The Sun.
London, England, 1814-03-04 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

• Six Special Jury Causes v;ire set down for trial
yesterday, but the merits of none of them were
gone into. Several were referred, and the rest
were disposed of very shortly, without any trouble
to Judge, Jury, or Counsel. Two or three com-
mon Jury Causes were decided, but they were
either undefended, or no effectUal resistance was
made.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

GLOVER V. BUCKLEY.

This was an issue directed from the Court of
Chancery,. to try whether a sum exceeding one
hundred, pounds. was due .front the bankrupt, of
whom the defendant is an assignee, to the plain-
tiff.. The question on which the case hinged, Was,
• whether Heald, the bankrupt, was or- was not a
_partner with another bankrupt of the name of
Showell, previously to the bankruptcy Of Showell,
which took place on the 22d of May, 1813. The
purpose of the issue was to satisfy the Lord Chan-
cellor whether a joint commission issued against
Showell and Heald was justifiable.
Serjeant YELL, for the plaintiff, attempted
to make out the partnership by a long chain of
circumstantial evidence.
Mason., .the• shopman of Showell, who was a
slopseller in lloundsditch, said that he knew Mr.
Heald, who was a warehouseman inCateaton-
street. In September•, 1812, and thence up to
March, 1813, he used frequently to come to the
shop of Heald, and interfered in the management
of the business, by examining the books, and-asking
respecting the money which witness was in the.
habit of receiving on accdun.t of Mr. Showell.—
At one time the counting-house was altered, and
Heald gave the directions to the carpenter. On
one Occasion, a package of goods being about to
be sent to Lynn,. in Norfolk, to he sold at the-
Mart there, Heald forbid them to be taken out of
the shop,•aod said that no goods should be taken
out of the shop without his knOwledge. On
several occasions, within the time in question,
goods we►e sent from Heald's warehouse to
Showell's shop,' -with invoices : as they had been
sent before Showell was indebted to Heald to a
considerable amount. Showell was indebted to
Glover, for goods delivered in 1813, to the
amount of more than 1001.

• Crooks, a foreman of Showell, 'corroborated
'this account, as the circumstances which came to
his knowledge.
' Mr. Joseph, a friend of Mr. Showell and Mr.
Heald, said that he bad frequently heard them
both say that they were in partnership. This was
about the end of 1812. Heald said that he was
to advance 30001. to the concern. They purchased
jointly some_additional premises in Honndsditch.
They also bought home goods on their joint ac:
count from a'lllr. Wolfe; .tWo invoices were made
out for these goods, which were sent to Heald's
warehouse._ In 1813 Showell andlleald borrowed
some money from Mr. Wolfe, and gave a promissory
note for the amount in their joint names. This
Was on the 12th of March.—On his cross-exami-
nation, this witness said, that he was in the habit
of writing for Mr. Wolfe, who was a creditor of
Showell, but that he was not his Clerk; be lived
on his own fortune.

The Carpenter, whO made the alteration in the
counting-house of 'Showell, said that Heald had
titian him to Showeli's. shop, and directed Lim
jointly with Showell. This alteration was made
on the 25th of March, 1813.

Lamburn said he was employed to take Sho-
well's stock on the 9th of March : it occupied him
about a'week. Heald spoke to him while he was
so employed, -and told hitu he tad an interest in
the business. Witness understood him to wean,
that -he was about to go into partnership with
Showell.

Mason, cross-examined as to dates, said, that
the time when Heald examined Showell's books
was subsequent to the' alteration in the shop.
It Was inhuitted, on the part of the plaintiff,

that there was to allusion to the partnennip in
Showell's ,Ooks.
Alr-Scrjeaut SHEPHERD, for the defendants,
contended, that all the acts which were proved
(leaving out of the question the evidence of Jo--
seph) were of an' eqnirocal nature, and if not
referable to the situation of Heald as a creditor
to a. large amount, were easily explained from the
fact, which he did not pretend to deny, that
-Heald was about to enter into. partnership with
Showell, which he would have done hadite not
discovered theetnbarrasSed State of 1113
,As to Joseph's. evidence, it was in contradiction
to the whole tenor of the other facts, and that
witness must have mistaken (which 'might easily
be the case) the conversations of Heald and
. Showell, as applying to at actually existing, in-
stead of a proposed partnership.
,The only evidence of consequence, on the part
of the defendant, was the production of a warrant
of attorney from Showell to Heald, in which he
confessed the sum of 30001. to be due to the lat-
ter. This was executed in December 1812.

The CHIEF' JUSTICE summed up -tlie evidence,
and observed on the facts stated by the shopman
and foreman a Showell, that they seemed rather
to indicate a partnership in contemplation than
in existence. He remarked,.. that the circuni-
stance that no mention of-the partnership was
made in the books wh le there seemed no motive
for its concealment, if it bad existed, operated in
favour of the defendant's case. Joseph's testi-
mony, however, if believed to be accurate all
its extent, would establish clearly the case of the
plaintiff. It was for the Jury to say, whether,
under all the circumstances, it was probable that
his evidence was strictly correct.
The Jury retired for half an hour,.and returned
a verdict (after the Judge had left the Court) fur
the plaintiff: -

THE. POLICE.

STEALING :20ACII GLASSES.

UNION-HNLL-.—Bishop was yesterday brought\
Izefore Mr. BIRNIE, by GO charged on suspicion
of-feloniously breaking. open the coach-house of
George Samuel Cotlyer, Esq. of Cle.phain Rise,
and stealing threecoach glasses, on the night of
the Sth-of last month. •

The Patrcic of Camberwell and Peckham stated,
that he was on duty early on the rimming in,
question, when he pet ceived two men coming out
of Mr. Coflyer's premises ; 'they had something
in their hands 'which glittered by the light of the
moon. The witness lost sight of onctof the pri-
soners, who went- behind 'some ccittages ; the
other, which was the prisoner, Bishop,, seeing
the witness following hint, attempted to escape
over a hedge, but falling down. the witness came
up and took 'hint into custody. Behind the cot--
tage to which ►.he otherarisoner retreated, were
found the three glasses, an iron crow, and a pad-
lock.

Mr.Vollyerswore to the fact of hisstablehaving
been broke open, and also swore to the gla,, es
being his property. The padlock which had been
found was aho Orb to by• Mr. Collyer, as being
the same which had been taken from the Tor of
the coach-house. The prisoner was fully coin-
Milted for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—We stated a ftW•(tays
since; that four persons were in custody, charged
with stealing coach-glasses, via. George %hikes,
alias /larding, James Butcher, Freeman, and
Franklin, together with Samuel ;Josephs, a Jew
receiver. The whole were re-examined vesterr
day before G. HICKS, Esq. for liorglariously break-
ing.and entering the dwelling-house of Sir Joseph
Bankes, Bart. and stealing several coach-glasses,'
of the value of 21. each and upwards. The
stables in Dean-street form part ,of the dwelling-
house in Soho-square. Franklin and Josephs
were admitted. witnesses. The former was a
hackney-coachman, es well as the other prisoners.
lie planned the robbery, and waited in the street
whilst Jilkes and Botcher accomplished it. This
witness gave a detail of the whole transaction,
and Josephs provcd having bought two box-coats
of Jilkes, Butcher, and Freeman, and which were
identified by Sir Josph Bankes's servants to be
the property of their master. Jilkes and Butcher
were fidly committed for trial, and Freeman was
remanded to answer another cha'rge.

111ANSION-HOUSE.---Yesterday John—nryant was
charged by Thomas Alexander. with robbing him
of his watch and three gold keys. The com-
plainant stated, that on Wednesday evening the
prisoner pushed violently against him in Leaden-
hall-street, bet‘vixt. the hours of eleven and
. twelve ; and, when he was in the act of falling,
had snatched his watch from him, Ot the value of
5/. The pvisoner was parsued and taken, but then
property was not found. The statement of the
complainant was corroborated by the evidence of
others, an.l the prisoner was fully committed.
James,Buckmaster, a boy only ten years of age,
- was charged by Mr. Smith, a tailor and draper in
Houndsditch, with breaking a pane of glass in
his shop,window, with a view of stealing some
pieces of cloth. The prisoner had been perceived
in his operations by a passenger, who took him
into custody. • On examination, the window was
found to have been broken, and no doubt, but for
the interruption, the end in view would soon have
been attained.

Although so young, iCappeared• that the pri-
soner had heel) before the LORD MAYOR for a si-
milar offence, on a former occasion. He was re-
manded till Saturday.

A pentagraph was fraudulently Obtained, ot
Tuesday last, from Mr. Bates, in the Poultry, by
a well dressed Young than, who ordered it to be
sent to him at .the New York Coffee-house; on
receiving it, he took the bill and receipt, and
pulling out of his pocket a 51. Bank note, and a
cheque upon Messrs. Roberts and Co. for 151. 7s.
he observed -the note was not sufficient, said he
had to meet some gentlemen up stairs, and desired'
Mr. Bates's young man to take the cheque to
Robarts's, and. return to him immediately with
the !uoifey. The cheque was fictitious, and the
swindler got clear. off.