The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-22 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, April 21.

MOSELEY V. ALSTAi.-THE NARROW V. TILE BROAD GAUGE.

Mr. BETHELL commenced and concluded his arguments in
support of the decision of the Vice-Chancellor of England
overruling the demurrer put in by the defendants to the
plaintiff's bill.
Mr. J. PARKER followed on the same side. In the course
of the Learned Counsel's address,
Sir F. liran.v, on the part of the defendants, applied
to his Lordship for leave to give a notice of motion
for Friday next, if it should turn out to be necess iry to dis-
solve the injunction which the Vice-Chancellor of England
had just then intimated to the parties it was his intention to
grant.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave the leave asked.
'lbis application was made and granted during the time
the Vice-Chancellor of England was giving his judgment.
Mr. JAMES PARKER then resumed his arguments, follow-
ing Mr. BETMELL.
At the conclusion of the Learned Counsel's address,
Mr. Wn.cox followed on the same side, and had not
finished when the Court rose, at four o'clock.

The arguments will be resumed the first thing on Friday
morning.

VICG-CHANCELLOR'S COuRT, April 21.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
MOSELEY V. ALSTON—THE x•nnow V. THE BROAD GAUGE.
Mr. ROLT commenced and concluded his address, following
Sir F. Kelly and ➢lr. Stuart, :,n behalf of the defendants,
against the motion for an injunction made by the plaMtiffs.
Mr. G. RUSSELL followed on the same side.
Itis lloNoun, at the conclusion of the arguments, gave
judgment, granting the injunction.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, April 21.
(Sittings in Banco before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN and a
full Court.)
THE 9UEEN V. DUNN.

At the sitting of the Court this morning, Mr. Dunn, the
barrister, was brought up upon a writ of habeas corpus from
the Queen's Bench prison, for the purpose of moving an
arrest of judgment, and for a rule to show cause why a
farmer trial, in which he stood charged with perjury, and in
which a verdict of guilty was returned against him, should
not be set aside, and a new one granted, on the
ground that the evidence which' could have established a
clear case in his favour had been rejected.
The defendant entered into a long and rambling statement
of facts, with all of which the public are well acquainted from
the proceedings upon the trial. The principal fact upon
which the application was grounded, was the non-admission
in evidence of certain letters written by Miss Coutts
to Lord James Stewart, by comparing which with
certain letters in his own possession, and alleged to have
been written by Miss Coutts to him, he would have been
able to prove that the letters he had received were in the
handwriting of the prosecutrix. Ile also submitted that as
Miss Coutts had declined, when on the trial, to give him
certain information, for which he asked, she, as
a principal witness declining to give all the
information in her power upon the case before
the jury, was not entitled to any credit, and
that the case ought to have been stopped. The question sub-
mitted to the jury was not a question as to the amount
' mentioned in the affidavit—it might have been 1,000 pence
or 1,000 pounds. The affidavit was perhaps false in fact,
and false in law; yet the question for them to decide was
whether, at the time he (Mr. Dunn) swore it, he be-
lieved it to be true. He called upon their Lordships to in-
vestigate the case, and he was sure that if justice had
not been clone already, their Lordships would, without hesi-
tation, remedy the evil at once. With regard to the affidavit
which he had sworn, it was not an affidavit under the Act
sth and 6th Victoria. The Act was silent as to the form in
which the instrument should be drawn up, and it mentioned
distinctly the parties before whom only such an affidavit
ought to be made, and, as the document had been sworn in
the Court of Bankruptcy, a place not mentioned in the
Act, it was certainly not a valid one under the
Act, which regulated the making of such affidavits,
and ordered them to be made before authorities entirely
distinct from that Court. Anything relating to bankruptcy
was not of necessity committed to the Court of Bankruptcy.
The matter when brought before the Court of Bankruptcy,
under this particular form of affidavit, was coram non
judice.—The applicant concluded his remarks (which occu-
pied four hours) by lengthened references to the different
Acts relating to bankruptcy, in support of the view which he
took of the informality of the affidavit.

After a short consultation among the Learned Judgee,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said—l think it right to read
my notes of the trial, in order that if there is any ground of
doubt whatever we may take into our consideration. There
may be probably some point upon the affidavit upon which,
at a!1 events, we may grant a rule. Ido not see any other
matter which requires the decision of the Court. (His Lord-
ship then read his notes of the evidence adduced upon the
trial.) _ _

At-the conclusion, some further deliberation took place
upon the bench.
The Lour) CHIEF JUSTICE said that there certainly was
some difficulty about the construction of the Act of Parlia-
ment, and upon which the decision of the Court would be
given at some future time.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
Hawkins, the master of the Citizen steam-boat, letter
J., was summoned before Alderman Farncotrb, for
having, in violation of the new bye-laws for the regula-
tion of steam-vessels, acted on board without being
licensed.
Mr. Pelham appeared for the prosecution.
A free vvaterman, named Godfrey, stated. that he
went, accompanied by a friend, on board the Citizen at
London-bridge, and was conveyed in her to Chelsea ;
that he paid for the passage for both, and that the de-
fendant stood on the paddle-box during the voyage and
gave the necessary directions to the people under his
authority. The witness knew the defendant well, and
had been provoked to the course of complaint by the
reckless conduct of the man, who did not seem to care
about anybody in passing through the river.
This evidence was confirmed by that of another person.
Upon the part of the defendant, who did not deny one
of the facts stated against him, it was said, that he was
upon the point of taking out a license, but he could not
do so until the mea.urement of his vessel should be
effected; and that the company to which the vessel be-
longed was remarkable for the observance of all the
bye-laws.
Alderman FARNCOMB said, it was quite clear that a
violation of an essential part of the Act had in this case
taken place, and that the defendant must pay the penalty
of 40s. and costs.
Mr. Goodman (the chief clerk) said, he hoped the
captains and crews of the various steam-vessels on the
Thames would, now that the season was commencing,
pay a more particular attention than usual to the various
regulations for their government. The Lord Mayor was
determined to inflict penalties in all cases which should
be proved before

BOW-STREET.
John Denby, a young man employed as a letter-
carrier in the Post-office, was charged with stealing
some country notes and securities to the value of
1101. 19s. 2d., which had been transmitted from Ly-
mington. His wife, Sarah Denby, was charged with
negotiating them.
The notes, &c., had been enclosed in a letter, which it
was the prisoner's duty to have delivered. It was proved
that he and his wife went together to a pawnbroker's in
Whitechapel-road, and there tendered one of the 5/.
Lymington notes in payment for a ring, selected by the
latter, and some other articles. The husband endorsed
the note, " William Willis."
Mrs. Freshwa.er, landlady of the Telegraph public-
house, in Oxford-street, Mile-end, proved that the pri-
soner paid her another of the 51. notes for certain chances
in a " Derby sweep" coming off at her house.
The prisoners were taken at their lodgings in Oxford-
street, Mile-end, the wife having the ring purchased at
the pawnbroker's then upon her finger. From her
d‘:,meanour, however, it appeared evident that she had
no concern in the robl:r:ry. Her husband at once
admitted his guilt and avowed the innocence of his wife,
who went into a hysterical fit on hearing the constable's
mission.

The wife was discharged by the direction of Mr.
HENRY, who remanded the other prisoner for further
examination.
WORSHIP-STREET.
A man of respectable appearance, named James
Knowles, described as a commercial traveller, was
charged with having, by wanton and furious driving,
run over and seriously injured a child eleven years of
age, named James Bland, the son of a labourer at Mile-
end.

A witness named Locke stated, that while standing at
his door at nine o'clock on the preceding evening, he
saw a horse and kind of gig- cart, driven by the prisoner,
advancing towards bim at a furious rate; and, appre-
hensive that some children playing in the road, of whom
little Bland was one, would be killed, he called out
loudly upon him to stop. Witness thought he might
have done so had he chosen, but the prisoner took no
notice of the caution, went on at the same pace as
before, and the next instant the child was struck down
and the off wheel of the cart passed over its body.
Several persons who had witnessed the occurrence en-
deavoured to stop the horse, but the prisoner thrashed it
violently, and it was not until a considerable time after-
wards that he was at length secured by a young man
named Newell, who had perseveringly pursued him, and
gave him into custody.
A boy named Page, who was playing with little Bland
at the time, saw the cart coming upon them at an ex-
tremely rapid pace, and called out to the prisoner,
brother;
upon
exclaimed,'
pbob
he had passed them, that he had run o
upon which the prisoner looked
back,exlaeu
pooh! nonsense!' lashed his horse, and drove on as
before.
Anne Martin also deposed to calling upon the pri-
soner to stop, and that he merely looked aside towards
her, drove on, and the wheel instantly passed over the
child.
James Bland, the boy's father, deposed to picking up
the child in great agony, and carrying him to the London
Hospital, and Sarah Bland, his mother, proved that upon
visiting him that morning in the hospital, she found
him so injured he could scarcely recognise her, and that
the nurse who attended him had but slight hopes of his
recovery.
A certificate from Mr. Nash, the hospital surgeon,
was also put in, describing the nature of the injuries
the boy had sustained, and stating him to be in con-
siderable danger.
When called upon for his defence, the prisoner ex-
pressed excessive regret at the unfortunate occurrence,
which he declared to have been purely accidental, and
said that he had no idea whatever that he had driven
over anybody, and was greatly surprised and hurt when
he was informed that he had in reality done so.
Mr. BROUGHTON regarded the transaction in a very
serious light, and ordered the prisoner, who was stated
to be respectably connected, to be brought up again next
week, to afford time for ascertaining the result of the in-
juries the child had sustained.
CLERKEN WELL.
William Bid, a respectable-looking middle-aged man,
was finally examined, charged with having committed
numerous robberies.
It appears that the prisoner for some time past has
romraltting hiq depreaqtions on bov•ding-school
e i C , o;, ,!, :10 called ur.,:er pro, 1r (1 of inquir-
ing as to the terms for the board 'and education of two
young ladies ; and invariably, after leaving the establish-
ments, gold watches and other valuable articles were