The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-10 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
HoUSE OF LOWS July 9,
This morning the Howe recommenced its sittings to
bear appeals.
Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, and the Bi.hop of
Salisbury (the first-named acting as chairman in the
absence of the Lord Chancellor) were the only Peers
present.

whu were in the habit of stnding up such diseased car-

cars 'a.
Sergeant White (No, 4.) informed the Alderman that
for the last two years they had been constantly cautioned,
but without effect.
A THIRD CASE.—George Russell deposed that about
ten o'clock that morning he saw two cows being driven
into Smithfield. He went up to the drover and inquired
JUDC3IENT—BENSON V. CHAPMAN. where they were going to, and was told to Mr. Morgan,
This case underwent an argument of two days' dun- I the salesman. Witness followed, and afterwards saw
Lion in the month of July, 1848, when Sir F. Theiiger 1 them tied up with other cattle, and on telling Mr. bier-
and Mr. Barstow were heard on ledialf of the appellant, : gan that one of them was in a very bad state, and that
and Sir F. Kelly and Mr. Martin on le half of the re- I he must seiz . it, be replied, "Very well, you may ;and
spondent. As we gave the case at full length during the h t
I there is another one which you mty take," pointing to
arguments, it will now only be necsssary to state that e second one, which was, however, not so bad as the
the questions in it arose out of the technicalities of first.
1 Mr. Nice said that he condemned one of them as being
pleading. i in a veil bad state from disease in the lungs.
The action was tried at Guildhall on the let of July,
Alderman MUSGROVE asked to whom they belonged?
1842, before Mr. Justice Erskine, when this jury gave a !
Russell replied that they belonged to a cowkeeper at
verdict for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the full
.Islington, who had many more in the same state, but
Court upon some points which had been reserved. By
these were the only two who were able to walk so far
the testimony of some of the witnesses it was proved, !
market.
that the vessel after the accident had been examined as 1 as the
to the extent of the danrige she had sustained, and was Alderman GROVE ordered it to be destroyed.
repaired at a cost of 7,1321. 3a. 81, to meet which a A FOURTH CASE.—George White, 24, said that at a
quarter-pest nine o'clock that morning he saw a men
bottomry bond was executed to Messrs. M•Celma,nd and
Co. The plaintiff also wrote to the defendant stating his , driving a cow in Hosier-lane, near Smithfield, where he
intention to abandon the matter, as the cost of repairs left it, and went to a salesman named Pickete, who re-
would be more than the vessel and cargo were worth ter fused to have anything to do with it. The man re-
him. On the trial, as has been stand, the jury found turned and drove it to the Greyhound-yard, when Mr.
for the plaintiff, and the full Court upon a subsequent Nice was again sent for and condemned it. It belonged
motion confirmed that view. The Court of Exchequer to a Mr. Kemp, of Coburg-street, Euston-square.
Chamber, however, reversed that holding, and the pre• .; Mr. Nice proved that the animal was tatted with
see' appeal was against Oat judgment. I pleure pneumonia, and was in A very bad stale It had
evidently been under medical treatment, but was by no
Mr. Baron ALDEaSoN now read the opinion of the
Judges, which went to uphold the judgment of the means fit for human consumption.
; Alderman MUSGROVE—II.ve parties whose cattle are
Court below.
Lord BROUGHAM having moved the thanks of the seized an opportunity of sending a medical gentleman
House to the Learned Judges for the care and attention of their own to consult with you?
Mr. Nice—They have, but they never avail themselves
they had devoted to this ciao), also moved that the opinion I,
just read be printed, and taken into consideretion on a ! of it.
Al ierman Mesoateve—So I thought, because the
future day. i
are too far gone.
Lord CAMPBELL concurred, and the motions were animals
agreed to. 1 Mr. Kemp and his d•-over both asserted that the cow
never entered Smithfield-market; but the latter's in-
COURT OF QUE.EA'S I igNCH, July 9. ' structions were to take it to Fox and Knot yard, and
(Sittings at N.si Preis, at Guildhall, before Lord Chief ' then go and ask Mr. Kemp's (pinion respecting it, and
Justice DENMAN and a Common J try.) iif he said that it was not fit for sale, then the animal
CHARTIST TRIALS.-31.NAMARA v. O'CoNNOR. was to be driven to the knacker's.
The plaineff in this ca.e is an attorney, and brought Alderman MUSIM.YE Said he was willing to believe
his action to rec over a sum of 1071. 173. 61, from the I that such was Mr. K mp's intention—to get the opi-
defendant, Mr. Feergus O'Connor, m.e, fe. costs and ni .n of Mr. Pickett. and therefore he should not give
expenses incurred by pl ,intitf in defence of five Chariist directions to the City S, l7citor to prosecute, bat all
prisoners, tried at the Old Bailey, and for which de- betties must bear in mind that it was not a question
i o fondant, according to plaintiff's case, had made himself f
whether the cattle was brought
liable. 1 the offence was the same anywhere, for all London was
Mr. Sergeant Allen and Mr. Bramwell appeared for' an open market. into the mirket. for
the plaintiff; Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. k'rentis for the ! Sergeant White observed that as there was no doctor
defence.
! appointed to examine the cattle, great inconvenience
rSergeant
. ALLEN stated the me, from which it ! was occasioned by Mr. Nice necessarily being absent
M
appeared that the prisoners for whose defence the 1 at times.
plaintiff's claim was incurred were Mr. Ernest Jones ' Alderman MUSGROVE said more positive measures
(barrister at-law), Fusse I, a st stem than that of
Sharpe, Vernon, and Looney. I must be adopted to prevent such
Plaintiff, defendant, and Mr. Ernest Jones met by ups appointing another medical men to the market, to be
pointinent at Ne vgate, on the 9th or 10th of June, always present, because it was exp• creel there would
1843. when defendant communicated to Mr. Jones that be an it,crease of this growing evil. The cm must be
the plaintiff was to act as his and his fellow prisoners' destroyed.
solicitor. He communicated the same to the other pri- I
amen; and Mr. Cope, the gevernor of Newgate, would
prove that he was present at the interview at which the
terms and arrangements of the defence were settled. It
was, therefore, clear that the plaintiff was employed by
the defendant to act as the prisoners' solicitor, and thst
it was to the defendant ho was to lock for payment of
his costs and expenses in the matter. The Learned
Sergeant then called
Mr. Cope. the governor of Newgate, who deposed to
what passed at the interview; and the Rev. Mr. Davis,
ordinary of the prison, who deposed as to what took
place at another interview between the parties in his
vestry, and from which it appeared that the defendant
introduced plaintiff to the prisoners as their solicitor.
Letters were also put in from the defendant to the
plain iff, being instructions to the latter not to act with-
out his (Mr. O'Connor's) authority, and not to take any
step without consulting him.
Yr. Sergeant SHEa addressed the jury for the defence,
and contended that Mr. O'Connor had never rendered
himself responsible to plaintiff for the cost of the pri-
soners' defence. A committee, he would show the jury,
had been formed about the Bth of June, for the purpose
of making arrangements for the prisoners' defence, and
to that committee, which was denominated " Tote De
fence Committee," it was clearly understood the plaintiff
was to look for his coats, a funl having come by sub-
scriptions into their hands for the purpose of defraying
the expenses of the defence. With respect to the ena •
ployment of the plaintiff by the defendant, he was in a
position to show that so tar from desiring to employ him,
Mr. O'Connor was do sirous to employ a Mr. Roberts,
his impression being that plaintiff was too young a man
to have the managem nt of such an affair. "rhe Learned
Sergeant then put in several letters from plaintiff to the
"Defence Committee," from which he said it was clear
the plaintiff looked to that committee for paypseut of his
cost. He then called

BOW STREET.

ROBBERY BY A S -LICITOR'S CLERIC.—YeStPrilay,
George William Saunders, a clerk in the service of
Meesrs. Stnith, solicitors, No. 5. S yuthampteny street,
HY lhorn, w ys placed at the bar before Mr. Hall. charged
wi,h stealing a mortgage deed, value 1,5001. from the
office of his employers. being the property of Mr. George
Bedf, yrd, the mortgagor.
William Gilby Welsh, a clerk in the service of the
prosecutors, stated that an action was brought by the
Rev. William Servante, and Mary Elizabeth, his ttiee,
against George Bedford. Esq., for the sum of 7431.
16s. 3t1., mentioned in the deed, together with interest
and further advances, amounting in all to 1,500/. and
upwards, upon which the defendant demanded of er, and
a copy of the deed. On the 21st June he inspected the
deed at their solicitor's office, and having brought it beck
to his employer's chambers, he placed it in a drawer in
his desk, where it was safe on the following day, but on
the next day, when it could not be found, he was in-
duced to conclude that his employera had locked it up.
In a short time, having ascertained that such WAS not
the case, a general search was made, but with no better
success. He believed that two letters produced were in
the prisoner's handwriting.
In answer to the prisoner, the witness said that the
judge never asked to see the endorsements on the deed,
and any person could leave the chambers of his em-
ployers without being observed by the clerks, although
they might see him enter.
Mr. John Sinaleton, solicitor, of 36, Great James-
street. B .clibrd-row, said that he was the solicitor for
the defendant in the action.. On the 3d instant, having
received the letter produced from Mt sirs. Mewlow, so-
licitors, of Ledbury, he c tnetnunicated with Messrs.
Smith respecting the robbery, and their suspicions im-
mediately rested on one of the clerks in their office, re-
vesting his assistance, which he granted by inserting an
advertisement in the morning journals, offering a reward
of 101 for the recovery of the documents; and on the
same day he got an answer at the receiving house in
Red Lion str• et, Bulb trn, which, after showing to them,
he inserted another advertisement off-ring 20/, which
appeared on the 7th, desirin.• that X Y. Z. would 041 ,
on the followii,g flay to receive the terms proposed, and
aecording to previous arrangements the constable was io
attendance. The letter proaueed had been inclosed
from town to the Rev. Mr. Servante, of Kempley
Vicarage, near Ledbury, in i ierefordshire.
Sergeant Thompson, F. proved that fr.,m information
he received from Messrs. Smith, he went 'at twelve o'clock
1 on Saturday last to the K -nt 1.10;el. in Brownlew street,
I Mth.- lane, where he waited, giving dire ions that
should any person call for R. W. s. or Mr. Singl-tim. he
should be shown into the roam, and in a short time the
1 prisoner entered. saying that he was deputed to wait
upon him respecting an advertisement. and having re-
, qtreeted he wou'd be se tted witness pulled out his p ,cltet-
titeik offering to pay him the amount of the reward, if
he had got tne document. The prisoner replied that he
hid it not with him, but could procure it by five o'clock,
upon which witness uttered to pray for a cab and eceem- 1
parry him wherever he wanted to gs. He then raid,
" ' l'is a singular mariner in vetted' 1. (seine p tssessed of
this d tcument. I come from Smiths, and have no good
reetine towards them ; quite the contrary, for they are
the greatest rogues alive, besides the clerk who manaees
their common-law; matters is the greatest foul, for
he took the document out, and having gone
to a coffee-house in Chancery-lane, left it
there. A party spoke to me about ir, and I
advised that it should be kept back until they should
advertise it, an I then Mr. Be iford would bring an action
against Smith." The prisoner then said that 201. was a
very small sum, and, having got a cab, they drove to the
Elephant and Castle, and a ter he had made a short delay
at No. 9. West-street, Walworth-road, he brought out
the document produced. Oa the way back witness
handed the prisoner a fictitious cheque for 201., and, on
his wishing to go into the City to get it cashed, witness
told him ha could better accommodate him with it in
the neighbourhood of Covent garden, to which he agreed,
and in a few minutes their journey terminated at the
station-house. Witness then ititroduc-d himself as an
officer of justice, and the prisoner said, " This is really
too bid; it is nut gentlemanly on your part."
The prisoner, after receiving the usual caution from
the Bench, said he could prove at a future day he did
not write the letter to Mr. Servante, contending that
the mortgage deed was valueless, as it was recited in
another deed, and that the opinion had been taken upon
the point. He Al,o denied that any of the letters were
in his handwriting, and said that the deed was handed
to him by a person who f fund it at Lucket's coffee-
house in Chancery-lane, and put himself in communica-
tion with the parties concerted reap-sting the reward,
and he would call that person to giv , evidence, but at
present he was b tend not to reveal his name.
Mr. HALL refused to accept of bail, and ordered the
prisoner to be fully committed for trial.

Mr. Robert Side, a school slate manufacturer, who
depsed that he was one of the Defence Committee in
question; that they had, by request of Mr. O'ConnO,'.
attended at Osborne's Hotel, ,‘delphi, on the 23d of
Juae, 1848, Mr. O'Connor's object being to ascertain
from them the amount of the defence fund in their
hands. Mr. Licsy, the treasurer of the conatnitte, p+ o
duced 401. or 501, and said that it was the wish of the
committee that Mr. O'Connor should employ that sum in
retaining counsel for the prisoners. Mr. O'Connor re-
marked that he should have prorerred employing Mr.
Roberts to M'N toara, and that he would n.tt himself he
liable beyond the extent to wnich the funds of the
committee nt;ght go. ['here were, besides the L lon
Coarist prisoner+, Chartist prisoners in the country,
who were also to be defended by the application of the
defence twat the intention of the contributors being that
the fund should be a cownon one for the defence of
town and country Chartists, sal that the distribution
for such purpose should a fair one.
Mr. Ewi:.r, clerk to the defeadant, d: posed that he was
present at on interview at Notting-hill, Bayswater, at
which plaintiff, defendant, and Mr. Ernest Jones were
present, and tha: defendant on that occasion distinc ly
informed p 1 iintiff that he, defendant, would not. be liable
for any amount of costs that might be incurred beyond
what the subscriptions would cover.
In cross examination, it was elicited from this witness
that Mr O'Connor, in relation to the defence expens's,
sail he 'bout,' have to " pay the piper," on which Mr.
Jones said, "IF you have got to pay the piper, I will
defend myself." Mr. O'Connor replied that the money
coll:cted should go as far as it could towards defending
all the prisoners
J,rnes Ryd-r, clerk in the Northern Star offi‘te,
deposed that h. had rec->ived a sum of 4791. 19s. Id. for
defence of the Chartist prisoners, and that he had paid
500/. towards that object in advance of various sumo,
the differencß between the two amounts baring been
paid by Mr. O'Connor.
Alnutt produced those letters of the plaintiff to
the Defence C unmittee, read by Mr. Sergeant Shee in
his speech for the defence.
Mr. Sergeant ALLEN replied, and commented on the
e7idenee.

L )rd DENMAN sucamPd up, and left it to the jury to
say whether they bPliwvea that the plaintiff looked for
payment to tin funds of the D3tenee Committee, or to
Sr. O'Connor.

The jury, unable to azree in the box, retired, and
after an absence of considerable duration, returned a
veri:et for the plaintiff, for 1071. 17s. 6d. the amount
chimed.