The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-07 00:00:00

HOLLAND.

AMSTERDAM, JUNE 4.—The transactions on the
money market were altogether of a favourable ten-
dency to-day—all the funds, national as well as
foreign, were rated at higher exchange; and French
stock not merely recovered its former tone, but closed
one per cent. higher than yesterday.—Amsterdam
Courant, June 5.

THE HAGUE, JUNE 4.—Yesterday the Minister of
Justice, M. Curtius, took official leave of all, the
gentlemen connected with his department, and in-
troduced M. Von Wickers, his successor. M. Cur-
tius, in a pleasant address to his former assistants,
exhorted them to discharge their duties to his suc-
cessor with the same zeal and earnestness which they
had invariably displayed while ho was in office.
Nothing further has transpired respecting the
resignation of M. Bund, the Minister for the
Colonies. _ _ _

The Second Chamber will resume its duties to-
morrow.

The Studs Courant contains the law abolishing
the duty on vermicelli and maccaroni. It likewise
publishes the law for the travelling expenses, &c.,
of the members of the Chambers.

In regard to the diplomacy of the Hague the Nation
says—

We are lost in conjectures respecting the pro-
ject of the Cabinet of the Hague; one thing is
evident, that the Queen Dowager is acting the
part of a Maria Theresa. It appears that a
project of law has been planned, of no less importance
than that of re-establishing the treaty of 1815, with
modifications, for the purpose of opposing a barrier to
France. A new kingdom of the Netherlands is to be
erected, composed of the conquests of Louis XIV., of
Belgium, of the Rhenish provinces, and of Hol-
land, which will constitute a state containing about
fifteen millions of inhabitants. Protected by Prussia,
peaec eowf
,rbaon
csee.c u rTehd
This
eirsmvialinaetn trl ye p
to r t Europey
a time on
w thei
l
will
chow how far there is truth at the, foundation."

SIR JOHN FRANKLIN'S EXPEDITION.—The United
States Government has taken steps to prosecute the
search after Sir John Franklin's expedition. It appears
by a telegraphic dispatch from Washington, that Captain
Wilkes is to have command of one of the ships. In a
letter relative to the search for Sir John Franklin, Capt.
Wilkes says that time would not permit, this winter, to
make any effort in the Arctic Ocean in search of Sir
John Franklin, other than for the Navy Department to
dispatch a smaller vessel from the western coast of
America to notify to the whale-ships that they should
be oa the look out. He add;, that " what is now required
is a speedy exploration of the Wellington channel. The
distance from our shores is not greater than that to
Europe, and the voyage may be readily performed in 45
days. IF vessels were now fitted, they would be in time
for the saason, which opens about the middle of July,
and would be able to explore this channel thoroughly
to its furthest extent or navigable point, and, if not to
succour, they will ascertain whether Sir John Franklin
had taken that route, and return safely back before
winter, with tidings."

CORN.—Two fine samples of wheat in the ear were
exiiii,itQd at. Canterbury on Saturday. The iniiirta Iron
the country are generally favourable. There is promise
of a large crop, and, with few exceptions, in every de-
scription of grab:lt—Kentish aazette,

C ils . INI ii ;Si S ..
~i 1
Names of ' ~,c.' Dividend Price Names of g (Dividend
per ~.
Companies. , A per ' Companies. 2 Annum. Price
Ito Annum. so
---...- , ---- - ---- -
X, I X
Ash tn & Oldh 97 i 71. - Macclesfield . 100, 27. 10s. -
100 181. 340
11,3 t
ra
kr /Intl yA.
b.
r.
g.
115600 15211.. 18850
oNie
faotrhd .. .. .. .. .. ..
100 201. 185
Birmingham 351 41. 80 Peak Forest. 78 ' 3/. 18s. -
Coventry.... 100! 251. 210 Regent's.... 33 ' 1/. ss. 17%
Derby •• . ••.100: 61. 63 Rochdale.... 85 41. 54
Ellsmre&Chs 133! 565. 41 Somrset Coal 150 ' 71.105. 130
Erewash ••• 100 321. --Do.LkFdSt 12 61. p. c. -
Grand•Junctn 100 5/. 85% Stffrd &Wore 140 281. 310
Grand Surrey 100,1 21. 30 Shrewsbury.. 125 151. -
Grand Union 100 1/. 10s. 24 Stourbridge.. 145, 201. 285
Grantham •• 150 - - Severn and)
Kennt & A.vni 39 7s. 6d. 5% Wye Rail. j 26 21. os. -
Leeds& Livrp 100 301. 315 Warwick&
Leicester ....1 j
140 5/. 63% Firming. lOO 4/. 50
Gelestr &Nth! 83 4/. 45 Warwick& I 100 31. 41
Loughborogh I 142 701. 650 Napton.
%lonmouthsh 100, 81. - Worcstr lil
Mntgemrysli 100 -- - Birming. j7B 2/. 41
MeltnMwbry 100 - - Wilts & Brks -, 11. 10

LIST OP SCOTTISH COMPANIES' PRICES
---
Dividend Amount
' Name of Company. per of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
---.--- ---_- ---- -
Bank of Scotland
British Linen Company 81. per cent. 100 0 0 100 0 0 200
Caledonian Bank .•..• 8 per eent. 10 0 0 210 0 31.18.
City of Glasgow Bank . 6/. per cent. 10 0 0 10 0 0 11%
Clydesdale Bank .• •
005 0 0
Commercial Bank •• •• 71. per cent. 500 0 0 100 0 .0 155
:o°oo 0° I°o 00
CO
91. 7s
2ntlnstnso.w..B..a.n.k.
66:611:
perpl,ee
rr
cent.
eee
nnn
ttt i .
1:2120550
5%
Exehangeßnk of Scot.. 4/. per cent. 100 0 0 50 0 0 273%y
Isle of Man. Company 71. per cent. 10 0 0 7 0 0 -
NationalsB
li. pp eep-rri. ecceeennnttt... 100 0 0 50 0 0 82
NortofSßeoatalaknd 'Bank 47. percent. 20 0
000
10250
_0: 000 31_12.220:
North British Bank ••
Western Bank •• • •
anionttoy
Bank
ill 00
ft ScotlandScotland
- 20 0 0 010 0 -
British Guarantee Ins. 47. per cent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 9s 6d
Caledonian Fire Insur. 10/. per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 21
Church of England Ins. - 50 0 0 20 0 2
BA b.
-e4rc'ceoernd .L Fire
e aa in da Fire Lifeife
'7
1.
City of Glasgow Life 6l. per cent. 25 0 0 2 0 0 21. 7s
Edinburgh Life Insur. 6/. per cent. 100 0 0 12 10 0 18%
East of Scotland Life - 10 0 0 015 0 98.0 d.
Eng. & Scot, Law Life 57. per cent. 50 0 0 217 6 -
Hercules Insurance Co. 71. per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 -
[nun. Co. of Scetlnd • •
5/. per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 -
Life Assoc. of Scotland 5/. per cent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 , 1/. 63
Mercantile Life ..
- 10 0 0 010 0 j3s. 6d.
• • • •
National Fire and Life 5/. per cent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 1205.6 d
North British Incur. •• 5%1.pr cent. 200 0 0 20 0 0 i 22%
North & West of Scot. 6/. per cent. 10 0 0 1 0 0 '172.6d
-
Scottish Life and Guar. 20 0 0 011 0 -
Scot. Sias. and Gen. Life - 1 0 0 015 0 ' -
pr cent. 20 0 0 1 0 0 11. Is
Scottish Union Insrncs. 6%1.
Standard Life ...... • . 51. per cent. 50 0 0 5 0 j 9%
United Dep. Assurance 51. per cent. 10 0 0 0 145,6 d
MISCELLANEOUS.
Dividend Amount
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price.
Annum. Share.
-- -.
X. s. d. X. s. d.
A.ustrallan Azriculturl - 100 0 0 30 0 0 16%
Anglo-Mexican Mint.. ]l. 4s. 10 0 0 10 0 0 -
Ditto, Half Shares.. - - 2 10 0
Canada ............. GI. per cent. 100 0 0 32 10 0 31
Uppr Canada Bonds 51. per cent. - - 70
City Navigation ...• - - - 9014
Comp.CpprMnrsEng. 51. percent. 100 0 0 70 0 0 -
Gen. Revers. & Invest. sp. c.tr.bs, 2/.100 0 0 100 0 0 90
Equitable Reversionry 5/, pr cent. 100 0 0 1100 0 0 99
Gen•SteatnNavigation 1/. 81. il5 0 0 14 0 0 22
London Institution ... - 78 15 0 -
-
Russell Institution.... - - 26 5 0 3
Peninslr& Orient.Stm. 8/. per cent. 50 0 0j 50 0 0 71%
Reversionary Int. Soc. 4%1. pr cent. 100 0 0 1100 0 0 92
Royal Mail Steam. ••• 61 18..4. pc, 100 0 01 60 0 0 50
South Australian"... 1/. per sha're. 25 0 0' 25 0 0 16
Van Dieman's Land., - 100 0 0 23 0 0 1%

• MONEY MARKET.—The premium on gold at Paris
is 12 per mille, which, at the English Mint price of 3/. 17s.
103-d. per ounce for standard gold, gives an exchange of
25.45; and the exchange at Paris on London at short
being 25.471, it follows that gold is 0.10 per cent.
dearer in London than in Paris. By advices from
Hamburgh the prica of gold is 439 per mark, which,
at the English Mint price of 3/. 17s. ion. per ounce for
standard gold, gives
an exchange of 13.12; and the
exchange at Hamburgh on London at short being
13.111, it follows that gold is 0.23 per cent, dearer in
Hamburgh than in London. The course of exchange at
New York on London is 1081 per cent., and the par of
exchange between England and America bei▪
ng 109 23.40
per cent., it follows that the exchange is 1.08 per cent.
against England. But the quoted exchange at New
York being for bills at 600 days' sight, the i▪
nterest must
be deducted from the above difference.
4, BLACK BARLEY.—A beautiful specimen of black
barley, healthy and strong in the stem, was brought to
our office for inspection yesterday, having been grown
by Mr. Nixon, at Union Hall, near Lemington, in this
county. The stems are three feet in length, and there
are six rows of corns in each ear. The seeds were sown in
November last, and should the present fine weather con-
tinuo the crop will be fit for the sickle in a very short
time. Not only is the yield prolific, but what is of
greatimportance to the farmer, it comes to maturity
so early that he will be able to obtain a green crop
after it. The seed was introduced into this dis-
trict by Mr. Rogerson, of the Crown and Thistle
Inn, in this town, last year from Cheltenham, where it
was first grown from a few seeds found in the jacket
pocket of a sailor after his death, but the previous his-
tory of which is involved in obscrurity. Mr. Rogerson
xyill have much pleasure in exhibiting the specimens in 1
his possession to the farmers attending our market, and
others interested in the subject,—Newcastle Journal.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEIV'S BENCH, June 6.
THE QUEEN V. PARHAM.

This was a writ of quo watranto, issued by this
court, to ascertain by what authority Mr. Parham held
the office of judge of twelve district county courts,
under twelve different appointments in Worcestershire.
The question to be decided was whether one person was
able to hold the appointment of judge of more than one
district at a time.

Sir F. KELLY, in support of the rule, contended that
one person could not under the statute hold more than
one appointment as judge of a county court, and there-
fore that there ought to be a separate person appointed
for each district.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who showed cause against
the rule, contended that one pcfson was competent to
hold office as judge of 100 county courts under 100 sepa-
rate appointments, if he was able to fulfil the duties of
each office. If there was a separate appointment to
each district there would be 640 judges of county courts
iu England and Wales. The Same Observations he said
opphed to the high-bailiffs and clerks. One person
could be clerk or high bailiff to several different courts.
He submitted that Mr. Parham was entitled to hold the
several appointments.

Sir F. KELLY to-day replied.
The COURT took time to consider their judgment.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, June 6. I
(Sittings in Banco.)
RINNERSLET V. KNOTT.—A DISQUISITION ON NAMES.
In this case the plaintiff, an endorser of a bill of ex-
change for 651. 103., brought an action against the de-
fendant as the acceptor, and declared against him by the
name of " John M. Knott," being that by which he had
signed the note; but without stating in the declaration
that the defendant had so signed it. To this declaration
the defendant demurred specially, and assigned as the
ground of his demurrer that the declaration had not pro-
perly set forth his Christian name, nor assigned any
reason under the statute 3d and 4th Wm. IV., c. 42, for
not doing so.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD, on behalf of the defendant,
said their Lordships were often told that a case rested
on a word; but here it rested on a letter only. It
was his• duty• to • contend, both upon principle
and precedent,- that this was a good ground of
demurrer. The. Court had decided that the letter
" I," being a • vowel and capable of pronunciation,
might 'be , taken to be a Christian name, but they
had at the same time intimated that such would not
be the case with a consonant, which, as it could not be
sounded alone, would be deemed to be not a name but
an initial letter only. Now in this case "M" was
plainly an initial letter, for it could not be pronounced by
itself. Standing by itself, therefore, it meant nothing.
He was sure a very eminent authoress (Miss Edge-
worth), whose loss they had recently had to lament, was
of opinisn that all the letters of the alphabet, by the
mode in which they were explained, were ,rendered little
more (to use judicial language) than "a mockery, a de-
lusion, and a snare"—that A B C D, &c., meant A B
C 1), &ce and• nothing more; but even if it would avail
him, he feared his friend could not rely upon such
authority.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—You say the " M" means
nothing—then let it mean nothing. Would a scratch be
demurrable?
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—I say that " M" by itself
cannot be pronounced, and means nothing; but here it
does mean something, which something ought to have
been stated or explained under the statute. Suppose a
person of the name of John Robins, the Court would
surely hold a declaration bad which described him by
the word John and figures of the redbreast! In like
manner the Court would hold this declaration bad, be-
cause it• either put a sign for one of the defendant's
names; or described it by the initial letter. A conso-
nant by itself was a mere sound withcut meaning. The
letter H, indeed, by the custom of London and some
other places, was no sound at all—(Laughter)—though
elsev here it protruded itself on all occasions.—(Re-
newed laughter.)
Mr. Justice MAULE—I had a policeman before me as
a witness the other day, who told me he belonged to the
hen" division, and it was not until some further stage
in the cause that I discovered it was not a division de-
signated by the name of a bird, but by " N," the alpha-
betical letter.—(Great laughter.)
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—It will, probably, be con-
tended that this person might have been christened in
the manner the bill is signed, hilt I submit that the court
will not intend that. It is true, we often hear of absurd
Christian names, and I myself remember when many
persons insisted upon having their children christened
" Sir Francis Burdett."
Mr. Justice MAULE.—I remember a very learned and
ingenious argument by Mr. Jardine, when I sat in the
Court of Exchequer, by which he proved to the satisfac-
tion of the court, that the Christian name is the real
name, and the surname is only an addition; that in the
case of John. Stiles, for instance, John is the real name,
but Stiles was perhaps originally added only because the
ancestor lived near one.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—Then having, I hope, con-
vinced the Court thut " M " by itself cannot be a name,
and means nothing, I submit it must be understood as
an initial, and therefore that it ought to have been so
stated. •
Mr. Justice MAULE—Pleadings are in writing, there-
fore the law presumes that the Court can read and know
its letters. Yoe els may be names, and in " Sully's
Memoirs" a Monsieur D'O. is spoken of ; but consonants
cannot be names alone, as they require in pronounciation
the aid of vowels.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—Yes; but in the case of con-
sonants they are taken to be but initials when used alone
both in law and literature. Throughout the ponderous
volumes of Richardson's novels, for instance, we find
persons spoken of in this manner. In " Clarissa Her-
lowe " for instance, " Lord M." is mentioned through-
out four volumes, but it could never be understood that
this was the real name, or anything more than an initial.
Again, an author well known to the Lord Chief Justice
(Charles Lamb) wrote a farce entitled simply " Mr. H."
but the whole turns upon this being the initial only of a
name he wished to conceal. In his prologue to it, he
humorously says—
" When the dispensers of the public lash
Soft penance give; a letter and a dash—,
When vice reduced in size shrinks to a failing,
And loses half her progress by curtailing,
Faux pas are told in such a modest way,
The affair of Colonel B— with Mrs. A—,
You must forgive them; for what is there, say,
Which such a pliant Vowel must not grant,
To such a very pressing Consonant?
Or who poetic justice dares dispute,
When mildly melting at a lover's suit,
The wife's a Liquid, her good man a Mute."
And he concludes by an appeal to the consequences of
this " mincing fashion," which (said the Learned Ser-
geant) I trust will have great weight with your Lord-
ships, for he adds—
" Oh, should this mincing fashion ever spread
From names of living heroes to the dead;
How would ambition sigh and hang the head,
As each loved syllable should melt away,
Her Alexander turned into great A,
A single C her Cmsar to express,
Her Scipio sunk into a Roman 5
And nick'd and dock'd to those new modes of speech,
Great Hannibal himself to Mr. H—."
The Learned Sergeant then cited and argued upon a
variety of cases on his side of the question, and sub.
mitted that their Lordships ought to decide in favour of
his client.
Mr. F. ROBINSON, on behalf of the plaintiff, said
Le did not deny the right of every Englishman to be
called by every name given to him at his baptism; but
he submitted that before he claimed to be privileged on
that account, he must show that his privilege has been
invaded. Here it was assumed throughout that the
" M." in the name " John M. Knott" was an initial
letter, but he believed there were instances in which
persons had been christened in this remarkable way in
this country. He was told there was lately a bank di-
rector who was christened " Edmund R. Robinson;"
but were it otherwise in this country, did it follow that
in no other country, Jew, Turk, or heathen might not
use such names? It; however, it were an initial letter,
why did not his friend apply to have the right name
substituted? If it were a misdescription, it was plead-
able in abatement. Such a name might originate from
an error of the clergyman at the christening.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—In the upper circles of
society it is customary to hand in the name in writing,
which prevents mistake.
Mr. Justice MAULE—The practice of the circles with
which I am conversant was, and I believe is, to give the
name verbally. There was, however, a gentleman, the
sheriff of one of the counties I went through on circuit,
Mr. John Wanley Sawbridge Erle Drax, whose name
was very probably handed in.—(Laughter.)
Mr. Ronneson—There are many Scotch and French
names, such as M`Donald, NTaggart, D'Harcourt,
D'Horsey—how are such names to be set out in the
pleadings? Suppose. again, a man's name were the
name of a river, as X ?
Mr. Justice MaunE—But that is not spelt so ; it is
idem per idem, X for ex. Beer, I believe, is sometimes
called X, but not water.
Mr. ROBINSON—There are some of our names which
are precisely those of letters, as Gee, Jay, Kay, &a.
Mr.
,Justice MAULE—But here it is not sonans, only
consonans, and cannot be sounded without other letters.
Mr. RomNsoes---Their Lordships should remember
the existence of a publication called the Fondle Nuz,
and unless they meant to give a " heavy blow and great
discouragement" to that' rising science, he hoped they
would not decide against his client.—(Laughter.) But
he had seriously to submit that by demurring to this
declaration the defendant admitted, according to legal
principles, that his name was that which was stated in
the declaration.
Mr. Justice Caasrvizeit, referred to and distinguished
this case from the case of "Roberts v. Moon," in 5 Term
Reports, where a plea in abatement of misnomer, begin-
ning " and the said Richard, sued by the name of
Robert," was held bad.
Mr. Justice MAULE suggested that as 65/. 103. de-
pended upon the question, it would be better for the
plaintiff to amend.
Mr. ROBINSON declined to do so, and contended no.
case could be cited directly, in support of the demurrer,
and therefore the Court should decide in favour of the
plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD having briefly replied,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE —The various stages in
the argument in this case have been already discussed
and decided. The courts have decided that they will
not assume that a consonant letter expresses a name,
but they will assume it expresses en initial only
.; and
they further decided that the insertion of an initial
letter is ground of demurrer, and is not merely an irre-
gularity. In the case of " Nash v. Collier, this Court
decided that a demurrer to the declaration which de-
scribed the defendant's name as 'William Ilenry_l\7". Col-
lier was not frivolous, and gave a strong intimation,
which the plaintiff had the good sense to attend to,
that he ought to amend his declaration. What decision

was acted upod by the Court of Exchequer in the subse-
quent case of " Miller v. Hayes," and as it appears to me
the case is precisely similar to the present, I think we
must decide in favour of the demurrer.
The other Judges concurring,
Judgment for the defendant.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Mrs. Catherine Stultz was again brought up for final
examination before AicLrman Gibbs and Garden, on the
charge of commissioning Mr. Barton, of Tlarogmorton-
street, stockbroker, to purchase 1,000/.. worth London
and North-Western Railway stock, which stock was
purchased, and which she refused to pay for, or the loss
thereon, amounting to 37/. 18s.
Mr. Huddleston, the barrister, and Mr. Hobler, the
solicitor, attended as before, to prosecute on behalf of
some members of the Stock Exchange, and Mr. Wontner
attended to watch the case for the prisoner.
Mr. Huddleston said that since the last examination
they had not had sufficient time to obtain such evi-
dence on certain points as to satisfy the mind of the
worthy Alderm in. On the last occasion the points he
understood were, first, that no evidence had been
produced to show that the prisoner had no means
and, secondly, that the piece of paper was not
of sufficient value to justify a committal, and that,
iu fact, it was not a valuable document. With respect
to the first point, he should have produced Mr. Bur-
goyne, the father of the prisoner, but a letter had been
received from a medical gentleman named Fenton, who
said that Mr. Burgoyne was in a bad state of health, and
if brought to London at present tha cxcitement might
prove fatal to him. Under those circumstances he was
unable to prove she was a person without means. With
regard to the next point, he contended that the contract
note, even if not valuable security, could be treated as
goods or chattels, and she obtained it under false pre-
tences. In support of this view, in the case of the
Queen v. Perry, 1 Dannison's Crown Cases, p. 69, tried
at the last spring assizes, before the fifteen Judges,
a prisoner was chargea in one count of the indictment
with stealing a cheque for 13/. 9s. 7d.; in another count
for stealing a piece of paper value one penny, when it
was held that, supposing the cheque to be a void cheque
(as being contrary to the provisions of statute 55 Geo.
c. 184), it would still sustain the charge laid in the
second count.

Alderman GIBBS —You have not shown me any evi-
dence that she had not the money in her possession when
she commissioned Mr. Barton.

Mr. Huddleston—Suppose she had succeeded in
getting the shares from Mr. Barton under her repre-
sentations, that would have been a misdemeanour. Then
came the question, did she attempt it; and ho certainly
was of opinion that she did. With respect to her means,
her father could, at some future period, prove that she
was worth nothing.

Alderman Ginn's—He could not prove anything be-
yound hearsay, as he lives in the country and she in
London. However disgraceful her conduct may have
been, ho considered there was no case established against
her, and therefore she was discharged. If at any future
time sufficient proof was obtained, then they could give
her into custody again.
Alderman Gins (addressing the prisoner)—Did you
receive a letter at the Compter from your brother Bur-
goyne? Mrs. Stultz—l did.
Aldermen GIBBS—WeII, I have a copy of it, and you
9ow_know what I think of you.

Mrs. Stultz held down her head and made no reply.
She was then discharged from custody.
SOUTHWARK.

William .Richards' an undertaker at Kennington, was
brought before Mr. Cottingham, charged with uttering
to the Equitable Life Insurance Company a forged po-
licy of insurance on the life of Walter Wilson for 20C/.
Mrs. Staff stated that the prisoner was her brother,
and that some time ago their father died, leaving by will
his property, which was to be equally divided between
them. Amongst the property bequeathed was a policy
effected in the Equitable Insurance Company on the life
of a person named Wilson, which was assigned over to
her father, and by him at his death the amount of in-
surance was to have been equally divided between her
and her brother (the prisoner). On calling at the in-
surance-office, however, a few days age, on the subject,
she was informed that the prisoner had produced a do-
cument assigning the whole amount of the policy to
the prisoner, and it bore her father's signature. She,
however, represented at the insurance office that it
was a forgery, and on that account the money which
was to have been paid over to the prisoner
was withheld, until the result of the present
proceedings was known, and that he established his
right to receive it. She added that her father sent for
her a few days previously to his decease, and informed
her that he had left all his personal property, share and
share alike, between her and her brother, mentioned that
the policy of insurance referred to was deposited in a
tin box, and that she was to receive half the amount
when it was paid by the insurance company; and that
she was to be careful and see that she obtained her
rights, and that no advantage should be taken of her by
the Prisoner, with whom she was not on terms of inti-
macy at the time. The complainant added, that after
this conversation her father became delirous, and that
he remained in that condition until his decease.
The solicitor of the Equitable Insurance Company
attended and produced a deed assigning the amount of
the policy to the prisoner, and it purported to have the
deceased, Mr. Richards's, signature attached to it. He
added that the prisoner had called at the office and pro-
duced the deed in question, and that the money was to
have been paid to him on Wednesday last, bad not the
complainant (his sister) called there in the interim and
represented that the document was a forgery.
The prisoner denied in the most positive terms that
the deed was a forgery, and said that there were no
grounds for such an accusation against him; that it was
true his father left his property equally between him and
his sister, with the exception of the policy of insurance,
which he made over to him, and executed a deed for the
purpose. He added that he had a person in attendance
who witnessed the execution of the deed, and who would
prove the fact. Ho then called
John Hammond, who, on being sworn, stated that he
was formerly in the prisoner's employment, and that he
recollected about three or four months ago (he could not
say precisely) being called on to witness the deceased
(Mr. Richards) execute the deed produced, assigning the
policy of insurance to his son (the prisoner), and that
upon that occasion he (witness) read over the document
to the old gentleman, whom he afterwards saw attach
his signature to it. The deed was shown to the witness,
and he identified it as the same he had witnessed on the
occasion alluded to.

Mr. COTTINGHAM inquired whether the deceased's will
was made previous to the execution of the deed assign-
ing the policy of insurance to the prisoner? The coin.
plainant replied that the deed purported to have been
executed eight or ten days subsequently to that of
the will.

Mr. COTTINGHAM said that the case was fraught with
suspicion. The accused, however, had called forward a
witness who was in his employ, and who bad sworn that
he saw the deceased attach his signature to the deed.
He (the Magistrate) would not, therefore, entertain the
charge as alleged against the prisoner, but would advise
the complainant to enter an action against the prisoner,
and that he had no doubt, if she would indemnify the
insurance company, they would withhold the payment of
the amount of the policy to the prisoner until the ques-
tion was tried before another tribunal.
The prisoner was then discharged.

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE OF

TUESDAY.
DIVIDENDS.
At the Court, Basinghall-street.
3, Gale, Bruton-street, Berkeley-square, bookseller,
June 26, at eleveu—M. J. Pyke, Brighton, jeweller,
June 27, at half-past eleven—W. B. Brodie and C. G.
Brodie, Salisbury, bankers, June 27, at half past twelve
H. Pinder, Southampton, Cheltenham, and Glou-
cester, tailor and draper, June 26, at one.