TILE Dimity, 1832.
14 to I agst Lord Exeter's Fully colt
.20 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Beiralyt
'25 to 1 agst Mr. Ch;tney's \Vali= the Fourth
DoweAsTEn. ST. LEGER.
7to agst Lord Jersey's Riddlesworth (taken)
Ato agst Lord Cleveland's Marcus (taken;
1.2 to agst Mr. Skipiey's The Saddler (taken;
13 to agst Mr. Robinson's Liverpool ;taken"
14 to agst Mr. Stotwhewer's Zany. IS to agst Mr. liouldsworth's Circassian
..5 to agst Mr. Beardsworth's Colwick
3) to agst Mr. Bower's Sir John
;25 to agst Mr. Vansittart's Slight colt
30 to agst Mr. Houldsworth's Frederica
:11 to agst Mr. Cool;e's Inctibus
30 to agst Lord Sligo's Bras de Fer

FRENCH GALLANTRY,--'fl ke Colt rrier de
'I
-Europe, in detailing a murder near Mortain, in France,
describeg the victim aM " a widow of a certain an,," who
hid u 1.,1-and.ilat.ighte aged 14.

LAW INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY).

COURT OF KING'S BENCIL

HUGHES V. KING.

This was in acti, n htought by the plaintiff, an attorney,
to recover the amount of his bill for work done and money
taid out in the conduct of two causes for the defendant.
Mr. PLATT, for the plaintiff, c lied a witness named
Richardson, who stated that he was a clerk with Mr.
Hughes in the month of August, 1828. He had formerly
e•irried en business as an attorney, but at that time his cer-
tificate was out, and he had no inta•ntion of renewing it.
The plaintiff cal'ed on him, and wanted him to commence
in action for him, when he told him of the circumstance,
but recommended Mr. Hughes, who was them em-
ployed, and lie (the witness) went on with the action
for Mr. Hughes, and in his name. The business done was
proved by other two witnesses, clerks at the time with
the plaintiff.

Sir J. ScAuLETT for the defendant, cross-examined the
witness Richardson, to show that the present plaintiff was
not consulted in the case, being ill at the time, and that
the action for which the present bill was claimed, was
stopped on account of a blunder committed by Richardson.
He then addressed the Jury and said, that as he was
instructed, his client Mr. King never saw the plaintiff,
nor was ever aware that any person was concerned in the
ha•iness except the witness Richardson, and that the
As-hole of the expences were lost to his client by a gross
hknder of Richardsons.

The Learned Gentleman then called a Mr. Paris, who
was a party to the action which gave rise to the present
one; he proved that he never knew that Mr. Hughes war
the person who conducted the business for himself and
Ring, but always understood that Richardson was the
party employed.
Mr. PLATT replied.
The LEARNED JUDGE then summed up, and the Jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 10/. 6s.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
DUNCAN V. 11AMPSON.

This action was brought to recover from the defendant,
as executor to a Mr. Wylde, a tea-dealer, the sum of 5001.
the amount of a promissory note, given by Wylde to the
plaintiff. The answer had been, that another creditor to
a large amount (Mr. Styan), had, shortly after Wylde's
death, got a judgment by consent of the then defendant,
(the present defendant) for 20,0001. on a debt of 9,6001.
Wylde's will being proved as under 9,000/.
The plaintiff's Counsel said, that the amount of Styan's
chit had not been proved, and commented on the facts
that Wylde's executor was Styan's ewn clerk, that Mr.
Styati should have been paid, as proved, 9 6001. being
more than the sum proited under the testator's will, and on
the facility with which Styan's clerk had allowed the
judgment to go in favour of his master to the detriment of
all other creditors.

The judgment was produced, and the validity of Styan's
claim, and the fact which was rather disputed by the
plaintiff's Counsel, of his having received the assets of
Wylde's estate proved.

The Loan el-lEF JUSTICE summed up, and the Jury
found a verdict for the defendant.

ROYAL WESTERN INFIR3tARY-GLENNESTON 71. HUNTER,

Mr. Serjeant WILDE, (with whom was Mr. lircuanns)
stated the case. The plaintiff, Mr. George Glennister, is
a butcher, living in Brawn-street, Bryanston-square, and
the defend ,nt was a Mr. Robert Hunter. The action
was brought for goods sold and delivered, and the facts of
the case were not only considered important to the plain-
tiff but to the public generally. The defendant was
one of the committee of the Royal Western Infirmary,
in Knutsrord Place, Bryanston-square, and the plaintiff bad
supplied by the authority of that committee divers quan-
tities of butcher's meat, from time to time, fur the use and
consumption of the patients in that institution. The
defendant feeling himself satisfied that there were no
grounds for an action alainst him, had put the plaintiff to
the proof. He (the Learned Serjeant) understood that the
Royal. Western Infirmary bad been established a few
years, and a number of gentlemen became members of the
institution, out of which a committee was formed to coy-
duct and manage the affairs of the establishment, and va-
rious tradespeople were engaged to supply the institution
with the necessary goods for the use of the patients.
The accounts were regularly sent in and audited
by the cominittee, and the plaintiff's demand upon
the Infirmary was found to be correct, but lat-
terly there bad ken some misunderstanding and
dispute amongst the gentlemen of the committee, and the
numerous tradesmen had been thereby kept out of their
just claims. The defendant would, no doubt, tell them
that he was merely a subscriber to a charitable institution,
and had no conduct or controul over its affairs. He was
a member of one of the committees for the management of
the business of the Infirmary, consequently he must have
known to what extent the funds could go ; he knew how
far they could extend their orders, and he knew what
amount of money was in the hands of the bankers; all of
these facts the tradespeople were totally ignorant of, they
could not have access to the cash book or the
banker's book of the establishment, and be wou'd
therefore appeal to the Jury as men of the world,
and men of business, whether, when goods were obtained
from them for the use of a public and charitable
institution conducted by honourable men, amongst whom
were Lords and Dukes as well as commoners, they did not
expect that such men would take care that there were
sufficieat funds to discharge their claims, and not allow
the institution to be supported at their expense. He (Mr.
Serjeaut Wilde) would chew that Mr. Hunter always was
an active member of the committee, attending all meet-
ings, and had the conducting of the affairs, and therefore
how he could show that he was not liable to pay he knew
not. It never could be supposed that gentlemen entered in o
arrangements to affect to carry on an institution to the ruin
of its creditors ; if so the charity would become monstrous
and a nuisance. The Learned Gentleman then cited the
cases of " Cullen and the Marquis of Queensberry" and
Hornsby and Bell," which bore upon the present case, and
were decided in favour of the plaintiff by my Lord Thur.
low, the then Lord Chancellor, and which were reported
in the " Ist Crown Chancery Case, 101," and which he
referred the Jury to, if they wanted any authority. The
Learned Counsel concluded by saying, he should show that
the defendant was one of the committee, and that the
meat supplied by the plaintiff had been ordered and de-
livered at the infirmary.

James Branch, formerly in the service of the plaintiff,
proved that from the beginning of the year 1828 till
December, 1829, be vas in the habit of delivering meat
at the Royal Western Infirmary. The nurses of the hos-
pital used to give the orders.

- Henry Karidge, another servant of the plaintiff, proved
having supplied meat at the hospital, and always delivered
a ticket of the same to the nurses, which had been booked
before it is as delivered. The meat consisted of sheep's
heads and shins of beef. No prime pieces were supplied.
Mr. Gale, who had been one of the subscribers to the
Infirmary, produced a book containing the minutes of the
different meetings of the committee, from which it ap•
pearrd that the defendant was always in attendance on the
occasion, and bad the conducting of the affairs,
Mr. Srrjeant WILDE then said that was his ease.
Mr. Serjeant SPANWIE was addressing the Jury when
our Reporter left the Court.

The action, Thomas v. the Marquis of Londonderry,
stands No. 25 on the list of this day, but it is not ex-
pected to come on till to-morrow morning. It is rumoured
that some very extraordinary diar,losures will be made on
the tiial.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
The case of HUNT c. LAwsoti, having been specially
appointed for this morning, the Court was crowded at an
early hour by persons anxious to hear it. It was an action
brought by the Hon. Member for Preston against the
Times newspaper for libel. Before the sitting of the
Court, however, the record was withdrawn, and the
crowds in attendance were therefore destined to experience
a disappointment in the non-hearing of the eau,.