The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-16 00:00:00

THE SUN. LONDON

LAW INTELLIGENC E .

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY
(Sittings in Banco.)

Mr. Justice Coleridge 'gave the judgment of the Cour
in the following cases:—
VIE DUKE OF BRUNSWICK V. HARMER.

Mr. Justice COLERIDGE said in this case, which was
triad before Lord Denman, Sir Frederick Thesiger had
moved for a rule for a new trial on two grounds,—first,
that the Learned Judge who tried the case misdirected

the jury; and secondly, because the damages were ex-
cessive. Sir Frederick Thesiger contended, in the first
place, that Lord Denman should have told the jury that
the plaintiff could not bring an action for :a libel pub-
lished more than six years ago, as the right of doing so
was barred by the statute of limitations, avd that
the publication relied upon was merely a repub-
lication to the plaintiff at his own instance.
It appeared that the newspaper in question (the Weelly
Dispatch of the 9th of August, 1830) was sold last year
to a person sent to purchase it by the plaintiff, to whom
he afterwards carried it. It was contended that this was
virtually a sale to the plaintiff himself, and therefore not
sufficient to maintain a civil action. In some sense this
might be true, but the Court thought it was also a pub-
lication to the agent, for a person to whom a libelous
writing was delivered was just as capable of being
affected by it, though the agent of the person libelled in
it, as a stranger, and it was therefore a publication to
' him. That this was a publication to the plaintiff was
not, however, material to the question now under consi-
deration. Sir F. Thesiger said Lord Denman should have
cautioned the jury that they should measure the da-
mages by the injury which they considered to have re-
stilted from the single libel proved. Now this would
have separated the damages from the libels set forth in
the other counts. This was impossible, as the counts, in
some sense, were incorporated the one with the other.
The Court saw no reason why the ordinary rule should
not have been pursued in this case. No doubt the jury
were properly informed of the whole bearings of the
case, and having a fair opportunity of considering the
libel referred to, and the whole of the other matters

involved in the case, would draw their conclusions.
The Court, therefore, saw no reason why a rule should
be granted on the ground of misdirection. Lord Den-
man was satisfied with the damages. The Court could
not grant a rule except upon the affidavits.
Rule granted accordingly.
MACNAMARA V. O'CONNOR.

I❑ this case, which was an action by the plaintiff, an
attorney, against Mr. O'Connor, M.P., to recover a sum
of money for defending the Chartist prisoners, tried
some time ago at the Old Bailey, the Court said Lord
Denman was not prepared to say that the jury was
wrong in finding for the plaintiff. The Court could not
grant a rule for a new trial upon the affidavits used in
the case, and saw no reason to disturb the verdict.
Rule refused.

Rules were granted in the following cases:—Neale v.
Radcliffe and another, Normwood v. Steer, Baker v.
Rust, Austin v. Speer, Smith v. Archibald, Cooper
v. Bluxum, Peacruft v. Russell, Compton v. Stephen,
Baylis v. Furniture.

Rules were refused in the following cases:—Channel
v. Harming, Westaway v. Frost, Whitley v. Woodhouse,
Doe on the demise of Lord Petre v. Pryme and others,
Williams v. Lord Beresford, Wyre v. Hilton, Bayley v.
Abraham, Strutt v. Whitcombe, Hurst v. Hurst.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
The Court took the demurrer paper to-day, but no
case of the slightest public interest was heard during the
morning.

BAIL COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice PATTesose)
NEWMARKET RAILWAY.
Mr. lleveruNs applied on behalf of the Newmarket
and Chestertord Railway Company for a rule calling
upon the justices of the peace for the county of Cam-
bridge, and also the churchwardens and overseers of the
parish of Bellingham, in the same county, to show cause
why a mandamus should not issue requiring the justices
to hear an appeal against two several rates, one made in
July and the other in August this year. There
were sixteen grounds of appeal comprised in
the notice, but it was contended at the hearing
that the 11th was bad. The company, however,
were willing to forego that ground if the trustees would
go into the case on the merits; but it was argued on the
other side, that although the company had 15 good
grounds of appeal in their notice, yet having inserted a
bad one, the Court was not at liberty to hear the rest, a
piece of the primest nonsense that could possibly be in-
dulged in before a court of law. The justice, neverthe-
less, viewed it in a different light, and, holding this
foolish objection to be founded in reason and law, they
dismissed the appeal altogether.
Mr. Justice PATTESON granted a rule to show cause.
Rule nisi accordingly.
COUNTY-COURTS.
Mr. Sergeant JONES was instructed to move for a rule
to show cause why a person named George Thomas,
who is at present a prisoner in Cardiff Gaol, under a
commitment of the County-court of Glamorgan, should
not be discharged under the circumstances disclosed
in the affidavits filed in support of the application. On
the 25th June last the Judge of the County Court of
Glamorgan, made an order upon the prisoner for the
payment of a debt by certain instalments, some of which
had not been paid, and on the 28th of August the County
Court issued what was called a judgment summons,
requiring the prisoner to show cause why, in de-
fault of payment according to the original
order, he should not be committed to prison.
There was a notice attached to the bottom of this sum-
mons intimating that if he did not appear ho would be
committed to the common gaol of Swansea. Consider-
ing that the Judge had no power to issue such a sum-
mons, the prisoner paid no attention to it, and on the
20th October an order of commitment was made against
him by the Judge of the County Court to the Swansea
gaol for a period of 28 days. On the 26th October he
was arrested under that order, and taken in custody to
the common gaol of Swansea, where he ascertained from
the keeper that it bad not been certified by the Secretary
of State as a proper prison for the reception of coonty
court debtors. An intimation to that enact was also
made to the clerk of the County Court ; and at
eleven o'clock the same evening, the prisoner
having been in custody since four o'clock, the clerk
appeared with a second warrant, committing the prisoner
to the gaol at Cardiff instead of Swansea. The prisoner
was then taken to a public-house in Swansea, and kept
there till the next morning, when he was taken to the
police-station, where he remained till four o'clock in the
afternoon, and then he was removed to the public-house
for the night. On the succeding day, which was a
Sunday, he was carried to Cardiff gaol, and there he
now remained. Now the County Court Act, the eth
and 10th Victoria, it was true, provided that county
court prisoners should be committed for default, con
tempt, or otherwise, to the common gaol of the district in
which the court was situated, but the 12th Victoria, chap.
101, sec. 1, repealed that section, and provided that such
prisoners should be committed to the debtor's prison of
the district, or to some other prison, which should be
certified as a proper place by the Secretary of State. It
was, clear, therefore, that the County Court Judge had
no power to issue the first summons, inasmuch as the
gaol at Swansea had not been certified, and it might turn
out that the prisoner was justified in disobeying the
order to appear, on the ground that it contained a notice
which the Court bad no power to put in force.
Mr. Justice PATTESON—But he has got to the right
place after all, and there is no reason why I should dis-
turb him.

Mr. Sergeant JONES submitted to his Lordship that
the judge had no power to order the commitment at all.
Mr. Justice PATTESON—Then he must bring an action
for false imprisonment. It seems he is now in proper
custody, and it is not usual for the Court to interfere by
way of Habeas Corpus, except where a party is impro-
perly detained.

Mr. Sergeant JONES put this case to his Lordship.
Supposing, instead of under a bad order he had been
taken under an informal ca-sa, and while ho was in
custody the error was discovered; he apprehended the
original arrest was wrong, and the second detainer must
fall with it.

Mr. Justice PATTESON would go that length.
Mr. Sergeant JONES submitted to his Lordship, then,
that this was an analogous case. Besides, when the
judge had issued the first warrant his jurisdiction was
entirely gone.
Mr. Justice PATTESON—Why did not the prisoner
appear to the original summons?
Air. Sergeant JONES said because he felt that it was
informal. Probably, had the notice stated that his non•
attendance would render him liable to be committed to

the Cardiff gaol, he would have appeared. It was of the
greatest importance to the public that there should be
strict regularity in the proceedings of county courts.
Mr. Justice PATTESON considered it of equal impel.•
lance that fraudulent debtors should not be allowed to
escape from the payment of their just debts.
Mr. Sergeant JONES urged upon his Lordship that if
this case were passed offer Q judge of a county court
might commit a man to a wrong gaol for a long period,
and then transfer him to the right prison for a further
keptgteoni gngthasopffru
rtithswoi son
m days,einstancent oafn
dthneopwr
twenty-eighti
hsoen ewrahs
days
under-
ynbdseee n
n.
itsriomthneerrasi forin
this
Car
h ri
.ffj
ub gaol.tc
e PATTESON asked when the second warrant
was dated ?
Mr. Sergeant JONES replied, that it was dated on the
same day as the first one, namely, the 20th of October,
and ordered the keeper of the gaol to imprison the de-
fendant for twenty-eight days after the day on which he
obtained possession of his body. He doubted whether
the judge of the court was aware of these proceedings,
since the clerk only seemed to have moved in the matter.
county court judges were great men, but county
court clerks were far greater.
Mr. Justice PATTESON inquired what the amount of
the debt was. _ _

Mr. Sergeant JONES said it was 121., the costs were
41., and now 21. 51. was charged for taking the prisoner
to Cardiff, a distance of forty-five miles.

,
Mr. Justice PATTESON—There appears to to sone
irregularity in the case. Let the prisoner, therefore, he
brought up on habeas corpus.
Mr. Sergeant JONES would prefer taking a rule to
show cause to save expense.
Mr. Justice PATTESON said it was not usual to pro-
ceed in this way where the liberty of the subject was
concerned.

A Writ was accordingly directed to lie issued, addressed
to the gstoler of Cardiff.

POLICE CHANGES.—It is rumoured that Mr. Daniel
Whittle Harvey, Commissioner of the City Police, is to
succeed Sir Charles Rowan as Chief Commissioner of
the Metropolitan Police, Sir Charles being about to
retire, from the delicate state of his health.
Do what you have to do just now, and leave it not
for to-morrow.—Eliza Cooks Journal.

BOW-STREET-(THIS DAY,)

A respectably-attired middle aged man, named &illy,
was charged with having assaulttd Mr. Joseph
Stopford, of No. 8, Southampton-buildings, Chancery-
lane, who represented himself to be the stcretary to the
Artesian Water Company.
The complainant stated that on Wednesday night ho
was passing alorg Wellirgtor-street, in the Strand, when
the prisoner, whom he had known for some time, came
up and struck him violently with a stick on the bead and
race, which collEcted a crowd around them, and a po-
liceman coming upon the scene of the assault, he felt it
not only to be his duty, but for his own protection,lto give
him into custody.

Mr. JARDINE asked him if he had given hlm any pro-
vocal ?—The complainant said he was not aware that
he had.

The police-constable, who arrested the prisoner, con-
firmed the statement as to the crowd being collected in
the street, and the prisoner being given into custody.
Mr. JARDINE asked the prisoner if he had anything
to say in answer to the charge? The prisoner replied
that he had much to say; the complainant, whom he
stigmatised with language that the law of libel will not
permit to be reported, had broken his pace of mind by
debauching his wife. lie had long suspected that
the complainant, notwithstanding that he pro-
fessed to entertain a most ardent friendship for
himself, had a design upon the virtues of his
wife, but he never could obtain any direct proof
of the nature of the connexion that of late had existed
between the two till the evening in question, when he
observed them come out of a brothel in Waterloo-road,
Lambeth, which was kept open to the public as a coffee-
shop. He had a friend with him at the time, or he
would have chastised the felluw there and then, but his
friend restrained his violence till they got across the
bridge into Wellington-street, whither he and his friend
followed them. Perceiving that they were on the point
of parting, he could contain his feelings no longer, and
gave vent to them in the manner that had heen
described.
Mr. JARDINE asked what became of the wife 7—The
police-constable said there was a female taking part in
the quarrel, but she ran away.
Mr. JARDINE, under the circumstances stated by the
defendant, declined to adjudicate in the case summarily,
but would leave it for the complainant to indict the de-
fendant at the sessions. In the meantime ho would take
bail for the appearance of the defendant.
The depositions wera then taken, and the complainant
bound over to prosecute. After which the defendant was
liberated on bail.

MARLBORO -STREET-THIS DAY.
William Roberts, a lad about fourteen years of age, was
placed before Mr. Hardwick, charged with having em-
buzled the sum of 15s. belonging to his master, John
Homans, greengrocer, Wells. street, Oxford-street.
It appeared that on Saturday last the prosecutor gave
the prisoner 155., with directions to go to Covent-garden
market and fetch two sacks of potatoes, which he (pro-
secutor) had purchased. Not returning with the potatoes,
the prosecutor went into the market, and from inquiries
made by him he learned that the prisoner had not been
nigh the person of whom the potatoes had been pur.
chased, and that the truck which he had taken had been
left in the market, where it was found by one of the
constables, who took it to the Greenyard. Nothing
more was seen of the prisoner till this morning, when
prosecutor met him in the street, and gave him in charge.
The prisoner, in defence, said he lost part of the money
and spent the rest.
Mr. HARDWICK committed him for trial.

THE LOVER TO HIS DEPARTING LOVED ONE,
(From Eliza Cook's Journal.)
Thou art leaving us all lore, and much may befal, love,
To warp and to wean thee from infancy's ties;
Thou wilt tread fairer places, and see brighter faces,
And freshness and beauty will dazzle thine eyes.
Thou hast promised thine heart, love, but now, ere we
part, love,
Take back all the vows thou hest given to me;
They were made in our joy, love, as girl and as boy,ilove,
When moonlight was gilding the old hawthorn tree.
We have grown up together like green moss and heather,
Our hands were entwined ere our footsteps were sure;
But the dreams of our youth, love, too often, forsooth, love,
Are painted in colours that will not endure.
And now thou art going where life will be glowing
With all the enchantment thou longest to see;
And a rarer Elysian may shut from thy vision
Our fairy romance and the old hawthorn tree.
If thou findest another whose presence c&ia smother
Our earliest words and our latest adieu;
Thou hadst better be breaking thy word than be taking
An altar to serve where thou couldst not be true.
I'd have thee forget, love, if aught of regret, love,
Should come with the thought that thy will is not free;
Oh! I'd have thee forget, lore, that ever we met, lore,
With promise and pledge 'neath the old hawthorn tree
Think not I would gain thee if duty but chain thee,
Think not that I deem thee unchangeably mine;
Shouldst thou love one more dearly, oh 1 tell me sincerely,
And my hopes and my claims I will sadly resign.
For my heart, while possessing its coveted blessing,
Would bitterly bleed, if affection could see
That thy young love had vanished, and feelings were
banished,
That gladdened my soul 'neath the old hawthorn tree.
I see by thy smile, love, thou'rt thinking the while, love,
That thou wilt return with thy spirit the same;
And perchance I am wrong, love, in breathing a song,
love,
That shadows one moment thy well-cherished name.
So, I'll tell thee no more, love, but that I adore, love,
With passion as fervent as passion can be;
And that if thou wilt come, love, unchanged to thy
home, love,
We'll have orange-bloom twined with the old haw-
thorn tree.

ELIZA COOK.