The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-16 00:00:00

EDINBUTGII, JULY 13.

STOCK EXCHANGE.-Thd sales are-Aberdeen, 304-
Airdrie and Bathgate, 31. 10%-Arbroath and Forfar, 261.
10s.-Ditto, Hal.ies, 141. 103.-Ayr and Galloway, 2/. 10s.
-Caledonian, 30/. 2s. 64-1.--'-Ditto, New, 21.-Caledonian and
Dumbartonshire, I!. 153. 6d.-Clydesdale Junction, 49L-
Deeside, 34 55.-Dunblane, Doune, and Callender, 11. 7s. 6d.
-Dundee and Arbroath, 37/. 10s. ex div.-Ditto. New. No.
1, 291. 103. ex div.-Ditto. New, No. 2, 32/. ex div.-Ditto,
New, No. 3, 31. 10s.- Dundee and Northern Junction, 1/.
I Is. 6d. -Dundee and Pertb, 331.-Ditto, New, 13/. -Ditto,
(loaners, 31. 65.-East of Fife, 11. 18s. 6d.-East Lothian
Central, 11. 178.-Edinburgh' and Bathgate, St. 5..-Edin-
burgh and Glasgow, 691.-Ditto, Halves, 221. 10s.-Ditto,
Quarters, 17/. 2s. 6d.-Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton, 191.
2s. 6d.-Ditto, Preference, 201. 10s.-Ditto, New, 24 Is. 6d.
-Ditto, Quarters, 135.-Edinburgh and Northern, la/. ss.
-Ditto, New, 3i. 155.-Ditto, Newport, 7/. Bs.-Ditto,
ditto, New, 2/. Its. 6d.-Edinburgb and Perth (New Co.),
11. 33. -Ditto, Halves, 63. 6d.-Glasgow and Ayrshire, 1204
155.-Ditto, New Stock, 42/. 2s. 6d.-Ditto, Halves, No. I,
St. 7s. 6d.-D.tto, Halves, No. 2,6 Z 11s.-Glasgow, Dum-
fries, and Carlisle, 5/. 7s. 6d.-Glasguw and Garnkirk, 391.
-Glasgow General Terminus, 121. 155.-Glasgow and Gree-
nock, 191. 55.-Ditto, Halves, 9/. 10s.-Ditto, Preference,
8/. 2s. 6d.-Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan, 31. 12s. 6d.
-Great North 4f Scotland, 1/. 17s: 6d.-Great Northern
(late Direct Northern), 44 53. 6d.-Ditto (late London and
York), 11. 125.-Newcastle and Berwick, 29/. 10s.-North
British, 334-Ditto, Halves, 15/. 173. 6d.-Ditto, Quarters,
41. 10s. 6d.-Ditto, New Quarters (scrip), 165.-Ditto,
Thirds, 2/. Its. 6d.-Ditto, Fifths, 6/. 10s.-Scottish Cen-
tral, 284-Scottish Grand Junction, 195.-Scottish Midland,
181.-Shrewsbury and Hereford, 103.--Shrewsbury, Oswestry,
and Chester, 9/. if:la.-Ditto, New, 11. 2s. 6d.-Stirling and
Dunfermline, 41. 17s. 6d.-Stirling
_and Midland, 21. 55.-
Wishaw and Coltness, 491.-York and Newcastle, 38/.-
Ditto, New, 171. 2s. 6d.-Ditto, Preference, 12/. 17s. 6d.-
Direct Bombay and Madras, 2s. 3d.-East Indian, ss. 3d.-
Great North of India, 2s. 6d.-Great Southern of Madras,
25.-Madras, Nellore, and Arcot, is. 6d.
GLASGOW, JULY 13.
. _ _

STOCK Excirwroz.—The sales are—Aberdeen, 29%--
Dundee and Perth, 331.—Ditto, Quarters, 66s.—East Indian,
4s. 9d.—East Lothian Central, 37s.—Edinburgh and Perth,
22s.—Glasgow. Kilmarnock, and Ayr, 1211.—Ditto (5 per
cent. guar.), 421,4—Glasgow and Greenock, Halves, 9%—
Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardroasan, 75s.—Great North
of India, 2s.—Mancbester and Southampton, 14s. 6d.—
Ditto, New, 21s. 6d. —North firiri4h, Thirds, 51s. 6d.

NIGHT BALLOON ASCENT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—As one or those who jolied in the "perilous
fookry,"—and, now that I have experienced the chances,
I can rn) selt give,it no better name—of the night balloon
ascent last week, permit me to hope that the manage
ment of Vauxhall will see the propriety of putting an
end to such exhi'Ations, after your admirable article in
the Times of this day.
There is nothing gained in the venture to balance th
chance of the sligilte:t accident. The balloon is out ofe
sight in two minutes, and the .a
aeronaut is thought no
more of as soon as the next firework
ground, or the other .4 intrepid" indrivildluabTutsth`7l:otsiodnotwhne
the wire with the squibs in his heels ;
wander about, he knows not in what ditection, untielf'tto
day-
light, or make some haphazard descent in the dark,
without assistance, and as possibly on the roof of a house,
or top of a tree, or in the middle of a river, as in an
open field.
If the fireworks exploding in the air at a great height
are the attraction, they might be attached to a small
balloon of vurniAed paper and have the same effect,
Sailing away no matter where, when over, and gradually
settling down. But if there is any other excitement
*Wet the matter, it must lie in the chalk* that the
gazers can procure, for half-a-ciown, of sa)ing, when
the seronau; is dashed to pieces, that they " saw him go
up." Bad becoming, individually, accessories to the
suicide.

I b
in* You will not consider that I am intruding on
your sPitee with them, few observations; and I beg to
subscribe myself;

Yours respectfully,
14, Percy street, 13 ciforci.strtn'TAeL,l3:;;RTLSMlTll.

Tractarian observance
saran prevalent in South
Devon, fur we learn from the
svli'exiern Times that in one
stoimwinlaar In.uemwboerficso,fw4-I,,iciit, a
e.
o,.s_ ace being replaced by
makes Im4euit. in the
ca
m 11.4
a f::ction..r in Kingsbrithie
crobs" and ' mar fish."
and is ohtaanng unpr. cedented patronage troll the high
church p irty.
FaaNCII CATTLE.—The steam-ship Harlequin,
arrived from Boulogne, has brought 35 heifers,
first importation ot live cattle into the being the
metropolis.from
France during the present season.
MURDER BY A MANIAC.—An inquest was held
on Monday last at Killeeuadenna, near Louv.hrea, by
Thomas Walsh, E,q., coroner, on view of the body of "a"
child, nine years old, named AI Huge, who was killed by
• a maniac named Fatly, while in a frantic state. He has
been subject to occasional tits of insanity. and was al.
lowed to be tit large, and unfor.unately he met this child
while labouring under one of his delirious moods, and
dashed his brains out with an irnmen-e stone. A ver-
dict was returned in accordance with the fact• stated,
ei,tlcl the unhappy man was removed to Galway ool.—
tidu'Tl Vinclie t
a "
MAYTIEL h
13.—Accorni: ng to appearance, there will
be a r• A. ,r short crop of hops, the vermin hat+ g in-
creased very fast WI . .
thin tr;ese last few days. This pes-
tilence is genera'
bhould it continue through most of the plantations ; and
much longer wi' bout a change, the
crop will fall very t.
The pot 'toes continue to look
well, apd-all.9ther crops 1 3 .* ~74utipaq,„. Ps are progressing favourably.—
A'' "12!'761/TER.—Wedn.esday:Mr. W. Carter held
n.... :. WO- at the Wind
1111sworth,
r , _ ,":* tsiiiilie,e24dr. of Ntanlrill, High-street, Lambeth,
ides; iKiS:A. ii t at No. 23. digb-strect, who died fr,.in
aged 68 years,
'.. the effo:6 tif *juries caused
BruCe, on Saturday night last, yutad man
circumstances al-
named James
ready detailed.; :
_The jury, atter hearing
-the wirnessys, .4 the testimony
of
Ithgr
Yell„
evidence of
surgeyn, who avribilt..d death to the rupture IncYv,L,the
Vei44, rt•suJigitlk-hp,,n external vi,j,,ne,.. '-
- of ri "''''''""
dice 01-nlianslaughter agkaomt. 3,..esrt-litureu,,c.o a vk t•-•
gaol Bruce,"
awaitvih°'
stands committed to Horsemonger-lane
bis trial. s

COA SIS TORY COURT, July 14.
• (Before 1)r. LIISHINGTON
HODGSON v. THE INHABITANTS of HILLINGDON.
The COURT, on the motion of Dr. R. Pnillunt re, de-
creed a faculty to issue for the repair and eulargemont
of the parish church of Hillingdon, in the county of Mid-
dlesex.

FITZOERALD V. FITZGERALD.
This was a suit for a divorce by reason of adultery and
cruelty promoted by the wife against the husband. The
proceedings were carried on in rmnam.
The Learned Judge was criite satisfied with the pro 4.
and granted the prayer of Mrs. Firzgerald.

TUCKER ?Y. TUCKER.

This also was a cause of divot ce by reason of adultery,
and was instituted by Mr. Tucker against hi wife. The
parties were married in the presidency of Bengal on the
14th of Oct b'r, 1842. The lady was a native of France,
aid there were three children, the issue of the m trriage.
She arrived in England with her husband in 1846, and
the adultery was pleaded to have or_curred in the course
of the voyage, and also since the arrival of the parties in
this country.
Th Queens's Advocate and Dr. Addams appeared for
Mr. Tucker; Dr. ilaggaid and Dr. it. Phillimore fur
the wife. _ _

-- ...._.
•The Learned JUDGE called on the counsel for Mrs.
Tucker first to address the Court. . . .

Dr. HAGGARD submitted that there was no principle
better established than that it was impossible to pro-
nounce for a divorce on the confession f,f the party
alone. What wis The evidence relied upon to establish
the charges made in this case ? There were the letters
of the wife, and from the language used iu them it
would be contended that there was an admission of her
having been unfaithful to her husband; but he was quite
at a loss to discover anything in the shape of supple
mental evidence. There were conversations proved be-
tween Mrs. Tucker and a witness who had been
examined, but still they were the admissions of the lady
herself, and the canon precluded the Court from pro•
flouncing for a separation under such circumstances.

There were several passengers on board the ship, one of
whom only had been examined, and he stated that there
wtis nothing to justify him drawing the conclusion that
there had been any criminality on the part of Mrs.
Tucker. He (l)r. Haggard) denied that since the
parties reached this country there bad been any oppor-
tunity for the commission of adultery. Mrs. Tucker,
shortly after her arrival, was entrusted to the care of
Mr. and Mrs. Succole, and whatever admissions had
been made to the latter must be taken with reference to
the state of her mind at the time, for it was evident that
she had been labouring under insanity.
De. R. PHILLIMORE having followed on the same side,
The Learned JVDGE, without bearing the Counsel for
Mr. Tucker, said, that if he had entertained any doubt
whatever as to the sufficiency of the evidence in this
case, it would have been both his duty and his incline
tion to avail himself of any benefit that he could derive
from the argument of counsel; but as he really could
not tiring himself to think that there was any deficiency
of proof either in law, or morally speaking, to affect the
conviction of• his own mind, it was unnecessary to
trouble them. He did not in the slightest degree dissent
from the wisdom of the canon which prevented the
Court from pronouncing for a divorce in a suit for sepa-
ration whether I mensis et thoro or pro dividendo matri-
monii vincula, upon the confession of the wife or the
husband, unless tor the best and plainest reasons, be-
cause it enabled the Court to guard against the
possi-
bility of imposition. He hoped that of late years there
had not been many attempts to obtain a separation by
reason of adultery throu4h a confession, when in fact
the act had not taken place. He must, however, take
care that he did not stretch the principle beyond those
bounds within which it ought fairly to be confined,
otherwise, cases would be left without remedy in which
there was a real grievance. The present case did not
fall within the decision in " Mortimer v. Mortimer" or
" Hemmerton r. Hammerton ;" the case of " Grant v.
Grant" was much more applicable to it. He had looked
at the letters written by Mrs. Tucker addressed both to
the father and the husband, and it was impossible to do
so without coming to the conclusion that they contained a
confession of aduliery. What was the auxiliary evidence?
It was proved that Mrs. Tucker was ready to receive and
did receive a letter written by the gentleman with whom
was alleged she had committed adultery, and nobody
could peruse that letter without being satisfied that it
was an admission of an improper intercourse having
taken place between the parties. It was to be
_

regretted that more evidence had not been procured from
on board the ship, but it was clear that the parties had
remained together a day in Liverpool. Was it possible
for him to doubt that criminal intercourse had then
taken place? No one was bound to prove the precise
time and place where it occurred. There were also de-
clarations made to Mrs. Succoie at a time when 21t,.
Tucker was not in a disturbed state of mind. He had
no doubt of the guilt of the wife, and must therefore
pronounce for the decree prayed.

..........—....
LAW IN TELLI GEN CE. i The UNDER-SHERIFF said it was not improbable that
COURT OF CHAA.Ch.RY, Lincoln's Inn, July 14. a man might forget, after a lapse of 40 years, but if he
IN RE DYCE SOMBRE (LUNACY). intended to commit deliberate perjury, he might imme-
Mr. BOLT (Mr Shaciwell was with elm) again men- diately have said at once that he had given her away,
tinned the petition in.this matter, and stated that the but it was entirely a question for the jury.
object of it was to have a rebesrirgof Alr.Dyce Sombre's The jury foune for defendant.
case, in order to prove that at the present time that gen. I PAYNE V. MAGSON.
Unman was perfectly competent to manage his own PAYNE, ADMINISTRATOR, V. MAGSON.
affairs. Mr. Dyce Sombre 's property in India was The first was an action to recover the sum of 1061. for
gkting into a very perplexed condition, and therefore he money lent, arid the second, as administrator of his father,
to recover 331. 4s. 3d. for goods sold. The plaintiff is a
was extremely desirous of going out there to superintend
its management. brasslounder in Shoe-lane, and defendant a brass finisher.
Mr. Tinney and Mr. Moore appeared for the commit- The case was wholly devoid of interest, and a verdict was
tees of the estate, but took no part in the discussion. given for plaintiff in each ease.
Mr. BETHELL (with Mr. Calvert) for the committee THE TITHE COMMISSIONERS OF ENGLAND AND WALES
of the person, resisted the application, which they stated V. HARDEN.
was in , ff-ct the same that had recently been heard This was an action brought by the Tithe Commis-
eefore his Lordship, and refused. The only result which sioners of England and Wales, to recover of the defen
eould accrue from rehearing the matter would be to add data, who is a tithe valuer, the sum of 181. 18s. for the
to the already enormous costs. enzrossments of the apportionments of the rent charge
The LORD CHANCELLOR inquired whether Mr. Djce in lieu of tithes, undLr the Tithe Commutation Act. It
Sombre was within the jurisdiction of the Court? appeared that the copies were ordered by defendant for
Mr. RuLT answered that be was not at present. If, the Hamlet of Catgut, and the parish of Woolhavington,
however, his presence were required, he could be in lin the county of Somerset. Defendant's excuse to the
England within 48 hours—the instructions having been Commissioners was, that he could not get in the money
forwarded from Boulogee. from the landholders, and he requested the Commis-
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he would look through sioners to assist him in enforcing the payment. He had,
the affidavits before he expressed his decision upon the however, given the orders, and promised to pay.
application. The jury gave a verdict for the amount claimed.
The petition stood over accordingly.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, July 15.
This morning the Court resumed its sittings.
IN RE CHARLES HUSK.

The insolvent, who had been in partnership with
James Scott Boyce, as meat salesmen in Newgate Mar-
ket, applied to be discharged.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS expressed his surprise at
the schedule filed by this insolvent. Ile owed 4801., and
had owing to him as much as 2,170/.
Mr. NICHOLS, who supported the insolvent, said it was
as stated, but as the insolvent could not get in his ac-
counts, he could not pay what he owed.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS thought the insolvent
might hare got in some of his debts; they were greatly
b•yond the debts he owed.
The insolvent was asked about some of the debts, aid
it appeared that he could not get the money. In otle
case he took law proceedings, and the result was, that he
had only to pay some law expenses.
Mr. Niel:tots was of opinion that the officer of the
Court. (Mr. Wiggins) could collect the money for the
creditors. . .

Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS —lf the schedule is cor-
rect, there is more than 20s. in the pound for the
creditors. _ . .

No creditor gave himself the trouble to apply for the
assigneeshi p.
The insolvent was discharged.
IN RE JAMES SCOTT BOYCE.
This insolvent, partner of the ab,:ve, was the next
applicant. His schedule was nearly the same, and a
hope was expressed that the creditors would be paid
in full.
He was discharged.

BLOOMSBURY COLIN I Y COURT, July 15.

FIARTEG V. REEDING.-BAD MONEY.

The plaintiff, in this;WOn,sougi,t to recover of James
Reed, a newsvender, the sum of 2s. 6d., under the fol-
lowing circumstances :
Having been sworn, the plaintiff said that on the day
of the Epsom races, he entered the defendant's shop to
purchase a copy of the Evening Sun, to ascertain the
result of the races. The newspaper was given to him,
and in payment he tendered half a sovereign, but before
he had received his change, seine other gentleman pur-
chased an Evening Sun, for which he gave half-a-crown,
and received the difference, before plaintiff, to whom
9s. 7d. was afterwards returned, amongst which was a
cad harfcroen, the coin (he believed) that the defend-
ant had taken from the second purchaser. The plaintiff
placed the money in his pocket, without examining it,
and he did not discover that the halfcrown was bad until
the Tuesday following. The coin had nut been out of
his possession during the whole time.
The defendant said he could not be liable, as he did
not believe that the naafi:l-own produced in Court was
the same he had given to him in change.
Mr. Dußois (the Judge)--Ile has positively scorn
that it is the same, and I must credit his statement, in
preference to what you believe.
The defendant—Yes; but I don't see that.—(Laughter
in Court.) Consider for one moment how unprotected a
tradesman would be ; any person who had a base coin
might swear that.

Mr. Dußois—But the law will not allow you to pass
bad money, and it is not probable that any person would
commit perjury, and risk transportation fur half-a crown.
They would begin at a sovereioli.— (Great laughter.)
The defendant was then ordered to pay the amount
claimed, and was about to quit, the Court with the bac.
haifcrown, when Mr. Wright, the Clerk of the Court,
requested the loan of it fur one moment, to test whether
or not it was silver.
The coin was handed back to the defendant in two
pieces.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME ClRCUlT.—Chelm,ford, July 14.
(Before Mr. BICOD PARKE.)
THE DAGENHAM DIURDEL

Thomas Kimpton, formerly a police-constable of the K
division, surrendered to take his trial upon an indictment,
charging him with having committed wilful and corrupt
perjury, upon an examination taken before Mr. Lewis,
the coroner for Essex.

Mr. Clarkson (with Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clarke) con-
ducted the prosecution fur the Treasury ; Mr. Hawkins
appeared for the defence.
Mr. CLARKSON, in opening the case, said that the
charge against the defendant was one of a most serious
character, and the offence was aggravated by the circum-
stances that the defendant was at the time he was
alleged to have committed it a member of the metro-
politan police force, and the perjury was committed
upon his examination as a witness before a public autho-
rity, upon an inquiry into the circumstances connected
with the death of another constable, named George
Clarke, who, there was no doubt, had been murdered in
the execution of his duty. It would appear that the
deceased (Clarke), the defendant, and some other con-
stables whose names would be mentioned in the course
of the examination, were stationed at Dagenham, in
this county, and they were under the superintendence of
a ser:reant named Parsons. On the 29th of June, 1846,
—which was the day on which the murder was com-
m.tted—the deceased and the other men were put on
their beats as usual, that of the deceased commencing at
a place called the Four Wants, and it was the duty of
the sergeant to patrol during the night, and meet the
men at different places, in order to see that the duty was
properly performed; and, in the course of the night, he
should have met the deceased at the Four Wants.
Claike, it appeared, was missed from his proper post.
and, although every search was made, nothing was heard
of him until the 3d of July following, when his body
was found in a wheat-field in the neighbourhood, cruelly
mutilated, and there was no doubt that he had been most
foully murdered. An inquiry took place before the
coroner, and it of course then became a very material
point of inquiry to ascertain when the unfortunate de-
ceased was last seen alive. Upon the first examination
the sergeant was summoned as a witness, and in con-
sequence of some portion of the statement made by him,
a belief was entertained that w rens he should have been
to meet the deceasea at the Four Wants at one o'clock
on the morning of the 30th, he did not go there at all,
and the inquiry was adjourned for the production of
rerther evidence. Kimpton wee examined upon this occa-
sion and he merely deposed to finding the body. An
adjo .rnment took place till the 14th of July, and on that
dal he was again examined. Prior to this it appeared
that Mrs. Page, the wife of a farmer in the neighbour-
hood, who had lent the policemen a cart to take
away the deed body of their comrade, was examined as
a witness, and she stated that when Kimpton brought the
cart home with some of his comrades, she asked them to
have some refreshment, and while they were partaking
of it she asked Kimpton at what time the sergeant last
saw the deceased, and he answerd that he did not see
him at all, tor that, being unwell, he had asked him
(Kimpton) to do his duty for him, and had told him to
take his horse for that purpose. Kimpton, upon being
again examined, swore that he never did do duty for him
on the night of the murder, and, also, that he bad never
made any such statement as that deposed to by Mrs.
Page. Some further adjournments: took place, and at
the difl-rent inquiries the evidence given by Mrs. Page
was confirmed by her daughter and other witnesses, am'
at length, on the 20th of August, when the coroner's
inquest was concluded, the defendant himself admitted
that his statement regarding his not having done duty
for the sergeant was untrue, and that on the night of the
murder he really did take his horse and do his duty, and
that the sergeant was not near the Four Wants at the
time he swore be was there on the night in question.
The Learned Counsel said there could be no doubt that
this false statement of the prisoner had the effect of ma-
terially interfering with the course of justice, as •it had
the effect of diverting the inquiry that would probably
have taken place into a totally different channel, and it
was for making that false statement the present indic:-
meat was preferred against him.
usbselxr., Cprhoavreledstheeahrnoeldil4wis, one of the coroners for
The following evidence was then adduced:—
of the inquest after the find-
ing
of the body, and he produced the depositions taken
on the different days to which the inquest was adjourned.
The depositions were read at length, but it will not be
necessary to refer to them more particularly than to
state that, on the 14th of July, when the jury met for
the second time, the prisoner swore positively that he
did not do duty for the sergeant (Parsons) on the night
of the murder, and that he saw him on horseback per-
forming his own duty of inspecting the men at nine, at
twelve, and at three the next marning, and that when
he went off duty in the morning, he told him that he had
not been able to find Cl itke on his beat. The other
mater al derosition was that made by the defendant on
the 20!h of August, when he admitted that his previous
statement was false, and that at twelve o'clock on the
night of the murder the sergeant toad him that he was
unwell, and asked him to take his horse and do his duty
for him, and that he went to the Four Wants to look for
Clarke but d,uld not find him, and he brought the hcrse
home at two o'clock in the mot gin f;, and saw nothing of
Parsons until six, when he awokz-• him and told him that
all the men were on, exc-pt Clarke. The defendant,
upon this occasion, also said that Parsons told him he
must say that he saw Clarke at one o'clock, and said
that he (Parsons) should say the same, andthekton and
the other men must tell the same story.
Cross-examined—Witness was quite sure that the de.
fondant was re-sworn upon every examination. A great
number of witnesses were examined at the different
inquiries.
By Mr. CLARKSON—For certain reasons, he wee very
par. icular in observing that the oath was duly adminis-
tered to the policemen who were c xarained,
• Mrs. Eirzahf,th Page; the wife of a farmer at Dtg t -
haw, deposed to the fact of the police making a search
upon her farm for the body of the deceased, and that

when it was (Auld she lent the defendant a cart to re-
move it. The defendant and some other policemen came
home with the cart late at night, and she asked them to
have some supper. While they were conversing upon
the subject she asked the defendant at what time Ser-
geant Parsons last saw the deceased on the:night he was
murdered, and he replied that he did not see him at all,
for that he (Kimpton) had done his chit) for him on the
night in question, as he was unwell.
Priscilla Page, the daughter of the last witness, con-
firmed her testimony respecting the statement alleged
to hive been made by the defendant on the night in
question.
John Stevens said that at the time of the murder he
was one of the police stationed at Dagenham. There
was but one horse at the police station, which was used
by Sergeant Parsons.
By the COURT—Sergeant Parsons was on duty some
portion of the night of the murder. He saw him at
half-past ten and at twelve o'clock. He was on horse-
back both times be saw him. He was discharged from
the police after this occurrence.
Thomas Archer said be was employed on a farm near
the Four Wants, and on the morning of the 30th of
June he was up about half-past twelve o'clock, and was
engaged in preparing a horse and cart to go to market.
Whil so engaged, about two o'clock in the morning. the
defendant came up on horseback, and he gave him a
light for his pipe. After he had lighted it he asked
him if he had seen his mate (meaning Clarke), and he
said he had not. _

By the COURT—He supposed he meant Clarke, be•
cause he was the only constable who did duty about
that neighbourhood.
Abiah Buttoy deposed that be was also one of the
police stationed at Dagenham at the time of the murder.
He did not of his own knowledge know whether the
sergeant was on duty or not on the night in question,
but in the course of a conversation that took place be-
tween him, the defendant, and Hickton, the defendant
said that on the night of the murder Sergeant Parsons
gave him the usual nightly report, and told him to take
his horse and go to the Four Wawa and meet Clarke,
and give him the report, and he also said that that was
after twelve o'clock at night. Kimpton also said, that
when he got to the Four Wants he could not find Clarke,
and he rode on to another man's beat; abd that he aftt.r.
wards wont over part of Clarke's beat, and kept the
horse out until nearly daylight. The witness stated that
he also heard the defendant say that the evidence had
been given before the coroner in order to exonerate
Parsons. Some more policemen had been sent down to
Dagenham in order to strengthen their force; and it
was agreed that they should endeavour to prevent the
young hands from knowing that the evidence which ILA
been given before the coroner was false.
Cross-examined—Witness was now living at Bethnal-
green, where he worked at his trade of a broad silk
weaver.

By the COURT— Did not know what had become of
Serg,ant Pars,•ns.
John Stevens recalled.—He saw Parsons on horse-
back near the Church Elms about 12 o'clock on the
night of the murder.

John Barnes, anoiher constable, deposed that after the
first examination before the coroner the defenoant said
that if they did not keep to the story that Parsons had
written down for them about his being on duty on the
night of the murder they should all get into trouble.
By Mr. HAWKlNS—Parsuns wrote out a statement of
what they were to say before the coroner.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. HAWKINS addressed the jury for the prisoner;
but it was very evid,lit, from the tenor of the Learned
Counsel's address, that he felt he could not offer any an-
swer to the facts.

Mr. Baron PARKE having summed up, the jury re-
turned a verdict of Guilty.
Mr. HAwKiNs then t,4,1t an objection to the form of
indictment, which, he said, merely averred that the
off- nce was committed on a certain day in the year
IB4G, and he submitted that the indictment should have
courained the words " in the year of our Lord."
Mr. Baron PARKE appeared to be of opinion that there
was something in the objection, and he said he should
take time to consider of it.
Isaac Hichbn, another constable of the same division,
wai then arraigned upon a similar indictment, arising out
of the same transaction. _ .

The evidence was of precisely the same kind, and it
will therefore not be necessary to repeat it. •
The prisoner, who had no counsel, admitted that he
had told some lies with regard to his meeting the ser-
geant on the night the murder was committed ; but he
sAid he was induced to do so at the sulteitation of his
superior officer, and to screen him from censure for
neglecting his duty.
The jury tiyund him Guilty, but recommended him to
mercy.—Judgment deferred.

NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Bedford, JON 14.

The commission for this county was opened yesterday
by their Lordships, who also attended Divine service, so
that the two Courts were opened for the dispatch of
business this morning. On the Civil side, where Mr.
Baron Alderson presides, there was an entry of three
causes; one of these was undisputed, the second involved
a disputed right to a moat, and the third was a case of
assault.

exercised similar rights during the corresponding period
of time. On the part of the defendant it was proved
that he had derived the moat close from the Fountains,
who held it for three generations, and it was also skown
that rights of ownership similar to those proved by the
plaintiff had been exercised by the Fountains, but not
later than 41 years back.
Mr. Baron ALDEBSON left it to the jury to say to
which side they would incline. There was proof of
ownership on both sides, but that of the defendant had
not been brought down to so recent a period as that of
the plaintiff; but it wa, for them to say whether the
moat in question belonged to the moat close or to the
adjoining lands.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.

The calendar contained the names of ten prisoners.
whose offences, excepting one of arson, one of man-
slaughter, two of burglary, and one of stealing Post-
office lettets, to which the prisoner pleaded guilty, were
of an insignificant character. Besides these, there was
an indictment for a misdemeanour under the Bankrupt
Act, which, having been found at the last assizes, was
taken at the sitting of the Court.
CROWN COUR r.-( Be fore Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
John Blau-ton, aged 22, pleaded not guilty to an in-
dictment which charged that he, being a trader, had
committed an act of bankruptcy on the 24th day of No-
vember, 1846, by a declaration of his inability to meet
his engagements, whereupon he was afterwards duly de-
clared a bankrupt, and that theretofore, and within three
months, he had, by falsely pretending that he had a
large shipping order, obtained certain goods to the value
of 50/. from one J. Taylor, at Luton, with intent to de-
fraud him.
Mr. Prendergast and Mr. Power appeared for the pro-
secution; Mr. Dasent conducted the defence.
It appeared that the defendant, whose brother-in-law
resided at Luton, in this county, where there is au exten-
sive trade in the straw-plait carried on, repaired to that
place in June, 1845, and there established himself as a
ed straw-plaitcontrived
married
tatr
ircrvat
check
ttbohhoei
push
dunpaseuhut
pursuits
it himselfteAsr
ol
ot
fhf
business,
into
tgs Although
business,ecsh withoutman.and aaHnn dys dealer
marriagescha
shortly
nri
tt al I
~
he
def t
the prisoner accordingly entered into some further trans-
actions which did not appear to have led to any favour-
able result. Be that as it may, he repaired on the 223
of August to the warehouse of Mr. Taylor, who dealt in
bonnets, and representing to him that he had reeeivei
an extensive shipping order from Liverpool for such ar-
ticles, requested to be immediately supplied with 410
bonnets, adding that if he could not have them he be-
lieved he should lose a good customer. On this repre-
sentation Mr. Taylor consented to take the order, and
the goods were forthwith supplied. Iu about a week the
prosecutor heard some sinister rumours touching the sol-
vency of his customer, and repaired to his warehouse,
where he ascertained that the whole stock on hand was
not worth more than 51 It should be stated, that when
the goods were sent the defendant, according to the cus-
tom of Luton, gave his acceptance at three months for
them. This, like many others such, was not paid, for in
the meantime the crash came and the deendant coin-
mitted an act of bankruptcy on the 27th of November by
the means stated in the indictment. At the close of the
case for the prosecution,
Mr. DASENT objected to the reception of the bank-
rupt's examination in evidence against him now, as he
had not been cautioned before he gave his answers, and
the examination itself was on oath and compulsory
This question, he believed, was still under consideration
by the fifteen judges in Garbett's case. The Learned
Counsel, also, at the close of the case for the prosecution
(which embraced an admission by the defendant of the
fact that he had not had any shipping order from Liver-
pool), submitted that the case did not fall within the
Act, which contemplated the fraudulent assumption of
the character of a trader by a bankrupt rather than the
fraudulent obtaining goods by an admitted trader. The
words of the Act 5 and 6 Victoria, chap. 122, sect. 35.
were—" If any bankrupt, under the false colour and
pretence of carrying on business and dealing in the
ordinary course of trade, shall have obtained goods on
credit from any other person with intent to defraud the
owners ;" and he submitted that the facts of this case
did not fall within the spirit of these words.
Mr. Justice PATTESON (having consulted Mr. Baron
Alderson,) intimated that they were both agreed
in overruling the objection of the Learned
Counsel, it being their clear opinion that the statute
applied to the case of a trader who obtained goods, in the
way of his trade and in the ordinary course of dealing,
with a view to defraud the owner. He might also say
that he had spoken to his Learned Brother on the other
objection, as to the admissibility of the bankrupt's ex-
amination against him, and that they both thought it
was receivable. It was not necessary to caution a bank.
rupt, and he was obliged to answer all questions put to
him on oath under the pressure of the laws relating to
had
bankrupts. He (Mr. Justice Patteson) never enter-
tained any doubt as to the propriety of receiving such
vidence on the ground of its having been given utithr
the compulsion of such an examination ;
and he might
say that, though no judgment was yet pronounced in
Garbett's ease, there was no difference of opinion among
the judges on this particular point. The case must,
therefore, go to the jury.
Mr. DASENT having addressed the jury on the merits
His LORDSHIP summed up the evidence to them,
leaving it to them to say whether they thought the de-
fendant bad been actuated by the intent laid in the in
dictment.
The jury having found the defendant Guilty, he was
sentenced to six months' imprisonment, without hard
labour.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
EUSTACE V. NEAL.
Mr. O'Malley and Mr. Wells were counsel for the
plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeantyles appeared for the de-
B •
fendant.
This was an action of trespass, in which the plaintiff
complained that the defendant bad interfered with and
in:errupted his rights in respect of three sides of a cer-
tain moat dividing his land from that of the defendant.
F. osi the evidence adduced it appeared that the moat in
question surroueded a piece of land belonging to the de
Pendant, called Moat Close; that that dote was ap.
proached by a road across a common and by a causeway,
and that on three sides she moat was bounded by the
property of the plaintiff, and on the fourth by that of one
ifolu3es. On the part of the plaintiff it was shown that
he derived his property from the Ellingham family, who
held for three generations under old Molly. Ellingham;
th&l, ;luring the earliest times the Ellingleons had
exercised rights of ownership
over tile moat adjoining
their lands till within the last twenty-five years; while
Holmes, who bought from one Falcon, had claimed and '