The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-07 00:00:00

(LEFT SPEAKING.)

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 6.
(Sittings in Banco.)
itEmP V. GRATES.

In this case Mr. Sergeant Ryles and Mr. Hugh Hill
were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Phinn represented the
defendant.

This was another action against a provisional com-
mitteeman. The plaintiff, ➢ir. N. J. Kemp, for a con-
siderable length of time had been the secretary of the
Midland Grand Junction Railway Company; and the
defendant, Mr. C. Twialeton Graves, who is a captain
in the navy, acted as one of the directors of that
company. The action was brought to recover 1251.,
the amount of salary due to the plaintiff At a general
meeting of the promoters of the scheme, on the 23d of
October, 1845, they resolved themselves into a provisional
committee, when, among other things, they appointed
the pleintiff the secretary, at a salary of 3501. per annum.
There was a meeting on the 29th of the same month,
at which the defendant was present, which confirmed the
minutes of the meeting on the 23d, at which meeting
the defendant was not present. At a meeting on the
16th of April the secretary's salary was reduced to 300/.
The plaintiff's father and brother were members of the
provisional committee ; he himself interested himself i❑
getting up the company, and continued to act as secre-
tary up to the 31st of March in the present year. The
defendant attended almost the whole of the meetings of
the provisional committee, and on one occasion signed,
with two others of the committeemen, a cheque upon
the bankers of the company for 86/. 10s., for a quarter's
salary due to the plaintiff. It was resolved at one of the
earliest meetings to prepare a deed of indemnity from
the secretary, solicitors, engineers, and promoters of the
company, to keep harmless the members of the provi-
sional committee against the expenses incident to the
formation of the company ; that resolution appeared
never to have been acted upon, and it was passed before
the offi'mrs named in it had been appointed. The de-
posits of the shareholders never exceeded 200/.
Mr. PHINN, for the defendant, said, the question for
the jury was, whether there was any promise, as laid
in the declaration, to pay the plaintiff, on request, his
salary. Captain Grave, the defendant, felt very keenly
the hardness of the plaintiff's selecting him from the
committee as the person to be sued, and leaving the
defendant to the poor expedient of a remedy over
against his brother directors. He submitted that the
resolution respecting the indemnity deed, though it was
never acted upon, went to show that the plaintiff's
demand was founded in bad faith and a violation or
agreement between the parties, and that the plaintiff
looked, not to the individual members of the provisioned
committee, one of whom was his father and another Ins
brother, but to the deposits of the company for remit-
neretion for his services.

The'LORD CHIEF JUSTICE told the jury, the simile
Tiestion for them to decide was, upon what terms did
the plaintiff perform his services as secretary for which
he claimed to be remunerated. They would have to
consider the construction to be put upon the resolution
I),,sed at an early stage of the company's existence, by
bleb the secretary, solicitors, and engineers of the
company were to indemnify the members of the pro-
Tisional committee. This resolution had been passed
heron, any of those officers had been appointed. Did
that resolution mean that the provisional directors were
to be indemnified only up to the time when it was
adopted by them ? or did it go forward prospectively
to affect those members who should afterwards act us pro-
visional committeemen ? The jury would have to con-
sider whether, by the terms of this resolution, the plain
tiff was to be employed upon the personal responsibility
of the directors, or was to indemnify them, or whether
it had any other meaning which entitled the plaintiff to
call for payment.
The jury found for the defendant.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

Yesterday Mr. H. Hugh O'Donnell Clayton, a young
gentleman lately an offker in the army, and residing in
B iry•street, St. James's, was brought before Mr. Jar
dilly, charged with sending threatening letters to Mr.
Gilbert East. •
Mr. Williams, a solicitor, of the firm of Cox and
Williams, produced several letters, and, handing them
up to the bench, stated his belief that they were in the
handwriting of the defendant. They were understood to
convey a threat that the writer would assassinate Mr. G.
East or his son unless some request preferred by him
were forthwith granted. Mr. Williams had formed his
judgment upon the writing by means of comparison.
The defendant said nothing to the charge.
No further particulars of the matter transpired in
Court.
His WORMIP remanded the defendant for further
examination.