The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-12 00:00:00


.- .
--- , -
. 1/5
sl‘l,k4 11 .'4:Z$
ri 71,e t Ilikt.
4.:4";7.......E
'l4l
'' ..,, •-•-- •-.-- . '
.. . . . .. :
. . ~ _
'
\ ' - ' '' ''' •
• / I
titer
: T--
.., vc,,-,,,,........,,, 4, ~, ---,,, ,-„., , • ~—,... ..,..;,,,,
, „, 4,1,".c
'‘11111......3`,- ~. •,
l ' A • IN '":' 1,.a';',,, b;•l4',-\\; ,i"7=7,-. ›.''''•ll .*kg., i"'T-. 4PP //
..,,, • st --•(:-•` ~,, .1 - .4
i v ;-r.
i.l ii, ,
,4. ~, ~.. sc 1,i.0 1. '-. '-, it - - ---"' e-----7''''' ''.\.`.,1;',tj.,1.'" '''' ('' d •;"'",' r,'...., \i- C\'lsl ''.,
: -\'` —, ~ ~.„.•• 4.' -- '4/ Cr '''
4 ,f 10 44 ~i si ./_,.c.23--- _.....--'--
' :f•' N•-,22' ,'',.,- . •-e. • ' -el ' ~., '
, ..- ... ‘:6 (-- -,.. / ~ k.,4--..,m,' ' • ......, .--' , ~ ..--A ,-A -.., ,.f -- - ‘,..4...... . ,
11/4.,V, , '",t..• •"-:;/. , .
\, . j I.l* 1., ll/\ '_, '7-:;..,„.,.. .1., . . ‘,._:...,57.4_,..47,) -
'1(4t0,...,V,-c *)
''' ' ' ,----A - t . ... ~„111,1). , 1- t..,,,
..,,,._ • ...
_,,,.; )1., j 4/ ..-,:, .:,......,. -, ...' • -4,7.., ii.---..,7 -- f,.-,.L.- _ .....,-/\7...;---, Ly.:-, ~,• 1,,,, ~
',..,,-;,--- :-% --'-', :7/if; i :,. `,,,.! ..1);.,, •,i i.• •,. .-1,,Frm,,,. - e 7..,.
.>> \. A ....,,,k--r--4---.7,,,, e"
-. 1 ,
~..,_.....".., :,......
.6.,;-:,,, .A, -.,..____.,,,..i, , • /..,,,, -. os ...,, -, -,v.,:-.--,04,:„„.
--07 4 '"----2.1i. 15 ',Lr,4 ''''t,- - *,,A: -1-..--.1•,.,.,:, ' --,---;'.-.4-_"_121;().1_1.4_ 4; lt ,
.1 ••4', ' \ ----:.„ -._.-- '
..,1,,,,..,:•.1i, . 'ti,.....-..,,,, , ,
/4.

849.

[PRICE SD•

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, May 11.

;Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before Mr. Jus-
tice MAIILE, and common juries.)
BARTON V. BUTCRINSON.

This was an action of indebitatus assumpsit, on an
alleged contract, by which the defendant was to pay
3001. to the plaintiff, for certain improvements effected
in a gai-meter,' of which the defendant was patentee.
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Hawkins appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Wis©
fur the defendant.

The defendant, it appeared, was the assignee of a
patent in an improvement in gas•meters, called the-yri-

ti,ll patent dry gas meter, which, in 1845, he sold for
3,000/. to a company, which was afterwards incorporated
tuhned he
British Joint-stock
hatid o
Foreign
gn Gas Companies
meterA Act, under the
Company.Thestyl eof
de-
fendant
was appointed the engineer of the company,
and also became a shareholder. Before the c'mplete
registration of the company, the defendant informed
the Board of the provisional committee that
the plaintiff could effect some improvements in the
meters, and upon the defendant's recommendation, the
plaintiff was employed, on the terms that he was to re-
ceive 3/. per week and a commission upon the sales of
the meters. This arrangement continued till the pro-
ject failed, and then the plaintiff made the present de-
mand for his services and commission. For the defence
it was contended that under the 25th section of the
Joint-Stock Companies Act, the contract was made with
the company, and not personally with the defendant,
who had only acted as the agent of the company in the
transaction. •

The Learned JUDGE left it to the jury to say whether
the plaintiff had proved a contract between him and the
defendant individually, or between him and the company
of which the defendant was a member.

The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages
230 L, and that the contract waa made with the defendant
inuividually.

LOVELL V. EARTY.

In this case Mr. Sergeant Wallinger and Mr. Locke
appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Prentice for the de-
fendant.

The action was in trespass, for false imprisonment and
charging the plaintiff with larceny before a magistrate;
to which the defendant pleaded a justiEcation, that the
plaintiff stole his dog, and that he gave him into custo-
dy and made the charge alleged in the declaration in
co

ns quence.
It appeared that the plaintiff was the toll-house
keeper at the Manor-house toll-gate, at the Seven-sisters
road, Holloway. The defendant was a person of re-
spectability, residing at Park-cottage, Tollington- park,
Hornsey-road. On Saturdiy, the 3d of February last,
the defendant's dog—a large black Newfoundland dog—
followed the patrol on duty there, and the policeman,
thinking it belonged to some one living in the neigh-
bourhood, and that it would soon be owned, left it in the
care of the plaintiff at the toll-gate. The plaintiff locked
the dog up in his yard. The defendant soon afterwards
hearing that the dog was there, early on Sunday morning
took a policeman with him to the plaintiff's house, and
On caking for the dog, it was shown to him, and he then
gave the plaintiff into the custody of the policeman on a
charge of stealing the dog. The plaintiff told the de-
fendant that the dog had been given into his charge by
one of the M division of police until it was owned, but
the defendant persisted in giving him in charge. He
was then taken to the Clerkenwell station-house, and
given in charge for having the defendant's dog unlaw-
fully in his possession. Oa Sunday night, the 4th of
February, he was bailed out. The case was heard the
following day before the magistrates of Clerkenwell
police-court, and the charge was dismissed. In conse-
quence the plaintiff lost a week's employment, besides
the annoyance he had been subjected to. This was the
plaintiff's case.
For the defence it was con•ended that the defendant's
son having been refused permission to take the dog
away, the defendant was justified in the step which he
took, and that any damage the plaintiff might'have sus-
tained would have been amply satisfied by proceeding in
the County Court.
The Jury fJund a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
251.

CENTRAL ChIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.

(Before Baron ALDERSON and Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
Mr. PARRY made an upplipetion to postpone the trial
of Martin Hansel!, f,ir felony and misdemeanor, in en-
deavouring to extort money from a gentleman named
Bevan, by the threat of publishing some letters of a
libt lions character in the Satirist newspaper, until next
session. The application was founded upon the affidavits
of two medical gentlemen, which stated that the de-
fendant was suffcring to such an extent from pulmonary
consumption, that it would not only endanger his life if
he took his ITN, hut even if be should leave his room
to. plead to the indictment.
Mr. BALLANTINE, who appeared for the prosecution,
said he did not ti.el that he ought t..) offer any opposition
.to the application.
Tile trial was accordingly ordered to stand over.
' Mr. BALLANTINE theft applied to the court to order the
recogrCziliet'S of the bail for a person named Sarah Mills,
who was included in the >amEo indictment with Hansel!,
to be'estrcatcd. She had been called upon her tecog-
nizatices, and had nit appeared, and he was instructed
that she was at Boulogne, and out of the jurisdiction of
the court.

Baron ALDERSON said that as the defendant did not
appezir, the tecognizances of the bail would, as a matter
of course, be estreatcd.
One of the bail addressed the Court, and begged that
the rtcognizances might not be estreated. He assured
the Court be had done all that laid in his power to pro-
cure the attendance of the defendant.

Baron ALDERSON said they had no power to assist
him. If p.‘pple became bail for others they did so at
tleir own peril; and if they failed in performing the
conditions they entered into they must take the conse-

quences.
The gentleman said he believed he should be able to
pror'uce the defendant at the next session.
Baron ALDERSON said that all he could do was to di-
rect that the estreat should not be returned to the Court
of Exchequer until the next session, and if the defendant
was produced at that time the estreat would probably
nut by, enforced.
George Ricers, aged 33, was indicted for feloniously
cutting and wounding Sarah Rivers, with intent to maim
and disable her, or to do her grievous bodily harm.
It, appeared that the prisoner inflicted not less than
twelve wounds on the neck and breast of his wife. The
facts of the case have already appeared in our police
report.
The jury.. found the prisoner guilty, and the judge
sentenced him to ton years' transportation.

IV E W COURT.
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)
Upon his Lordship taking his seat, Timoleon Vlasto,
the young Greek, who pleaded guilty on Wednesday to
stealing an immense number of coins, the property of
the trustees of the British Museum, and also Colonel
Richard Fox, amounting in value to above 1,000/., was
brought up to receive sentence.
The prisoner was sentenced to be transported for
seven years.
Mary Ann Rollings, a smartly attired young woman,
30 years of age, surrendered to take her trial on a
charge of bigamy.
In the year 1835 the prisoner, who was then 15 years
of age, married a fisherman, named Richard Rollings, at
the parish church of St. Margaret's King's Lynn, Nor-
folk, with whom she only lived three days. She sub-
sequently came to London, and went into service, where
she met Joseph Jupwell, with whom she cohabited for
some time, and, in 1848, married him at Westminster,
her husband being then and now alive.
The jury found her Guilty.
The Court sentenced her to three months' imprison-
ment, without hard labour.
THIRD COURT.
(Before Mr. BULLOCK.)'
James Williams, a broker's porta, and John Lester, an
itinerant juggler, well known about the streets of Lon-
don, were indicted for a highway robbery on the person
of Charles Belson, and stealing from him a half-crown
and 7s. 6d. in silver,
After hearing the case,
The jury found them Guilty.
Mr. BuLLocit said it was a bad case, and sentenced
them to seven years' transportation.
Shortly after their conviction Mr. Payne came into
Court, and addressing Mr. Bullock, said he had come
into that Court to make an application to postponsjtn,
eohe
trial of the prisoner Williams until the nextsesappii.
having been waiting in the Old Court to make
effect,
and was
an
cation to Mr. Baron Alderson to thatb been dragged
out
now much surprised to find the case ad
and transported without his being atwar
avoid _
what had out of that Court into this one. The preisoofnethrseafarect.tried
Mr. Bur.Loca said he could no
The pd..
oc-
curred, all he
thhaadt gwoetrietohdrooowgahst tobesfoitrethheirme and try all
the prisoners .
soners had been asked whether they had any counsel,
and had answered in the negative.
ir. PAYNE said that it wvs impossible for prisoners
placed in the p..sition these men had been to know
whether they were detendtd or not, and he now applied
to have the judgment respited.
Mr. BULLOCK said they could not try the men over
again, but he would attend to the Learned Counsel's
application.
Mr. PAYNE had instruction given him in the case
of Wildame, that, he had no doubt, would have en-
sured an acquittal, since, to a great extunt, it was a ques
ttioonshoofwehtahraatchtetsr
caintrdnitdh,:maatit3o..olyllcemnwoeuloduthaoNf•epboesesensasiboloe
of a house on Wednesday, and had much money en-
trused to him, besides a number of witnesses to his cha.-
racier ; and he had no doubt but when his Lordship heard
thete, although he could not recall the verdict, he would
make such an alteration in the sentence that it would be
merely nominal.

EMILY SANDEJIID.—It appears, trom a letter which
the Bishop of Norwich bus written to Mr. S. W. Bur-
gess, of Roston, n gentleman who has taken much
interest in the future welfare of this unfortunate young
woman, that it is the intention of the porde& who have
subscribed for her benefit to send het7,Apider the pro-
tection of au cider brother, to 040 at- the West lu-
cglQUiegl.