The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-09 00:00:00

Vbirb 12bition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock,

SHERIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BIRCHELL.)
PROVIS V. CULL.
The plaintiff sued as the public officer of the Wilts and
Dorset Banking Company at Dorchester. Defendant is
a solicitor at the same place. The action was brought to
recover the sum of 961. 4s. sd. for money lent and in-
terest.
The defendant allowed judgment to go by default.
Mr. Andrews, solicitor to the Company, proved an
admission of the amount due, and the Jury gave a ver-
diet for the amount claimed.
BOURNE V. BROAD.
This was an action brought to recover the sum of 141.
10s. for the board and lodging of defendant's wife, and
for medical attendance, &c.
It appeared by the evidence that the plaintiff and his
wife were married in December, 1843. In February
last. Mrs. Broad, who was then residing at Dorking,
was taken ill with a complaint of the liver, and the
plaintiff's wife, who is her aunt, recommended her re-
moval to London for the benefit of medical attendance,
and she was accordingly removed to plaintiff's house,
Churton• street, Pimlico. Dr. Ord was called in, and
attended her till June, when she was pronounced
convalescent. The present demand was for 10i. a week
for board and lodging, and 71 for physicians' fees, &c.
For the defendant it was contended that this amounted
to a separation, for defendant's wife had been living with
plaintiff for six months, during which time defendant
never even went to the House, nor had he ever given
say authority for the separation; therefore, there was no
case to go to the jury.
The UNDER SHERIFF considered that there was
sufficient to go to the jury.
Evidence was then adduced with a view of showing
that defendant's wife was addicted to drinking, and that
she left the house of the defendant on the recommenda-
tion of the plaintiff and his wife, but that defendant said
she should not, for Mrs. Bourne said she wovld take
Mrs. Broad with her, and make a bright girl of her, and
she ;should be no expense to Mr. Broad (defendant).
She was not under medic it treatment at Dorking for
two months previously to leaving. She had not returned
home since. Plaintiff had said she had left his house,
and was living under the protection of a gentleman.
The UNDER SHERIFF, in addressing th• jury, said, if
the defendant's wife had left without the assent of her
husband, he was not liable; but if, on the contrary, he
had assented, he would be responsible for any necessaries
supplied to her. Her subsequent conduct—supposing it
to be true that she was living with another party—did
not bear in the present case.
The jury, after being locked up, gave a ►erdict for
81. 53., money out of pocket.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,
(THIS -EVENING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The Earl of SaarrEsnuar, in the absence of the
Lard Chancellor, took hi, seat on the Woolsack
shortly after Five o'clock.
MINISTERS' MONEY (IRELAND).
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition fro
(Cork, praying for some substitute for ministers'
money in Ireland.
Lord MONTIAGLE suggfeed that the pay-
ment of ministers money should be commuted is
the same manner u the payment of tithes had
teen commuted in Ireland, and sugirested that a
Committee should be appointed to consider the subject.
Lord STANLEY admitted that it would be
desirable to commute the payment of ministers' money
in some manner. It was a tax laid upon house pro-
perty, payable by the occupier ; it might be more
convenient to levy it upon the owner, but it
would make no real difference, inasmuch as the owner
would demand a higher rate. Various attempts had
been made to have a new valuation for levying the
amount, but the objection always made was that it
would be taking a burden off the shoulders
of one set of persons to put it on those
of another; besides, if it were made a land-
lord's tax, it would be exceedingly difficult in
many instances to get at the landlord. He hoped
the present plan of levying it would not be aban-
doned until an equitable substitute for it had been
discovered.

The Earl of ST. GERMANS thought there would
be great practical difficulties in levying the tax on
owners instead of occupiers.
JEWISH EMANCIPATION.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from the
Protestant Dissenters of Lancashire praying for a
removal of civil disabilities from the Jews.
SPIRITUAL DESTITUTION.
The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition com-
plaining of the spiritual destituton of Devonport.
IRISH OUTRAGES.

Lord FARNHAM drew the attention of their
Lordships to a communication from a person whose
name he would not mention, suggesting the necessity
of a more efficient and stringent measure of coercion
for Ireland. He would not mention the name, be-
cause if be did so the writer would afford another
instance of the truth that life was not
worth one day's purchase in Ireland. He had
communicated the name to the Noble Marquis.
(The Noble Lord then read an account of the assas-
sination of the Rev. J. L'oyd.) He took that oppor-
tunity of doing justice to the Rev. Mr. King, a
Catholic clergyman of that neighbourhood, who had
exerted himself to the utmost to suppress these out-
raifes•
e Marquis of LANSDOWNE had seen the
letter, and considered the writer as one of the highest
authorities, and whose name if:
produced, would com-
mand the entire confidence
:of their Lordships as to
any statement he mi
CsDAlMEtinjlnite.
The NonLx -....usequlsotfhe
the!x laid upon the table cer•
DISTRESS.
twin papers illustrative
monetary state of the
country, and moved that t be referred to the
Committee on Commercial Distress.—Agreed to.
Their Lordships then adjourned until Monday.

--
HOUSE OF comm
lONS.
The SPBAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
Mr. Mackinnon and two other honourable Mem-
bers took the usual oaths and their seats.
NEW WRIT.

A. new writ was ordered to be issued for the
borough of Weymouth for the election of a Member
to serve in Parliament in the room of Mr. Christie,
who had accepted theA
O ChiIFSATTAR Atern Hundreds.
Petitions praying for an inquiry into the charges
brought against the Rsja of Sattara were presented by
Dr. Bowring, from Westbury, Westminster, and the
parish of St. George, Hanover-square ; several by
Mr. Hume; by Mr. Williams, signed by 812 of the
inhabitants of Blarylebone; by Mr. Lushington,
from the parishes of St. Ann's, Soho, St. George's,
Hanover-square, and St. Paul's, Covent-garden; and
by Mr. Berekeley, from Bristol.
HEALTH OF TOWNS.

Mr. H. JONES presented a petition praying the
House to adopt some measure for promoting the
health of towns.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
(Nisi Prius Sittings at Guildhall, before the CHIEF
JUSTICE and a Common Jury.)
BUSHELL V. WEISS.
Mr. Montague Chambers, Q.C., and Mr. Hayes ap-
peared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Cockburn, Q.C., and
Maymott for the defendant.
The plaintiff in this case was an engineer, and the
defendant one of the provisional committee of the
London and Birmingham Extension Railway Com-
pany, which was formed in 1845, for the pur-
pose of constructing a railway from Northamp•
ton, by Daventry, to Warwick, and the action
was brought to recover the sum of 2061. 18s. alleged to
be due to him for attending as a witness, to give evidence
before the Standing Orders Committee in respect of that
company. It appears that the plaintiff who had been
employed in surveying a portion of the lino was sum-
moned to London on the 4th of Marth, 1840, by the so-
licitors to the company, Messrs. Wright and Hanbury,
to give evidence before the Committee in consequence
of some disputes which had grown up between Mr.
Pritchard, the engineer in chief, and the company, the
result of which was, that Mr. Pritchard declined to come.
forward to support the Bill in Parliament. The plain-
tiff was told that he must be prepared to act as engineer
in-chief, if Mr. Pritchard continued to persist in his
determination, and he was examined in that capacity on
the 30th of March. His cbarga against the company,
for attending as a witness, was at the rate of ten gui-
neas a-day. It was stated by a witness, that Mr.
Pritchard took away the briefs which had been prepared
in support of the Bill, and refused to return them; and
the plaintiff was employed to draw up additional ones,
which it was alleged could not have been prepared
without the plaintiff's assistance.
It was admitted that the defendant ;was a provisional
committeeman of the company, and that he was liable
for any reasonable sum which the plaintiff might be en-
titled to.

Mr. COCKBURN', for the defence, submitted that the
charge of ten guineas per day was most exorbitant, and
that the plaintiff was only entitled to receive the ordi-
nary remuneration given to witnesses when called to give
evidence before the Standing Orders Committee. He
also submitted that the solicitors were only at libei ty to
engage the plaintiff as a witness, and as such he was en-
titled to receive compensation from the defendant, but
theyhad no authority to make him engineer in chief with-
out the concurrence of the company. The Learned Counsel
then stated that the plaintiff was entitled to no more
than was given to an ordinary surveyor, which was at
the rate of two or three guineas a day.
Mr. Stephens, an engineer, and oter witnesses, were
called on the part of the defendant, and stated that the
highest sum paid to surveyors for attending the Railway
Committees, in 1845, was five guineas per day, and
that the usual sum was two guineas per day. He, how-
ever, admitted that an engineer in chief was entitled to
ten guineas.
The CHIEF JUSTICE having summed up,
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for 85/.

CHURCH-RATES.
Lord NUGENT presented a petition from Ayl6s-
bury against the imposition of church• rates.
JEWISH DISABILITIES.

Mr. DIYETT presented a petition in favour of
the removal of Jewish disabilities.

Mr. FREWEN presented a petition from a place
in Hampshire against the admission of Jews into
Parliament.

N EW WRIT FOR KILKENNY.

On the motion of Mr. J. O'CONNELL, a new
writ was ordered for Kilkenny, in the room of the
Hon. and Learned! Member, he having chosen to sit
for the county of Limerick.
CRIME AND OUTRAGE—IRELAND.

Mr. ANSTY presented a petition from the Con-
federate Club of Drogheda against the Crime and
Outrage (Ireland) Bill.

.ge
THE LATE RAJA OF SATTARA.

Sir B. HALL presented a petition from Maryle-
bone, praying the House to institute an inquiry into
the case of the late Raja of Sattara.
THE NEW HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Lord DUNCAN, seeing the Noble Lord the First
Lord Commissioner of Woods and Forests in his
place, was desirous of putting a question to him,
the answer to which involved, in these times
of the prevalence of epidemic disorders, the health of
the Speaker and every Member of that House.—
(Laughter.) He wished to know from the Noble
Lord if he was enabled to state at what date it was
likely the New House of Commons would
be fit for the reception of the Members. He
also wished to know why the other buildings,
such as the libraries and other places, were not at
the present time fit for the reception of the different
officers connected with the House. He was, also,
desirous of knowing why greater progress had not
been made with the official residences.
Lord MORPETH stated that he had been in-
formed by the architect that the new House of
Commons would be ready for the reception
of Members in from fifteen to eighteen months
after the arrangements for lighting, warming, and
ventilating the House were completed. Having said
thus much it was necessary he should state that the
Government, considering all the circumstances, had
thought fit to desire that Dr. Reid's plans for venti-
lating the Rouse should be carried into effect.
With respect to the question of the Noble Lord, as to
the official residences, it had been considered best to
appropriate the sums voted by Parliament to the com-
pletion of the shell of the building in preference to
the official residences.

Mr. HUME said that last year he had moved for
returns of the liabilities incurred with respect to the
erection of the new Houses of Parliament, but those
returns not having been laid on the table, he was
desirous of knowing when they would be.
Lord MORPETH said that he had made inquiries
on the subject, and he could assure the Honourable
Member that the returns would be shortly laid on
the table.

CRIME IN IRELAND.
Mr. BAINES gave notice of his intention, in
Committee, to move amendments to the Bill for the
prevention of crime and outrage in Ireland.
OFFENCES AGAINST THE REVENUE