The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-01 00:00:00

VAUGHAN V. WATT.

This was an action of trovcr, brought to recover the
value of a quantity of linen pledged with the defendant
by the plaintiff's wife. It was tried before Mr. Baron
Rolfe, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff.
Last term Mr. Wityrz moved for, and obtained a
rule nisi, for a new trial upon the ground of misdi-
rection on the part of the Learned Judge.
Mr. PIKE now showed cause against the rule, and
contended that the verdict ought not to be dis-
turbed, the direction of the Learned Judge having been
perfectly right, both according to the law and the facts.
The goods ware pawned for 101. by Mary Hubbard,
in behalf and in the name of the plaintiff's wife, on the
c)4th July. The plaintiff found the duplicate, and on
6th August he went to the promises of tho defendant,
ofered the money due upon the goods, and demanded
them as his own. Between those dates Mary Hub-
bard, as the agent of the wife, had applied for and
obtained two forms of declaration, having lost the du-
plicate. Under these circumstances, the pawnbroker
refused to give, up the -goods until one of the decla-
rations came in, or he found that the goods
were actually the property of the plaintiff.
The parties went before a Magistrate, but he
had no jurisdiction, and the matter was dismissed.
As the plaintiff could obtain no redress, he was reluc-
tantly compelled to bring an action of trover. The
Learned Gentlemen contended that the refusal upon
the 6th August was a full conversion of the goods, and
the Judge was perfectly right in so directing the Jury.
There was plenty of time for the 'defendant to make
inquiry into the facts of the case, indeed, he must have
known the goods were the property of the plaintiff
from what took place before the Magistrate, and he
had no good and reasonable ground for his refusal to
deliver the goods, as the action was not commenced
until August 21.

Mr. WHITE and Mr. COCKBURN, in support of the
rule, contended that it ought to have been left to the jury
to say whether, after the party pledging the goods had
obtained two forms of declaration previous to the 6th of
August, the pawnbroker had not just and reasonable
grounds for believing the goods to be the bona fide pro-
perty of the person pawning. In place of that his Lord.
ship told the jury that if the goods were those of the
plaintiff, then the refusal to deliver them up, was
a conversion of the property, and if so they ought to
find for the plaintiff. They contended that what the
Learned Judge had assumed was a question for the
Jury, and ought to have been left for their consideration.

The LORD CHIEF BARON said it was with great
regret that ho concurred in sending the case down to a
new trial, fur the expenses must be infinitely greater
than the sum in dispute; still the question of reason-
ableness of time ought to have been left to the Jury.
The cause must again go down, although no one could
for a moment doubt but that the result would be the
same. The defendant, however, had a right to have
the question left to the Jury, The rule, therefore,
must be made absolute.
Mr. Baron PARKE and Mr. Baron ROLFE concurred
in the question of law, as well as in the regret expressed
by the Lord Chief Baron.
Upon the interference of Counsel on both sides,
proceedings were ordered to be stayed upon the
defendants delivering up the goods, and paying all costs,
exclusively of the costs of the trial.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, APRIL 31.
The Court was occupied the whole of the day with
arguments in the oft litigated and long contested case of
Small v. Attwood. It will be recollected that, after
being carried through all its stages, that renowned cause
reached the Lords, on appeal—and the decision was for
Mr. Attwood.

The present action was brought by Mr. Attwood to
recover interest upon the purchase-money of the pro-
perty in dispute, the payment of which money had been
so long delayed ; the question mainly in dispute was
whether the plaintiff could claim interest on that inter-
est as well. The verdict was for defendant.

Sergeant Wilde, the Solicitor-General, suppportcd,
and Sir W. Follett opposed, a rule for a new trial
the arguments were not over when the Court rose.
The Court sat also in Nisi Prius, but no case of in•
tcrest occurred.

THE MIDDLESEX QUARTER

SESSIONS.

The Court sat on Wednesday, pursuant to adjourn-
ment from List week, for the purpose of hearing appeals.
Mr. Sergeant Adams was in the Chair, and among the
Magistrates upo❑ the bend. were Sir W. Curtis, S;r J.
Williams, Sir J. J. flimsier, S:r J. S. Lillie, Mr. Ser-
geant Arabin, Captain Bague, R.N, &c.
Mr. D. Ells appealed against the rafusal of the Jus-
tices of the Holborn division to grant a license to No.
198, Strand.

It appeared that the recognisance entered into by
the appellant to prosecute the appeal, set forth that he
would. abide the judgment of the Court, but did not con-
tain the words " and pay all costs if required to do so,"
according to the terms of the Act of Parliament.
After hearing Counsel on either side, Mr. CONANT
(who in this case took the Chair at the request of Mr.
Sergeant Adams) decided that the recognizance was
insufficient, and that the Court could not therefore hear
the appeal.
The appellant was ordered to pay the respondents'
costs, amounting to JO/. 19s. 10d.

L, ea nroeraid.
st
Mr. Richard Smith appealed against the refusal of
residing next
the Justices of the Kensington division to grant a license
to the Manor House, King's-road, Chelsea.
TAh emae prnpoerl
iaa
In
ft
r' so
mp e t or
.n was
ittle then
door to the manor-house, was read against the appli-
cation.
A memorial from six licensed victuallers in the neigh-
bourhood, and from fifty householders, including the
rector, curate, and churchwardens, were also presented
against the license.
Mr. BoDxIN regretted that a Magistrate (Captain
this case, by stating•
Bague) should have prejudged his
determination to oppose this license before he had heard
the merits, and he could not help stating that it was
not becoming a judge, who should act dispassionately,
Ultimately the Magistrates divided, and there appeared
13 to 1 against the license being granted.

In the course of the appeals that were heard the
CHAIRMAN ohser%ed that he was surprised that a large
body of men like the police had not a professional ad-
viser, as the course of justice was frequently interrupted
by the informality of the proceedmgs of the officers,
who, of course, could not be expected to understand all
the technicalities of the law.

THE MONUMENT OF CHATTERTON•—TIIe
monument, which for some time has been in course of erec-
tion near the muniment room of Redcliff church, to the me-
mory of Chatterton, was finished on Thursday last, when the
statue of the unfortunate poet was fixed in its place. The mo-
nument is nearly 40 feet high; it has been erected by public
subscription, and was designed by Mr. Fripp, the architect.—
Bristol Standard.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

Yesterday a Court was held for the despatch of
public business.

ALDERSGATE•STREET DISPENSART.

Mr. Herring, and others of the Governors of the
General Dispensary, Aldersgate-street, appeared at
the bar, and presented the following memorial from the
institution : _ _

That the General Dispensary was established in the
City of London in 1770. It is the parent institution
of this kind, and has been and is chiefly supported b)
voluntary contributions. That the objects of the in-
stitution are to afford medical and surgical relief gra-
tuitously to the sick poor, without regard to their
places of abode, and to visit at their own habitations
poor persons residing within the limits or liberties of
the City who may not be able, from the nature of their
disease, to attend at the Infirmary house. The follow-
ing statement will show the gradual incress of its use-
fulness during recent years, and the great advantages
conferred by the institution on the poor of the me-
tropolis :
From the Ist January, 1839, to the 31st December of the
same year, including 1,067 patients visited at their own
houses within the City of London, there were ad-

mitted .......................................... 6,273
There remained under cure at the end of 1838 1.280
Making total for the year 1839 - 7,553
Of this number there have been cured, re-
lieved, and dismise I
Died
- 6,331

Leaving under cure at the end 1839 1,222
The number of patients admitted within the last
eleven years amounted to nearly 60,000, and had nearly
doubled since 1829, the number being 3,909 in that
year, and 6,273 in 1839.
From the commencement in 1770 to the 31st December,
1839, the number of patients admitted has been 252,307
Of this number there have been cured, relieved,

and dismissed -.••• 233,583
Died 6,806
--- 240,389

Leaving under cure at the end of 1839 1,222
That from the increased number of patients the ex-
penditure of the institution has also much increased by
reason thereof, and of the falling off rather than in-
creasing in amount of donations and subscriptions, a
considerable debt has been incurred, and now remains
due to the Treasurer of the institution. That your
memorialists and other charitably disposed persons, feel-
ing that unless the funds of the institution are consider-
ably augmented, the amount of relief hitherto afforded
to the poor must necessarily be diminished, have entered
into an additional subscription towards liquidating the
present debt, and otherwise advancing the interest of
the institution ; and your memorialists venture to hope
that your Honourable Court will encourage and assist
their exertions by such exercise of its benevolence as
the occasion may appear to requires Your memorialists,
therefore, most respectfully beg leave to recommend
the institution to the kind and generous patronage of
your Honourable Court, and humbly pray that your
Honourable Court will be pleased to grant such aid in
behalf of the objects of the institution as to your Hon-
ourable Court shall seem fit.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir PETER LAURIE said the Court was perfectly
aware that ho was not in the habit of recommending ap-
plications for grants of money. He:was generallylopposed
to pecuniary petitions, but the Aldersgate-street Dis-
pensary, as appeared from the statement just read,
rendered invaluable benefits to the sick poor of the
City of London.—(Cheers.) The arrangements were
all upon the most economical principle, and the institu-
tion instead of encouraging idleness, a fault possessed
by some, aimed at the most speedy restoration of pa-
tients to their families. He trusted that the Court
would testify their estimation of its value by the libe-
rality of their contribution.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. STEVENS wished that the memorial should be re-
ferred to a Committee, but did not consider that the
mere reference was a proof of the intention to subscribe.
Sir Peter Laurie, it was evident, thought that as he
had been a means of saving money to the Corporation
by rejecting other applications, he had a right to give
away the funds in a favourite instance of his own, and
which was in his own ward.

Sir PETER LAURIE said that the Dispensary com-
prehended the sick and diseased of the whole city,
although it certainly stood, very much to his gratifica-
tion, in his own ward.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. BED/ORD also spoke in warm terms of the great
utility of the institution.
The memorial was then referred to the Coal, Corn,
and Finance Committee.