The Sun.
London, England, 1824-01-20 00:00:00

PROBERT.

The stibioinfd Letter appeared hi The Times
of this'dej
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
SlR—Since mjc liberation,. from. the county-gaol at Hertford,
you, as well as many others, have not failed to impeach me with
every crime which- you think will tend to destroy my. character
or peace of mind; but let me tell you, that the day is at hand
when that just Almighty, who has mercifully saved an inno-
cent man from an ignominious des will chew nay actions in
a very different light : but to be brie I have only to add, that
if you defame my character after this otice, legal means will
be the redress which I shall consider myself justified in taking.
l'ours respectfully,
PROBERT.

9, Gravel-lane, Southwark.

MENDICITY SOCIETY.

TO THE EDITOII7OF THE TIMES.
SIR.—In the letter in your paper of this day,
signed A Friend to the Poor," a note or query is added,
requiring information whether the Honorary Solicitor has par-
ticipated in an item of 4611. ls. 10d.,* eharged in last year's
cash account of the Mendicity Society for ascpences incurred
for apprehensions, prosecutions, and constables wages ?
I was in hopes that an 'unimpeached professional character of
five-and-twenty years' standing, would have protected me from
the imputation the note in question implies, and cannot but feel
surprised and mortified, that any person possessing the intelli-
gence and apparent means of information of the, writer of the
letter alluded to, should. have known so little of me as to sup-
pose that I would for one moment have permitted the word
" honorary" to have been prefixed to my name in connection
with any Society, and at the same time submit to receive any
emolument whatever from its funds.
It becomes me now, however, explicitely to declare, that no
part whatever of the expences attending the prosecutions of
the Mendicity Society, nor any other item of chArge, has, di-
rectly or indirectly, been received by me 9 • and that so far
from benefitting by my intercourse with the Mendicity Society,
or any other charitable or scientific institution of which I
happen to be eitfier an officer or a member,. I not only bestow
my time and attention gratuitously, but am a pecuniary con-
tributor to all, and have, I trust, never been found deficient
in an endeavour to promote their prosperity and usefulness,
either by personal exertion or occasional extra subscriptions,
asaircutustancea of. prosure ox-imitgaiate exigeng Al/ight Re--
quire.
The indiscriminate censure recently cast on the motives which
may influence professional or other persons of active habits from
taking an interest in promoting plans of benevolence, is more
calculated to deter honourable men from taking a prominent
part in them, than to defeat the sinister views of vain and self-
interested individuals.

I am; Sir, your most Obedient servant,
Bedford-row, Jan. 17. Wlll. TOOKE.
• The following is the apportionment of the three particulars.
constituting this sum, viz.:—
Wages of eight constables
Rewards and fees on apprehension of vagrants
Prosecutions, being fees and other expences paid at
the several police-offices, and at sessions, on con-
victions

£402 19 0
44 3 6

13 19 4

Total

£461 1 10

LADY ERSKINE.

Bow-STREET—A few days ago Lady ERSKINE,
(widow of the distinguished nobleman lately deceasecbsalled
a
at this office; and in private interview with Sir R. Blasiu,
requested his assistance to recover a large quantity of wearing
apparel, which, she said, was illegally detained by a Mr. Adams,
the keeper of an asylum for lunatics at Bayswater, Her
Ladyship admitted that she had been confined there, but said
that she was properly discharged, and Mr. Adams, therefore,
could have no shadow of right to detain her apparel. Sir R.
BIRNIE lamented his inability to afford her any assistance,
observing that it was a matter entirely of a civil nature, '
ald a Magistrate could exercise no authority whatever over
Mr. Adams. Lady Erskine departed with this answer, but
renewed her visit on a subsequent day, and pressed he, suit so
earnestly, thht Sir Richard said he would desire an officer to
call upon Mr. Adams, and apprise him of her application, and
he should then hear what answer that gentleman had to make
to it:
In consequence of the visit of the officer, Mr. Adams came
yesterday to the public office, and having stated his name to
Sir R. Birnie, andinformed him that he was'a licensed keeper
of a madhouse, he produced a bundle tf papers, consisting, he
said, of testimonials of his character and 'respectability, and
his fitness for the calling which he followed.
Sir R. BIRNIE said, it was quite unnecessary to produce
may such documents, for his character was not at all at stake be-
fore him, nor did he in the smallest degree question his respec-
tability. Lady Erskine called upon him, and represented that
he (Mr. Adams) detained a large quantity of apparel, which
she (having as she declared been left in a great measure unpro-
vided for) stood greatly in need of, and although, strictly speak-
ing, a magistrate had no jurisdiction in such a case, he had, to
oblige her Ladyship, stepped a little out of his way, in the
hope that an explanation and arrangement might be brought
about. _ _ _

Mr. Adams said, the fact was, that she was placed under
his care by the late Lord Erskine, and was most decidedly a
fit subject for-his asylum. A quantity of clothes was of course
sent for her use, and they were still in his possession. On the
night before the Noble Lord departed this life, Lady Erskine
made her escape from his (Mr. Adam's) house, and he had
ever since been in vain endeavouring to find her. She had ne-
ver been discharged from his custody, and she was not fit to
be at large.
Sir R.. BIRNIE said she did not appear to him to have any
symptoms of insanity about her. He conversed with her for a
considerable time at each interview, and she was, as far as he
was able to judge, perfectly rational.
Mr. Adams said, she might appear so to the worthy Ma-
gistrate, for the most confirmed lunatics had their lucid inter-
vals ; but lie could assure him that she ought to be in con-
finement, and he would venture to ask Sir Richard if he could
give him any information which would assist him in finding
her Ladyship, as he was determined to take her into his cus-
tody wherever he might meet with her.
Sir R. BIRNIE said he should give no information upon
the subject.
Mr. Adams said he had learned that she was running about
with very wild sort of company, and he wished to find her if
possible. Would Sir R. Birnie order an experienced officer to
assist him in the inquiry ?
Sir R. BIRNIE said he should give no orders upon the sub-
ject. Mr. Adams no doubt knew his own power, and he would
exercise it as he thought proper.
Mr. Adams said he had made his application : it had been
refused, and there was an end of it. With respect to the wear-
ing apparel, he should certainly keep it, as there were consider-
able arrears due to him for board, &c.
Here the conversation ended, and Mr. Adams left the office.

HARRIS v. BODENHAM AND PHILLIPS.
The argument, which had been considerably protracted, con-
cluded to day.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that this was a case which
ought to producers considerable feeling of caution with persons
of property how they entered into any transactions which they
might not afterwards wish to have known ; and it ought to serve
particularly as a warning to gentleinen concerned in the business
of banking, not to run any improper risks for the sake of profit
merely. It appeared that two persons of independent property
had embarked in.a bank at Herefordoogether-with one man a
business of the name of Garrett. There was hargins transacted
by this last named person as it was alleged; on behalf of the
firm, in stock jobbing, which amounted first and last to nearly
3,000,000 sterling. Among the parties with whom these
bargains had been transacted was :the. plaintiff, who had been
deeply • implicated in them. The defendants avowed their
responsibility in a portion of these transactions, but,
nam-
ing a particular period at which they said that they had
ceased to have .any dealings in . them, they declared that
they had positively directed Mr. Garrett to have done with
them also ; anti that upon his failing to observe those
directions, they caused him to leave the firm. During this last
period, and before the departure of Mr. Garrett, there had
been new bargains effected between him and the plaintiff. Pre.:
sently afterwards, the defendants make 'up their hoOks, and
send•to the plaintiff, demanding the balance of their account
due from him. He proposed to set off the account the balance
of the stock transactions, which proposal the defendants op-
pose, alleging that those jobs were between Garrett and the_
plaintiff on Garrett's separate account, and that the firm had
nothing whatever to do with them. Upon this. followed ,pro-
ceedings at law, in the course of which it would appear that
Mr. Garrett had supported the assertions of the defendants ; for
before they could bring their action at laW, the plaintiff had in-
dieted Mr. Garrett for perjury. Upon the trying of that cause,
Mr. Justice Bayley was of opinion that there was no proof of
any material perjury ; for as the ground for an indictment for
perjury must be laid in fair and sound transactions, so in this
case the transactions being entirely illegal, no material perjury
could be committed. In giving that opinion, the excellent Judge
seemed to entertain not the least doubt upon the law of the case.
But with deference to so respectable an authority, he (the
Lord Chancellor) entertained very considerable doubts as to
thelavr. The plaintiff, however, obtained an injunction from this
court to restrain the defendants from proceeding at law for the
recovery of the balance which they claimed. And the form of
their proceeding was this :--They had paid over to a Mr. Mat-
thews, who seemed theoughout to have acted as a very honour-.
able man, a promissory note given by the plaintiff, and for the I
better security of, Mr: Matthews, endorsed by the defendants,
and he was in the act of proceeding to the recovery of it when
ataYed by the present injunction. Now, without prejudicing
any of the facts as they had been set forth by the defendants,
and without the slightest intent to impeach their veracity, •he
did think it very material to consider, upon the face of those
proceedings, what would be the effect of allowing bankers, or
other persons connected in partnership, to disown, upon their
own surmise, a long course of transactions the uninterrupted
records of which were to be found in their own books, letters,
• bills; and accounts. What security could tilers he for thepub-
lie at large, in dealing with any one who should afterwards
• turn out to be a partner in a firm ? He would not now•say what
Innst be ,cifSne with The case eventually ; hut at any ratehatoust
put the defendants to the trial of their right by an issue at law.
It would be material to observe what line of examination would
be likely to answer the purposes of
.justice, before determining
the form of the issue, as the admissibility or non-admissibility
of evidence must be considered on each side. He rather thought
that the hankers ought to bring the action, and not Mr. Mat-
thews, after striking out their own endorsement. If they heard
nothing more from him by "Wednesday morning, it was to be
understood that they were at liberty to proceed to an issue at
i law upon the bill, without any prejudice, however, to their
Tight of addressing him upon the subject in the mean time. The
injunction in the mean tune remains undisturbed.

ORDERS OF TUE COURT.
An order had been published in November last, in the Six
Clerks office,. and that of the Registrar. by which it is direct-
ed that all cases adjourned without reason assigned should be
peremptorily struck nut of the paper.
Mr. AGAR applied to have a cause restored to the paper,
which had been displaced in consequence of this order. There
might be something
very proper in . the order • but, with all
deference, it was not rendered sufficiently public considering
its importance. It was issued late in November, and many
country solicitors who were not aware of it had adjourned
their cases over the holidays, and would be made to suffer
without the consciousness of having committed any offence.
Mr. HART did not dislike the order so much as his Learned
Friend, Mr. Agar. There were cases, however, in which it
might operate prejudicially, though, on the main, its tendency
was obviously good. Sometimes a plaintiff had a very ricketty
case, so Much so that he might rather prefer not to bring
it on than otherwise. Ile would be glad of such an opportu-
nity as this order afforded him to commit 'aches which would
for ever dispose of the case, especially as by that means he
would be enabled to pass by the disagreeable question of costs.
Perhaps the order would perfectly answer all the purposes of
justice, if his Lordship would add to it, leave for the defend-
ant to show cause for adjournment in case of the momentary
defy th of the plaintiff:
The LORD CHAN er.t.r.on approved of the suggestion of
Mr. Hart. But the order had been rendered necessary by the
continual adjournment of causes in which the Court had no
power to bring them on, though the Solicitors had ; and of
course so adjourned Without any reason assigned, there were at
the time of making the order no less than 93. It was time to
speak out. The obloquy of these delays had been thrown
upon the Court, when the blame belonged exclusively to the
parties in their suits or their Solicitors. The Court had enough
to answer for without taking upon• itself the odium which be-
longed to others ; and for his part he was determined to have
the order enforced.