The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-03 00:00:00

DAINTRY L. HUTCHINSON.

Mr. KELLY moved for a new trial in this case,
which was tried before Mr. Baron Alderson at
the late Cambridge Assizes, when a verdict was passed
for the defendant. The Learned Gentleman said
the action was upon an agreement to run a match with
greyhounds for 1001. a-side. The defendant challenged
the plaintiff to run a course of three matches with his dog
Grasper, against his (the defendant's) dog King Cole. It
was accepted, and an agreement entered into, in which it
was stipulated that the said match is to be run on the
Wednesday during the Newmarket February Meeting in
1841, P.P. ; and it was upon these words the point
turned. It was given in evidence, that the usual prac-
tice was for the Stewards to appoint the day of the
February meeting in the previous November, but al-
ways with a proviso that it was fixed, weather permit-
ting ; and that, clause was rendered necessary, becauselit
was impossible for the dogs to run should frost prevail at
the time fixed. The, first Tuesday in February,
1841, had beeu so appointed by the Stewards for the
commencement of the meeting, -but some days previous
to that time, there being a hard frost on the ground,
and no . immediate prospect of a change, the
Stewards met and adjourned the day of meeting till the
Tuesday fortnight, and both parties to the action were
present at the time, but, in order to make all sure, the
plaintiff caused a written notice of the fact to be served
upon the defendant. The meeting was held upon Tuesday,
the 16th of February, and the plaintiff attended with his
dog, prepared to run the match on the Wednesday, but
the defendant did not appear. The plaintiff took all the
steps usual upon such an occasion, and brought his
action upon the agreement. At the 'trial the Learned
Judge laid it down that:the meeting specified in the
agreement was the first 'Tuesday: in Abruary, and
the Jury found fcr the. defendant,' according
to his directions. He was surprised at the
direction, and would contend that the meeting clearly
was properly adjourned till the 16th, and that the meeting
then held was the meeting contemplated in the agreeinent.
The COURT granted a rule nisi.
GRAY V. PEARSE.

This was an action upon a bill of exchange for
3,400/. which was tried before Lord Abinger, at the
sittings in London after last Term, when a verdict was

found for the defendant. .
..,,
Mr. ERLE now moved for a rule nisi to enter the ver-
dict fur the plaintiff, or, failing in that, for a new trial.
He said the plea to the action was "that the defendant
made the promissory note to James Augustus Grant for
money lost at play to the said J. A. Grant, and that the
said bill was endorsed over to the plaintiffs, without
consideration. At the trial the Lord Chief Baron allowed
it to be proved that in October, 1840, a Mr. Caldwell
called at the Albion Hotel, Brighton) and ordered a
dinner for three gentlemen to be ready on the 10th—that
on that day the same gentleman, Mr. Pearse the de-
fendant, and a person, who answered to the name-of
Grant, did dine there, and afterwar6 drank very freely
of wine and played at cards to a late hour—that on the
15th of the same month the same parties were again at
the hotel, and upon that occasion the waiter was called
up and requested to sign a "paper as a witness.
Ile did so, but did not see its contents. The
paper was put into his hands, and identified. It was a
memorandum as follows :—" Mr. Pearce having lost to
me 3,4001., has this day given me a promissory note for
1 that sum, I hereby undertake not to call upon him for
payment of it until he shall have first given me notice
that he is in a condition to pay the same," and that was
signed "J. A. Grant." It was further allowed to be
proved that some time ago Grant levanted, leaving
many debts unpaid ; that he had, about the
17th, offered the bill to a person to whom
he was indebted, and that Gray, the plaintiff,
was a bankrupt in 1831, "and the keeper of a play-booth
on Epsom Downs. To .all of that he (Mr. E.) had ob-
jected at the time, and he now contended that every part
of it was inadmissible. Nothing done or said by Grant,
could in any way effect Gray, the plaintiff ; neither was
,the Grant at Brighton at all identified as the Grant who
endorsed the bill to the plaintiff. The memorandum
was clearly no evidence.
Mr. Baron PARKE—You did not prove; consideration;
that 'you were called upon to do.
Mr. BaLE submitted not, for, strike out the evidence
of which he complained, and there was nothing left ,but
that seine parties dined at Brighton, drank wine and
played"; but'how' was it shown that the two Grants
were the same ?
The COURT were of opinion that as the whole of the
evidence was and could only be circumstantial, none had
been improperly admitted.—Rule refused.

SHERIFFS' COURT, Nov. 2.
UPSTON V BROMWICH.

This was an action to recover the sum of 71. Bs. 9d.,
being the amount of an attorney's bill of costs.
Mr. Thomas appeared fur the plaintiff, and Mr. Baines
for the defendant.

The bill was an ordirary attorney's bill of costs, and
the only defence was with respect to the items, which
were alleged to have been unnecessarily charged. An-
other ground of defence was, that the amounts of those
items had been paid at various times.
A witness was put into the box, .a clerk of the plain-
tiff, who stated that many of the items were charged for
attendance, &c. upon the defendant, which charges were
not entered in any book, , but were charged upon the
recollection of the witness.

Mr. BAINEs addressed the Jury for the defence, and
stated that the present action was a vexatious one, as the
plaintiff was indebted to the defendant, and, in order to
get rid of that claim, the present was brought. The
Learned Counsel then called several witnesses, who
proved that the plaintiff had called his creditors to-
gether, and in the list was the name of the defendant.
The defendant's claim was for money received by the
plaintiff on account of the defendant.
The Learned UNDER-SHERIFF summed up, and the
Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.

COURT OP BANIGHIPTCY, Oct. 22.
b.{ i4E t?2k4iii; _ _

raf This
Was the day fixed for the final examination of the bank-
rupt, whose examination in August last was reported in
this journal. He was deeply engaged in mining spoon-
latione in Cornwall a few years ago, and having been
comparatively successful in his first attempts, he soon
obtained the reputation of being a " fortunate " man, and
having embarked la an increased number of a similar
rialktre, he obtained a subscriptions " from clergymen in
Kent to the amount of 100,0001., and upwards, and from
one Member of Parliament (Colonel Rushbrooke, M.P.)
us less than 75,000/, The mines turned out to be a, must
a total l'ailure
The Learned COMMISSIONER asked if any solicitor. was
in attendance to put any questions to the bankrupt touch-
ing hie fite Malts, as, if not, he would nut delay his last
examination for more than a few days.
Mr; Niasj a solicitor, who attended for several credi-
tors,. said that from a severe inquiry by himself, and also
from information which he had derived from the official
assignee, he (Mr. Nies) ova s perfectly satisfied with the
accuracy' of the bankrupt's accounts, as presented to the
Mitt by Mrs Matt, the accountant, at the express de-
sire of the creditors.
Sir C. F. WiLLIAms—I ane obliged. to the official as-
signee for his very effective sxamination of these volu-
minOtis counts, forf Mika that my early impressions
of the case were very diffetent from thaw, *Thiel) I now
entertain; haying given to it in the meantime my most
antiolis tonsidetatiolit
Mr. Nits—My clients, your Iforldiff; fttilk share in
your feeling: Although they are fully satisfied that Oil
will riefer tit anything by delaying the bankrupt's final.
examination, they still believe did tlatounts to be accurate.
Sir C: F: WIELIAMS—I thonght it tamest impossible,until litetient dtt§e; filth atf Y3ttite) In ifbb* so large a
sum as 360,0001. had been embarked, shoilid 1104 tattled
in producing nothing ; but in justice to the bankrupt,
and ne atfordieg somr, satisfaction to the creditors and
the public (Who ribuit noi feitsdnebly have been satisfied
if the utmost vigilance had fidt been eitereised hi the in-
vestilvatibn Of the ittinkrdpt'l ettraordinary affairs), I
shall plitideed put some few quistioils to filth; in Order
that he may have an opportunity of expleining her* it
happened that so large a sum should have been expended,
and end in producing nothing but " cobwebs." It must
really atpbtif I,d lii inbfeditilt lb the wqrld.
The bankrupt was theft sworn ; and in eiarhination
by, the Learned Commissioner; gave the following
eaidenbe Wag ref thank years In the War-.
affidd at A good diary etid &tit the year
1829 or 1830 I first commenced my view of en,
tering into mining speculations, and had property. to
begiti with tti this amount of 12,0001. to 13,0001., partly in
cash and partly iti an Utile hithageged to a Mr. M.'Don-
nel for about 20,0001. I miter put out any flaming pro-
specttiSea tabs et thittite advertisements to induce any
party Whetabeitt to jaiti ,tie, not did I ever ask any one
to join me who actually did so, On the contrary, all
those who did join me were actually " volunteers." I
collected 360;000/. in subscriptions an the course of five
or six years, And 'litany persons, ffam whom I now hold
letters in my hand, pressed me to allow them to subscribe
to the speculation.
Several letters were here handed up to the Learned
Commissioner, and, after their perusal, he said that he
did not feel it right to mention the names of those persons
who had flung themselves into so profitless a speculation.
Examination continued—l did not know the names of
the writers of some of these letters ; and so many pressed
to join me, that I told them that I must reduce the inte-
rest from 10 to 7 per cent.
Sir C. F. WILLIAMS—Sva delusion, such infatuation
would scarcely be credible, if we had it not upon oath
before us.
The Bankrupt—Only two persons ever made any in-
quiry as to the produce of the " mines," or the nature of,
the accounts, as the mines had a very "high reputation,
and I think they are very valuable still.
vvee no such
r realised
Sir C. F. WILLIAMS—Indeed 1 and they uhe
a
one shillala for the creditors. We shall
delusion hero What was the amount of
interest which
b