The Sun.
London, England, 1824-04-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, APRIL ?I
POYAIS BONDS.—M‘GREGOR v. LOWE.
This was an action to recover money had and received for
the plaintiff's use.
The plaintiff Mr. M'Gregor, or Sir G. M`Gregor, who claims
a tract of country on the Spanish Main, sought by this action
to recover from the defendant, Mr. Lowe, certain sums of money
alleged to have passed through his hands as the agent for rais-
nig a loan of 100,000/. by bonds, secured upon the supposed
territory and bank of Poyais.
Witnesses were examined to prove that scrip was sold by
the defendant, and that money was paid into the hands of
bankers.
Tke LORD CHIEF JUSTICE inquired whether the parties
who engaged in the business had ever seen the settlement of
Poyais. He was told that a map had been produced in Scot-
land by Mr. lil`Gregor, but it did not appear that any settle-
ment under the name of Poyais was known to be in exist-
ence at the time the public were invited to purchase Poyais
stock. His Lordship was of opinion that neither of the parties
could support any claim, arising out of a transaction which ap- ,
peared a mere delusion or bubble, and without suffering the
cause to proceed further, his Lordship directed a nonsuit —The
plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited.
THE KING V. TAGGART AND BASCOW.
This was an indictment against Mr. J. Taggart, a Gentle-
man of fortune, residing at Chiselhurst, and .1. Bascow his ser-
vant, for contravention of a statute made for the purpose of pre-
venting corrupt interference in the appointment of persons to
offices under the East India Company.
The prosecution was at the instance of the East India Com-
pany, and the indictment charged the defendants with taking
a promise from John Morgan of 1001., for the interest of Mr.
Taggart, in procuring a cadetship for a young Gentleman
named Frederic Bennett. It appeared that a Mr. Morgan, re-
siding in Wales, was the friend of Bascow, who had lived many
years as butler in the service of Mr. Taggart, and was considered
a confidential servant, having some influence with his mastbr.
Morgan wrote a letter, in which he said—" I shall be glad if
you can get a place for a friend of mine. Mr. Taggart may
not have any person to use his influence for, and I will guarantee
one hundred guineas down, and to remunerate you for all loss.
lam certain every confidence may be placed in the secrecy of
the parties, and if you like to have it done, I should be happy
to add two hundred and fifty guineas to your Exchequer." The
person Morgan wished to serve was a Mr. Pritchard. Bascow
applied to his Master, and Mr. Taggart wrote to Mr. Bell, Of
the India House, recommending Pritchard as his godson to the
Cadetship. Pritchard was appointed, but died. Morgan, after
the death of Pritchard, saw Bascow, and said he wish Fre-
derick Bennet might be substituted instead of Pritchard, on the
same terms. The young man got his appointment, and his
brother paid Morgan 100 sovereigns, who, instead of paying
the money to Bascow, gave him a bill of exchange. The bill
was not honoured, as 3lorgan became insolvent, and Bascow
applied to the Brother of Mr. Frederick Bennett, begging him
to pay the money to him, and proceed against Morgan to re-
cover that which had not been paid. The application was,
however, unsuccessful. Mr. Charles Bennet said he was sorry
for the loss, but the expence of fitting out his brother had been
so great that he could not comply.
These were the facts of the case. All the witnesses who had
seen Mr. Taggart described him to he a Gentleman advanced
in years, of a friendly humane disposition, possessed of a largo
fortune, and not a mercenary man.
Mr. SCARLETT addressed the Jury in behalf of Mr.Taggart„
and contended that no proof of a corrupt motive was to be traced
to that Gentleman who had merely used his interest at the soli-
citation of an old and faittiiil servant.
The COMMON SERJEANT was heard for Bascow, the
servant.
The LORD ClifEr JUSTICE left the Jury to decide, whe-
ther, upon the evidence, they believed Taggart knew his servant
acted for a bribe. If there was any doubt on that question, they
ought to find him not guilty. With respect to the servant thew
was little doubt. The letter, and taking the bill of .exchange,
proved his intention.
•The Jury retired from the box about twenty minutes, and on
their return found Mr. Taggart Not Guilty, and Bascow, the
servant, Guilty.

LIBEL.—DANKES v. CLENEXT•
Mr. GURNEY stated that this was an action brought by the
plaintiff to receive compensation in damages for a false, scan-
dalous, and malicious libel, inserted in the Morning Chronicle
newspaper of the 14th of November, 1823. -The plaintiff is a
lace-manufacturer, in a large way of business at Bermondsey ;
and the publication complained of reflected upon his character
in a very serious manner. He was in the habit of procur-
ing apprentices from the parish, and the libel imputed to
him that he employed children of too tender an age, and
that their treatment was such as was not consistent with a
regard for their health or humanity. In consequence of some
representations which were made to the Magistrates of the
county of Surrey, a deputation from this body visited and in-
spected the factory. Mr. Bankes had some secret enemy, and
it would probably appear, in this inquiry, who that enemy was.
—lt would be shewn that every attention was paid to the com-
fort and care of the children. The defendant pleaded in justi-
fication, that the statement was true. The libel stated that
there were 30 charity children employed in this manufactory
under 9 years of age, and who were kept at work for 12 hours
a-day, and that the .lAlagistrates had expressed their disappro-
bation of this system. The paragraph went on to say, that it
was to be hoped the subject would he brought before Parlia-
ment, as it would be more humane to cut the throats of the
children than that they should continue in such a condition.—
Mr. Gurney contended that this statement was unfounded, as
he would prove in evidence.
Robert Joseph Chambers, Esq. a Magistrate of Union-hall,
examined by Mr. CasarnELL (he appeared greatly affected.)
—He stated that he inspected the manufactory in Bermondsey
of the plaintiff, on the 27th of October last; there were four or
five other Magistrates present besides himself; they occupied
one or two hours in inspecting the manufactory; the situation
was airy ; witness told Mr. Bankes the bed-rooms were crowd-
ed, and he would require a certificate from the parish officers
from time to time when he applied for apprentices.—[This
witness was exceedingly agitated, and wept during the whole of
his examination.l
The A T l' ORNET-GENERAL communicated to his Lordship,
that the brother of Mr. Chambers was on the point of death.
Cross-examined by the AT TORNET-GEliEltAL.—He re-
quired of Mr. Bankes to be allowed to inspect the manufactory
before 'apprentices' were bound ; Mr. Bankes said he should
take care that the children were instructed in reading and writ-
ing. Witness was never there before the 27th October. Mr.
Peel's Act was put in.
William Bankes, brother to the plaintiff; superintended the
plaintiff's manufactory. In October last there were thirty ap-
prentices ; ten had been bound from Mary-la-bonne. The others
were on trial. The youngest was about nine and a half, the
oldest about fourteen. There was only one under ten. There.
were several- female superintendants. The hours of work in
summer were from seven in the morning till eight in the even.
ing ; and in winter from eight to eight. If the children were
not clean the work would be injured. The children were al-
lowed three quarters of an hour to breakfast ; an hour and a
half to dinner ; and half an hour to tea. They had meat for
their dinner five days in the week, and soup two. The other
meals were tea and bread and- butter. The orders from the
plaintiff and witness as to the quantity were, to give them
as much as they could eat. Bibles, testaments, prayer-books,
copy-books, &c. were provided for the children. The house-
keeper heard them read before a schoolmaster was appointed,
which was arranged as early as possible. The children were
heard to read by the housekeeper every day. [A frame was
here produced, and the witness described the manner in
which the work was performed.]—The children went to the
parish church on Sundays. Two of the children weekly did
the domestic work, so far as they were able from their years.
Cross-examined—Witness is not in partnership; has a fixed
salary ; believes Mr. Chambers expressed his disapprobtttion
at the place not being sufficiently ventilated. Believes Mr.
Chambers expressed disapprobation at the children sleeping
three in a bed, contrary to the Act of Parliament. NO copies
of the Act were hung up in the factory. The work is chiefly
with cotton ; cannot say exactly the proportion. The children
use a great deal of thread, but not quite so much as-cotton.
Will not swear tile proportion is one-tenth. When the Gen-
tlemen attended, the children were not at all working horizon-
tally; will not swear how many were sloping. The time set
apart for reading was after the hours of work. Saw the article
in the The Moaning Chronicle about two days after it ap-
peared. Kee Lrreed. in
7Cannothe T i say that his
re co; brotherrecollect
ttol d
positivelyh n li e
whetherhads eenhis
1
brother said he had seen it in any other paper. The witness
was pressed very much on this point, but he persisted in saying

he did not recollect. The business is going on well now, but
it had been much interrupted.
Mrs. Elisabeth Dowling, housekeeper of the establishment,
sworn.—The children were washed twice a week, not exactly
all over; they were instructed in the Scriptures as far as wit-
ness was able to expound them; there were plenty of bibles
and prayer-books. They went to church twice on Sundays,
and the children were
always well except bead ashes. Witness
took the same care of them as if they had been her own chil-
dren. The clothing they had they brought from the parish.—
There is a large garden for them to play in. They play there
before and after dinner.
Cross-examined by Mr,
o c CARLETT—Has a very arduous
situation, but not trying to temper; delights in it ; now and
then the boys tell neg.-4
lying three in a bed. A laugh.)—ApprLved of the children
Sarah Andell, one of the teachers of the establishment, cor-
roborated the preceding witnesses. What salary do you re-
ceive? I decline to answer to that question.—Do you receive
any? Yes.—And you
will not say how much? I receive
enough to satisfy me for my trouble.—You may retire.
Colonel Gaitskill, one of the Magistrates for the county of
Surrey, examined. Attended with other Magistrates to inspect
the plaintiffs manufactory. Some objections were made to the
children stooping over the frames. Observed generally they
were clean. Witness objected to the children sleeping three
in -a bed, and that in the workhouse of his parish he would
never suffer it. The minutest inquiry was made into the state
of the factory and the condition of the children. Mr. Bankes
expressed his readiness to adopt any suggestion the Magistrates
might make.
Cross-examined.—Went to inspect the factory on the 27th of
October; found the other Magistrates there. Witness does
not recollect that Mr Bankes objected to the visit of the Ma-
gistrates, and saying that they had no right there. The chil-
dren appeared healthy and decent-looking children, about
nine Or ten years old. There were none, in witness's opinion,
under nine; there seemed several about that age; they were at
work. Witness thinks the frames were all horizontal. After
inspecting the factory, the Magistrates retired by themselves
into the parlour, when some objections were made to the em-
ployment of children of such tender age, and recommended
sonic relaxation. In that all were agreed. There was a paper
drawn up by Mr. Chambers, expressing the opinion of the
Magistrates. Witness objected to any of his own parish chil-
dren being bound, until he knew what wages the apprentices
could earn when they were out of their time. Mr. Bankes
pointed out, that according to their proficiency they might get
14, l@, and 18 shillings a week. The children appeared healthy
and clean.

Mr. Nottage, also a Magistrate of the county of Surrey, exa-
mined.—His evidence was to the same effect as that of the
preceding witness.
Mrs. NlTright sworn.—Works at Mr. Bankes's factory. The
children appear equal to the work they arc called upon to per-
form ; as two children of her own ; the children are kept as
the children of every family should be.
Mr. Gtritifa Y.-A question has been asked about the size of
the child:ex ; now I have every one of them here. Let the-
children walk in.

The children were introduced accordingly. They looked
•healthy, clean, orderly children, and some of them seemed not
a little pleased with the novelty of their situation. The
youngest appeared very small.
31r. 'W. Bankes stated that those were the same children as
were employed at the manufactory on the 21th of Octoher.
Edward .Whittington is assistant to the Overseers of the
workhouse of,The parish of Mary-la-bonne. Witness went on
the 19th of-September to inspect the manufactory, and found it
very. spacious, healthy, and a desirable situation. The witness
produced the indentures, and stated that ha was the subscribing
witness.
The lion. and Rev. Edward Tumour examined.—ls a 'Ma-
gistrate for the county of Middlesex. Has inspected the ma-
nufactory twine—once on the llth of January. Went over it,
but as it was on a Sunday, did not see the children at work.
Mr. Whittington recalled.—Saw the indentures executed—
i cannot say on what day, but after the :27th day of October, and
belidvcs after the 11th of November.
Ilia Counsel for the defendant having taken a legal objection
as to the manner in which the indentures had been executed,
The LORD CUIET JUSTICE observed, if the allegation was
immaterial, proof was not necesoiary ; but if it was a material
e ant.
en tii r
that outghlei oiu ntd
e all
. n
allegation, proof must be given. The allegation "of and con-
cerning" the plaintiff in his business, and " of and concerning
his of the said ai:Tptrlelonuti.cac;
ethe mployment
etnhte
tare was not .executed according to law, until after the 27th of
Oct., and probably not until after the nth of November.

Mr. CAMPBELL submitted that the objection was not ma-
terial, and if it were, the allegation in the first count had been
established. The Libel itself was a sufficient admission.
Cllr. GuuNEY followed on the same side.
3lr. CIIITTY argued to the same purport.
The AT replied to the arguments on the
other side, and contended that the objection was well founded.
He then addressed the Jury-, lie was ready to make an admis-
sion on the part of the defendant, that proper attention had been
paid to the health and comfort of the children.
31r. GunNE f said, as the only object of Mr. Bankes was to
giveindi
the Jury no further trouble.
and would
he was satisfied with this admission,
Jclttitreorhwisascltilaireanctwerit,hdrawn.