The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-03 00:00:00

his indications." M. Struve's communication has been
published in this country by the Astronomer Royal,
who has expressed his assent to the reasons therein
contained, and his determination to adopt the name of
Neptune. Professor Gause and Professor Encke have
also, as I understand, adopted this name. I have only
to add that it is my intention (and I am permitted to
say, the intention of Mr. Adams also) to follow the
example set by these eminent astronomers.
(Signed) J. CHALLIS.
Cambridge Observatory, March 22,1847.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
II 0211 E ClRCUlT,—Kingston, April 1.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENNAN
and a Common Jury.)
COON V. SMITH.

This was an action arising out of a defunct rail-
way scheme called the Brighton, Lewes, Tunbridge•
wells, Gravesend, and Eastern Counties Junction Rail-
way Company.
Mr. M. Chambers, with Mr. Petersdorff, was for the
plaintiff; Mr. Sergeant Channel! and Mr. Wordsworth
for the defendant.

The plaintiff is a lithographer, and he sought to re-
cover from the defendant, who was the solicitor to the
proposed railway, a sum of 3001. odd, the balance of his
account for maps, surveys, &c. The original projector
of the scheme appeared to be a Mr. Spencer, an engineer,
but he retired from the undertaking, having previously
introduced the plaintiff to Mr. Smith, who was the re-
gistered solicitor of the company, and under his direc-
tions the plaintiff performed the work, receiving some
money occasionally on account from the defendant, but
leaving the amount now sought to be recovered due to
him. This was one of those cases where the plaint ff re-
lied upon the liability of the solicitor on the ground that
there really was no " company" or responsible commit-
tee in existence; and it was urged that the defendant had
projected the scheme upon his own responsibility, and
finding on account of the panic that the public would not
come forward and join it, he deemed it prudent to as-
sume the character of an agent and shift his responsibi-
lity upon a " company" which never appeared to have
had any existence.
The evidence for the plaintiff went to show that the
work
Shad been performed by the direction of the de-
fendant, and that he had given his own cheques for the
amount that was paid on account. It likewise appeared
that the only evidence of the existence of a company was
when upon one occasion the plaintiff was pressing for
money, the plaintiff referred him to the committee who
were sitting in a house in Adam-street, Adelphi, and he
there saw several gentlemen who were entire strangers
to him; but upon his applying to them for money, they
told him that they had not got any at that time, but they
would see whether he could have any in a few days, and
referred him to Mr. Smith for a final answer.

Sergeant CHANNELL, in addressing the jury for the
defendant, said ihat the present case involved a question
of very great importance to solicitors; and if they were
to be made answerable for the liabilities of a company
with which they were only professionally connected, th-
consequence s would be very serious indeed to gentlemen
in that p,,sition. In the present instance, Mr. Smith had
merely acted as the solicitor to the company, and
although he had certainly paid money out of his oven
funds to the plaintiff on account, he only did so as the
agent of the company, and on their behalf, till they ob-
tained funds by the allotment of shares; and upon three
occasions when he so advanced money, he expressly told
the plaintiff that he only did so out of his own private
funds, and required him to give I 0 U's for the amount
to be paid when he received funds from the company;
and the plaintiff gave receipts acknowledging the com-
pany as his employers.
Evidence was adduced on behalf of the defendant to
show these facts ; but it appeared that the plaintiff was
not required to sign the receipt as from the company
until after it was pretty tolerably apparent that the
scheme would be a failure, and it became important for
the defendant to endeavour to shield himself from re-
sponsibility on account of his connexion with it.
Mr. CIIA3IBERS, in his reply upon the defendant's
case, said he admitted that the point at issue involved
an important question for solicitors who were connected
with railway schemes, but he could not help thinking
that the jury would consider it was equally as im-
portant that tradesmen should not be induced to per-
form services, and expend their time and property upoa
bubble schemes, and, when they exploded, be told by
the person who had employed them, when they applied
to him for payment, that le was not responsible, and
they were referred to a company and a committee neither
of which had existence.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in summing up, said
that a solicitor to a railway or any other company would
not be liable for work performed for it if he merely acted
as the agent of such company, and did not take upon
himself any special responsibility ; but there ought to
be evidence of the existence of a company, and of re-
sponsible persons to whom he acted as agent. In the
absence of such evidence in this case, with the exception
of that which related to the visit of the committee in
Adam-street, Adelphi, which appeared very slight, for
none of the parties present appeared to be known, the
question for the jury was, whether the defendant was
not personally responsible to the plaintiff for the work
that had been pertbrmed by his direction.
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict
for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said it was unfortunate
for Mr. Smith, but he hoped there were some other
responsible parsons connected with the scheme to whom
he could himself look for payment.

OXFORD ClRGUlT.—fitrefurd, April 1.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Sergeant UASELEE
Susan George was indicted for the wilful murder of
William George, her infant child, at Kimbolton, on the
26th of November, by drowning him.
Mr. Greaves and Mr. Cooke appeared for the prose-
cution ; Mr. fluddlestone and Mr. Barrett for the defence.
It appeared in evidence, that the prisoner was a pauper
in the Leominster union workhouse ; that on the sth of
November last she was delivered of a male child, and on
the 26th of November left the workhouse, in company
with another pauper, Susan Millie, taking the child with
her. Muffin parted with the prisoner at about three
o'clock, at which time the child was alive and well. The
prisoner remained until nearly four o'clock at the Duke's
Head public-house ; the child had some food provided
for it, and ate nearly a teacup full. On leaving
.the
public-house the prisoner was seen by the schoolmaster
of the workhouse going in the direction of the Cheaton
brook, about a quarter of a mile distant from the
place at which the child's body was afterwards found.
The prisoner in the evening was at the Bull's Head
public house, and had no child with her. here she re-
mained until the following morning, and left at eight
o'clock, saying she was going to Kingsland. On the
27th of November, the prisoner having been met by one
Mary Barrer, who inquired after the child, said that it
died in the workhouse, but on the next day told the same
woman, with whom she stopped till the Wednesday, that
she had taken it alive out of the workhouse, but that it
was afterwards take❑ ill and (lied in her arms, and that
as she sat crying a gentleman who was passing by took
away the body, saying he would bury it. On the 6th of
December it was found in Cheaton brook, partly covered
with mud. The arms and legs were contracted, and the
hands clenched, as of a drowned person. On examina-
tion, the lungs were found to be collapsed, the brain
di-tended with blood, and the stomach containing undi-
gested food. Mr. Watling, the surgeon, who deposed to
the state of the body, was subjected to a long cross-
examination, with a view to prove that all the appear-
ances observed in the body were consistent with the
probability of the child having died from convulsions.
The collapsed state of the lungs and distension of the
brain were the circumstances principally relied upon in
proof of the convulsions, by which the child was said
by the prisoner to have died. The principal contrary
facts were the presence of undigested food in the sto-
mach, and the contracted rendition of the limbs. The
witness admitted that if he had not known where the body
was found, he should have attributed the death to con-
vulsion- ; but, under the circumstances, thought it had
died by drowning. The child was dry-nursed, and it
appeared that children brought up in that manner are
more liable to convulsions than children that are suckled.
The limbs would have been partially straightened had it
been undressed after death. The contraction and rigidity
of the limbs would cease almost immediately after death,
unless the body were thrown into cold water.
There appeared some contrariety between the evidence
of the surgeon and opinions expressed in well-known
works on medi,,al jurisprudence, as to the symptoms
which indicate death by drowning.
Mr. lICDDLESTONE addressed the jury for the pri-
soner, insisting on the high probability, as appearing
upon the case for the prosecution, that the child died
through convulsions.
The jury retired for a few moments, and on their re-
turn Acquitted the prisoner.
The business in this court was over before three
o'clock. Mr. Sergeant Allen assisted to-day and yester-
day in disposing of it.
The business had not closed on the Crawn or civil side.

ALLEGED DEATH OF A WOMAN FROM ILL-USAGE
BY HER HUSBAND.—Mr. Joseph Payne, Deputy Coro-
nerfthageeCd 43,ity',of
held
No. aniisn.quuen -court. Thursday night, at
the City Arms, Ilolborn-bridge, on the body of Ann
Collins,
The Coroner
said he had summoned the jury to inquire into the cause
of death of a woman who, he was informed by an anony-
mous letter, had (lied from a blow she had received from
her husband. This letter stated that the deceased had
been used most brutally by her husband, and that if the
case were not cleared up by acoroner's inquest, he would
be torn to pieces by the neighbours. From the evidence
of a woman named Sinnell, lodging in the same house,
it appeared that in the night of Saturday week, hearing
the deceased and her husband quarrelling, she went to
their room, and saw him give her a violent blow on the
left eye, the mark of which was seen next thy. The
deceased had been endeavouring to prevent her husband
from beating her son for being out late. Mr. Digby,
surgeon, of Fleet-street, said he had attended the de-
c( ased fur some titn'2 past for disease of the lungs. He
saw her four days after she had received the blow, when
she was suffering from erysipelas, the effect of it. She,
however, recovered from that, and died from her old
complaint on Saturday last. The son, the cause of the
quarrel, said that the deceased received the blow by
aeei.lent, as his father aimed it at him (the son). The
jury returned a verdict of " Natural death ;" and the
Coroner, calling in the husband, informed him there
was no ground for the charge made against him.
DISTILLATION FROM GRAIN.—The opponents of
" strong drinks," members of the teetotal and temper-
ance societies of Leeds, have presented a requisition to
the Mayor of Leeds to call a public meeting of the in-
hsbitants to consider the propriety of petitioning both
Houses of Parliament to enact a law to prevent the
destruction of grain in breweries and distilleries, and
thereby cheapen the food of the people by preserving to
their use, " the kindly fruits of the earth." his worship
has complied, and convened a meeting for Easter Monday
evening.