The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-19 00:00:00

:,;4: 'ltrb Ebitton

NEWMARKET RACES
(THIS DAY-BY EXPRESS.)

Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, for three yrs old. T.Y.C.
Redwing .
Veroncts

Four ran.
Handicap Sweepstakes of 20 sovs. each. T.Y.C
Bishop of Romford's Cob
African
Cocoa Nut 3

Seven ran.
MATCH, 200, h ft, Bst 7lb each, T.Y.C.—Duke of
Bedford's Rithen beat Sir J. Hawley's Piccinino.
Sweepstakes of 50 soya. each, for three yrs old. A.F.
King of Morven walked over

LLOYD'S SHIPPIN G-(THIS DAY.)
LONDON, APRIL 19.—Wind at Noon N.W., moderate
breeze, and fine.
DEAL, APRIL Ig.—Wind N. to N.N. W.—Arrd. Clipper,
River ; Mary Bibby, Archibald, Cuba. Sld. Young
England, Batavia; Lady Flora Hastings, Wetherall, New
Orleans; Mary Caroline, St. John's, New Brunswick;
Ganges, Sydney, New South Wales; Morning Star, Ceylon ;
Brahmin, Bombay ; Semiramis, Havannah ; Victoria, New
York ; Cottingham, Richibucto.
OFF DARTMOUTH, APRIL 18.—Wind N.—Barham, Gimlett,
Calcutta, left Ist of January; Enchantress, Cape of Good
Hope.
CARDIFYZAPRIL 14.—S1d. Isabella, Quebec.
CORK, APRIL 16. Wind S.W. Arrd. Prospect, Kent,
Philadelphia. 16th, Lalla Rookh ; Martha, Callao; Almera,
Curling, New Orleans; Forrester, Andrews, Norforlk Island;
Napoleon, Chesebro, Baltimore ; Newhaven, Downes, New
York; Elizabeth Churchill, M'Gilvary, ditto. Sld. 15th,
Governor, Douglas, Baltimore; Mary Ann, New York;
clittn; Que, cc.
TOiAT LOSS OF THE BRIG CANNING, BY FIRE.
A dispatch has been received at Lloyd's from the Foreign-
office, inclosiog a copy a- a dispatch from bet Majesty's

Charge des Affaires in Chili, announcing the merchant brig
Canning having been destroyed by fire in the Straits of
Magellan, 16th December last; carpenter and two men sup-
posed to be drowned ; vessel sunk in 71 fathoms water.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco, before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN
and a full Court).
IN RE GARBETT.
Mr. PARRY applied for a writ of habeas corpus, on
behalf of Edward Garbett, now a prisoner in Newgate,
in order that he might be brought up and admitted
to bail. The Learned Counsel stated, that the prisoner
had been committed by his Lordship at the Kingston
assizes fer forgery; and he had to submit to their Lord-
ships, that from the mode and manner of his committal,
never having been taken before a magistrate, he was
placed in a position of peculiar difficulty as regarded
his defence.
Lord DENMAN—Ire placed himself in that position by
his own statement. lie could not have been taken
by surprise, for he went fully into the history of his
having forged the bill, although he did not pay that
he forged it in so many words.
Mr. PARRY—That was your Lordship's opinion, sitting
as a magistrate; but a committal by a magistrate is not
conclusive against the party committed. He was corn
mitred on suspicion, to take his trial for forgery, and the
difficulty I wish to point out is this—a true bill has now
been found against him for forgery, and that circum-
stance places him in a position of still greater difficulty
than before. There may be witnesses on the back of
the bill of whom the accused knows nothing whatever,
and he is not entitled to a copy of the bill. There were
no depositions taken, and he has, therefore, no warning
of what the case against him may be, except the admis-
sion he made—namely, although there are no precedents
to cite to your Lordships, yet, in this instance, justice
will not be defeated by allowing the party to be bailed.
Mr. Justice WrGirratax—ls it usual to bail a person
against whom a true bill has been found, and upon such
a charge as that of forgery ?
Mr. Paltar —I admit that it is not usual ; but this is
an extraordinary case, and the accused is in a position
entirely different from that of ordinary prisoners against
whom bills have been found, and who know the charge
and the witnesses against them. But in this instance
the prisoner is quite in the dark. Ile swears that it is
his desire to meet this trial, and to bring witnesses who
can prove his innocence. •
_ _

Mr.
Justice WIGIITZIAN—How does any person know
what witnesses are brought before the grand jurj ?
Mr. PARRY—A prisoner may not know what wit-
nesses are brought before the grand jury; but by statute
he is entitled to a copy of the depositions, at a very mo-
derate charge. here there are no depositions, but the
statement of the accused—an admission made under cir-
cumstances of surprise and agitation.
Lord DENMAN—I have bound over the short-hand
writer to appcar as a witness. Does he swear that in
his agitation he has stated that which is not true?
Mr. PARRY—IIO says that in his agitation—for he
was surprised at the mode of cross-examination of coun-
sel, and at the questions asked, that he' does not knuw
what he did state.

Lord DENMAN—Does he state that he did not forge
,he acceptance _ _

Mr. PARRY—IIe does ; for he says that he is not
guilty of the crime with which he is charged.
Mr. Justice PATTESON—I thought yuu said that he
did not know the crime with which he was charged.
Mr. PARRY—Ho does not know except it is a charge
of forging the bill. If it he the charge of forging a
particular acceptance, then he does not k❑ow what
witnesses are to bring home that charge to him.
Lord DENNAN—W by, it is trifling with justice to sup-
pose that a man who, by his own statement, admits that
he forged the acceptance of a bill, should not be con-
signed to prison to take his trial for his crime. It ap-
pears to me to be abourd.

Mr. PARRY—I would not continue to press anything
against your Lordship's opinion, but you must forgive
my reminding you that the prisoner never stated that he
forged the bill.

Lord DENMAN—No, not in set terms, but he said it in
effect, as clearly as if the words wero uttered. It is
trifling with common sense to suppose that such an ap-
plication could be granted. The prisoner knows very
well that it is only a wish to try the chance of the Courts
allowing him to escape from the consequences of his
crime. Here is a man, himself an attorney—in order to
shield a defendant—stating in open Court, that he him-
self forged the acceptance. Ido not know what expla-
nation can be given when the trial comes on, but to
attempt any now is merely trifling with justice, and the
application cannot be granted.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
The cases heard in this Court possessed no feature 6
public interest.

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
SHARP V. CHAPLIN.
This was an action tried at the last sittings before the
Lord Chief Baron, when a verdict was entered for the
plaintiff for 1001.
._.

Sir F. TIIESIGER moved for a rule to show cause why
a nonsuit should not be entered, and also why a new
trial should not be had, on the ground of the admission
of improper evidence. The action was brought to re-
cover the sum of 100/., the amount of a deposit paid by
plaintiff on 20 shares in a projected company, called the
London and Westminster Water Company. The plaintiff
had, in 1841, applied for shares in this 'company, and in
accordance with that application an allotment of 20
shares had been made to him. The Learned Counsel
contended that the receipt produced at the trial, the
advertisements, &c., ought not to have been produced in
evidence.—Rule granted.

COMMON PLEA S.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
000DLEY V. RICO.
This was an action on a promissory note for 51., which
was tried at the last sittings before the Lord Chief Jus-
lice, when the verdict went for the plaintiff.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD moved for a rule to show
cause why the verdict should not be set aside and en-
tered for defendant, on the ground that the debt
was barred by the Statute of Limitations. The promis-
sory note was given on the 30th September, 1835, pay-
able six months after date. There were several pleas,
but the only one on which stress was laid was the one
pleading the Statute of Limitations. On the 7th June,
1843, a letter was written by defendant to plaintiff, and
it was maintained that this was an evidence of the ac-
knowledgment of the debt, but he contended that this
letter was not such an unconditional acknowledgment
or promise to pay as invalidated the plea of the Statute
of Limitations.—Rule granted.