The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-14 00:00:00

RAILWAY COMPANY V. WOODCOCK.

This was an action for calls which was tried before Mr.
Baron Rolfe at the last Liverpool assizes, when a verdict
was found for the plaintiff. A rule was obtained, on the
part of the defendant, I.r setting the verdict aside, on the
ground that no evidence was given of any resolutions
of the Directors fixing the time and place where the calls
were to be paid. and that they were made in filluro ; that no
evidence was offered that the person signing the notices of
the calls was chairman of the Court.
Mr. WIOUTHAN now shoed cause against the rule, and
contended that, according to the Act constituting the
Court, the Directors were not bound to prove any resolu-
tion for a call ; they had given the proper notice in the
newspapers, and in that they had fixed both time and place
where the calls were to be paid, and that he contended was
enough. As to the other objection, there was a resolution
entered into on the 13th March, that a call should be made
on the 30th March, to be payable in the following May; he
contended that the call was good enough, it having been
really made on the 13th, all the words respecting the
30th was mere surplusage. The witice of the call was in
effect the call, and that did not appear till April. By
the Act that public notice was all that the Directors were
obliged to do, and the public and the shareholders were
not entitled to know anything of the resolutions of the
Directors.

Mr. CRESSWELL, for the defendant, contended that
the call was perfected by the resolution of the Direc-
tors, and if so, then they were invalid, because the
resolutions making these two calls made no mention of
either time or place fur the payment of the money. The
second objection applied to only one call, but he appre-
hended it was fatal so far as that call was concerned. It
was resolved on the 13th March that a call should be
made on the Mill. Now if the Directors could
make any call in flaw°, what was to prevent those who
went out by rotation making a call which would bind their
successors ? lie obtained his rule upon another ground, to
which his Learned Friend had not adverted. He con.
tended that the Directors had not been legally elected.
Mr. WroirrmaN hoped the Court would hear him upon
that new point, for he had clearly understood that it had
.oeen overruled when the motion was made. According to
the 146th section, the Directors named in the Act of Par-
liament were to remain in office till others were duly
elected, and the calls in question were signed by a full
quorum of the Directors so named in the Act. Their
powers were legal.
Mr. CREESWELL argued that the Act required the Corn-
pan:: should duly elect Directors at the first general meet-
ii gof registered proprietors. At the time these gentle-
Area were elected there was no sealed registry, and it had
bf‘n held that the reOtry was no registry until it was

Mr. Dundas, Mr. Crumpton, and Mr. Cowling followed
on the samu side.

The CovzT WA time to consider their judgment.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JAN. 12.

IN THE MATTER OF RALPH BF,NSON, /SQ.
Ti..e petitioner in this case, who bad been Member of
Parliament for Stafford for a number of years, appeared
nn his petition, from the Queen's Bench prison, praying
to be discharged under the Act. He was opposed by Mr.
Nichols on the part of Mr. A'Beckett, solicitor, in Golden-
square ; Mr. Cooke and Mr. Woodroffe supported the ap-
plication on the part of Mr. Benson.
The insolvency was ascribed by Mr. Beasor on his pro.
ceedings to the expenses be had incurred in three con.
tested elections, two for Stafford and one for Bridgnorth,
to losses on underwriting, law expenses, and other ex-
penses, which he set forth. The debts in the aggregate
were 76.0321. 12a. Bd., of which sum 22,191/. 15s. Id.
ware without consideration, leaving the bona fide claims
from the year 1920, amounting to 53,840/. 17s. 7d. There
were no debts owing to Mr. Benson, but he detailed
in the schedule his various estates, and the incum-
brances he had created on them. Among the
items stated was one in the year 1820 of 11,0001., as paid
for debts contracted on two contested elections, one for
Stafford and the other for Bridgnorth. There was another
item in 1125 of 5,5001., as having been paid;for the ex-
penses of a contested election for Stafford. The descrip-
tion was of \Venlock, in Shropshire, and residences in
London during the time he was in Parliament, front 1820
to 1830. His Parliamentary expenses were stated at
550/. a year. He had been in the Queen's Bench Prison
since October last. Several creditors had entered oppo-
sitions, but only one creditor opposed.
Mr. Benson stated his belief that the incumbrances on
his landed estates exceeded the value of his interest in
them, which was for life only. He had resided in France
nearly ten years, and returned to this country in July last.
He had only one detaining creditor, Mary Ryland, who
had been one of his servants, and whom he owed wages
between 501. and 60/. He was arrested at her suit in the
Strand as he was going into the City. The detaining
creditor, Mary Ryland, got judgment by a Judge's order
for 501., and he was taken to prison. He had to a num-
ber et his debts set up in his schedule the statute of limi-
tation as a bar. The arrest was not a "friendly" pro-
ceeding,

UltiMately the Court declared that ho was entitled to
the benefit of the Act.

He was discharged accordingly,

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.

John Craft, and Louisa, his daughter, were charged
before Mr. Alderman White, the latter with robbing
her employer, Mahommet Palouker, and the former
with fraudulently misrepresenting her character and re-
ceiving a portion of the stolen property.
The prosecutor (who was dressed in the Eastern cos-
tume and spoke English very fluently) said that he re-
sided in Sun-street, Bishopsgate-street. About twelve.
months ago the female prisoner applied to him for a
situation, stating that as she was just come from the
country she could only refer to her father as to charac-
ter. Upon application to the male prisoner, Ile spoke
of her in such high terms that she was engaged, but
before she had been three days in the place various
surses of money were missed, and the woman having ac-
knowledged that she took them she was discharged.
Immediately alter her departure he found that she had
taken two satin veils and a diamond pin, and he never
saw her afterwards until he met her in Holborn, when
he gave her into custody.
Police Constable 276 said that when the female was
searched at the station-house she acknowledged having
given the pin to her father.

Both the prisoners, who Strongly protested their inno-
cence, were ordered to be brought up again to-morrow.

GLASGOW JU,t;TICIARY COURT.

TRIAL or TDB " LADY TIIIEF."—On Saturday Jane
Petresie, or Harris, was charged with the crime of theft,
in so tar as on the night of the 15th or morning of the 16th
of October last, within the Commercial Hotel, Glassfurd-
street, Glasgow, occupied by Mrs. Stewart, she had stolen
from the pockets of Thomas Bayne, Esq., commercial
traveller from Manchester, seven one pound nott s and five
sovereigns; also, from M. Gobert Jacob Mces, of Rotter-
dam, a Bank of England note of five pounds, and thrce
sovereigns, from same hotel; also, oa the 16th of October,
fron► the Royal Hotel, George-square (Carrick's), front
the pockets of Crean, the police-officer, two bank notes,
as also a card-case ; also, from the pockets of Robert
Paul, Esq., of the Commercial Bank, Edinburgh, same
place, Manager of the Commercial Bank of Scotland,
seven pounds—all the above sums having been taken while
the owners were asleep in bed.
The prisoner, in an audible voice, pleaded not guilty.
This trial excited a deep interest in the public mind.
The singular circumstances attending the thefts with which
the prisoner stood charged—the boldness and dexterity
which had characterised their commission—the known
superiority of the prisoner in point of education—and,
above al!, the msatery which hung over her history, all
combined to create a strong felling of curiosity, and to
beget an anxious desire to see the prisoner and hear the
proceedings on her trial. The Court was accordingly
very much crowded, and among the spectators there was
a greater proportion of ladies than is usual. On Mrs.
Harris making her appearance, the utmost eagerness was
manifesied to get a sight of her countenance. She was
veiled when she first entered the Court ; but, on her name
being called to hear the indictment read over, she lifted
the veil from her face. We were exceerimgly struck with
the alteration which had taken place upon her from the
period of her imprisonment. Before her committmeirt to
jail, we had an opportunity of seeing the prisoner, and
could not fail to mark, what every person who saw her bad
observed, that she had a pair of most attractive, we had
almost said bewitching black eyes. On Saturday, how-
ever, her eyes had undergone a most complete transforma-
tion. At a distance the white portion of the eye-ball ap-
peared to be unnaturally prominent; while a nearer in-
spection showed that she had a decided squint. This sin-
gular change gave her countenance, as may be supposed,
an appearance very different from that which formerly
characterised it, and certainly not in the way of improve-
ment. The impression upon some people in Court was,
that the squint was feigned ; but, upon inquiry, we find
that it has been observable for above a month ; and that
the Surgeon of the gaol has given it as his opinion that
in all likelihood, the strange alteration has been caused
by some disorder brought on by excessive anxiety of mind.
Unless when spoken to ber by her counsel, Mr Maxwell,
or by her agent, Mr. A. Young, the prisoner, throughout
the whole of the trial, kept her eyes shut, and, though pale,
manifested the most perfect composure. She was dressed
in a straw hat and veil, and ►lack silk gown and shawl, and
altogether her dress might be called becoming, if not
elegant.
After all the evidence had been adduced, Mr. Maxwell,
the prisoner's counsel, addressed the Jury. and Lord
Cockburn having summed up, stated his perfect belief of
the guilt of the prisoner.
The Jury, without retiring from the box, gave in a ver-
dict, unanimously finding the prisoner guilty of all the
charges, with the exception of that relating to the theft
from Mr. Mces, which had been departed from by the
public prosecutor.
The prisoner was then sentenced to eighteen months'
imprisonment in the prison of Glasgow. Lord Medwyn,
in proposing, and Lord Cockburn, in passing sentence,
buth expressed a doubt that they had dealt a too lenient
sentence The prisoner was evidently a woman above the
rank and condition of the ordinary race of criminals, and,
from her superior education, must have well known the
aggravated nature of the crimes she had committed. They
were not sure but seven years' transportation ought to have
been awarded ; but the Court being always inclined to
mercy, lied, after consideration, resolved on doing so on
the present occasion.
The prisoner then left the bar.