The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, JULY 26, 1841

MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS.

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF SATURDAY.

HERALD.—When Mexico has been and is rigorously
screwing up her tariffs, the chiefs of the province of Yucatans
which has revolted from Mexico, have, on the contrary, re-es-!.
tabltshed the old and more liberal tariff of 1828, at the same
time that the old constitution of 1824 was adopted as the form
of government. The tonnage duly exigible under that tariff
moreover has been reduced from 17 reals, at which it stood for-.
merly, to 12 reels per ton.
In like manner General Anaza, commanding the insurgent•
federalists, when the city of Tabasco fell into their power, im-
mediately issued two decrees, by the first of which the Mexi-
can tariff of 1828 was re-established, subject to ulterior dis-
positions of the General Congress, when it should assemble,
and also with modifications, among which are the following :
The anchorage duty abolished. Every vessel entering Tabasco,
on whatever account, to pay a duty of 12 reals per ton. Fo•
reign vessels not to engage in the coasting trade from one port
to another; but once unloaded and visited by the Custom-house
officers, to be permitted to take in freight of national products
at Tabasco, on proving by a regular certificate of the respec-
tive custom-houses that they have acquitted the duties. Three-
fifths only of the import duties established by the general ta-
riff of 1828 before cited to be exacted for the present. No in-
ternal duty, nor, in the state, any kind of impost upon the
circulation of national or foreign commodities, shall be exigi-
ble, the interior custom-houses being from this moment
suppressed. Arms, gunpowder, provisions and lead to he ex-
empt from all taxes on importation. There are also other re-
gulations in these decrees freeing foreign trade from various
vexations.

These facts accomplished of intrusive or insurgent Govern-
ments are cited to show the heads of the Mexican Republic and
Legislature the impolitic and unpopular course of fiscal exaction
which they have been and are pursuing to the destruction of all
foreign trade, and the disgust still more of the Mexican people
themselves than of foreign nations. For the Mexican tariff
itself is one mass of prohibitions or prohibitory duties payable
at the ports of entry, and these are extravagantly enhanced
again by duties on internal consumption, or rather on being
forwarded into the interior, all payable by the foreign merchant.
The Mexican Government ought to understand that when in-
surgent provinces declare their independence, and hasten as the
very first step to suppress odious tariffs and replace them with
a more liberal and equitable system, it is a clear sign that they
are acting no less from a desire to benefit the ccmmunity than
to gain popularity, to which the reduction of oppressive imposts
is felt to be the readiest way.
POST.—We hear of a number of additional failures having
occurred in Germany and other parts of the Continent, some of
them being failures of importance. The condition of the firms
previously noticed prove to be even more extensive than was
at first imagined.
Here a stoppage in the West India trade has been talked of,
but we furbear to go into any particulars upon the subject at
present.

The case of the Wakefields, late of Broad-street, bankers and
stockbrokers, as unfolded within the last day or two in the
Court of Bankruptcy, has formed a very prominent topic of
discussion among our commercial men. Educated at a school
like the Stock Exchange, it was not to be expected that
the books of these persons would prove entirely free
from items that might lead to an indulgence on the
part of the Commissioner or the creditors, the reverse
of flattering to their feelings. The public appear, however,
not to have been by any means prepared for the development of
facts so perfectly damning to their reputation, as men of bmi-
ness, as those which were brought to light upon the occasion ;
for what has been the conduct pursued by them for the last
three-and-twenty years? With a capital of 1,50(1., including
the lease of the Broad-street premise', if such a sum is worthy
to be called a capital, Messrs. Wakefield have been receiving,
as bankers, cash to an unlimited amount, partly in deposit,
and partly for investment , as well as secui ities in trust, the
whole of which they have, apparently without the smallest
hesitation, appropriated to their own purposes as often
as their shameful extravagance produced a necessity for
supplies. Every species of property confided to their
custody has been made away with, for all that re-
mains out of nearly 100,0001. (the aggreate of their
debts) is a miserable sum of 5,706/. (property, 4,9511.,
gaol debts, 755/. ), or, say, about one shilling in
the pound, and, if the expenses be deducted, nothing like so
much. The bankrupts state the amount of their profits, since
January, 1818, to be 73,706/. From these we deduct the sum
put down for expenses at 19,4051., and another sum for losses
(gambling losses on the Stock Exchange, of course), at
35,547/., which leaves a remainder of 18,754/. to meet the ex-
penditu:e of the two insolvents for the same period, amount-
ing t.d 112,410/., the son having spent 37,256/., and the father
the very modest amount of 75,1541. ! or five thcusand a year,
of which four thousand was the money of other people, im-
properly converted to their personal uses.
The elder Wakefield was a member of the Committee of the

Stock Exchange, and Trustee and Treasurer of the Decayed
Members' Fund. In the latter capacity he made free with
Exchequer Bills to the extent of 4,000/. belonging to super-
annuated jobbers, widows, and orphans, a sum which, however,
it is likely his co-Trustee may be called upon to make good, as,
in justice he ought to be. He is clearly liable, and can, we
understand, well afford to pay.
While the old Stock Exchange counts among the more re-
spectable of its members gentlemen of the character of Messrs.
Wakefield and Son, for there have been, and are, others of the
body to whom our censure might be equally well applied, we
do think those of our Contemporaries who are sometimes in-
&lced, in spite of their obvious feelings, to defend their mis-
doings, should be so hard as they are upon the class they de-
nom►nate the " shut out." The privilege of being admitted
to the society of the Wakefields, and their equals in respect-
ability, is one that does not, in our humble estimation, appear
so valuable as to render the circumstance of one's exclusion
therefrom a legitimate subject of derisiou.
During the late examination at the Bankruptcy Court an
officer holding a commission in the a my presented himself.
After many years' service and severe economy, the veteran had,
it seems, placed in the hands of the bankru?ts stock he had
acquired for 10,0001. They transferred it, made off with the
proceeds, and he was thus robbed of every farthing he pos-
sessed. This we name as hut one of the many miseries inflicted
by the unprincipled conduct of parties engage d in money trans-
actions, and occupying a station calculated to impose upon the
unwary.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, July 24.
MILNER V. SINGLETON.

This case came before the Court upon appeal from the
decision of his Honour the Vice-Chancellor, refusing to
grant a new trial of an issue which the Court had di-
rected. The only question in the case was, whether the
defendant Singleton, in negotiating with the Dean of
York for the lease of a farm, occupied by the plaintiff,
acted as- his agent or on his own account, On the case
cdming- on before the Vice-Chancellor, his Honour di-
rected an issue to try that question ; and the jury, upon
that issue, gave a verdict, to the effect that Singleton in
the transaction acted as the agent of the plaintiff. An
application was then made to the Vice-Chancellor for a
new trial, which that Learned Judge refused to grant,
and from that judgment the present appeal was brought.
Mr. Wigram and Mr. Elmesley appeared on behalf of
the appellant, and Mr. Richards and Mr. Smythe were in
support of the judgment below.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, without calling upon the two
latter gentlemen to address the Court, gave judgment,
refusing the motion with costs, thereby affirming the de-
cision of the Court below, refusing to grant a new trial.
ELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR SCOTLAND.

In the course of the morning, the Duke of Richmond,
the Duke of Leeds, and the,Earl of Marchmont, appeared
in Court, and took the necessary oaths to enable them to
vote at the election of representative Peers for Scotland.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, July 24.
HERRING V. CLOBURRY.

The plaintiff in this case had been taken under an at-
tachment issued out of the Court of Chancery for the
non-payment of costs, which he had been ordered to
pay upon the dismissal of his bill, and having been
brought up to the bar of the Court, was turned over to
the Fleet Prison, where he is at present confined. The
solicitor for the defendant had been unable to find the
plaintiff for the purpose of serving him with the subpoena
for the taxed costs, which is necessary before issuing an
attachment ; and upon affidavit of the steps which had
been unsuccessfully taken to serve the plaintiff personally
by repeated application at a house, No. 66, in St. James's-
street, of which the plaintiff described himself, and also
at Tattersall's subscription-rooms, which he was said to
frequent, an order was made that service of the subpcena
on his clerk in Court should be good service, and upon
this order the attachment issued.

Mr. WAKEFIELD now moved to discharge the order
and the attachment, on the ground that the defendant's
solicitor, being informed at 66, St. James's-street that
the plaintiff did not reside there, but that any letter or
message left there for him would be delivered, ought to
have stated to the person residing there what his object
for inquiring was, or ought to have left some letter or
note for that purpose, which he did not do,' as the plain-
tiff would then have had an opportunity of making an
appointment for the purpose of meeting the clerk whose
business it was to serve him with the subpoena.
Mr. K. BRUCE and Mr. HARE, for the defendant, said
the order for the substitution of service. was not ob-
tained ex parte, but upon notice served upon the clerk
in Court, and the plaintiff, if he had any objection to
the order, ought to have appeared and opposed it.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR said it was not probable that
leaving any letter or message at St. James's-street would
have facilitated the personal service of the subpoena.
Everythinc, that could be done appeared to have been
done, and. refused the motion with costs.

Julian Hugh
,Poters. Exparte Bodenham 8, Adolphus
and Ellis, 950, was referred to in support of the argument;
The VICE-CHANCELLOR rose without hearing the
further arguments in this case.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY—JuIy 23.
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONELANQUE.)
i%IABIUS MERENTIE'S BANKRUPTCY.
This was the day fixed to take the choice of assignees
against this estate. The bankrupt is described as a merchant
of King William-street, and had connexion with firms of the
same name.at Paris, Marseilles, &c. and the choice of assig-
nees was, after some short discussion, adjourned to allow time
for proofs, &c. to be received thence.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT—JuIy 23.
(Before Mr. Commissioner BOWEN.)
NE THOMAS HOLLOWAY.
The hearing of this case excited very considerable interest
on account of the celebrity of the insolvent, he being the pro-
prietor of " Holloway's Ointment." From the description
given in the schedule, it appeared that he had formerly re-
sided in France, since in various places, and lastly at 144,
Strand.
The amount of debts in his schedule was stated to be 3,0591.,
and his assets 5201. The cause of his insolvency he attributed
to his expenditure exceeding his income.
Mr. Cooke appeared on behalf of Messrs. Peter Ashnell,
Burrell, and Edward Paterson, solicitors, of White Horse-
court, Lombard-street. Mr. Woodroffe appeared for the in-
solvent.
Mr. Cooke—How many creditors have you in your sche-
dule? Insolvent-204.
Mr. Cooke—How many are there in it for newspaper ad-
vertisements-190? Insolvent—Yes.
Mr. Cooke—What property have you to give up to your
creditors? Insolvent—Not any.
Mr. Cooke—Did you not give them your acceptance for
30/., half the amount -due to Messrs. Burrell and Paterson,
paa able four months after date, dated 29th May, 1840 ? In-
solvent—Yes.
Mr. Cooke—Was it honoured? Insolvent—lt was not.
Mr. Cooke—Did they not make frequent applications to
you for payment? Insolvent—They did, and I sent them a
10/. note in a letter, by a Mr. Hibbert, on the 6th of October,
1849, but it was rejected.
[A letter was here put in and read by Mr. Cooke, dated
Manchester, October, 7, 1840, addressed to Messrs. Burrell
and Paterson.]
Mr. Cooke—Were you at Manchester on the 7th of Octo-
ber? Insolvent—No, I was in London ; hut I wrote as if there,
with a view that they would renew the bill and accept 101.
Mr. Cooke—Have you not given a bill of sale to your
mother ? Insolvent—Yes.
Mr. Cooke—What is her name? Insolvent—Mary Holloway.
Mr. Cooke—When? Insolvent—ln 1840.
Mr. Cooke—Who prepared it? Insolvent—Mr. Spencer,
my attorney, in this Court.
Mr. Cooke—What property did you make over to your
mother? Insolvent—All the property I had, of every kind.
Mr. Cooke—Then the bona tide creditors got nothing? In-
solvent—My mother was the greatest creditor. I owed her
altogether 800/.
Mr. Cooke—What was the consideration? Insolvent—For
board and lodging, and money lent (1951. fr,,m 1836 to 1840).
Mr Cooke—But why give your mother -all ? Insolvent—
Because she was the most pressing.
Mr. Woodroffe—Execution has been levied, and there is 251.
to be paid into this Court. There had been a judge's order ob-
tained, and there was an issue to be tried.
Mr. Commissioner Bow Ex—l will not discharge the insol-
vent until the issue is tried.
Mr. Cooke—The bill of sale must be brought into Court, and
cancelled.
Mr. Commissioner BOWEN—Certa:nly.
The insolvent, who had been out on bail, was remanded to
prison.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
OXFORD ClRCUlT—Stafford, July 22.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
William Simpson was indicted for the wilful murder of Wm.
Hewitt, on Saturday, the 19th of June last.
Mr. Greaves and Mr. Kynnei sley conducted the prosecu-
tion. The prisoner had no counsel.
It appeared, that on the morning of Sunday, the 20th of
June, a person of the name of Holland went to a stone pit at
Armshead, a hill on Wetley Moor, for the purpose of fetching
some sand, and there saw extended at full length the body of
the deceased, who was an old man of about sixty years of age,
with the head lying on a stone in a shockingly mangled state.
The body was at that time quite stiff and cold, showing
that the deceased had been dead several hours, and Hol-
land observed that the flap of his trousers was down, and
that one of the pockets was cut off. Upon the discovery of
the body a search was made round the pit, and under a heap
of stones was found a large stone of about five or six inches
in length, covered with blood and hair. The house of the
prisoner was about 300 or 400 yards from the spot where the
body was found, and it was proved that about eleven o'clock
on the morning of Saturday, the deceased Hewitt was seen
going up towards Armshead from the prisoner's house in his
company. This was the last time the deceased was seen alive.
About two o'clock in the afternoon of the same day some young
ladies passed by the pit, and saw a man lying there, with his
feet towards the entrance (the position in which the body of
the deceased was found), but thinking that he was intoxicated
and asleep, they took no particular notice of the circumstance,
and passed on their way. It appeared that the old man, who did
not bear the hest of characters, and was well known to Mr.
Brutton, the governor of Stafford gaol, was a person of penurious
habits, and had scraped together a small sum of money, which
he always carried about him—a circumstance which was shown
to have come to the knowledge of the prisoner on the
Thursday before the murder was committed. The prisoner at
that time complained that he was badly off, and on the Satur-
day afternoon he went to a place called Bucknell, about a
mile from the scene of the murder, and asked to pay his shot
at a public-house, where he had run up a small score. He
there produced a sovereign and a purse, the latter of which
was identified as the property of the deceased. He after-
wards went to Hanky, about a - mile further on, and there
changed another sovereign, and purchased a smock-frock for
Ss., his upper dress consisting at that time of a jacket with
sleeves. This jacket was produced at the trial, and the left
arm was found to be marked with stains of blood, which the
prisoner had accounted for by stating that his nose had bled
while he was in the lock-up house, but it was shown that
there were no stains of blood either on the straw or any other
part of the cell in which he was confined. After obtaining
the smock-frock, the prisoner went to another shop at Han-
ley, and there laid out 1/. ls. 3d. in the purchase of other
goods, paying for them a sovereign and ls. 3d. in other coin.
I Afterwards he went to a beer-house, and there paid away
some more money, and he also paid 14s. 9d. to get a jacket,
which he had pledged, out of pawn. Altogether no less than
five sovereigns and a-half were seen in his possession, and he
told a person named Lamb, on the Sunday morning, that lie
would lend him a sovereign if he liked, and that he had six
sovereigns hidden in a secret place where no one could find
them. The deceased was shown to have had about 15 or 16
sovereigns in his possession just before his death. It will be
seen that the case, of which the above statement is in its
main features an accurate outline, was one purely of circum-
stantial, evidence, collected from a great number of wit-
nesses, and that it rested principally upon the previous po-
verty and sudden affluence of the prisoner, combined with
the fact of his having been seen in the company of the
deceased' a few hours before his death, and with the circum-
stance of the purse of the deceased being found in his pos-
session.

Mr. Justice COLTMAN summed up the evidence with great
care and minuteness, and

The Jury, after deliberating together for about a quarter of
an hour, returned a verdict of Not Guilty, to the evident as-
tonishment of the Judge and the whole Court.

NORFOLK ClRCUlT—Cambridge, July 22.
(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
DAINTREE V. HUTCHINSON.

This was an action upon a contract, by which the parties
agreed that their respective greyhounds should run a match of
three courses for the sum of 100/., "p. p." (" play or pay.")
Mr. Kelly and Mr. Byles were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr.
Andrews and Mr. Gunning for the defendant.
The plaintiff, Captain Daintree, resides at Fenstanton, near
Cambridge, and is a magistrate and agentleman of fortune ; the
defendant lives near Nottingham, and is alto a man of property,
and both parties are the owners of several greyhounds, and
very fond of the sport of coursing. They were at the Louth
coursing match at the end of November last, and after dinner
the conversation turned upon the comparative merits of the•
plaintiff's greyhound King Cole, and the defendant's Grasper,
which ended in the parties signing the following agreement ;
" Mr. Hutchinson challenges Capt. Daintree to run a greyhound
against his for 1001. the best of three course: in one day. Mr.
Hutchinson names his red and white dog Grasper, Capt. Daintree
names his fawn and white dog King Cole. Each party is to name
a judge, and the judges a referee. The match to be ran on the
Wednesday in the Newmarket February meeting, 1841, p. p."
It appeared by the evidence that there exists at Newmarket a
coursing club, which holds its meetings in the first week in
February and November in each year ; of this club the plaintiff
is a member and the defendant is not. Before the time when
the agreement was signed, the Newmarket February meeting
had been fixed for Tuesday, the 2d of that month, and the
coursing was to take place on the four following days. On
Tuesday, the 2d of February, the defendant was at Newmarket
ready to run his dog, but there was so severe a frost, that it
was found impossible to run, and the members of the club, who
met arid dined together on that day, adjourned the coursing
until the " first open Tuesday," which proved to be the 17th of
that month. The defendant, who had traeellectnea.ly 100
miles, was prepared to run the match, but the plaintiff was not,
and the former therefore said the match ought to be off, but
the plaintiff gave him written notice that he should insist upon
its coming off " on the adjournment-day. The defendant
then left Newmarket, and did not return on the 17th, the day
on which by adjournment the coursing of the club took place ;
the plaintiff was on the ground with " King Cole," and after
the secretary to the club had in due form made proclamation
for Grasper" and his master and they appeared not, he de •
dared the 1001. to be forfeited by the defendant.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON, in this state of things, was of opinion
that the action wild not be sustained. The parties make a
contract that their dogs shall run a match on the 3d of Feb-
ruary, for, as the Newmarket meeting was fixed before the
contract was entered into, that date was to be considered as im-
ported into the agreement. The day arrives ; the defendant is
prepared with his dog, and ready to sun, but owing to the state
of weather it is found impossible to start. The defendant was
not bound to run his dog on any other day than that on
which he had agreed that he should run, unless he made a
fresh agreement; he was no party to the postponement by
the club of the coursing, and he was not to be kept from his
home and business for a fortnight or a month, or to return at
the time to which the club thought proper to adjourn the meet.
ing. The plaintiff was not ready to run on the day mentioned
in the agreement, and therefore was not entitled to treat the
100/. as forfeited by the defendant.
The Jury then, under the Learned Judge's direction found a
verdict for the defendant.
This trial excited great interest, and several members of the
club and gentlemen connected with the " sporting world'' were
present.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT—York, July 22.
(Before Lord. DENMA N. )
CRAVEN AND OTHERS V. THORNHILL.

This was a Special Jury case.
Air. Cresswell, Mr. Hildyard, and Mr. H. Hill appeare 1 for
the ph intiff, and Mr. Knowles, assisted by Mr. Tomlinson and
Mr. Watson, conducted the defence.
_ _

The plaintiffs were three brothers, who occupied two farms
lat Fly tenanted by their deceased father, and which belonged
to the defendant, a gentleman of very extensive possessions in
this and in other countries. It appears to have been the cus-
tom of Mr. Thornhill to let his farms to tenants from year to
year, upon such terms as to the course of husbandry and the
coming in and goir g out of tenants as were expressed in cer-
tain old leases of the same property. It was alleged that
the fatheF of the plaintiffs had been let in on these terms,
but for some reason or other notice was given to the sons to
quit, and on quitting they claimed to be valued out, according
to,the custom of the county. The defendant had just before
parted with his steward, Mr. Oastler, on account of some
difference between them, and who had taken a great quantity
of documents'away with him, and among the rest the two leases
which related to the two farms in question. The under-
steward was also dismissed about the same time, and the flew
steward having no means of ascertaining 'that the claim of the
plaintiO3 to go out according to the custom of the county was
not right, appointed a valuer on behalf of the defendant, who

valued with one appointed by the plaintiffs. The two valuers,
going upon the .411.1),,sitton that the custom of the' county was
to be their rule, after some differing, agreed to fix the sum to
be paid to the plaintiffs on going out at 2851. Subsequentlx
Oastler was worsted in an action brought by Mn Th6frihiil
against him, and then he gave up the docinnents, and the old
leases were discovered. The defendant refused to pay for the
valuation, which it was said was obtained by the fraudulent
statement of the plaintiffs, who then brought the present ac-
tion. The defendants paid 1101. into Court, and the plaintiffs
now sought to recover the remaining 1751.
Mr. KNOWLES addressed the jury on behalf of the defen-
dant, and produced witnesses to prove the terms under which
old Craven came in ; that the old leases were read to him, and
that he was made fully aware of their contents, and assented to
the terms; also, that the plaintiffs, in stating the terms of
their holding to the defendant's present steward, had suppressed
these facts, and denied that they held under any express terms,
but according to the custom of the county.
Mr. CRESSWELL replied, and
Hia LORDSHIP, in his observations, seemed to think that the
appointmeat by the agent of the defendant of a valuer, and his
valuation having been made, were facts too strong to admit of
the result of that measure being rebutted by the evidence which
had been adduced.

Verdict for the plaintiffs—Damages,l7s/.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN, in the course of the day, disposed
of three or four cases in the other court.

WESTERN ClRCUlT—Devizes, July 22.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Ma )
Richard Fuller, Charles Palmer, and James Hobbs, were
indicted for having, on the.9th of May, committed a rape upon
Harriet Godding.
Mr. Merewether conducted the case for the prosecution, and
Mr. Ball defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the statement of Harriet Godding that she
was twenty-eight years of age, that her husband, to whom she
had been married seven years, was a journeyman bricklayer,
that he had been out of employment two months, and they
were reduced to the lowest ebb—they had no money, no home.
On Saturday, the bth of May, they had not eaten any thing
all day, but in the evening they called at a gentleman's house
near Swindon. They made their case known to him, and
happily he knew the neighbourhood from whence her husband
came. He gave them supper, and allowed them to sleep in
one of his cow-sheds. On the next morning (Sunday) he
gave them money wherewith to purchase their breakfast, told
them they, might sleep again in his cowshed, but desired them
not to come till after dark, as he did not like to see poor people
about his premises. The man and his wife then wandered
away, and in the afternoon went into a public-house to get
some refreshment, where they met the three prisoners. Fuller,
finding that Godding had no money, gave him a pint of beer,
which he and his wife drank. Fuller then began making over-
tures to the wife ; but she would not listen to him. He, how-
ever, declared he would have his will of her that night. The
husband, a poor half-starved creature, asked what was the
matter, upon which Fuller, who has but one hand, .but has af-
fixed to the arm an iron stump, knocked down the huiband
with this stump. The wife interfered, and this brute then
struck her on the forehead with the same weapon. The pOor
people were frightened, and left the house, intending to pro-
ceed to their miserable hovel. They were followed by these
wretches and overtaken, mid they then one arid all committed
the offence for which they were indicted. All this was ac-
companied by the most horrible language ard most brutal
treatment, and is perhaps one of the worst cases that has been
heard of in recent times.
For the defence several witnesses were called with a view of
showing that the woman was intoxicated, that she had winked
at the men, and had conducted herself with great levity,'but
they broke down in their cross-examination.
The woman gave her testimony exceedingly well, and no one
could doubt the accuracy of her statement, in which she was
supported by other witnesses.
The Learned Judge having summed up,
The Jury found all the prisonerS
Mr. Justice MAULS then told them, that had the offence
been committed some time since, their lives must inevitably
have been sacrificed, but as an Act of Parliament had now
passed taking away the punishment of death for this offence,
although it had not yet come into operation, still he should only
order judgment of death to be recorded against them. They
would however, be sent out of the couhtry.
A feeling of horror pervaded the Court during the whole of
the trial, the details exhibited such a case of brutality.
Edward Ladd was convicted of having assaulted Ann Per-
rett and Emma Perrett, being each under the age of 12 years,
with intent, &c. _ _ _

From the evidence it, appeared that the prisoner was the
uncle of the little girls, and that he had been in the habit of
conducting himself in an indecent manner towards these little
children.

The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sentenced to
one year's imprisonment andhard labour.
This was a case of most horrible depravity.

HOME CIRCUIT, Chelmsford, July 24.

- -
The busin?ss of this assize, owing to the heavy tithe
case, has been of unusual duration, and it has been found
necessary to make several cases remanets.
-LOrd Chief Justice Tindal disposed of the criminal
business on Thursday afternoon, and he then proposed
to get rid of some of the causes, but this was found to
be impracticable, owing to all the leading counsel being
engaged in the other Court, and the attorneys in the
different cases declined to go on with the juniors in their
absence.

On Friday morning his Lordship took his seat upon
the Bench, and the cases were called on ; but the same
difficulty still continuing, his Vordship found that it was
no use to proceed further, and he adjourned the Court,
and soon afterwards proceeded to London, leaving Mr.
Sergeant Taddy to dispose of the rest of the business.
Some of the remaining causes are of very public inte-
rest. The Commission will be opened on Monday, at
Maidstone, by Lord Chief justice Tindal.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

GREAT GLASGOW ROBBERY.—It will be in the recollec-
tion of our readers that Gavin Scott, alias Charles Hamil-
ton Douglas, who lately absconded from Glasgow with
8,6001., the property of his employers, Messrs. M`Gregor
and Co., merchants, was traced by John Forrester, the
City officer, to London, on the 31st of May, and from
thence to Havre and Paris, at which latter place the
officer ascertained that the delinquent had booked his
place on the Bth of June, by diligence direct to Mar-
seilles. Forrester made application to the English Am-
bassador for his interposition with the French authori-
ties upon the subject, and at , the request of the former
functionary the Prefect of Police at Paris consented to
telegraph Scott, which was done with great alacrity and
promptness, and the authorities at Marseilles received
full instructions relative to the runaway.
Forrester and Mr. .I.ll‘Gregor arrived in Marseilles on
the morning of the 21st of June, at five o'clock, and
immediately communicated with the Commissioner of
Police, from whom they received the utmost attention.
It then appeared that Scott had been arrested on the
15th of June at , Marseilles. At the prison they were
introduced to Scott, who was immediately identified by
Forrester, who went to the Hotel de Paris, the abode of
Scott, and there, after considerable difficulty, succeeded
in recovering 4,390/.
In his communication with Forrester Scott declared
that part of the money had been abstracted from his
drawers at the hotel, and upon that statement proceed-
ings have been instituted against the parties charged by
the authorities at Marseilles. It is said that a further
sum of 1,900/. will be recovered.
Forrester returned to town a few days ago with the
4,3901. and accompanied by Scott, who was on Saturday
brought before the Lord Mayor, by whom he was sent
to Scotland in the course of the evening.
The officer stated to the Lord Mayor that he could not
speak too highly of the French authorities, who ren-
dered him such prompt and ample assistance.
Felix Homo, the Frenchman, charged with running
away from Rouen with property belonging to his cre-
ditors to the amount of from 16,000 to 20,000 francs, was
brought up for re-examination.
The gentleman who upon the first examination acted
as intzrpreter, stated to the Lord Mayor that the prisoner
had threatened, upon the first convenient opportunity, to
murder him, and that there was no doubt whatever of
the sincerity of the intentions of the man.
-The LORD MAYOR stated, that although the prisoner
had committted no act of robbery in England, he cer-
tainly should be detained till he should find securities to
answer for his good behaviour.
Mr. Hobler, junior, appeared before the Lord Mayor
to give publicity to a very scandalous and heartless act,
committed by some fellows who evidently delighted in
harrassing the feelings of others. A man of consider-
able talent, who was suffering very much from pecuniary
embarrassments, and whose sensitiveness was so great
under the infliction, that many of his friends appre-
hended that he would make attempts upon his own life,
lay at that moment in a very precarious condition. A
letter enclosing a check for 20/. upon the house of Glyn
and Co..reached the house by the penny post, and was
opened by the son. It contained the following infor-
mation :—Sir, I beg to annex a check due this day.—
W. Day." The young man did not know to what account
the letter referred, and he mentioned the circumstance to
Mr. Hobler, junior, who immediately went to Glyn's
and stated what had taken place. Upon reference to the
books it was found to be all a hoax, no such name as W.
Day keeping account with the house.
Mr.•liobler, junior, said that Messrs. Glyn expressed
their readiness to do all they could to bring the writer of
the letter to justice. On the envelope of the letter were
the words " with care ;" and on the wax was impressed
' the words " God bless you."
The Loan MAYoR observed that perhaps through the
medium of the press, the writer might be detected ani
punish ed..
.. _ _ _ _

Mr. Hobler said that the letter had cost the poor man
twopence, which he could very ill afford indeed.

HATTON-GARDEN.

SU:GT.II,AR CASE.—A gentleman, named Biggers, was
charged with assaulting Mr. James Williamson, land-
lord of the Crown public-house in St. John-street-road.
The complainant stated that on Friday evening the de-
fench,nt had some refreshment in his house, which he
paid for all but threepence. Witness in consequence
seized his hat, when the accused immediately collared
him, and, after shaking him, threw him from the bar
into the street. For this assault he was given into the
custc,dy of a policeman.
1)4 !fendant, in his defence, said that he paid for what
he id. He had been in the plaintiff's skittle-ground
with a friend, and when about to leave the pot-boy said
there was threepence due. That amount had been had
in b y strangers to him, who had quitted the place. Mr.
Williamson said the pot-boy should not be a loser of it,
and that he (defendant) should pay. He, naturally in-
dign ant, refused, and the complainant then took the
liberty of snatching his hat from his head, for which he
justly chastised him.
Mr. ComnE (to complainant)—What right had you to
take away his hat ? Mr. Williamson—l considered that
the law authorised me.

01111 r. COMBE--Indeed it does net. An innkeeper has
the power to detain the luggage of a traveller for neces-
saries supplied. If your notion of the law were correct,
you would be equally justified in taking off his shirt or
trousers. You: commenced the outrage, and I consider
he was justifiedl in resenting it. He is discharged.
Mr. William son—Then do you mean to say a publican
has no remedy against a person who eats and. drinks-in
his house, and then refuses to pay ? • •
Mr. CoxnE—:-You can detain propertyrsuch as a trunk,
but you must not strip him. If it be an evil, you can
easily remedy it by refusing to give up your articles

until you receive 'payment. If you think my opinion
incorre go to tilt, tiessions, and indict him for WC a,sault.
Mr. Williamson said he Ninuld do so.

MARLBOROUGH-S Tlitt

COMMITTAL OF _ONE OF .THE JUVENILE SWELL MOB.—
John Dutton, a very fashionably dressed and good-looking
youth, about fourteen years of age, was committed to take his
trial for picking the pocket of a.... 3 It. Frederick Cherrens, auc-
tioneer, No. 4, Avenue-road, St. John's Wood, Regent's-park,
of a handkerchief.

Several of the force identified the prisoner as having been for
a long time connected with the swell.rnob, and also with having
been frequently in custody for picking pockets in omnibuses,
meetings, and places of public worship.
Mr. Cherrens said it was an extremely fortunate thing for
him that, just previous to his leaving home, he had taken big
pocket-book, which contained a large amount, from out of the
pocket where the handkerchief was in, and locked it up in his
desk.

Thirty-seven stout beggars of both sexes, from the age of six
years to seventy-three were brought up by the officers belong-
ing to the Mendicity Society, having been apprehended begging
on Friday at the west-end of the town. With the exception
of three or four cases they were committed for various periods
of imprisOnment, varying from seven days to one month.