The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-06 00:00:00

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

PERJURY-THE QUEEN V. MARY DIXON.
This was an indictment for perjury alleged to have been
committed by the defendant in an affidavit in the Court of
Chancery with respect to certain proceedings stated to have
taken place at a public house called the City Arms,
Millbank, Poplar, on the 28th of January, last year. The
house was kept by a person named Newman,
who, it appeared, lived with the defendant, and on the day
in question, as he was about to part with the house to
Messrs. Reid and Co., the brewers, Mrs. Newman, who had
separated from him the preceding month, went there with her
solicitor, Mr. Masterman, for the purpose of defending her inte-
rests and those of her child. She found her husband inebriated
in the bar parlour, in the company of Mrs. Dickson and her
brother, whose name was Banks. Mr. Noble, who
was related to her by mar,riage, shortly after-
wards came in. A deal of recrimination ensued.
Shortly after Dixon and Banks left. Mrs. Newman
afterwards received a cheque of 560/. from the brewer's
clerk, on the understanding that it was to be paid on the
following day. They came at one o'clock, and left about
eight in the evening. It was not, however, paid, as Messrs.
Reid declined to cash it without her husband's sanction. A
bill was subsequently filed in Chancery by Mr. Noble, as ulrs.
Newman's next friend, seeking that Court to interfere its
authority to prevent the payment of the money to Mr. New-
man, on the ground that he was not in a fit condition to ma-
nage his affairs—but the bill was dismissed with costs,
principally on account, it was contended, of the
affidavit filed by the defendant. It stated that on the day
in question, Mrs. Newman poured neat spirits down her
husband's throat with the view of making him insensible,
and that she (Mrs. Dixon) knocked a glass of spirits, which
she had drawn for that purpose out of her hand, and that
Mrs. Newman whispered to Mr. Noble to let her husband
have whatever drink he wanted.

Mrs. Newman positively denied the truth of these state-
ments, and added that Mrs. Dixon poured neat spirits down
her husband's throat, and that she knocked a glass of spirits
out of her hand which she had drawn for that purpose.
Mr. Noble, a linen-draper, in Shoreditch, stated that New-
man was in an insensible state, and that Mrs. Dixon poured
some gin down Newman's throat; she held his head back,
and some went down his throat and the remainder on his
clothes. Mrs. Newman did not whisper to him in the way
mentioned.

Mr. Masterman, and Mr. Filmore, the brewer's clerk, cor.
roborated this evidence.

This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Sergeant C. JONES then proceeded to address the jury
on behalf of the defendant. He said he hoped his Lordship
would excuse his imperfect knowledge of the proceedings of
the Court of Chancery.
Lord DENMAN—I don't know that you ought to state that.
You ought to know, and I am sure you do know, the pro-
ceedings of that Court.
Mr. Sergeant Jones consulted the attorney.
Lord DENMAN—That is not the proper way to conduct a
case; it is very improper for a counsel to receive instruc-
tions from an attorney in Court. It is a very growing
practice, and a very improper one, and it is one that the
gentlemen of the bar ought to put down. I have frequently
seen them spoil the case and ruin the cases of their clients by
so doing. They don't understand that it is a great liberty.
When a gentleman of the bar is addressing
the Court, somebody tells that gentleman something
which prevents him from going on with his address. Such
conduct is quite inconsistent with decent manners and pro-
per conduct ; it is easy to give suggestions without doing
this.

Mr. Sergeant JONES, after apologising, addressed the jury
and contended that even the statements in the affidavit, sup-
posing them to be true, could have had little influence on
the suit, and that it was possible the defendant might have
been mistaken. They had failed to prove that New-
man was unable to manage his affairs. It was
equally possible that Newman asked for the spirits, and that
Mrs. Dixon bad simply supplied him with them ; but he
should prove that the defendant did all she could to induce
Newman not to drink, as the parties had come there pur-
posely to intoxicate him, and to get the money from him.
Aperson named Harris, who was formerly in the service of
Newman as a barman, swore that he did not see Mr. Dixon
pour spirits down his throat, and that both Mrs. Newman
and Mr. Noble did all theycould to induce Newman to drink.
The defendant knocked a glass of spirits out of Mrs. New-
man's hand, which he bad drawn for her husband who was
quite sober, and who was not in the habit of taking more
drink than other gentlemen.
Newman himself deposed that he was quite sober at the
time, that Dixon did all he could to induce him not to drink,
and that both his wife and Mr. Noble did all they could
to induce him to take brandy and water, in order to get his
money from him. Mrs. Dixon knocked a glass of spirits
out of Mrs. Newman's hand, and Mrs. Newman one out of
hers, with which she was serving a customer. She took
8001. from him, and had him left at the Three Nuns, in Ald-
gate, with 11141. in his pocket. He admitted he was in-
toxicated at that time.

A Mrs. Gillham, who had been in his service, corroborated
this evidence.

Lord DKxit&N, in summing up, said Mr. Noble was to
blame for filing the hill in Chancery, as it appeared that
Newman instead of being insane from drink, was an acute
and sensible man. It seemed very remarkable that Newman
so easily parted with the cheques.
The jury found the defendant Guilty.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
The Court was engaged to-day with a special jury case,
arising out of a dispute with the Sun Insurance Company as
to the amount which ought to be paid to an insurer for damage
done by fire.
The case presented no point whatever of any interest to
the public.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)

IN RE GILLIAM.

This bankrupt had cat;iedlOnTlSiness as a jewel-case
maker, in Frith-street, Soho, and having filed his own
petition, came up to pass his last examination.
His HONOUR observed, that in this case the balance-sheet,
if such it could be called, commenced on the Ist of January
1844, with a capital of 4361. ; his debts .1.504/., liabilities, 161/.,
the assets not being enough to pay the expenses of the
fiat, his property consisting of pawnbrokers' duplicates,
the official assignee stating that he had net bees able to
collect any of the debts, nor likely to do so. This was, as
of nine out of ten of the cases which now came before the
court—a case in which the bankrupt filed his own petition,
and had not a single farthing for his creditors. In such a
case he would not grant the certificate. On this subject, and
in cases of insolvency where the insolvent had no assets, he
bad to make some observations on the application hitherto of
the statute in regard to them. His Honour then proceeded
to say that a petition had been filed by a person named Baum,
and he bad not any estate to be administered by this court. and
it was such a case as he had alluded to. His Honour said the
frequency of petitions of this kind, and the mischief which
arose induced him to look carefully over the Acts, and he
had been assisted by the suggestions of his friend and
brother Commissioner, Mr. Ellison, of Newcastle. on-Tyne,
who had adopted in his Court the course he (his Honour)
would now point out. His honour then read the petition,
which was in the form prescribed in the schedule of the Act
ith and Bth Victoria, in which is a clause in which the in-
solvent says that he is desirous that his estate should be
administered under the direction of this Cuurt, and
that the same amounted to not less than

Now in this, as in a great many other cases, the blank was
filled up 0 0 0, this was a gross perversion of the Act, and a
mere mockery. How could the Court distribute "nothing."
It was not within the meaning of the Legislature that
persons who had not a farthing for their creditors
should come before this Court, which had not the power of
inflicting a direct and intelligible punishment, for by these
acts the rights of the creditors were taken away without an
equivalent. In such cases he should refuse, unless good
reason was shown that he was wrong, granting in-
solvents the relief they sought, but leave them to
apply to the Court of Insolvency,, which had the
power to punish the guilty and acquit the innocent. His
Honour then referred to the cases in which the petitions
were filed by the bankrupts who had no assets, and said that
in those cases the object of the Act was departed from, the
principal of the bankrupt law being the fair and equal di3tri-
bution of the bankrupt's estate and effects ; and the bank-
rupts appeared to think that in going through the necessary
forms he acted in " conformity with the law, but he had
only half done so, not having placed any assets for the benefit
of his creditors, but had either squandered it away or given
it to some favoured creditor. Under those circumstances,
also, he should hold that the statute had not been complied
with, and should leave the parties to seek the relief and meet
the punishment which the Court of Insolvency could, ac-
cording to its opinion, inflict.

CLERKENWELL.-(THIS DAY).
PULLING NosEs IN COURT.—A young man of highly re-
spectable appearanoe, named Harris, was charged before
Mr. Greenwood w ith assaulting Mr. Robert Hobbs and
pulling his nose in the passages of this court.
From the evidence of the prosecutor, who stated himself to
be a private gentleman residing upon his own income in
Calthorpe-street, it appeared that on Monday last a charge
was preferred by him against the defendant for having
knocked at his door, and, as is often the case in such
charges, the usual threats of indictments for perjury were
bandied between the parties before they left the presence of
the Magistrate. The moment they got into the passage,
close by the door, and almost before it was closed, the de-
fendant stopped short suddenly, and after calling him a
number of opprobrious names, caught him by the nose and
gave it three or four sharp twinges, which nearly brought
tears into his eyes.
The defendant denied having pulled the complainant's
nose, but acknowledged that atter he (the complainant) had
called him a liar and scoundrel, and paid him many
similar compliments, be shook his hand in his face, but never
touched him.
After evidence was called for the defence,
Mr. GREENWOOD said it had been proved that a very
serious contempt of the Court had been committed. It was
a great presumption on the part of the defendant to commit
such an act almost in the presence of the magistrate, and he
should fine the defendant 405., and in default of payment,
commit him for a month to the House of Correction.
The fine, as a matter of course, was immediately paid, and
the defendant left the Court.

RE-APPEARANCE OF THE POTATO DISEASE.—At
the ordinary meeting of the Botanical Society of London,
held last evening at the Society's rooms, 20, Bedford-street,
Covent-garden, J. Reynolds, Esq , Treasurer, in the chair,
Mr. Barnes, of Sidmouth, exhibited numerous specimens of
diseased potatoes, which were of this year's early crop. Mr.
Barnes could find no potato free from the disease, and he
was afraid it would be more serious than last year.
THE DEER IN WINDSOR GREAT PARK.--PRESEN-
TATIONS TO TUB POOR OF ‘Virrosoa.—lt has just been deter-
mined by his Royal Highness Prince Albert, as the Ranger
of Windsor Great Park, to cause a considerable decrease in
the number of deer in the royal domains at Windsor; the
quantity which is intended to be killed and given to the
poor of the five parishes surrounding the Park being i 6.

LEICESTER TRADE.—The general trade is flat. In
Spring gloves and cotton hose there are orders in the market
at old prices; but we believe that the new rat es of thread and
cotton could not be realized. Wools and yarns remain firm,
but without alteration.—Leicestershire Mercury.