The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-10 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER GOURT.7(THIS DAY.)

LARCHIN V. OWILLAN.

Mr. BUTT moved that the defendant be discharged from the
bail bond which be bad given. He was arrested upon an
affidavit, which set forth that the defendant was lately a Cap.
tain in the Scotch Fusilier Guards t that he had sold out, and
was now a Captain in the l 7th Foot ; but the deponent be-
lieved that it was his intention to sell out of that regiment also,
and ieafe the country. Upon this affidavit a Judge's order
was obtained, and the defendant vras arrested. The Learned
Gentleman had now the affidavit of the dticndant, in vrhich he
deposed that be had no intention of selling out of the army;
thht he was now on leave of absence from his regiment, which
was now in Ireland; that he «•as about to join it at the end of
the month ; and that as it had only lately returned from abroad,
there was very little chance of its being sent on foreign service
for a long time to come. The Learned Counsel contended that
the going to join his regiment on professional duty, and going
only to Ireland, was not such a leaving of the country as was
contemplated by the recent Act of Parliament, in order to
justify the arrest upon tnesn6 process.
Tne Count refused the rule on the ground that by going
to Ireland, the defendant would be out of the reach of a pro-
cess from any Court in England. 'I hey thought that the
principle of the Act was, that the plaintiff should have a
security that the body of the debtor should be within the
jurisdicti,:n of the Court when enecution was taken out, pro-
vided it was within the jurisdiction at the commencement of the
action.

The LORD CHLEF BARON was sitting in Equity in the Ex-
chequer Chamber. Mr. Baron Parke had to retire uponsome
family affairs, at half-past eleven o'clock, and as none of the
Counsel had motions to make, the Court rose at that hour.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

THE QUEEN V. JOHN DISNEY, ESQ.

Mr. PRICE moved for a rule to show cause why a mandamus
should not issue against Mr. Disney, a Magistrate of the
county of Essex. This was a case wherein certain parties
were summoned by information under the Southend Pier
Company's Act, an Act for erecting a pier and imposing cer-
tain tolls on goods and passengers landed at that place. The
parties for whom ho appeared were bargemen, who bad for
the last eight or ten years been struggling with the Company,
contending that they were not liable t 6 toll, and they were
exceedingly anxious that the Company should bring an action
for the purpose of having the point settled. Elbe Company,
however, did not appear to be inclined to do so, but bad
brought the parties before a Magistrate to compel them to pay
the penalties under the Act.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—What iS your mandamus for?
Mr. PRICE—TO compel the Magistrates to return and
enter an order at the sessions, from which the parties meant
to appeal, which they are entitled to do under a clause in the
Act.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE —Have they refused to return it ?
Mr. PRICE—Yes. The Magistrate, in the course of his
duty, having thought fit to make the order, has not returned
it to the sessions. He has returned the conviction, but nut the
order discharging part of the information, and convicting
on part.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—Your client was convicted on
part and acquitted on part, and you say the Magistrate is
bound to return the order ?

Mr. PaicE—Certainly. We are entitled to appeal, and
when we go to the sessions, the Clerk of the Peace may say
there is no order in the office.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—The order is the acquittal o
your client?

Mr. PRICE—Yes, and we want it for two purposes. We
want, strange as it may seem, to appeal from it, for they have
saddled us with costs, and acquitted us of the more penal
part. It is an exceedingly impot tent question, which I should
be glad to bring before the Court of Queen's Bench, but at
present it nits v,ith the local jurisdiction, and we are desirous
of having the opinion of the 111ag strates.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—What is the Act

Mr. PRICE —The 10th Gen. IV. c. 69, amended by the
sth and 6th William IV., c. 90, and the clause which gives
the power is the 146th section of the first of these Acts, which
is embodied in the second.

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE said he would look at the affidavits
and give his decision ou Monday morning.

THE GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY.
Mr. CRESSWELL moved for a r ule to show cause why an
inquisition taken More the Coroner for Warwickshire should
not be quashed. The matter was brought up by certiorari
some time since. The inquisition was on the body of a person
named Thomas Horton, whose death was caused by the en-
gines of the Grand Junction Railway Company, and the Jury
found that the accident was caused by the Company having
negligenty, carelessly, and improperly, caused the said
engines to be used; but they exonerated the people who had
the care of the engines from all blame, and thr'y then imposed
a deodand on the engines. He (Mr. Creswell) apprehended
that a deodand could only be levied where the accident hap-
pened without the interventi4n of hainn means.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—Take a rule to show cause.

BOW-STREET -(THIS DAY.)

CHARGE OF HORSE-STEALING

George Edwards, a gamekeeper, was brought up by Ruth-
yen, the officer, for re-examination, charged with stealing a
horse and chaise, ke_preesf 'arty of Mr.
fleryir -rrttchard-ey-stable keeper, Percy-sireeC,Rathbone-
place, Oxford-street.

_ -
It appeared that he the beginning of August last,
the prisoner came to the prosecutor's stables for the
purpose of hiring a horse, but having never seen
him before, be begged to know how far he wanted to take
him. He replied that he wanted to go as far as Hatfield, and
requested to be allowed the grey mare which Mr. Heath was
in the habit of hiring, as he was living in that gentleman's
family. He was told that the journey mould be too much
in one day, and he agreed to hire the horse for two days.
The prisoner then took the horse, chaise, and harness, and
they were never heard of until the 6th inst., when they were
found in the possession of Mr. Aylward, landlord of the Run-
ning Horse, at Alerford, who bought it from the prisoner, on
the 7th August for 151. The prosecutor never heard anything
of the prisoner until the 4th, when, with the assistance of Ruth-
ven, he was apprehended at Sandhurst, near to BlaCkwater :
and he then told who the person was to whom he had sold the
property, which was valued by the prosecutor at 401.
The prisoner declined saying anything in his defence, and
he was fully committed to Newgate for trial.

BIRMINGHAM RAILROAD.
Return between the 2d October and sth November inclu.
sive, to and from Birmingham :
Travelled, 3,553,061 Miles.
No. of Persons, 56,816.
Duty paid to Government, 1,8501. Ils.
The foregoing is the substance of the declaration of the Re.
turn made before the Magistrates, Mr. Twyford, and Dr.
Robinson, a County Magistrate,