The Sun.
London, England, 1825-10-31 00:00:00

JOINT STOCK COMPANY.

MANsioN-HousE.—On Saturday a respectable broker of
the Stock Exchange, accompanied by eight or ten gentlernen,,
who stated themselves to be Shareholders in a Mining Com-
pany, which was started about three.motiths ago, appeared at
the Justice-rooin, to request the interference of the Chief Ma-
gistrate with the Bankers or the Directors of the concern, in
order to obtain a restitution of money'which they had advanced
as deposits upon shares. They had, they said, paid the depo-
sit of 21. per share, in the expectation that what the prospectus
,set forth would be positively realised, and that their money
would be most advantageously invested. The shares had
reached a small premium in cOnsequence of a Mencouvre in the
market, but they soon tumbled down to a discount. The
holders, naturally alarmed at this sudden downfal of the Shares,
began to inquire about the responsibility of the persons whose
names appeared as Directors. They perceived that there werqt
some respectable names amongst them, but upon application,
they were referred to the Secretary, who was able, they said, to
give the most full . and satisfactory information. The Secre-
tary, in answer to their inquiries, assured them, upon his ho-
nour, that the Company was one of the most promising in the
kingdom, and that they would soon receive a tine per tentage
for their money. This was all they could learn. Not a word
was said about the manner in which the Directors were dis-
posing of their property. In. fact,-the Secretary seemed to
khowjust as much about the prices as the Shareholders, who
thereupon applied to the Bankers for tnformation. Here they
also failed ; the Bankers referring them back to the Secretary.
Under these circumstances they demanded the'amount of their
receipts, but were refused, the Directors having issued no or-
ders to pay them off.
A Shareholder—l was told by a Director of the Company,
that the money had been drawn out of the banking-house, from
the apnreignti.A.oll.3lmt, .it ,wouldr,bej attached' in the
Another—Yes, I believe that to be the case. lam convinced
that they have no more idea of digging a mine, than they have
of building another tower of Babel. This has been the man-
ner in which multitudes have been taken in. A man takes up
a prospectus, sees a number of respectable names attached to it,
and calculates upon its success in consequence of the manner in
which it is thus introduced.

A thfrd Shareholder—The Directors are chargeable with a
great deal. They, it is notorious in all cases where the money
of the public is determined. to be played with, merely lend their
names for the reward of a certain number of shares, and the
moment they receive the shares, they sell them, and then, in
gratitude, retire from the direction.
Alderman ANSLEY, who sat for the Lord Mayor, laughed
very much at the statement, and said he was really astonished
that the public had not taken warning long since, from certain
occurrences which had taken place when first the mania com-
menced. Surely enough had been said to• induce people to
keep their money in their pockets. "' Why tin you not fix
upon the Managers," said he, " and demand your property
from them ?" _ _ _

A Shareholder--lt is useless.—We are referred to the Secre•
tare, who continues to boast of the concern, and humbugs us.;
It is notorious that no moresthan 400 shares. have been paid
upon, and can the managers be justified, supposing that they
were serious in the assertion that the concern was going on, in
applYing the money already subscribed, when it was arranged
that nothing should be done until the whole 1,300 shares should
be paid up on ? Were not the shareholders the persons
to decide upon the disposal of the money in the hands of the
bankers ? _ _

Alderman AITSLEY said,. he did not think the bankers could
be called upon, ur were responsible to any but the Directors,
upon whose account they. received the deposits and issued the
scrip. He believed that an action at law would have the effect
of making the managers refund.
A Shareholder-1 was told some time ago by a Director, that
it was intended to get hold of the tears for some hundreds of the
shares which were locked up; and that as. soon as that was
done, those who held shares could dispose of them at an im-
mense premium. The attempt had,- I believe, been made, but
proved unsuccessful, upon which. the managers seemed deter-
mined to do the best they could for themselves.
Another—Yes I was told there would be a " rig ". in the
.tharket ; but the public had seen the operations in the Lower
Rhine Company, and no tears could be caught. -
A third—lt would be very desirable to have the bunkers
here, to state what has taken place for the good of the share-
holders. lam aware that there is no grbund for summoning
them, but if the Lord Mayor would write a note requesting
their attendance, no doubt they would consent without hesi-
tation.
Alderman ANSLEY told the applicants they might, if they
pleased, ask the Lord i\layor to interfere in the manner sug-
gested, but he_cpuld not give them any further assistance than
the advice to take the opinion at,Caunsel upon the question,
which it certainly appeared was one of very general interest.
Mr.'Hobler said, he believed the best manner in which the
complainant' could act, would be by indicting the managers for
a conspiracy. '
The complainants went away, apparentlydeterniined to adopt
the latter suggestion.

GUI LDIIAL L.—Saturday, Mr. _alums Elias Levi, of Sloane-
street. Chelsea, an elderly Gentleman of the Jewish persuasion,
was charged before Alderman Titeotiesoti„ under the follow-
ing circumstances :—Passing through Fleet-street, he was, so.
exasperated on looking at the shocking caricature of the Supreme
Being which has been exhibited for some time in Carlile's Win-
dow, that having reasoned with the ehopman on the sin of ex-
posing such a picture in vain, he smashed a pain of glass with
his umbrella, and tore the picture to pieces. He was called oh
to pay the damages, 175., which he refused to do, and was given
in custody, The As hEaistast said he did not wonder that
such indignation had been felt by him, but he should have laid
an information for the exposure, which would have been treated
as amisdemeanor, instead oftaking the law into his own hands.
As it was, he Must pay the damage, which he did instantly.—
He then wished to lay an information, but this was judged
improper, as being done rather in resentment than from prin-
ciple.
Bow-S,TREET.—C. Bicker?, 11 years of age, was charged
with obtaining cash from _Nil. "L'urner, a baker at Highgate,
irf Mansion-house Academy, for *-2.71.•
for a forged cheek on ~Ilessrs: Drummonds, purporting to be
well in his first attehipt, that he applied
Mr. D., and again obtained 81,—
s.
d
The check was pronounced a forgery at talliz6r
fibbi
rey
a:ult
ocrc.aeDnetioo
of money
tn,g -
the bankers, and the
prisoner, on being apprehended, .said he was sent by a man
who stated his name to he Dowling, and who was standing at
Dlr. a's gate.—Remanded.

PRICE SEVENPENCE.

FOR. THE SUN.

DEAD BODIES.

88, St. life rt ites-tatie, Charing-cross:
MR. EDITOR=---A paragraph, copied, I pre.
sume from a .Dublin Jourtiali headed ccEiroa.
TATtors or Sun..rEcts," has called for the follow.;
-ing observations, to which I trust you will give
insertion in your widely circulated Journal, at
through that medium they may perhaps have the
effect of calling the attention of those in power
to a subject Which- has become intimately con.;
nected with the vital' interests of the community
Although I am not immediately "connected with the transac-
, tioa alluded to, yet. in common with all the Meinbers. of tiat
Medical Profession, I am indirectly Concerned in whatever iii
calculated to enhance or deteriorate the interests or respects.
bilityOf that irrofession. . It appears that the traffic in dead
bodies has for some time been carried on between Dublin and
London ; and does ndt this, I would ask, palpably- prove,_ teat
ffi
they cannbt be obtained at the London schoolS in sucient.
• quantities for the instruction of the junior branches of the
Profession in the most essential part of a medical education,"
viz. Anatomy ?
The grand cause of the scarcity here, appears to me to be at
tributabl' principally to those entrusted with the management
of the ;loyal College of Surgeons, who instead of attempting to
remedy the evil by an -energetic appeal to the Legislature, are
engaging in framing laws to circumscribe the usefulness of
thost of the members, who by their indefatigable exertions and
extraordinary talents have rendered theinselVes objects of envy ;
instead of affording protection to the Members, and assisting the
Students in obtaining what is so essential to them, in order to
practise their profession with credit to themselves and advantage
to the public ; these self-elected Gentlemen are engaged in rais-
ing obstacles to the advancement of science, and driving the
English students to. foreign capitals to seek that information
which is' denied them in their own country.
The era is' fast approaching when something must,be be
done-to release the medical prefession from the disabilities under
which it is at presetit labouring. Will nothing arouse the
heads of the College from their proverbial apathy on this sub,
jest ? Will neither the imperative calls of duty, nor the ap-
proaching degeneracy of the profession excite their dormant
energies ?—for, I am convinced, nine-tenths of those who now •
pass their. examinations know comparatively little of Practical
Anatomy, and yet those young men are distribUted throughout
the country with authority to practise Surgery, when any bre
possessed of common sense must be aware, that without being a
good practical anatomist, it is impossible to become a good prac-
tical' surgeon. The Legislature • has hitherto appeared to be
indifferent towards this most importaat subject ; the only
alternative therefore appears to be for the Members to unite,
and eniancipate themselves froM the trammels of this corpo‘
rate body, to concentrate their feelings and sentiments in the
form of a Petition, and lay it before Parliament, and there tan
be no doubt of their ultimate success.

.The profession is , much indebted to Dr. Armstrong, and
a periodical work coiled The Lancet, for their spirited ex.
ertions in this _cause, which is indeed the cause of htimanity,
and in what I have here advanced, I have but reiterated
the sentiments they have so long and with so much ability
advocated.

Before I conclude this letter, perhaps it may be permitted
me to say a tew words in censure of the Public Press for its
unnecessary exposure of exhumations, the evidence respecting
Which has been reported from the Police Offices with all the,
exaggerated detail consequent - upon examinations of such, a
nature. That-the Public Press, the guardian of all that is
liberal and useful, the champion of science, which dictates laws
to'civilized nations, and dispenses the most salutary lessons to
all classesvf men, should be foremost 'to excite a feeling,vC
prejudice in the minds of the ignorant against anatornieig
u-
quiries, instead of checking their mistaken antipathy of
abine ue Itdoptea for procuring an ample supply of aubjeets,
there is no other resource, at least in this country, but to obtain
them by exhumation. The necessity of disinterring the dead
would easily be obviated by giving up for anatomical instruc-
tion all those who die and (from whatever cause) are not claim-
ed by relations or friends, as well as all who suffer death for
offences committed against the laws of their country; by this
plan no individual feelings would be outraged, neither would
those disgusting exposures take place which have so frequently
excited public horror.
Much more, Sir, might be said on this interesting topic, but
fearing that it might occupy too large a space in your columns.
I shall for the present leave it to the unbiassed considerati'on
of an enlightened Public.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
J. N. BAINBRIDGE,
Member of the Royal College of Surgeons-

Oct. 23.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, OCT. 29.
PEARSON V. WHEELER.

This was an action on the case for a fatee and fraudulent re-
presentation of the trade of a public-house, whereby the plain--
tiffwes induced to purchase the lease at a sum greatly exeeedii4
its value.
It appeared on the evidence far the plaintiff, whose case was
conducted by Mr. SCARLETT and Mr. COMYN, that the de-
fendant was a publican, who-in the beginning of this year kept
the house called the Two Spies, in Catherine-street, and he'd ,
the premises for an unexpired term of about 14 years. The
plaintiff being desirous of taking the house, applied to the de-
fendant, who, according to the evidence of the plaintiff % uncle.
stated the sum taken at the counter as from 2001. to 4001. per
month, and finally asserted it to be 2001., and represented that
from four to five butts of beer were sold in a month. The plain-
tiff upon this representation, which, according to the testimony
of Dowell, the broker, was repeated just before the execution
of the agreement, consented to give 1,600/, for the lease and
good-will, which he subsequently paid. It was now proved
that the beer and spirits supplied to the house during the year
immediately preceding the statement, did not exceed 751. per
month; and the plaintiff sought to recover a compensation for
the loss he had sustained by the bargain.
MT. BROUGHAM and Mr. RICHARDS, for the defendant,
called 'two persons, Mr. Wade a rectifier of spirits, and Mr.
Nice an auctioneer, to !thew that they had severally offeied
terms as advantageous as those which the pla ntiff had given ;
and that therefore it was unlikely that the defendant would
make a false representation,_ which was unnecessary to his .ob-
ject ; and even if he had, plaintiff had not a losing bargain.
Mr. Wade stated that he had proposed to take the house as a
speculation, to put in a person to keep it, allowing Mr. Wheeler
to retain the first floor, and paying 2001. a year. Mr. Nice
stated that he offered 1,6001., but the bargain went off because
it could not be completed at the day, and he would 3611 give
that sum. He also thought that the landlord, in consequence
of the vicinity of the theatre, might make profit by the sale of
soda water and cider, or by supplying refreihments which would
not be traced in the account for,beer or spirits. •
'The LORD CHIEF. JusTicE:directed the Jury to consider,
first, whether an untrue representationn had been Made, and
secondly, if so, what damages.the plaintiff was entitled to reco-
ver. A man of enterprise might be willing to give *larger
sum for premises of this description in the hope of increasing
the trade by his, personal exertions ; but if the plaintiff fonnded•
his contract on the statement of the actual trade, and had been
deceived, he was entitled to remuneration for the 'amount of
his loss.
The Jury withdrew' for an hour, and on their return into
Court found a verdict for• the plaintiff—Damages 25UL

f. • w

~ ~

) •

• 4 .4