The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-16 00:00:00

EXECUTION OF BLAKESLEY.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 15.
LLOYD V. WAIT.

The arguments in this part-heard cause, which have
already occupied the Court three days, were resumed this
morning.

ROLLS' COURT, Nov. 15.
MASSIE V. DRAKE.-SAME V. SAME.
The MASTER of the Rotas gave judgment in these
suits; the first of which came before the Court on the
petition of Captain Drake, to procure taxation of the
bills of costs of Messrs. Harper and Parry Jones, his
solicitors, which had been settled and paid by him. His
Lordship said that it appeared the bills had been de-
livered to the plaintiff by -the defendants, and had re-
mained in his possession some time, and that he had
applied to them for an abatement, which they
had thereupon made. It also appeared that the
agent of Captain Drake bad waived the taxation
of the bills, and that all the parties had met together for
the purpose of settlement, when the accounts were ac-
knowledged, and it was found that a balance was due to
Capt. Drake. He had gone carefully over the bills with.
the assistance of a clerk of Court, and had not found that
the overcharges exceeded the abatement that had been,
made to Captain Drake. Under these circumstances
the petition must be, , dismissed with costs.,
In the second case; which prayed an account of certain
sums of money alleged to be due to Mrs. Blake from the
same parties, for money received by them individually
,and in partnership, on her account, his Lordship as to
certain portions of the account, dismissed the petition,
but as to other portions of them, directed the account
prayed for to be takan.

'Die execution of this wretched man having been ap-
pouted
o to take place yesterday, the Old Bailey: and
all the approaches to it were crowded before seven
o'clock, and the conduct of the multitude, as might be ex-
peeted upon such brutalising occasions, was marked by
the most disgusting levity and indecency. It was :
indeed a matter of astonishment to observe that those
who had undergone so much inconvenience as those
thousands suffered. being crammed together in so small
a space, for the sake of witnessing the revolting spec-
tacle, continued their sports, throwing about each others
hats and bonnets from one part of the throng to another,
with shouts of laughter and wild jests, whilst the miser-
able object of their curiosity s stood upon the drop, and
was being launched into eternity.
On Sunday evening his father called at Newgate, but I
was not admitted into the condemned cell. The object
of the distressed parent's visit did not transpire.
Blakesley has a mother and three sisters living, but his , .
father only has visited him since his condemnation.
About i I o'clock, the culprit, who has worn a strait
waistcoat since his violent conduct towards his keeper
on Thursday, lay down for a short time, but he evinced
great restlessness, and soon after midnight he arose and 1
occupied himself in praying, and writing two letters, one I
to Ins wife, and the other to the Rev. Ordinary, the con-
tents
of which were not communicated to the Reporters. '
As early as four o'clock in the morning the Old Bailey i
was thronged with males and females of the lower class, i
and the appearance of the workmen and police bearing
torches, throw a sombre and awful effect upon the gaol
awl the fatal apparatus which was hastily 'proceeding to •
completion. Inspector Woodroffe With 200 of the City
Police, were ia attendance to preserve order, and as the
time of execution advanced, the crowd became far
greater than even at Courvoisier's execution. ..'"L:'..
Mr. Sheriff Rogers arrived at six o'clock, and was
speedily followed by Mr. Sheriff Magnay, and the Under-
Sheriff's, Messrs. Pritchard and Beavan. : The Rev. Mr.
Carver arrived at half-past six o'clock, and immediately
proceeded to the condemned cell, and offered the
wretched man the best spiritual consolation his awful
situation required. The silver chalice and sacramental
cup, with some bread and wine, were taken into the pri-
soner at half-past seven ; but the Reporter was after-
wards informed by the Rev. Ordinary that he had not
administered the sacrament to Blakesley.
The convict having partaken of some coffee, Calcraft
the hangman proceeded to pinion his arms, and he un-
derwent the ceremony with most astonishing composure.
At a few minutes before eight o'clock the Sheriffs in-
quired of Blakesley if he was desirous of making any
statement, upon which he addressed the Ordinary to the
following effect :—" I do assure you, Mr. Carver
that I • did not intend to murder Mr.. Bnrdon.
but I did intend to murder my wife, ani I.expected to.
be brought here, and to die for it. It is not true that
Mr. Burden was sitting down when I stabbed- hiss, but he
came before me and my wife, in, this way—(bere Blake*,
ley, sat down in a chair, and placing a handkerehief .over
his head,: he described how- Mr. Burdon hastily rose
Rfrom : his chair and came between them). The
Reterend: Mr,' Carver then asked the - convict in
:tern he placed his future hope, and he replied calmly
4
'lens Christ, my SiviOur, who died for sinners." "And
you believe he will 'Tjeeteite you ? " inquired the
ClutPlidn, to ,which Blakedlenswered " Yes,- I do."
whether it was
feigned insanityop
7Zrn'ogwar.r.• then, questionedbim as to whether he .
opinion that: lIV ,bad been really mad, or
condemnedassumed,: and be stated that lie .had
üblile
jected toavoid • being present at the
thhe- sermon,to
that he might not be stib-
I Sheriff :ff* inMatghneay hawing gaze, and it was not
.obtaining a reprieve. Mr.
further request to make,
to co upon his parents and ee!osgmtefrosr,
he begged
if the culprit had any
the Rev. Mr. Carver
and also upon his
comfort to
fthem. During
wife, to administer spiritual
the whole of this time the countenance theH culprit was
composed, and he spoke in a firm voice.° e was attired
in a suit of black, and wore a white cravat. It being now
nearly eight o'clock, the prison-bell sounded the ipr
F Ull eCs death. knell, and the officers slowly and mournfully
iiitwed across the Chapel-yard and along the 'dreary: nar-
row passages' of the . gaol towards the scaffold. The
(.„„vict, who was preceded by the Sheriff, Under-She-
i riff, Governor, and Ordinary, walked with a firm step,
repeating to himself the solemn prayers uttered by the
Rev. Mr. Carver. He ascended the scaffold without assi,it..
ushiliaveulnychfe4
.'
one,., and, upon being placed under the fatal beam, the
ex corations of' the mob were almost deafening. After
prayer rather better than a minute
trhenevaraiital ibeonirsagn.e.edreinweiatrheddratowns
into eternity. Ile app iriaigngdlehceon"N'a-
shrieks of
of the men defies any-
females and tile shouting . •
. The body hay-
soine minutes. and during this time the - -
thine. like an • accurate description
,7.
rent. A number of gentlemen
moved into the prison for intern .
jug' been suspended an hour, was cut down; and re-
females occu-
piedwithin the gaol, and several well-dressed.
particularly of the medical profession, were admitted
the windows of the houses opposite.
Some pick-
pockets were apprehended by the police in the course of
" the sight."
---=

The Speaker of the House of Commons (the
Right Hon. C. S. Lefevre) had an audier.ce of Sir James
Graham yesterday morning at the Home-office. Sir R.
Wilson also had au audience of the Right Hon. Baronet.

THE SUN, LONEIO2C-TUESDAY, N'OVEMBER 16, 1841.3

fendant, that upon the last occasion of the at-
tempt being made prior to the institution of this
suit—namely, ten years ago, the occupiers of the lawn
resisted the 'demand of a- poors -rate, and that the parish
authorities gave up the demand; these circumstances led
him to put the matter in a train for further investigation.
He would suggest, as a point deserving of the defend-
ant's consideration, whether, if Benefield-lawn were ex•
tra parochial, and the tithes therefore the property of the
Crown prior to the alienation of 1832, the title to those
tithes might not now be in Lord Winchelsea. If they
were extra-parochial, he thought the Crown would
have the power to transfer them. His Honour
then directed an issue to be tried by special jury,
whether the lands called Benefield-lawn, in
the pleadings mentioned, are part of the parish of
Cottingham-cum-Middleton," the affirmative to be upon
the plaintiff.

SUTHERLAND V. BRIGGS.

His HONOUR stated that he would give judgment in
this cause on Thursday.

ROBERTS V. WILLIAMS.

In this cause the bill was filed to enforce a voluntary
settlement made in favour of the plaintiff.
His Honour postponed his judgment.

JESSQP V. JESSOP.

In this cause his Honour decreed " a reference to the
Master to inquire who are the next of kin, and if he shall
find the next of kin are parties to the record, then to
proceed to take an account."

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 15.

THE QUEEN V. JOHN SHEEHAN AND SIR JOHN JIILLEY

DOYLE.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL-applied to the Court in
this case, which was a rule for a criminal information
against the defendanti, to enlarge the rule till Saturday.
He made the application upon an affidavit which stated
that the rule was served some days after it had been
obtained ; that the affidavits consisted of upwards of
thirty brief sheets, and the defendants had not time to
prepare their answer. The Court was aware that the
case arose out of some dispute at Cambridge, between
one of the defendants and Sir Alexander Grant.

The COURT granted the application.
THOMAS V. REECE.

This was an action of assumpsit upon two bills of ex-
change, and upon an account stated. The case was tried
before Mr. Justice Pattesen on Monday last, and a ver-
dict was had for the defendant.

Mr.BansTow now mosecfior a rule to show cause
why the verdict should not be set aside and a new trial
had, on the ground of misdirection. At the trial, on the
part of the plaintiff it was proved that with regard to
the bill for 211. 1 is. a person went to the defendant,
who admitted his liability, but begged the plaintiff to sue
the acceptor and endorser, and that if they did not or
could not pay, he would. The plaintiff accordingly did
so, but they turned out to be insolvent, and application
was again made to the defendant. Then the defendant
established the fact that the bill had been presented a
day too late ; but it was submitted for the plaintiff that
he was entitled to recover on the account stated, but the
Learned Judge was of opinion that he could not recover,
not having new assigned ; and it was to take the opinion
of the Court upon that point that the case was now sub-
mitted to their Lordships.
The COURT took time to consider its decision.
THE QUEEN V. SCHOLFIELD AND OTHERS.
This was an indictment for a conspiracy to obtain
goods under false pretences and representations. The
indictment charged the defendants, Edward Scholfield, a
Manchester warehouseman, carrying on business in Wat •
ling-street, London, ; Arranfeldt, his partner, residinr,
at Manchester ; Armand Cusell, and Lascell, a native of
llamburgh, carrying on business in London, with con-
spiring to obtain goods under false pretences from Jos.
Raleigh and Co., of Manchester, and from Messrs.
Goolde, Smith, and Holland. The transactions took
place in the months of June and July, 1839 ; and the
clerk of Lascell, in the beginning of that year, went to
Manchester, and on the suggestion of Arranfeldt went to
one of the prosecutors (Raleigh), and obtained goods to
the amount of 1,6001. or 1,700/. giving references
to Scholfield and other parties. One of the prosecutors,
Mr. Goolde, came to London in July, and made inquiries
concerning the character of Lascell, and ultimately the
goods were delivered, and shortly afterwards Lascell ab-
sconded, and the other defendants became bankrupt.
The Jury found all the defendants guilty, and a rule for
a new trial was subsequently obtained on the ground of
misdirection, and upon affidavits in which the defendant
Scholfield deposed that the statement made by the pro-
secutor Goolde was untrue—Goolde having deposed at
the trial that he had a conversation with Scholfield in
London, on the 3d of July, while Scholfield swore that
he never had any conversation with Goolde till after the
12th of July.
Mr. REILLY now appeared to show cause against the
rule. The case had occupied the attention of the Court
for two days, but he would not trouble them at any
length, because, from the affidavits which were now be-
fore them there could be no ground whatever for a new
trial. With regard to the defendant Cusell, there was
some ground fbr doubting whether he was implicated,
and as regarded him a, nolle prosequi ; but the question
the Court was now called upon to decide was, whether
there was not evidenceut the trial to support the verdict
against all the others.
Mr. THESIGER, for the defendant Scholfield, was
ready to admit that there was enough upon the answer.
ing affidavits to show that Goolde was in London on the
of July, and he should therefore abandon that part of
the case. What he relied upon now was, that there was
no satisfactory evidence at the trial to show that the de-
fendant Scholfield was engaged in the conspiracy.
Mr. KELLY complained that the substantial objection
which had been urged to the verdict had now been aban-
doned, and that a new ground of defence, which he was
not prepared to argue, had been brought forward. He
was unwilling, however, in a crimiaal case, to offer any
objection to its being argued, but submitted that there
was ample evidence to connect Scholfield with the ob-
taining of these goods. There was distinct proof of com-
munication between the parties pending the negotiations
for them—the goods were sent to Scholfield's warehouse
in the first instance, although the invoice was made out
in the name of Lascell,—the inquiries made were
answered in a wa) that the parties must have known to
be false, and, he did not think that any point had
been improperly pressed against them. The Learned
Counsel having referred at some length to the evidence
at the trial, submitted that, independently of what ap-
peared upon the affidavits,ai impossible apr.ndssiwblheictoh
entertainmater a
materially
strengthened his case, it was
doubt that these parties had fraudulently conspired to
obtain these goods under false representations, and that
the rule for a new trial must be discharged.
Mr. BAINES followed on the same side.

Mr. THESIGER, for the defendant Scholfield, said
that, whatever might be the result of the present long
and anxious inquiry, the defendants must be satisfied
that their Lordships were desirous that the criminal law
should be administered fairly and impartially. Their
Lordships, he was satisfied, would not say that the ver-
dict should not be set aside, because there was some
evidence of a conspiracy ; but that they would do so,
unless they were convinced, upon a view of the whole of
the evidence, that it was perfectly satisfactory. Now,
with regard to the nolle prosequi that had been entered in
the case of Cusell, they were placed in a very unfair
and extraordinary position. The prosecutors, notwith-
standing the verdict of the Jury, now admitted that the
evidence was not sufficient to warrant his conviction.
Mr. KELLY—No ; but that there were some doubts.
Mr. TMESIGER that was a most. -unwarrantable pro-
ceeding. because it would infer that the prosecutors
were still satisfied of the guilt of Cusell, and that their
only ground for refusing their consent to a new trial in
favour of Cusell was, that it might operate favourably to
the other defendants. That stamped the prosecution in
a manner which it was unnecessary for him to charac-
terise. There was no doubt whatever that the
Jury had come to a very hasty and inconsiderate
conclusion, and it would be far from satisfactory
if punishment should follow such a verdict. The
evidence showed that Scholfield had had only
a few months knowledge of Lascell. He had obtained a
satisfactory reference, and had one or two dealings with
Lascell, and when Mr. Goolde applied to him he showed
him these transactions in his ledger, and gave such a
representation of the character of Lascell as these deal-
ings warranted. Looking at all the circumstances, he
submitted that there was nothing to show that Schol-
field was a party to any attempt to obtain the good upon
false representations ;' that he had no reason to
believe that Lascell was in such a state of
insolvency as that he was unable to pay for
them, and that he fully, freely, and fairly revealed to
Goolde all the transactions he had had with Lascell,
order to enable_ Goolde to form his own opinion. Under'
these circumstances he thought it would be a most harsh
and cruel thing to allow a conviction of that kind to
proceed against a person who had hitherto maintained a
highly respectable character, when the charge was
founded upon proof of knowledge which 'ad not exist,
and upon misrepresentations which had- never been made;
and when in the result Mr- Scholfield himself was the
greatest sufferer, these transactions having- dragged him
down from a state of affluence to bankruptcy, and which,
Unless his character was cleared by the opinion their
Lordship that day pronounced, would, he feared, result
in his utter ruin.
Mr. lIGMFREY addressed the Court on behalf of the
defendant Arranfeldt.
Mr. MARTIN on the same side' with Mr. Thesiger,
then addressed the Court.
Their LORDSHIPS took time to consider their decision,
the question being of considerable importance.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov, 15.
At the sitting of the Court this morning the Lord
Chief Baron called upon Mr. Tyrwhitt to take his place
as Postman of the Court, in the room of Mr. Whately,
now a Queen's Counsel ; and Mr. Crumpton was called
upon to succeed Mr. Tyrwhitt as Tubman. These are
old offices connected with this Court. We are not aware
that any duties are attached to them, but the Postman
has the privilege of
movin first, even before her Ma-
jesty's Attorney-General, The Tubman is called upon
second and before any Queen's Counsel.
The Court was occupied the whole day with the special
g
paper. The arguments were merely technical.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER, Woe. 15.
BESIVICK V, WESTBROOK.
Mr. JAMES opened this case to the Jury. He said
the plaintiff was
his action for false imprisonment against the defendant
who he believed to be an independent gentleman. Aboutclock one o' a ,
on the morning
the evening with some
of the 29th September, the
plaintiff, who had been spending
friends, was returning to his home through Great Or-
mond-street, when his atteation was attracted by some-
thing glittering on the ground.. When he was in the
act of picking it up, the defendant, and a friend of his
came up, and asked what it was. Plaintiff jocularly
asked what they would give for it, or something of that
kind. The defendant was very wroth, and instantly
called for the police. A policeman came up, and de-
fendant gave the plaintiff pin charge. The policeman
hesitated, considering it no charge at all ; defendant in-
sisted, and the policeman desired them all to go to the

watch-house. On arriving at the station-house,and finding
the charge would not be taken, the defendant changed it,
and said he belonged to the Mendicity Society, and would
give him in charge for begging, for which there was not the •
slightest pretext. Now it was to be borne in mind that
the charge of begging was one which ensured the impri-
sonment of the plaintiff, for upon it no one could be
bailed. He was locked up with some drunken persons,
walked through the streets to the police-otfice as a va-
grant ; charged there as such ; detained for some time,
and instantly discharged when the hearing came. For
that wrong he now claimed damages of the jury, and he
trusted they would teach the defendant that he had no
right to put the powers of the police in action upon so un-
founded a charge. He then called
Morris, 78 E, who was called at the time in question.
When he came up defendant had hold of plaintiff, and
gave him in charge as an impostor, because he wanted
him (defendant) to give him money for what he called a
gem, but which was only a bit of bronzed China. De-
fendant said plaintiff was an impostor, and he would
know who he was. He insisted upon witness taking the
charge. They all went to the station. house, where the
defendant, on finding that the charge would not be
taken, charged him with begging, and he was locked up.
Witness took him to Hatton-garden next morning. The
charge was not heard till two o'clock, when the plaintiff
was at once discharged. The plaintiff was quite sober.
The defendant appeared to hare been drinking.
In his cross-examination the witness said defendant
offered several times to let plaintiff go if he would make
an apology. Plaintiff said he was as respectable as de-
fendant, and would see the charge out.
Inspector Maud gave an account of what took place at
the station-house, as stated above.
Baron ALDERSON—When charges are made before
you, do you use no discretion ? Witness —Yes.
Q.—Why then was the plaintiff detained ? A.—The
charge was regular.
Q. Suppose the Lord Mayor of London were brought
before you, and charged with begging, would you detain
him ?—A. No ; but here I presumed the charge was
reasonable.

Q. Why ? Was the plaintiff ill-dressed ? A. No.
Q. Did he appear to be in want ?—A. No.
Q. Well, he was well dressed, perfectly sober; he told
you he was a tailor, and where he lived ; he is charged
with begging by a drunken man. Why detain him under
such circumstances ?—A. Why, I had some doubts
Baron ALDF.RSON—Then you ought to have inquired.
When you have doubts in future, exercise them for the
purpose of keeping people out of prison not for putting
them in. If you had exercised any discretion, or the
least common sense, this matter would never have been
heard of.

Mr. ERLE, for the defendant, said the action was as
trumpery a one as had ever been tried in a Court of
Justice. The evidence clearly showed that the plaintiff
was most anxious to get a cause of action, or he would
not have minded what had been said by a drunken man.
It was a case wherein the very smallest coin would fully
compensate the plaintiff.
The Learned JUDGE having summed up, the Jury
found for the plaintiff—Damages 201

BAIL COURT, Nov 15.
(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
THE QUEEN V. BRADSTOCK AND OTHERS.

Mr. GURNEY moved that the defendant Bradstock
in this case should be brought up to plead.
The defendant was accordingly brought up. and, having
pled, was re-committed to Giltspur•street Compter. It
was understood this is one of the cases connected with
the late City election for Bridgemaster.

GREEN V. HIPPESLEY.

In this case, which was an action brought against a
Sheriff, the plaintiff had been non-suited, in consequence
of no one being in attendance when the case had been
called on.
Mr. THESIGER had obtained a rule nisi to reinstate
the cause, on the affidavits of the attorney for the plain-
tiff and his clerk, from which it appeared that the at-
torney had been in attendance in Court on the day of
trial, and had instructed Mr. Thesiger and Mr. Martin
to appear for him ; that he had remained in Court until
nearly two o'clock, at which time a cause was in the
course of trial, in which numerous witnesses were ex-
pected to be examined ; and that there were two de-
fended causes at that time standing on the paper before
the cause of Green and Hippesley ; and that the at-
torney, thinking the case safe, had gone away ; that
during his absence the two causes preceding this one
had been postponed to the next sitting of the Court
on account of their length ; and that when Green
and Hippesley was called on, Mr. Thesiger and Mr.
Martin, the Counsel for the plaintiff, being both in
the Court of Exchequer, it was represented to the Court
that no person appeared fur the plaintiff, and the nonsuit
was entered accordingly. Under these circumstances, he
trusted the Court would order the case to be reinstated
in the paper.
Mr. FAME said, that as this was an action against a
Sheriff, he had been instructed by the attorneys for the
defendants, Mesrs. Adlington and Gregory, to take every
advantage which the law gave. It was the duty of the
attorney for the plaintiff not to leave the Court ; if he
chose to do so, he must take the consequences. He hoped
his Lordship would not suffer the cause to be reinstated.
Mr. TRESIGER having replied,
Mr. Justice PATTESON said that it appeared from the
affidavits that the attorneys for the defendants were per-
fectly aware that it was the intention of .the plaintiffs to
fight this cause, and the Court ought to hilve been in-
formed of that fact when the cause was called on ; as that
had not been done, he thought the,osiuse ought to he re-
instated.—Rule absolute.
GOODMAN- U. •MORAN.—TFIE .LAW OF BUTTON-HOLES.

In the "Life kid Opinions of Tristram Shandy" the
learned author of that work path promised to write a chap-
ter upon button-holes. - -Until this day we were not aware
that that which Sterne;in the overflowing playfulness of his
sparkling wit, had proposed to do as the ne plus ultra of
facetious' absurdity, had been actually perpetrated by
" the collective wi4dom" in sober solemn seriousness.
Reader, if thou seekest a chapter upon button-holes turn
to the statutes at large, and at cap. 12 of the 7th of Geo,
1., thou wilt find one. By that statute it is enacted
" that from and after the nine-and-twentieth day of Sep-
tember, which shall be in the year of our Lord 1722, it
shall not be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever
within the kingdom of Great Britain to use or wear
on any clothes, garments, or apparel whatsoever
any buttons or button-holes made or bound
with:cloth, serge, drugget, frieze, camblet, or any stuffs
whereof clothes or wearing garments are usually made,
and that if any person whatsoever within the kingdom of
Great Britain shall use or wear any buttons or button-
holes so made or bound, such person shall, on being
convicted thereof by the oath of one or more credible
witness or witnesses, or by confession of the party, for-
feit for every dozen of such buttons or button-holes so
used or worn the sum of forty shillings."
In this case the law in questicn had been brought
under the notice of the Court. The plaintiff, a tailor, had
brought an action to recover for goods sold and delivered,
and the plaintiff had pleaded that the buttons were ille-
gitimate, and the button-holes breaches of the law.
Mr. Hocams, on behalf of the plaintiff, moved for a
rule nisi, to strike out the plea as irrelevant, and to sign
udgment for the plaintiff thereupon, and argued that
the Act said nothing about tailors making, but about
persons wearing unlawful buttons, or indulging in crimi-
nal button holes, and that moreover he was entitled to
recover his cloth.

Mr. Justice PATTESON granted the rule nisi.
The consequence of the above decision is that the de•
fendant will have to show cause against the rule, and
the Court will, at some future period, be occupied for
some hours in listening to a learned argument Gn button-
holes. Oh Sterne, Sterile ! hide thy diminished head!
Here we shall have a solemn judgment on button-holes,
delivered in Banco Regina, by the Judges of the land I
What is a chapter to a judgment ?

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 15.
FORRESTER V. PADDOCK.
In this case, which stood over from Saturday, Sir T.
Wyble resumed his argument in support of the rule for
a nonsuit, and was followed by Mr. Sergeant Bompas on
the same side.
Their LORDSIIIPS took time to consider judgment.

POLICE INTELLU,ENCE.
MANSION-HO USE. '

A case of considerable importance, as regards the laws
relating to mastei-s and apprentices, came on for decision
yesterday before the Lord Mayor. . ,
Mr. Pritchard, an extensive cigar manufacturer at
Clerkenwell, appeared before his Lordship, . upon the
`hearing of a complaint against his apprentice, James
'Moore, for misconduct, the hearing having been ad-
sjoUrned on Saturday, in order that the City Solicitor's
opinion might be taken upon an objection raised to the
jurisdiction of the Magistrate; because it appeared by
the indentures that no premium had been paid, and it
was contended for the apprentice, that inasmuch as the
words of the Act, giving the Justices jurisdiction, related
to " pauper apprentices and others upon whose binding
out no larger sum than five pounds was paid." it must
be made to appear that some sums had been paid by way
of premium. It had been decided,. it was said, at some
of the police-offices, that a farthing would be sufficient
for the purpose, but without the pap-tient of a premium
was recited in the indenture, the Magistrate would be
ousted of jurisdiction under the statute.
The City Solicitor being detained at Guildhall upon
pressing business, the following opinion was read :
"MT DEAR Sin,—l have, as you say, heard that it
has been somewhere decided by somebody, that the pro-
visions of the 4th George IV., c. 29, do not apply in
cases where no premium has been paid. If that is so it
must have been equally the law under the provisions of
29th George IL, c. 19. The words are precisely the same
in both, except that the Act of George IV. extends the
jurisdiction oL the Justices from Si. to 251.
" I can find no case in which the doctrine now con-
tended for has been laid down. The former Act was in
force 70 years, and many hundreds, perhaps thousands
of cases similar to the present must have been decided
under it. If the limited construction thus attempted to
be fastened upon this clause were the true one, it seems
impossible to believe that it would not have found its way
into the Courts of Law long before the passing of the last
Act, and in that case there can be but little doubt that
Parliament would have chosen otlicr words to express
what was undoubtedly its meaning, if the words actually
employed do not justify the interpretation they have al-
-1 way s received.

1." In passing an Act to give cheap and summary re-
dress between masters and pauper apprentices, or where
the small amount of- the premium indicates that the par-
ties are not in a situation to encounter the expensive and
dilatory process of an action at law, it never can have
been the intention of the Legislature to exclude from the
benefit of such an useful law a class of persons too poor
to pay any premium at all.
" I do not think the words . doubtful ; -but assum-
ing it to have -been the intention of Parliament to
bring such cases within the provision of the Statute, I
think the Lord Mayor cannot do wrong in following the
example of Lord Tenterden, who, wider ginger circum-