The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-18 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEA'S BENCH, Jan: 16.

The Court took the Crown paper to-day. No cases
came on for argument possessing any claim to public
interest.

BAIL COURT, Jan. 16.

KIABILITV OF PROVISIONAL COMMITTEEMEN.-PARROTT
V. FREKE. _

This was an action to recover the sum of 1,500/. due
by the defendant to the plaintiff for certain newspap r
advertisements inserted, and for work and labour done.
Mr. Keene appeared for the defence, and Messrs.
Humpl,ries and Wordsworth for the plaintiff.
Mr. Humexeites stated that the plaintiff in this case
was a newspaper agent, and the defendant, the Hon.
Percy E. Fr.- ke, was a gentleman of fortune, and the son
of Lord Carberry. The question of his liability did not
rest upon the mere fact of his name appearing on the
previsional committee of any railway, but on other facts
which he should prove, and which would leave no doubt
on the minds of the jury that their verdict ought to give
the plaintiff his claim.
The Learned Counsel then called
The Secretary of the London, Birmingham, and
Buckinghean Railway Company, who stated that the
first meeting of the promoters of the company took
place in September, 1845. The defendant was present,
and was, with others, made a member of the provisional
committee. At a subsequent meeting, on the 10th of
October, the defendant was present. On the 3d of
October, a resolution that the company should be adver-
tised, was passed and acted on. The defendant was not
present. Papers, containing these advertisements, were
laid on the table on all occasions. The defendant was
often present. On the 24th of September the solicitors
to the company were empowered to solicit the co-opera-
tion of gentlemen, and to publish their names, " should
it be deemed necessary." The defendant was summoned
to attend at all the meetings of the company; at least,
witness put a letter, ssontaining a summons, into the
post-office for him before each meeting. On the 3d of
October the name of the company was altered, and
several names were added to the provisional committee.
By Mr. Justice ERLE—The name of the company was
changed from and after the 3d of October.
Mr. KEENE objected to any evidence being given of
facts which took place while the defendant was absent.
Mr. Justice ERLE said that there was evidence that,
though the defendant was not present when certain re-
solutions were made, he was present when they were
acted upon, and thus identified himself with them by
confirming acts done in his absence. This fact was,
therefore, admissible as evidence of his consenting that
the company should be extensively advertised.
A resolution of the 3d of October, authorising the
solicitors to publish the prospectus of the company, was
then read.
Examination continued —By the instructions of
Messrs. Forbes and Drake he took some prospectuses to
Mr. Parrott. Witness directed him to advertise in the
Times, Herald, Morning Chronicle, and The Sun, besides
several of the local papers. Mr. Parrott sent in an ac-
count in the month of February. It was laid on the
table for further consideration, but no objection was made
as to its incorrectness.
Mr. Pritchard, of the Joint-Stock Company Regis-
tration Office, produced the registration of the London,
Birmingham, and Buckinghamshire Railway Company.
Mr. Freke's name is there. The company was first
registered on the 23d of September, and afterwards on
the 29th of October. Has Mr. Freke's written consent
to be on the committee.
The secretary identified the handwriting as that of
Mr. Freke.
Mr. PRITCHARD said that the first prospectus ever re-
gistered contained the name of Colonel Fr, ke.
Mr. KEENE objected to any evidence of proceedings
prior to the 29th of October being given. As it was
only on that day Colonel Freke gave his written con-
sent, he could not be made liable for anything before
that period.
The Secretary of the company was then recalled and
cross-examined by Mr. KEENE—OnIy knows Mr. Par-
rott as the advertising agent. Shares in the company
were allotted, but cannot say whether Mr. Parrott had,
or applied for any. First saw Mr. Freke on the
24th of September. He was introduced by Mr. Drake,
and afterwards gave his name to witness. Has not any
of the original prospectuses taken to the advertising
agents.
Mr. Wm. Grogan, clerk to the plaintiff, stated that his
employer resided in Alderman's-walk. The advertise
merits mentioned in the account produced were inserted
from time to time. The advertisements are inserted in
the newspapers produced.
Mr. KEENE objected to them unless the original ad-
vertisements sent to the newspaper-offices were produced.
Examination continued—The charges made are quite
reasonable. The amount of the bill is 1,558/. 17s. 2d.
The Secretary was here recalled by Mr. KEENE—He
stated that there was a managing committee appointed
on the sth of November. Colonel Fri-ke was not a
member of it. It was appointed by the provisional
committee.
Mr. HUMPHRIES stated, that in order to obviate the
objection to the managing committee, he would ask for
nothing which was inserted after the sth of November.
All the charges after that date should be struck out.
Mr. Thomas proved the payment by Mr. Parrott of
various large sums for the insertion of advertisements.
All the advertisements charged were paid for by Mr.
Parrott.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. KEENE submitted that there was no proof of any
one fact to render ColoneliFreke liable. Besides, there
had been no proof given that the prospectus had ever
been advertised. He wished that the original prospectus
sent to the newspaper-offices should be produced; that
the fact of its being printed should be proved, and the
authorised copies of the newspapers from Somerset
House. Every piece of paper covered with print could
not be proved to be the Times for a legal purpose. He re-
quired that the paper produced should be legally proved
to be a newspaper. He also wished that the advertisement
should be proved to be in conformity with the registered
prospectus.
The secretary was then re-called, and he proved that
the registered prospectus and the printed advertise-
ments acre in conformity with each other.
Mr. Justice ERLE inquired if Mr. Keene would admit
the conformity of the prospectus and advertisements?
Mr. KEENE said he could not.
Mr. Justice ERLE then re called Mr. Pritchard, who
proved that certain prospectuses were registered from
time to time.

Mr. KEENE said that he would admit that there was a
conformity between the prospectus produced and the ad
vertisements in the the printed documents produced, and
purporting to be newspapers. He objected that the
prospectus registered and published in the advertisement
was not the one authorised by the committee. He also
objected that the papers produced were not proved
to be newspapers.
Mr. Justice ERLE—You have not got the printer to
piove that the papers are copies of those printed at
certain dates. _ _

Mr, HIIMPIIRIES—NO, my Lord.
Mr. Thomas then produced a copy of the Morning
Herald, which he stated came from the Herald office, and
a copy of The Sun from the Stamp•oice. The papers
produced by the name of the Times are papers published
and circulated by that *a ne on the dates named on
them.

By Mr. KEENE—Applied for a copy of The Sun in
writing. Has not got the letrer.
Mr. KEENE then objected to the production of the
paper.
Mr. Grogan recalled, and examined by Mr. Justice
ERLE—Saw the secretary of the company deliver cer-
tain •prospeetuses to Mr. Parrott. He has also given
them to witness. Witness gave these prospectuses to
Mr. Thomas for insertion in the newspapers. Gave the
identical ones brought by the secretary to Mr. Thomas.
Mr. Justice ERLE then stated his opinion that there
was a case to go to the jury. It was, however, subject
to the objections of Mr. Keene.
Mr. KEENE then proceeded to address the jury, and
contended that there was no proof that the defendant
was present at any meeting which authorised the in-
sertion of advertisements. The resolution of the 24th

of September did not authorise the expenditure of one
farthing of money, as it only authorised the inviting of
the co-operation of certain gentlemen, " and to publish
their names if necessary ;" and therefore all the work