The Sun.
London, England, 1840-12-17 00:00:00

LAW IN TELLIGEN CE.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Dec. 16.
His Honour the Vice-CHANCELLOR took motions to-day.
MEWL AND CO. V. SMITH--.SEAGER AND CO. V. SMITH.
This case came before the Court, upon motion, to dis-
solve an injunction which was granted some time since,
restraining the defendants from proceeding with two ac-
tions at law, which they had commenced against the
plaintiffs. Two suits had been instituted, in one of which
Messrs. Meux and Co., the brewers, and in the other
Seeger and Co.,
the distillers, were the plaintiffs, and the
assignees of a person named Albin the defendants. The
subject matter of both suits were two actions at law which
had been brought Against the plaintiffs by the assignees of
Albin to recover from them the sum of 2,000 guineas,
which the assignees alleged under the circumstances that
had taken place they were entitled to. The facts of the
case were as follow 1838 a person of the name of
Gurney was the owner of a public-house called The
Dolphin, in the Whitechapel-road, of which he had a
lease for 63 years. Gurney dealt with Messrs. Meux and
Co. for his porter, and Seeger and Co. for his spirits, and
became indebted to each of those firms to the ex-
tent of upwards of 1,0001. In 1838 Gurney was
anxious to retire, and to dispose of his business, and
the lease of his house. He found a purchaser in Albin,
who, it was agreed, was to give 2,4501. for the lease,
which was not assigned, but an under lease was granted,
wanting ten days of the term of the original lease. Albin
was also to pay Gurney for the stock, effects, and fixtures
according to the amount at which they should be valued.
According to the custom often adopted in the licensed vic-
tualling business, when a party wished to enter a public-
house, and had not money enough to complete the pur-
-1 chase, an arrangement was made by Albin with Messrs.
Meux and Co., and Seager and Co., by which they agreed
to pay Gurney 2,000/. of the purchase money, they having
the lease deposited with them. Gurney owed the plaintiffs
2,0901., and that amount was paid by him to them by their
writing off his debt, and giving to him their checks for the
amount, Albin paying the remainder of the purchase money
himself. The lease was then handed over to Messrs. Meux
and Co., who held it for themselves and Messrs. Seeger
and Co., until 1839, in the course of which year it was
discovered that Albin, who had been a publican at
Pcntonville had come there from Liverpoul, at which
place he had been made a bankrupt, and had never ob-
tained his certificate. Upon discovering this, Messrs.
Meux and Co., and Seeger and Co., were desirous of
closing their dealings with Albin, and to sell the property,
but they thought it would not be right to take that step
without communicating with the assignees under the fiet,
and accordingly a person was sent down to Liverpool by
them. This led to negotiations between the plaintiffs and
the assignees, and ultimately it was agreed the lease of the
Dolphin should be sold to a Mr. Thorne for 2,2001., and
that out of that sum Messrs. Meux and Co. should be paid
1 000 guineas, and the like sum should be handed over to
Messrs. Seeger and Co., and the residue was to go to the
assignees without prejudice to their right to insist upon
the whole. Upon this arrangement the assignees jcincd
in the assignment of the lease to Thorne, but since that
time they had brought two actions against the plaintiff 3 to
recover the 2,000/ , to restrain them from proceeding with
which the injunction now sought to be dissolved was
granted.
Mr. K. Bruce, Mr. Richards, and Mr. Freelieg showed
cause against dissolving the injunction on the behalf of
Messrs. Meux and Co., and Mr. Swanston and Mr.
Chandless for Messrs. Seager and Co., Mr. Jacob and
Mr. Keene appeared for the z.ssignecs of Albin.
The VICE. CHANCELLOR, without calling upon Mr. K.
Bruce to reply, gave judgment, ordering the injunction to
be continued.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 16.
THOMPSON V. LEWIS.

This was an issue directed under the Interpleader Act,
upon the application of the Sheriff of Middlesex (who was
at first made defendant), to try tile question whether cer-
tain horses seized and sold under an execution at the suit
oF Lewis, were the property of the plaintiff. They were
seized as belonging to Holding, a judgment debtor to the
defendant in th amount of 6121. The plaintiff's case oc-
cupied the whole day, and the further hearing was ad-
journed till to-morrow (this day).

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.

Peter Anthony Cullen, the comedian, was indicted for

bigamy.
Mr. CLARKSON appeared for the prosecution, and stated
the facts of the case at they afterwards appeared in ev-
dence. _ _

Mr. Cueststans defended tho prisoner.
Mary Bridge deposed that she was the wife of
Thomas Bridge, who resided at Bury St. Edmunds.
On the 24th of February, 1824, she was present
when the prisoner was married to Mary Anne
Mitchell, at Whitechapel church. Mary Anne Mitchell
was still alive, and she had seen her that day. She did
not know where the had been living latterly. In the
mantis of July, 1834, she saw her and the prisoner walking
together.
Cross-examined—The reason she believed this took
place in 1834 was on account of her then living in lodg-
ings in Whitechapel, at which place she met them. She
lost sight of the prisoner between 1827 and 1834, at the
time she met him with his wife. Believed that they se-
parated in the year 1827.
Re-examined—The prisoner's wife was a tailoress when
be marriec her, and she had worked fur the same master

ever since.
John Murray, a policeman. produced a copy of the re
gister from the marriage registry of St. Mary, White-
chapel, which was handed in and read.
Martha Arnold deposed that she was present at the
parish church of St. George's-in-the-East on the 16th of
November,A.ir.c
again through the ceremony of marriage with Jane Bristow.
in
RKSOI.I the
presentSaidlle year, when the prisoner went
should now call the second wife.
Jane Bristow was accordingly sworn. She deposed
that she resided in Caroline-street, Lambeth, and she.
became acquainted with the prisoner by his coming to her
house to look at a lodging. He engaged apartments in the
house, and afterwards paid addresses to her. At this time
she had liloo/. in the funds. She had four children, all of
whom were entitled to a share of this money. The pri-.
soner proposed to marry her, and she told him that she
had heard be was a married man. He did not deny it,
but said that ho was married seventeen years before, and
that he had not seen his wife for eight years, and he be-
lieved she was dead. Witness believed this to be true,
and consented to marry him, and they were married at St.
George's Church, or. the 16th November:
Cress-examined.—The prisoner was violently assaulted
in August last, and a man was tried in that Court for the
offence. The injury affected his head a good deal, and
he was outrageous at times. Witness believed the first
wife was dead, although several persons came to tell her
that she was alive, but the prisoner prevented her from
believing it, and she was in consequence induced to marry
him. Her youngest child was eleven, and the eldest
eighteen years old. They would be entitled to share this
property.
Re-examined.—The prisoner did not behave so well to
her children, after they were married, as she expected.
Three days after the marriage, he turned her eldest
daughter out of the house, and when she remonstrated
with him, he said she might go to hell and be
Directly after the marriage he asked her for her papers re-
lative to the money, and when she told him she had not
got them, he insisted that she should get them, and asked
her what she supposed he married her for, but her money.
The prisoner got his living as a comedian at the Surrey
Theatre.
Mr. CHAISBRRS addressed the Jary for the prisoner, and
called Mr.
the Surrey Theatre, and was acquainted with the prisoner
Saville, who deposed that he was an actor at
as a brother actor. He had known him several years, and
always considered him to be a single man. Before the
accident, the prisoner was a steady, regular actor, but
since that time his memory had appeared to fail him, and
he was very flighty.
By Mr. CLasatsots—The prisoner played in a great
range of characters, chiefly in the " heavy' line. His
most celebrated character was " Blueskin," in Jack
Sheppard.
Mr. CLARKSON—Was that in the " heavy " line ? Mr.
Saville—Decidedly. You surely know the nature of the
character ?
Mr. CLARKSON—ReaIIy,
Mr. Saville, you do me too
much honour. Has he played this character often since his
accident? Mr. Saville—Yes, about three weeks before he
was apprehended.
Mr. CLARKSON—Does he sing in this character ? Mr.
Saville—Yes; he sings "Jolly Nose."—( Laughter.)
That, I believe, was the last effort of his vocal powers.
Several other witnesses were called to show that they had
'known the prisoner for some years, and that they had never
heard him say that he was a married man. •
Mr. CLARKSON replied.
, Mr. Justice PATTESON summed up the evidence, and the
Jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
The prisoner, on being asked what he had to say why
sentence should not be passed upon him, addressed the
Court in a very vehement tone, and went into a long state-
ment of the differences he had had with his first wife, and
said that the charge had been brought forward against him
out of spite. He entreated the Court to have mercy upon

Mr. Justice PavrnsoN told the prisoner that all he had
said had nothing to do with the case. It was clear that
he had deliberately deceived the woman Bristow, and con.
tracted a marriage with her when he must have been
aNare that h:s first wife was alive. It was an offence that
subjected him to transportaticn ; but, looking at all the cir-
cumstances, he did not feel that be was at all required to
go to that extent. There could be no doubt that the se-
cond wife had acted with very great imprudence. Under
a:l the circumstances, the Le.,,erice was, that be should be
imprisoned, but without hart: labour, for the space of six
calendar months.
The Recorder sat in this Court in the evening, but the
cases disposed of were of no public interest.

POLIOE-INTI:EIG-i'-.I;NCE.

MAII'SION-110USE.

A watchmaker of Durham, ❑arced Barry Jackson,. ex-
hibited to Alderman Wilson the model of a design for pre-
venting railway engines and carriages from being upset or
accidentally forcol off the rails. lle said that his proposal