The Sun.
London, England, 1840-11-04 00:00:00

MA DDEFORD V. AUSTVVICK.

The arguments of Counsel upon this motion, which was
opened yesterday, were then resumed. The motion was,
that the Master might be directed to admit certain evi,
dente upon the rderenee before him. The only feature
of public interest in the case is, that the proceedings origi-
nated out of the partnership transactions of Russell and
Co , the late eminent carriers, in which business the plain-
tiff and defendant in this cause were partners.

QUEEN'S BENcH.—(THIS DAY.

( Sittings in Banco).
THE CORPORATION OF MALDON V. WOOLIT.

Mr. THESIGER moved in this case for a rule to show
cause why the verdict for the dcfendar.t should rot be set
aside, and a new trial had on the ground of misdirection.
It was an action of trespass, for breaking and entering a
certain close, carrying away soil, and for fishing in certain
waters, the property of the plaintiffs, tried before Mr.
Baron Gurney at the last Essex Assizes. In summing up,
the Learned Judge had stated that a charter, granted to
the Corporation in 1810, must be put entirely out of then
consideration, as it was merely a charter of restoration,
and net of grant, anti the Jury were to consider whether
the Corporation had, previously to that time, exercised
these exclusive rights. The Jury, expressly on that ground,
found for the defendant.
The COURT would confer with Baron Gurney on the
subject before pronouncing its decision.
TIIE QUEEN V. HART.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved in this case for a rule
to show cause why a writ of certiorari should not issue to
remove the depositions into that Court, and to show cause
why the defendant might not be bailed in Liverpool. The
defendant had been committed to the gaol of Liverpool on
a charge of ripe, alleged to have been committed on the
person of Elizabeth Gordon, on the night of the 21st Au-
gust last, at her lodgings in London-road, Liverpool. He
(the Attorney-Gencral) held in his hand a number of affi-
davits as to the respectability and general good conduct of
the defendant, who had for ten years carried on the busi-
ness of a silversmith in Crescent• place, paying 1201.
a-year rent, and his stock in trade was valued at 5.0001.
The defendant became acquainted with Mrs. Gordon in the
month of July, when she invited him to take lodgings at
114, London-road, where she lodged. An intimacy took
place bats%een the parties with the full consent of Mrs.
Gordon, and was carried on at their lodgings in the Lon-
don-road, the White Bear Hotel, and other places, as
could be proved by the affidavits of the servants of the
lodging-house, and other parties. He would now come to
what bad occurred on the night of the 21st of August,
which would clearly show that the present charge was the
result of a conspiracy.
Lord DE/V MAN did not think it was necessary to go into
details—it would be sufficient to hand up the affidavits.
After stating the substance of one or two of the affi-
davits,- the-Court -granted the rule.

BAIL COUKT.-(TIIIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
CERTIORARI.

Mr. PLATT moved for a rule for a certiorari to remove
into the Court of Queen's Bench an indictment which had
been found in the Central Criminal Court against certain
persons, one of whom was a gentleman at the Bar, for con-
spiring to defraud certain other persons of a sum of money.
The affidavits set forth that the charge was totally ground-
less, and that the prosecution had been instituted solely
through malice ; that as the case was one of misdemea-
nour it could not be tried by the Judges at the Old Bailey,
as they only tried cases of feleny ; and that as it was pro-
bable that several important questions of law would arise
in the course of the cause, it was desirable that it should
be tried by the Judges of the Superior Courts, and that the
parties desired to be tried by their peers, namely, by a
Special Jury.—Application granted.
The names of the parties did not transpire.
THE QUEEN V. TIIF. LONDON AND GREENWICH RAILWAY