The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-22 00:00:00

EVENT/1G

Roe, expressing his regret at the disappointment, and
hoping the amount might be forthwith remitted; but the
manager was not to be so easily deceived, for although he
did forward the first half of a bank post bill through the
Post-office, he took the precaution to send one of the
clerks and head-constable Lynn to Borris-in-Osory to
watch its delivery. Long before the hour for cpening the
office, arrived Whelan, and rapped for Mr. Roe's letters,
producing a forged order as on the former occasion.
Having received them, he was about to decamp, when the
police-constable, aided by the postmaster, took him into
custody, and brought him before B. Thacker, Esq., J. P.,
who, after fully investigating the affair, committed himaud
his accomplice to Kilkenny gaol.

ALTERATION OF THE MAILS.—On and after
Monday next, the 24th instant, the Hull and Selby Rail-
, way will be employed by the Post-Offici for the convey-
ance of the South and West mails. The mail train is to
arrive at the railway station at fifty-five minutes past eight
in the morning; the bags are to reach the Post-Office at
ten minutes past nine, and the delivery is expected to coin-
mence about ten o'clock. The whole of the North mails
arc expected to be conveyed by railway, and ari acid de-
part with the South and West mails, in January next, and
we hope that in a short time arrangements will be niaoe
for reducing the number of the smaller mails, and ad piing
those which arc unavoidably continued more completely co
the arrival and departure of the principal ones. It is
highly desirable also, that a more convenient Luilding
should be provided for transacting the business of tae Post-
Office.—Eastern Counties Herald.

HISTORY OF THE PRESS.—A gentleman at
Chichester is about giving to the public a work under the
title of " The History and Statistics of the British and
Foreign Newspaper Press." The Wiltshire Independent
in allusion to the work, says, " If there he one literary fea-
ture more than another of which England has cause to
be justly proud, it is of the extent, character, and influ-
ence of her ' Newspaper Press;' in this she stands distin-
guished above all contemporary nations. Our supremacy
in all the varied particulars which make up that remarka-
ble feature of our national literature is not merely unap.
proached, it is undisputed, by any other people. The Bri-
tish Press is at once the envy and admiration of the world."

WEYMOUTH, AUG. 20.—The Chancellor of
the Exchequer and family have arrived, and are expected
to remain for the season. Lord Villiers, Member for the
borough, Lord Grimston, Hon. Frederick Koppel Craven,
Lord and Lady St. John, Lord and Lady Charles Towns_
head, Lady and the Misses Stourton, Colonel Maeplitr-
son, and Colonel and Mrs. Jarvis, are among the latest
arrivals. Lord and Lady James O'Bryan are sta3ing at
Bournemouth. The Government commission, consisting
of Rear-Admiral Sir James A. Gordon, K.C.8., Mr.
Lawrence, of the Post-oilice, and Captain Drew; of the
Trinity House, appointed for the purpose of inquiring as
to the best port for the station of her Majesty's Channel
Islands mail steam-packets, have through their Secretary
signified their intention to visit •Weymouth early in the
ensuing week.

The number of visitors to Hampton Court
Palace and Gardens has this season been unprecedented,
particularly of the higher order of artisans, who are led
there by a refined taste for art. At the east end of town
are several clubs established for the conveyance of indivi-
duals and parties to this popular place of recreation and
amusement, to which members contribute one penny per
week. There are also numerous vans which ply every
Tuesday and at the early part of the week, and convey
passengers at 2s. 6d. per head. The behaviour of the
visitors is ; enerally very decorous and orderly, and furnishes
a fresh instance of the improving taste of the people.

STEAM-BOAT ACCIDENT.—AS Mr. Bryant, a
lighte.rnian, was returning from Vauxhall in an empty lug_
boat, about nine o'clock on Wednesday evening, he mat
with an accident opposite the Hermitage-stairs, Wapping,
The Vesper, belonging to the Star Gravesend Conipany,
approached within a few yards of his boat, and he, seeing
no other chance of escaping being crushed to pieces,
jumped overboard and swam on one side. Immediately
Lfcervvards the Vesper went over his boat and smashed her
to pieces. Captain Smith, of the Vesper, finding that an
accident had happened, stopped his vessel, and, seeing Mr.
1.3 t ant struggling about in the water, threw him out a
rope, and he was taken on board, where every attention
was paid', to him by the Captain and company. Had it
been any but an expert swimmer who had been placed in
such a perilous situation he must have perished ; and if
he had ternaincd in the boat he would have been crushed
by the steamer, and by jump;ng into the water must have
been drowned. Mr. Bryant does not attribute any blame
to Captain Smith, of the Vesper, for not stopping the
vessel, as the noise caused by the two steamers (tire
Greenwich boat and the Vesper) was so great that it
was next to an impossibility to distinguish any sound. Of
course Mr. Bryant will be compensated by the Star Com-
pany for the destruction of his boat.

Last week an eel was caught in the large pond
in Biaxted Park, Essex, three feet eight inches long and
eleven inches in circumference, and weighing B:ilbs,
Mr. Smith, a native of Guernsey, and bead
clerk in the office of Messrs. Purley and Co., at Gains_
borough, was accidentally drowned last week, whilst bath-
ing in the Trent, a little below the bridge. The deceased
could not swim, and was unacquainted with the deceitful
bottom of the Trent, which, at a single step brings the
bather from 3to 10 feet of water. His body was not found
until six hours from the time he disappeared. His death
has caused a painful sensation among a large circle of
friends by whom he was much respected.

A slight epidemic is now prevalent in this city,
( Lincoln), partaking of some marked symptoms of tiysen.
tery and cholera. It is advisable to abstain from too
r u
pu
freely eating plums and other acid fruits, particularly such
as are immature, and in any respect decayed. A medical
g e
inotul esnri
ea
ga r
n ,i
dn rteofer cleanliness,en c e toe th eboth aboveof personrema r remark, ,aansldv advises a
habitation, s
to those especially who reside in close:and confined streets ;
and he says that a vast influx of Irish wanderers, in great
and
to
habitually
spread living
the
germs
of typhus
m most meagre
in fare,every
place
illovetwherey,
almost certain
want of care and bad ventilation may favour
the development of that fatal disease.—Lincoln Paper.
CATHOLIC BEQUESTS.-About two years ago
we announced that the enormous sum of three hundred
thousand pounds had been left to two Vicars Apostolic of
the Catholic Church, by the late Mr. Blundell, of Ince,
in this county. We have now to anrounce, that the large
property of the late Mr. Heatley, of Brindla Lodge, in
this county, has fallen into the hands of the Grand Vicar
of the Lancashire district, the Very Rev. Thomas Sher-
burne, of the Willows, near Kirkham. This gentleman
was confessor to the departed gentleman. and is left the
sole executor and residuary legatee. Various are the
rumours that are afloat on this subject. They are of too
painful a nature for us to give them a wid:r circulation,
particularly as we are informed that the validity of this will
is to be contested by the heiresses-at-Iraw.—Lancaster
Guardian.

THE BLOND TRADE.—The stand in this branch
still continues ; and the determination of the hands Ap-
pears unshaken. The machine owners in the k3astie Don.
ington district, almost without exception, have evinced
their sympathy for the workmen by signing a paper not
to require any rent for their machines during the " turn
out." This laudable example will we trust be univer-
sally followed; as it must be evident to every reflecting
machine owner, that the great reduction proposed, if
once submitted to, must reduce the price of machinery
very considerably, as no workmen can then pay the present
high rents. We trust, before our next publication, the
operatives in this branch will have resumed their labours
at the price for which they contend. That price is only a
reasonable remuneration for intelligent labour, and Nye arc
credibly informed that the present state of the blond trade
does not require the proposed abatement. —Nottingham
Rccicw.

CAUTION TO HOUSEKEEPERS, &C.—SOLAR
IGNITION .—On Sunday, Lantrisaut Rectory House, Ac-
gicsey, was in danger of destruction by fire, caused by
the sun's rays concentrated through a globular crater_
bottle, which stood filled with water on a dressing. table
near a window and covered with a linen cloth. E dressing-
glass stood on the table, and the cloth, having had a fold
in it, did not lie quite flat on the table, so that the fire
having thus a small vacancy below, followed the crease for
several inches under the glass, scorching the table, and
actually blazing when it was discovered. The occurrence
took place about five o'clock in the afternoon (the window
being on the‘ west side of the house), and the conse-
quences must have been serious had not the smell of
burning wood excited alarm.
TILE HAND-LOOM WEAVERS.--Last week
we gave a full and detailed account of the sufferinr.r,s and
privations which this numerous body of men are now
suffering, and we then thought it impossible for any
further reductions to take place. Since then, however,
there have been still further reductions.—Norther;
Liberator.

LOVETT.—We understand that William Lovett,
the Chartist, his wife, and daughter, arrived at Fraddatn.
near Hayle, from London, on Friday last, for the mirpose
of recruiting his health. lie is expected to visit Newlyn
WeWst, bia native place, the latter end of the present week.
—est Br.

BRISTOL AND EXETER RAILWAY.—We
understand that the lease of the Bristol and Exeter line to
the Great Western Company has been signed, subject to
the confirmation of the general meeting of the Great
Western Company, which will be held on the 99th instant,
and of the Bristol and Exeter on the 2d of September.
The laggard progress of our line has damped the energies
of railway speculators, and materially depreciated the inter-
ests of the shareholders—we believe that it has tended to
inflict a heavy blow and great discouragement on our fair
city, in the inevitable necessity which appeared to exist of
stopping same years at Taunton. This for a long time
would have been the terminus bad not more vigorous steps
been taken to give increased vitality to the Company. In
the course of next summer the Great Western Line will
be
it li )drgo
wu ga ht
cort—tv thhi ec h
lrobardi n
gw i
Exeterl then b
within Conti-
nuous
a s
easy twelve hours of London.— Western Times.

DESTRUCTIVE FlRE.—Between twelve and one
o'clock on Wednesday morning, a very alarming fire broke
out in the property of Mrs. Redford, at Carlisle, consist-
ing of several dwelling-rooms and two six loom weaving
shops. The inmates were all fast asleep, and but for the
howling of a faithful dog, must have been burned to death.
Such was the fury of the destructive element, that all the
furniture to a considerable amount was wholly destroyed,
and the parties had to escape almost in a state of nudity.
The poor dog, we regret to say, fell a sacrifice to the
i fire, and was literally burnt to a cinder, after having been
the means of saving the lives of all who were in the housr:.
Vie whole of the looms and properq in one of the shops
Y—deFstroroymed.tho epistle of the yearly
mweereQetiucr:g4l7olf:Rtchsie Society of Friends, we learn that- the
amount of the sufferings of the Friends in rer,ardh to tithes
and other ecclesiastical demands, including
charges of distraint, during the last twelvein
gmtoneticosts
Is, is up'
wards of eleven thousand two hundred pounds l"

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

SECONDARIES' COURT, AvG. 21.
(Before Mr. POTTER.)
DEFFEE V. INGRAM.
Mr. JAMES stated the plaintiff's case. It was an
action brought to recover the sum of 8/. due on the
defendant's promisory dote. In the month of June last
the plaintiff sold the defendant, who is a postmaster
residing in the Hackney-road, a pony, for the sum of
84, for which the note forming the ground of this action
was passed by the defendant, payable in one month.
The Learned Counsel said be understood it was in-
tended to be set up as a defence, that the animal was
unsound at the time of sale, but he would bring forward
witnesses to prove that the defendant bought it at the
time, knowing it to be affected with a cold, and that
any consequence which followed afterwards arose from
ill treatment ; and the fact of the defendant having put
the animal out in a wet swampy marsh in Hackney.
The defendant had offered to compromise the matter by
paying the sum of 6/. but this was refused on the part
of the pluintiff.
Several witnesses hivir g been called in support of the
plaintiff's case,
Mr. CORRY for the defence, said it would be wrong
to deduce a conclusion unfavourable to defendant
from the latter fact stated, of his having offered
to compromise the matter, as he did so, well
knowing that in the greater number of lawsuits
even the victor wins a blank. He should en-
deavour to prove that the horse, besides having the
cold, was affected by a particular kind of disease,
called abscesses, from which it might appear quite
free at one moment, and in a few hours afterwards be
covered with them. To prove the nature of the bar-
gain he should call
William James Ingram, the defendant's son. This
witness being sworn, stated, that he was present when
his father bought the horse. Understood that there
was a warranty of his soundness. Lent it to plaintiff
to drive in his chaise on the evening he was bought,
and that was all the work it had done since it came
into the hands of witness's father, till its death in eleven
de's after. Was treated as they usually treat horses
with colds.

Cross-examined by Mr. JAMES—Perceived several
abscesses on the horse at the time he was purchased.
Mr. Ingram was also aware he had a cold.
Several other witnesses were examined, whose evi-
dence was without any interest.
Mr. POTTER, in summing up observed, that from
the evidence it appeared the defendant was fully
aware that the animal had cold, or he should not
have got him for so low a price. As to the fact of
its being in a state of disease by those abscesses, he
thought the evidence of Mr. Ingram, jun., left no
doubt as to that being evident to any person who gave
himself the trouble of an examination at the time of
purchase.
The Jury after a short consultation, returned a ver-
dict for the plaintiff in the full amount claimed.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, AUG. 21,

ruTe; RE PROPERTY.

At the sitting of the Court this morning, Mr. Cooke
appried in the case of a party discharged under the Act
some years ago, to ♦acate its proceedings, on the grouud
that all his debts had been paid in full, and the officer
of the Court had made his report thereon. The Court
granted the application.

COVENT-GARDEN MARKET.-IN RE THOMAS PEPPER.
This insolvent was up a day or two ago, and was re-
manded until a sum of money had been paid into Court.
He had kept a shop in Covent-garden Market, and it
came out that all the tenants of the Duke of Bedford
in the market were weekly ; his Grace took nothing for
his stands, but permitted, when a man failed, that the
creditors should be benefited if any sum could be ob-
tained for the stand. In this case 200/. had been ob-
tained-30/. in money, and a bill at sixteen months
for 1501.

The Court thought the Bill had better be discounted,
and adjourned the case for the money to be paid into
Court.

Andrew Shiell was opposed by Mr. Woodroffe, on
the part of Messrs. Mortlock, bankers and millers at
Cambridge, and Mr. Wallace, a miller at the same
place. He was supported by Mr. Cooke.
The insolvent had lately been a baker. He was
rather advanced in years, and had figured six times in
his present character.

The CHIEF COMMISSIONER referred to the schedule,
and found the dates of the several appearances to be
first in 1815, then in 1820, then in 1825, in 1880, in
1835, and now again in 1840.

Mr. WooDaoFFE asked the insolvent whether there
had not been an overture in the shape of a bankruptcy
between the " acts " of insolvency.
The insolvent admitted he was a bankrupt in the
year 1823. He had now 100 creditors in his present
schedule. His debts were in the aggregate 1,8861.
17s. 9d., of which nearly -100/. were without considera-
tion, arising on security he had given to several Loan
Societies. He had paid money to the opposing credi-
tors ; he owed Messrs. Mortlock upwards of 1001.,
and Mr. Wallace about 701. for flour. He had given
the opposing creditors several bills of exchange, which
e,ere read. He disclosed the manner in which the bills
had been manufactured. He said three persons, named
Camp, Nelson, and Levy, drew and accepted them,
and he paid them I s. in the pound for the accommodation.

. .
The CHIEF COM3fISSIONER asked whether the insol-
vent had inserted in his schedule the money he had
given for the bills he had mentioned ?
The insolvent said he had not done so.

The CHIEF COMMISSIONER said that it did not fol-
low that a man who became insolvent once or twice was
a fraudulent man ; but when a party came so many
times, it was pretty certain there was something faulty
in his conduct. The judgment was, that the insolvent
should he discharged when he had been in prison for a
period of six months from the date of the vesting order
ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

LIVERPOOL—Atrausr 20.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
LIABILITY OF SHAREHOLDERS.
HUMBLE V. LANGSTON.

This was an action arising out of the sale of certain
shares of the Bristol and Exeter Railway. The plain-
tiff is Mr. Michael Humble, merchant and shipowner,
of this town, the defendant Mr. Thomas Langston, a
sharehroker, at Manchester.
Messrs. CRE9SWELL and CROMPTON were counsel
for the plaintiff; Messrs. ALEXANDER and COWLING
for the defendant.

The declaratio❑ stated that the plaintiff was pos-
sessed of thirty shares in the Bristol and Exeter Rail-
uay, which he agreed to sell to the defendant at 7/. .2.5.
6d. per share ; that the defendant promised to receive
aid accept the said shares, and to indemnify the plain-
tiff from all subsequent payment of calls or other charges
upon them ; that the plaintiff did deliver certificates of
transfer ; and that the defendant had received, ac-
cepted, and paid for the same ; but though certain calls
had been afterwards made on the shares, the defendant
h,.d neglected to pay the same, and the plaintiff had
Lcen obliged to pay certain large sums in consequence
of his default. The defendant pleaded first, that he
made no such promise ; secondly, that he never re-
ceived any such consideration ; thirdly that he did not
agree to pay the calls ; fourthly, that the plaintiff was
not ready and willing to transfer ; fifthly, that he gave
n;) notice of his readiness to transfer ; sixthly, that he
had nn notice of the alleged liabilities of the plaintiff;
sr %Tenthly, that the plaintiff had been damnified of his
.owii wrong ; and, eighthly, that, after making the said
promise, the plaintiff had exonerated him from its per.. '
for:mance. All this was denied by the plaintiff, and on
these pleas issue was joined.

AIL CRESWELL said this was an action to recover
a sum of about 9001., which the plaintiff had been com-
pelled to pay in consequence of a default on the part
of I\lr. Langston, which was without the slightest jus-
tification. In the beginning of 1838 the defendant,
who resided in Manchester, and was speculating largely
in tiie share market, was desirous to have some shares
ia the Bristol and Exeter Railway, and wrote to Messrs.
Atkinson and Townley, sharebrokers at Liverpool, to
procure them for him. On the 20th of February, Mr.
Earle Langston, a relation of his, communicated to
Messrs. Atkinson and Townley his desire to have some
Bristol and Exeter shares. On the same day the de-
fendant wrote to Messrs. Atkinson and Townley, sa
Our market is good, particularly for Bristol and
Exeter. They are expected to go to 31. premium. I
am a buyer at 71. 10s. Birmingham, Derby, South-
ampton are all inquired for, and every thing is certain to
go up. I hope you have seen Earle." On the same day
Messrs. Atkinson and Townley procured the shares front
Messrs. Richardson and Thompson, who were selling on
behalf of Mr. M. Humble, and a sold note was sent
to the defendant. " We have this day sold you 30
shares in the Bristol and Exeter Railway, at 101. paid,
discount 01. 17s, Gd., making the price 71. 2s. Gd.,
and with brokerage added, 71. 55." On the same day
the defendant wrote again, saying, " Bristol and Exeter
shares have sold at 8/. to-day—upwards of two oe three
hundred hare been sold at that price. Now, Si. 10. s. is
the price, and no sellers.
Neither Leigh nor Atkinson
could get the shares I wanted, though I 4,..ave no limits.
Our markets have been good all day. He wanted
more shares, which, it seemed, could not be procured,
as Messrs. Atkinson and Townley wrote to him to say,
" There are the Bristol and Exeter offering—the
only
ones being those we sold to you this morning." On
the olst he wrote again to this effect--" Our market
aas been very lively to-day for Bristol and Exeter, and
this stock is becoming quite a favourite here. 91. per
share is offered, and they are inquired for." On the 2d
of March Mr. Langston sent for a transfer of the shares.
tin the 3d of March the defendant wrote again, " You
may buy any Bristol and Exeter shares that come
at 91. I have bought at 9/. 10s., and sold at 101.
to-day." Messrs. Atkinson and Townley accordingly
sent the transfer of the 30 shares in blank, so
that the defendant might fill it up either in his
own- name, •r in that of any person to whom he bad
sold. If the defendant thought that the transfer re-
qui •reti a name in it he ought to have said so, but at all ,
events the sending of the transfer was abundant proof

of an offer of transfer. The defendant, at the time,
made no objection to this transfer. The price of the
shares was settled between Messrs. Atkinson and
Townley and the defendant, and the money was paid to
the plaintiff, who supposed the transaction to he at an
end. Some time afterwards, however, he eived
notice of a call, which was of course handed over to Mr.
Langston. Various calls were subsequently made on
the shares, amounting in the whole to between 900/.
and 1,000/. It afterwards turned out that the defend.
ant having the transfer made to him, which stood in the
name of another person, took it to the Company, and, in-
stead of getting himself entered as transferee and owner
of the shares, actually got the plaintiff entered, so making
him responsible for the calls. He (Mr. Cresswell) ap-
prehended the law to be that the person who purchased
shares, most undoubtedly agreed to take to those shares
with all their responsibilities, and to indemnify the
seller. No person would sell his interest in shares, if he
were to be liable to pay up the calls subsequently made.
When a man parted with shares, he naturally thought
that he had done with them, and the purchaser was
bound to indemnify him. In this instance the defend-
ant had sold the shares again, at a considerable profit
to himself, and he now sought to avoid payment of the
calls.

Mr. Charles James Townley, of the lato firm of
Atkinson and Townley, share-broker, proved the order
from the defendant, through Mr. Earle Langston, to
buy, and the purchase of the thirty shares for him from
Messrs. Richardson and Thompson, the plaintiff's
brokers. He identified the correspondence alluded to
in the opening, and also some other letters, in one of
which, dated March 2, 1838, the defendant said,
" Herewith I hand you Pilling's transfer, executed and
witnessed. Pray despatch the thirty Bristol and
Exeter, bought at 71. 55., and let me know what is to be
done about the fifty " (referring to another transaction).
I want a name for five London and Birmingham, and
also a name for the fifty new Southampton's. Pray
attend to this instanter, as I must give in names directly."
In a letter dated next day, and addressed to the same
parties, he said, " Pray despatch the thirty Exeter's
forthwith. I have sold at 91. 17s. 6d."
Mr. William Thomson, •f the firm of Richardson and
Thomson, proved that in March, 1838, they had sold
the thirty shares in question for Mr. Humble, to
Messrs. Atkinson and Townley.
Mr. James Bellinge Badham, secretary to the Exeter
Railway Company, proved, that, from March 1838, to
November 1839, there had been six calls, four of 51.
per share, and the two last of 10/. per share, and that
on the thirty shares in question, all these calls had been
paid with the exception of the last.
A letter from Mr. Allan Kaye, the plaintiff's solici-
tor, addressed to the defendant, and dated 16th Sept.,
1839, was then put in. It was to this effect :—" Dear
Sir—l am desired to give you notice on behalf of Mr.
Michael Humble, from whom you, some time ago, pur-
chased thirty shares in the Bristol and Exeter Rail-
way, that he has received a letter from Mr. J. B. Bad-
ham, stating, that if the fourth, fifth, and sixth calls of
51. per share, with five per cent. interest, are not paid
on or before the 16th of October, the directors will
bring an action for the amount. You are required to
register yourself as owner of these shares, and to pay
up the calls and interest forthwith ; and I have to in-
form you that, if the directors bring an action, Mr.
Humble will hold you liable for all expenses, costs,
and losses incurred."
This was the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. ALEXANDER wished to ask his Lordship's
opinion on the facts as they now stood. The case, as
it appeared at present, was one in which the defendant
was supposed to be liable for the payment of this
900/. as being the party who was to be considered
registered as the proprietor of the shares in question,
and the letter just read expressly called upon him to
register as owner and pay up the calls, the❑ amounting
to 3601. without interest, forthwith. They had learned
from Mr. Townley that the shares were sent over in
blank to the defendant, who was a sharebroker in
Manchester. The pleadings raised amongst other
points that there was an agreement to buy and sell,
and that the plaintiff was damnified by his own wrong.
Now, unless it was a broker's duty to make entries on
the books, it was perfectly clear that he was not liable
for a breach of duty if he neglected to do so. Mr.
Humble might have his action against his brokers,
Messrs. Richardson and Thompson ; other gentlemen
might step between the plaintiff and the defendant
for they (Richardson and Thomson) treated with
Messrs. Atkinson and Townley, and the defendant,
another broker at Manchester, treated with them.
What privity, therefore, there could be between
Mr. Humble and Mr. Langston it was impossible to
conceive. The Liverpool brokers were applied to by a
Manchester broker to purchase a given number of
shares. He was then acting in his capacity of broker.
Messrs. Atkinson and Townley procured the shares
from Richardson and Thompson ; four days afterwards
the transfers were sent over by the brokers in Liver-
pool to the defendant, in blank, the only name given in
the transfer being that of Humble, to blank. What
obligation then could there b. on the defendant to re-
gister any change of proprietorship in the Company's
books ? Mr. Humble was the owner of the shares ;he
employed brokers to sell them, and they were sold under
his authority to another house. The alteration in the
registry ought to have been entered at that time, and

there svas no obligation on the defendant to make it

In the absence of anything to show the least degree of
privity between the plaintiff and the defendant, he
begged leave to ask his Lordship how the defendant
could be liable in this action ?
Mr. COWLING followed on the same side.

Mr. Baron ItoLFE said that this very question arose
at Taunton, at the last Assizes, before him, and was
new before the Court of Common Pleas. He had re-
served the point whether or not the sale or shares under
these circumstances, and the delivery and transfer of the
shares, the law implied an undertaking on the part of
these purchaser to indemnify the seller. It seemed to
him the best course to allow the case to go on, and to
give the defendant liberty to move to enter a nonsuit if
the Court should be of opinion that on this evidence the
defendant was not liable. There was another point as
to the regularity of the transfer. The Act required that
it should be by deed.
Mr. COWLING said it was so in all the acts, and he
applied for leave also to reduce the damage to the three
calls mentioned, if the Curt should be opinion that the
defendant was liable.
On this a letter trom 2viessrs. Littledale and Bards-
well, the plaintiff's present solicitors, dated 7th of Fe-
bruary, 1840, addressed to the defendant, and making
an application for the payment of two other calls, was
put in and road.
Mr. ALEXANDER said there was one fact which he
wished to add. He could give evidence that amongst
brokers it was the practice, unless there was a stipu-
lation in the contract, not for the purchasing broker,
but for the broker on the other side, to make the

requisite entries. He had brokers to speak of the
usage if his Lordshp thought it of importance.
Mr. Ba.on RoLFE—It can hardly be a question of
usage whose duty it is.
Mr. ALEXANDER said, that the custom of the trade
was sometimes found to be admissible, and the point
ought to he settled, because it was a question to
brokers of vital importance, whether brokers, three or
four times removed from the owner, should take the

responsibility upon themselves. lie had brokers in

attendance who would speak to the rule being, that
the person employed by the vendor was, unless the

. .
contract stipulated to the contrary, the one whose
duty it was to enter any change of ownership in the
Company's books, and to save his own client from any
responsibility from his name being continued in the
books.

Mr. Baron ROLFE thought this was all a question
depending o❑ the legal construction of Acts of Parlia-

ment.

These things were all of such modern growth

that they could hardly speak of any usage.

He (the

Learned Judge) thought there was a great deal in Mr.
Alexander's point, but it was one which would be settled

elsewhere.

A verdict was then entered for the plaintiff, damages
9001., subject to the opinion of the Court above on the
point of law.

RUSSELL AND ANOTHER V. SMITH.

This was an action brought by John Russell, and Eli-
zabeth Russell, his wi'e, to recover from Dr. W. Grey
Smith, formerly of Dunarics, and late of London,
the sum of 931. ss. Sd., being the costs decreed
against him by the Scotch Court of Session in a suit
of divorce a vinculo matrimonii, instituted against him
for adultery, by the female plaintiff, to whom he was
married at Glasgow in the year 1824. The result
of the suit was a decree of divorce, entitling his wife
to marry again, a privilege of which she availed herself
by marryine, the plaintiff. There were some questions
of fact touching the regularity of the proceedings in
the Scotch Courts, which were carried on in the ab-
sence of the husband, a mode by which, as Mr. Cress-
well observed, the process of horning, which was the
commencement of the Scotch law-suit, might be effec-
tually carried out, as the husband might return from
India, or some other part of the world,
and find his wife
married to
his neighbour. There were also several
,
points of law touching the jurisdiction of the English
Courts, which,
were turned P
with the facts into a s c-
dial case for the eonsiderationof the Court above, and
the verdict was entered nominally for the plaintiffs.
DEFAMATION.-TIIE CONNOR-BOND AFFAIR IN ST.

-----
ANNE'S WARD.
JONES. JUN., V. LITTLER.
This was an action for slander and defamation,
brought by Mr. Robert Jones, jun., one of the repre-
sentatives of St. Anne's Ward in the 'rown Council,
against Mr. Peter Littler, farmer.
Messrs. Cresswell and Wightman appeared for the
plaintiff
• Messrs. Alexander and Martin for the de-
fendant.

The first count of the declaration stated that the de-
fendant had spoken certain slanderous words of the
plaintiff, calculated to injure him in his trade and busi-
ness. The second count alleged that the plaintiff had
sustained fiecial damage thereby, James Parke and
Samuel Saunders and Son having refused to deal with
the plaintiff in consequence.—The defendant pleaded
not guilty, and denied that Mr. Parke and Messrs.

Saunders and Son had refused to have any dealings
with the plaintiff in consequence of the imputed slander.
Mr. CRESSWELL stated that the plaintiff in this case,
Mr. Robert Jones, carried on business in Rose-hill, in
this town, as a brewer, and was in a considerable way
of business. The defendant, Mr. Peter Littler, was a
p»rson who managed some stone quarries belonging to
the Earl of Derby, a few miles from this place, and
was, he believed, a person of considerable property.
The plaintiff in this action sought a compensation in
damages for that which to him as a tradesman was
certainly calculated to be of very serious injury, and
which, if not repelled by a challenge of public inves-
tigation, might probably have been the ruin of him in
his trade. The jury would find that in the month of
March, a party of men were assembled at a public
house, amongst whom were Mr. Pye, an acquaintance
of Mr. Jones, and one or two others to whom he was
well known, and the defendant Littler. They began
to talk of various matters, and the name of Mr.
Jones was mentioned. He (Mr. Cresswell) rather
thought that Mr. Jones was the representative of St.
Anne's Ward in the Town Council of this borough,
and speaking of him and his father, Mr. Littler broke
out in these terms—" Jones is a d—d rogue, and his
father is no better. I have known both of them well,
and where they have come from. They have come
from 'Westmoreland. I have a share of a mill in
‘Vestmoreland, and that's the way I got to know them,"
affecting to have a personal knowledge of the matter,
and thus giving additional force to his observations.
" It was through their dishonesty," continned he, " that
they left and came to Liverpool. Mr. Jones and his
father left Ulverstone in disgrace. bet five pounds
to one that Jones was in a sponging-house for debt
within the last fortnight, and I can produce the man
who locked him up." Mr. Pye was astonished to hear
this, and asked " Do you mean that Mr. Jones, cf Rose-
hill, was in a sponging-house for debt within the last
fortnight ?" and the defendant said " I do." He clearly
meant the plaintiff. Mr. Pye expressed his astonish-
ment at the assertion ; the defendant repeated, and said
he could prove it. Mr. Pye afterwards communicated
to Mr. Jones was had passed, and Mr. Jones brought
this action to vindicate himself from the aspersions cast
upon him. For aught he (Mr. Cresswell) knew, he
might now be sorry that he had used them. If so, and
if he would say so, and would indemnify the plaintiff
for his expenses in coming there to vindicate his cha-
racter, he (Mr. Cresswell) was content. If not—if
the defendant would not apologise for it, and indemnify
the plaintiff, then the Jury would know how to deal
with him.
Mr. ALEXANDER—I have not the least objection to
accept the offer of my Learned Friend, provided be
will withdraw a juror.
Mr. CRESSWELL—I made no such offer, and
think the proposition an additional insult—an additiona;
injury.

Witnesses were then called to prove the case, and
Mr. ALEXANDER addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant, without calling witnesses.
Mr. Baron ROLFE, in summing up said that with
regard to the motive, it was immaterial, if the words
spoken had by a necessary consequence a tendency to
injure the plaintiff in his trade and business. lVhat
they bad to consider was, whether these words were ut-
tered by the defendant. The imputation of insolvency
had certainly that tendency, and the words alleged
were, in his opinion, actionable in their own nature, and
therefore, though no special damage had been proved,
the plaintiff was entitled to some compensation in re-
spect of those words. He might be wrong in this
opinion, and if so, he should be set right hereafter.
The only question for them at present was, whether the
words had been uttered. The evidence was unques-
tionably of a very unsatisfactory nature, but at the same
time he did not know how they could come to
the conclusion that the words had not been uttered.
Possibly the action was one which they might think,
and which others who heard it might think, ought never
to have been brought, for if Mr. Jones never had any
thing else said against his character than was said
amongst men who were in such a state as these men
must have been after drinking from three in the after-
noon to same time between eleven and twelve at night
—by a man who talked on for an hour and a half at
such a rate that nobody could stop him—if Mr. Jones
had not anything said of him more calculated to
damage his credit than that, he might range with the
highest people on the Exchange of this place. To talk
of any injury to his credit from such a thing as that
was pushing matters to a great extreme indeed. At
the same time it was no justification to say that the
words were uttered while in a state of intoxication,
for if a man chose to deprive himself of reason, he
must take the consequences, The only question was
were they satisfied that these words were uttered in the
manner represented. If they were, then came the question
of damages. He (Baron Rolfe) thought there was as little
damaging in the transaction as could well be conceived.
These parties had got into a state which he should de-
signate as nearly approaching to drunkenness ; because
a man speaking of himself never admitted more than
that he was not sober, and that description seemed to
apply to all the people at the Running Horse, excepting
the man who was tied in the gig ; and he at least must
be taken as absolutely drunk. The parties were all
talking at once, and the defendant, after uttering these
words, indicated that he himself had no confidenee in
the truth of what he was stating, for after he had laid
down with great bravado a 51. note, and the bet was
taken, he took it up again, put it into his pocket, and
walked away,—about the strongest antidote to what
he had said that could be conceived. There i
was nothing on which Juries were more bound to
consider the feelings of the parties than in actions for
slander and attacks on character. When such attacks were
really calculated to do injury, Juries did right to give sub-
stantial damages. But there were cases of this kind
of such a nature that the time of Courts of Justice
might be much better employed than in hearing them—
cases in which character would be much better vindi-
cated from defamation and slander, by passing them
over with contempt, than by bringing them before a
Court of Justice. If they thought that the plaintiff
had not sustained any real damage through this ridicu-
lous
and nonsensical proceeding, they would give nomi-
nal damages only ; if they thought that he had received
substantial injury, calculated to injure his feelings, and
hurt his credit for solvency, then they were not only
wars anted but bound to give substantial damages to
mark their sense of the case—such damages to be
nominal or real, as they thought the plaintiff fairly en-
titled to either.
The jury, after a short consultation found for the
plaintiff. Damages 40s.
The verdict carries costs.
BRANCKER AND OTHERS V. MOLYNEUX.
This was an action brought by the assignees of Messrs.
Humberston and Frodsham, bankrupts, formerly trading
together as merchants and brokers, in this town, to re-
cover the sum of 3,1661., being the value of a cargo of
cotton sold to Messrs. Humberston and Frodsham, by
Mr. 'F. B. Molyneux, of Charleston, and shipped on
board the Diamond, which arrived at this port on the
13th of June, 1837, the day after the bankruptcy of
Messrs. Humberston and Frodsham, and seized by the
defendant, Mr. Edmund Molyneux, either as agent for
the vendor, or as mortgagee of the vessel. The cause
was tried at the last March assizes, when a verdict was
entered far the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the
Courts above on several points of law. A new trial
was directed, and certain letters and other evidence
admitted on the former trial being excluded on this, the
Learned Judge expressed his opinion that the cotton in
question had never come into the possession of the
plaintiffs, and directed a verdict for the defendant.
The Court rose shortly after six o'clock.

OXFORD CIRCUIT—GiocEsTER, Aua. 19.
CROWN COURT.
MURDER OF MR. YARWORTIt.
Upon his Lordship's taking his seat in Court this
morning an application was made by Mr. W. J. Alex-
ander, who, with Mr. A. M. Skinner, appeared for the
prosecution of Bowen, for the murder of Mr. Yarworth,
to postpone the trial to the next assizes, upon the affi-
davit of a surgeon from Bristol, that one of the princi-
pal witnesses for the prosecution had been suddenly at-
tacked with cholera, and was dangerously ill. An affi-
davit was also made by the attorney for the prosecution,
that the evidence of the witness in question, a Mr.
Sharpe, who travelled with the deceased and the mur-
derer (whoever that was) from Worcester to Cornbe-
hill, just before the attack was made, was material and
necessary for the trial.

Mr. Maclean and Mr. Greares opposed the applica-
tion on behalf of the prisoner.
Mr. Justice Wlwalts said, he saw no reason to
vary the usual course, which was always upon an affi-
davit like the present to postpone the trial as prayed
for. The cause for that postponement was the act of
Providence, not any want of care or diligence on behalf
of the prosecution ; and further, if he looked to the
deposition of the witness whose illness had caused the
application, it was impossible not to see that his evi-
dence might, and perhaps would, be the most material
in the case.

The prisoner was accordingly remanded till the next
Assizes. He is a young man slightly made, without
anything at all remarkable in any way in his appearance,
a circumstance probably material in a case where nis
identity as the guilty person is to be established by the
evidence of persons previously unacquainted with his
person.
The Court was excessively crowded till the result of
this application was known.
The business of these Assizes will be brought to a
close in the course of to-morrow.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—WARwicr, Ave. 20.
DUE, D. GILBERT AND OTHERS, V. ROSS.
This was an action of ejectment to try the right to
certain property situate at Manchester, in this county.
Mr. Serjeant Goulburn, Mr. Humfrey, and Mr.
Hayes, were counsel for the lessors of the plaintiff ; and
the Solicitor-General (who c ime special), Mr. Serjeant
Adams, Mr. Hill, and Mr. Daniel for the defendant.
The property which was the subject of this action
consisted of an estate said to be worth about 20,0001.,
and had belonged to a family of the name of Miller.
The lessors of the plaintiff were three sisters, who

' claimed the estate as lineal descendants of William
Miller, who, in the beginning of the last century, devised
it away under certain limitut:ons ; and after passing
through several hands, the property devolved upon Arthur
Gramer Miller, who died in l 832,having no issue, but who
devised the estate at a time when lie was alleged to be
in a state of mental imbecility to the defendant, Fanny
Ross, a person who had been engaged by his sister-in-
law to take care of him, and who was alleged to have
obtained great influence over him. The question as to
the validity, or rather invalidity, of this will was not so
much the subject in contention, as that. of whether or
not the lessors of the plaintiff were able to prove that
they were the lineal descendants of the common ances-
tor. A great dual of evidence, principally of pedigree,
was brought forward, and the cause proceeded during
the whole of yesterday and part of to-day, when
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE suggested, that as there
was much doubt and difficulty in the case, it would be
very desirable if the parties could come to some ar-
rangement.
Upon this suggestion a conference took place between
the Learned Counsel on both sides, which terminated
in a compromise upon the following terms, as we un-
derstood :

The costs of all parties to be paid out of the estate.
The residue to be divided into three equal parts, one to
be given to the lessors of the plaintiff in this action ;
another to go to two other persons of the name of
Miller, who claimed to he the rightful heirs ; and the
third to be divided between the present defendant and a
person named
.Clifford, who was defendant in another
action brought in respect of another part of the estate.
This case closed the Assizes.

WESTERN CIRCUIT—Ds;zzEs, Aua. 20.
William Hare was indicted for the manslaughter of
John Blake.

From the evidence it appeared, that a club had been
held at the Park House Inn, near Amesbury, and the
deceased had been in the inn drinking a great part of
the day, and was the only guest remaining at 12 o'clock
at night, when the prisoner and two other men came to
the door and insisted upon being admitted. The land-
lord refused, upon which they burst open the door, but
in a short time they were all turned out. The prisoner
had some altercation with the deceased, and at length
gave him a push ; the Devonport mail passing at the
instant, the deceased reeled against one of the leaders,
and falling down, the coach went over him and killed
bim.

The jury having found the prisoner Guilty, he was
sentenced to three days' imprisonment.
Three cases of murder have been postponed in conse-
quence of the absence or illness of material witnesses.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY.)
Lorenzo Canape, aged eighteen, an Italian, was in-
dicted for feloniously cutting and wounding Jesse
Peters, with intent to do him some grievous bodily
harm.
Mr. Payne defended the prisoner.
The prosecutor stated that on the Bth July he was
fn Cross-street, Islington, when he observed the pri-
soner, who had a hurdy-gurdy, and a number of boys,
and the latter were peltinr, him with stones, and he also
pelted them, and attempted to strike some of the boys,
and he saw him strike and kick his brother, a little boy
nine years old, and he went up to the prisoner for the
purpose of protecting his brother, when he drew a
knife from his pocket and made a plunge at his breast.
He parried the blow with his hand, and received a
severe cut in his thumb. The prisoner then ran away,
but he was pursued and taken into custody.
Mr. Payne addressed the Jury and said it was clear
that the prisoner, in a moment of excitement and
alarm, had made use of the knife, but without the
serious intention imputed to him by the present indict-
ment, and that they might only find the prisoner guilty
of an assault.
Mr. Baron• GURNEY summed up, and the Jury
found the prisoner guilty of an assault.
He was sentenced to six months' imprisonment,
with hard labour, one week in each month to be passed
in solitary confinement.
John Broughton, a soldier, was indicted for cutting
and wounding James Jennings, with intent to maim
and disable, or to do him some grievous bodily harm.
The prosecutor stated that he was a police constable,
and he was on duty on the morning of the Ist August,
and he heard an alarm in Down-street, Piccadilly, and
on going to the spot he found another police constable
there, who was in the act of ordering away a number of
prostitutes ; and the prisoner, who was also there, in-
terfered with the other constable, and said he had no
business to order the women away. He was told to
go away, but be refused, and became very violent, and
kicked him several times. He attempted to take him
into custody, when he said, " You —, I'll do for you,"
and at the same moment he struck him across the eye
with the brass•platc that was upon his belt, and he fell
to the ground insensible. He was still very weak and
ill, in consequence of the injury inflicted upon him by
the prisoner.
James Seeks, another policeman, corroborated the
evidence of the prosecutor, and said that the prisoner
also kicked him in the belly.
Mr. Tarrant, a surgeon, described the injury received
by the prosecutor as being of a very serious character.
The prisoner, in his defence, said he had no recol-
lection of what had taken place. He had been with
some friends and had drank more than he ought to
have done.

Mr. Baron GURNEY summed up, and the jury found
the prisoner guilty of an assault only, and acquitted
him of the felony.
The Learned JUDGE told the prisoner that drunken-
ness was no excuse for misconduct ; all men were bound
to keep sober, and soldiers especially. The Jury had
taken a merciful view of his case, and the sentence was
that he should be imprisoned and kept to hard labour
with solitary confinement, for six calendar months,
" And," said the Learned Judge, " at all events you
will not get drunk during that period."
John Pheteon, aged 32, was indicted for stealing a
quantity of plate, value 284, the property of Thomas
Robert, Earl of Kinnoul.
Messrs. Bodkin and Ballantine conducted the prose•
cution. Mr. Chadwick Jones defended the prisoner.
As the facts of this case have been very recently
fully detailed in the police reports, it will be unnecessary
to repeat them here. It will be remembered that the
prisoner acted in the capacity of under-butler to the
Noble Earl, and upon the occasion of his Lordship
leaving town, the plate was ordered to be packed up
and sent to the banker's. A quantity was discovered
to be missing, and the prisoner, upon being questioned,
admitted that he had pawned it, 'Jut said he intended
to have redeemed it ; and it appeared that some of the
plate had, in point of fact, been taken out of pledge by
him.

Mr.. Tones made a very ingenious address on behalf
of the prisoner, and contended that the Jury could not
say thot the original intention of the prisoner was
to deprive his noble master entirely of the property in
question, and that they ought to believe that he in-
tended to replace it ; and that consequently he ought
not to be convicted of felony.
A number of witnesses gave the prisoner an ex-
cellent character.

Mr. Baron GURNEY in summing up, said that it
would be a very dangerous doctrine indeed to dissemi-
nate that a servant might make free with his master's
property in this manner, and then say that he intended
to redeem it.
er ef cite?. mj eunryd that
he
eo
intendedm erc y
toon
Tne Jury, after consulting for a short time, expressed
a wish to retire, and in about half an hour they returned
inzo Court with a verdict of Guilty, but with a strong
theaccount of fr'
replace
Mr. Jotpiciertyb.elief
Jones submitted that this was tantamount to a
verdict of not guilty.
Mr. Baron GURNEY said, without expressing any
opinion upon this point, as there was another indictment
against the prisoner. he thought it would be better that
he should be tried up on it.
The prisoner was accordingly again indicted on a
charge of stealing a silver saucepan, the property of the
same Noble Earl.
Mr. Bodkin addressed the jury on behalf of the
prosecutor, and said, that although he had no desire to
make any remarks that might be considered unfair or
harsh towards the prisoner, yet his duty to the public,
and the position in which he Was placed, compelled
him to remind the jury of the importance of the point
that was submitted to them in this prosecution. He
would ask them what would be the condition of society
if it could for a moment be allowed that a servant could
take away his master's property, pawn it, and apply the
proceeds to his own use, and then, when the fact was
discovered, be relieved from the consequences by setting
up as a defence that he intended to have redeemed it.
The evidence was then gone into,j
and theury re-
turned a verdict of Guilty.
Mr. Baron GURNEY then sentenced the prisoner to
be transported for fourteen years.
(Before the RECORDER.)
The Grand Jury came into Court soon after the
Recorder had taken his seat upon the Bench, and re-
ported that they had concluded their labours. They
at the same time made a presentment of the usual cha-
racter, and also expressed their opinion that many of
the trifling cases:might have been disposed of summarily
The RECORDER said that his experience taught him
that summary convictions were not very efficacious in
the repression of crime. The Legislature appeared to
consider that it was advisable that parties should be
sent far trial in the ordinary course, and, occupying the
position he did, It would not be becoming for him to
offer any further observations upnn the subject.
The Grand Jury were then discharged with the thanks
of the county for their services.

THE PARIS BOURSE.--" There are morning
Ministerial papers,"
observes the France, " to preach up
peace, and there are evening Ministerial papers to preach
up war. They are the buckets of a well which come up
and go down alternately, but they serve to draw up some-
thing else than water. See the stock article,"

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Information having been received by the Lord
Mayor that Daniel Forrester, the officer, had taken
into custody, yesterday morning, John and James
Christie, for the apprehension of whom rewards to the
amount of 4001. had been offered, his Lordship or-
dered that the prisoners should be brought before him
for examination in the course of the day. They were
accordingly put to the bar.
Mr. Johnston, of the house of Johnston and Farqu-
har, solicitors, New Broad-street, attended for the pro-
secution.

A warrant had been granted in Saotland by Lord
Moncrief, upon the affidavit of Mr. Andrew Ruther-
ford, advocate, which stated that about two years ago
the two prisoners, residing at Golspie, in Sutherland-
shire, were appointed joint agents for the Aberdeen
Town and County Banking Company at Golspie, and
they continued very lately to act as such. The depo,.
neat had been informed that sundry payments, which
had been made at the branch bank during the said pe-
riod, by or for the behoof of his Grace the Duke of
Sutherland, who had an account kept at the branch
bank, to the amount of 4,000/. and upwards, had not
been entered in the books of the branch bank, nor been
reported to the head office of the bank, according to
the invariable practice, although the agents had given
or granted receipts or vouchers for the same, intended
by them to bind or render the said banking company
accountable for the said sums, and such notices or re-
ports had been wilfully omitted to be made by the said
agents, who fraudulently applied the same to their own
use. The affidavit concluded by stating that the said
agents had absconded.
The LORD MAYOR asked whether the prisoners ad-
mitted that they were the persons mentioned in the
warrant ?
John Christie (the elder prisoner)—We admit with.
out hesitation that we are the parties.
The Loan MAYou—I think it necessary to mention
to you, that any thing you think proper to say may
be used against you, and the charge is most serious.
John Christie—We are perfectly aware of that.
Daniel Forrester stated that from inquiries he had
made, he had been enabled to apprehend, upon the
warrant backed by his Lordship, the prisoners that
morning, at seven o'clock, on board of the Iberia steam-
packet, which was about to sail for Gibraltar. Under
the bolster in the hammock of James Christie he found
500 sovereigns, and in a purse in the pocket of John
Christie he found 28/. 10s. He had seized their bag-
gage, of course, but had not examined it, but both pri-
soners said that the property described was all they
were possessed of in money.
The LORD MAYOR asked whether there was any one
in the room who could identify the prisoners. He con-
sidered that in a case which involved charges of exten-
sive robberies, testimony as to personal identity ought
to be produced before he could proceed.
Mr. Johnston said, that by a singular accident there
was a gentleman present who could identify the prison-
ers. It happened that a brother of the prisoners, who
resided in Eastcheap, had been just under examination
before the Commissioner of Bankrupts, and by mere
accident, and never expecting to see the prisoners in the
Justice-room, the gentleman, who was a creditor to
the bankrupt's estate, and had attended the meeting,
walked in and at once knew them.
The witness alluded to stated that he was quite sur-
prised at seeing the two prisoners, whom he knew to be
the two persons mentioned in the warrant, brought into
the Justice-room in custody. He had seen them about
a year ago, with their brother, who had been just under
examination as a bankrupt, and who was indebted to
him about 2,000/. He knew that they had disappeared
from the establishment at Golspie, and he produced a
letter from the principals of the Aberdeen Bank, which
stated that fact, and that it was apprehended they had
escaped out of the country, as they had contrived to
have a younger brother of theirs to do the business of
the concern during the first three weeks of their absence.
'The LORD MAYOR—Are there any bank notes mis-
sing? I see that the placard offering the reward says
that a vast deal of property was taken, including a quan-
tity of plate, and that books and papers of consequence
had also disappeared. Has there been any clue to these ?
Mr. Johnston said that be was not, as yet, in posses-
sion of the details. He had merely had notice of the
necessary facts to justify his proceeding, and he had im-
mediately given instructions to Forrester to look sharply
after the alleged delinquents.
John Christie—We have not taken a single book or
document, or paper of any kind from Golspie, nor
have we taken one halfpenny away from that place,
nor a single article of plate. Nothing whatever have
we taken from thence.

The LORD MAYon—lndeed! How, then, is this
money to be accounted for ?
John Christie—That money was got in London.
The LORD MAYOR—Do you mean that ;his money
is not the property of the Bank at Aberdeen ?

John Christie-LI do mean to say so, most distinctly.
Not one shilling of it belongs to the establishment. I
am aware that but little credit will be given to any-
thing persons situate as we are may say ; but I think
it necessary to declare that the bank has nothing what-
ever to do with that money.
The LORD MAYOR—Did you not get any notes of
the bank changed ?
John Christie—Not one.
The LORD MAYOR—Let the luggage be most par-
ticularly searched.

James Christie—Nothing will be found there but
clothes. You have all the property we are possessed of.
I have been recently engaged in a distillery.
The LORD MAYOR—Have you had any connection
with your brother who carried on business in Eastcheap,
and who is now a bankrupt ?
John Christie—No ; we know him only as his credi-
tors to the amount of 3,0001. In fact, it is to that cir-
cumstance we owe our present condition ; it is entirely
arising from that calamity. We never meant to ab-
scond.

The LORD MAYOR—HOW then can you account for
going on board the vessel in which you were appre-
hended ?

John Christie—lf we had any intention of absconding
and avoiding inquiry, we could have easily effected such
an object. We have been to America, and we came
back to this country purposely to give every explanation.

. The LORD MAYOR—In America! and. came back to
explain! How then did you happen to be found in
the Iberia ?

John Christie—Finding upon our arrival here that
such steps were taken against us—for we had heard
that there were placards offering rewards and accusing
us of theft—we thought the most prudent course we
could pursue under the circumstances would be to leave
England.

The LORD MAYOR—In what ressel did you go to
America ?

John Christie—ln the Britannia. We sailed from
Liverpool on the 4th July in that vessel, and we need
not have returned, but we came back, for the purpose of
explaining everytlung, in the British Queen on Satur-
day last. _

James Christie—We left sufficient funds to meet a:
our obligations.

The Lonn MAYoa—Were you both agents to the
bank ?

John Christie—We were both named in the contract
but my brother James has not been concerned these
two years. He has been, as he has stated, connected
with a distillery in Golspie.
The LORD MAYOR—Was your brother in London
a bankrupt before you went to America?
John Christie—Yes, and we knew the fact ; we are
jointly his creditors.
The LORD MAYOR—.It seems from the bills that the
books and plate are missing. What can have become
of them ?

James Christie— We know nothing whatever of
them. When we left home, we had no idea of stay-
ing away. We took neither book nor paper.
Mr. Johnston produced a paper which he said was
found upon John Christie, and happened to be one of
those the prisoner was accused of having taken. It
related to a pecuniary transaction, and perhaps they
could explain it.
John Christie said that be came possessed of the
Patin. accidentally. He should, at the proper time, ex-

plain everything.
The LORD MAYOR—DO you wish to say anything
more ?

John Christie—Nothing ; but that we are desirous
to go as quickly as possible to Edinburgh to have every-
thing investigated, and to have the assistance of our
friends. The charge of taking books and papers from
Golspie is quite gratuitous, and nothing is to be found
amongst our clothes.

Mr. Johnston requested that his Lordship would al-
low Daniel Forrester to take the prisoners in custody
to Edinburgh, and his Lordship consented.
The amount stated to have been received and not
accounted for by the prisoners was, upon a rough guess,
said to be about 10,0004 It is stated that the parties
who arc responsible for the sums deficient are so ex-
asperated, that they determined to apply to the autho-
rities of any country to which the prisoners might have
repaired to give them up, by an appeal to the common
principles of justice.

BO W-STREET.
ROBBERY BY A POLICE CONSTABLE.—Wm. Reeve,
a constable of the P division, was yesterday brought
before Mr. Henry, charged with having stolen a great
coat, value 205., the property of another constable in
the same division.
John Brown, 52 F, stated that he had known the
prisoner a considerable time, and his friends, residing
in Norfolk. On Thursday night the prisoner, who
should have been on duty, had absconded, and the pro-
perty being missed from a closet, where it had been safe
the morning previous, suspicion fell upon him ; and
Witness being sent into the City to search for him, he
discovered him walking in Long-alley, with the coat
produced upon him. Oa being asked why he committed
such a robbery, and where he intended to go 7 he said
it was his intention to have gone home, and to send it
back in a few days.
In answer to the charge, the prisoner said, that being

in ill health, he wished to return home, and had taken
the cash for that purpose, which he intended to return
on his arrival, as he came from the same part of the
country as the prosecutor.
Superintendent Ludcock proved that for the short
time the prisoner had been a constable he had con-
ducted himself as an officer i❑ a very creditable man-
ner, but the fact of his not having applied for leave of
absence, and absconding from duty with the police
clothing, formed, under the Metropolitan Police Act, a
separate and distinct charge, for which he should an-
swer should the present charge not be sufficiently proved
against him.
The prisoner produced a character from a gentleman
in whose family he had been servant, declaring that he
had often had valuable property in his custody. No
charge had ever been brought against him on any for-
mer occasion.

Mr. HENRY said that as it was not in his power to
treat the case in a summary manner, the prisoner should
be committed for trial.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

BLOXWICH RACES.—MoNnAr.
The Trial Stakes of 4 sovs. each, twice round and a distance,
were won in two heats by Mr. Yates's Jim Crow; the Hurdle
Race Stakes of 5 sovs. each were won in three heats by Mr.
Hughes's Lansquenet ; and Mr. nibble's Miss Anne beat Mr.
Friend's Dame Durdan in a match for 201.

TUESDAY.

The Handicap Stakes were won in three heats by Mr.
Hughes's Lansquenet, beating two others ; the Beaten Stake
by Mr. Friend's Proteg6e ; and the Pony Race by Mr. Jones's p.

WEYMOUTH RACES. —WE oNEsuA v.
The Weymouth Stakes of 5 sovs. each, with 25 added. Two

miles. (6 subs.)
Mr. Galpine's Blemish, 3 yrs, 7st 51b
Major Shirley's Ochiltree, 5 yrs, 7st 31b
Mr. Hopkins s Peg Leg, 5 yrs, 7st
The Pony Race was won in two heats by Mr. Carlile's gr m
Violante, Bst 71b, beating Mr. Sims's Lady Paulett, 7st 81b ;
and the Hurdle Race Stakes of 3 sovs. each, with 25 added,
winner to be sold for 701., Gentlemen riders, were won in two
heats by Mr. Beavis's g Dandy, aged, 12st, beating Mr. Jen-
kins's Nun, siz yrs, llst 11b, and another.

PLYMOUTH AND DEVONPORT RACES—
WEDNESDAY.
The Produce Stakes of 15 sovs each, 5 ft. Once round.
Gentlemen riders. (4 Subs. )
Mr. C. Trelawney's Rosemary, 4 yrs, lOst 91bs
Capt. Lee's Calypso, 4 yrs, lOst 91b
A good race.
The Saltram Stakes of 25 sovs. each, 10 ft, and 5 only, if de-
clared. Once round and a dis. (29 Subs, 20 of whom
declared.)
Lord Morley nd Cracksman, 4 yrs, 7st 101bs (Horsley,svn.) 1
Gen. Gilbert's Passport, 5 yrs, Bst 51bs
Mr. J. Harris ml Tory, 5 yrs, 7st 1 Jibs
Mr. G. Gregor nd Harmodius, 4 yrs, 7st I Ilb
The Plymouth Plate of 701., added to a Sweepstakes of 3 sovs.
each for the second; three-yrs-old, ist 41b ; four, Bst lOlb ;
five, 9st 51b ; six and aged, 9st 101 b ; winners extra, &c.
Heats, two miles and a distance.
Mr. Forster's Combat, aged ..............(Mr. W. Sadler) I I
Mr. Ley's Abracadabra, 3 years
Sir E. Baker's Montezuma, 4 yrs
Mr. Treen's Doncaster, aged, and Mr. Downs's Harmodius,
4 vrs., also started, but were not placed.
The County Members' Plate of 25 sou., with a Sweepstakes of
5 sou. each added. Heats, once round. Gents. riders.
Sir W. Caress's Eden, 5 yrs, list 71b...( Gen. Gilbert) 1 I
Capt. Lee's Sultan, 12st I Ilb
A good race.
The United Service Plate of 401. Mile beats.
Mr. Forster's Variety, 3 yrs, 7st 101 b ( Burbidge) I I
Mr. Downs's March First, 5 yrs, 9st 81b
The following also started, but were not placed :—Sir E.
Baker's Spume, aged, lOst 21b ; Mr. Treen's Doncaster, aged,
lOst 21b ; Capt. Lee's ch in Sarah, aged, 9st 121 b, and two
others. A fine race.

TUNBRIDGE WELLS RACES.—THURSDAY.
The Town Plate of 50/. The winner to be sold for 120/., &e.
Heats, two miles and a dis.
Mr. l3alchin's Clematis, 3 yrs, Est 121 b ...(Esling) 1 I
Mr. Shepherd nd Ascanius, 5 yrs, 9st
Mr. Monk's Nominee, 4 yrs, Bst 71b
Mr. Wickham's Curate, 4 yrs, Bst 71b
Two others started. Won cleverly.
The Stewards' Stakes of 3 sovs. each, with 40 added, for the
beaten horses. The winner to be sold for 80/., &c. Mile
and a half heats. (4 subs. )
Mr. King's f Dahlia, 3 yrs, Est 111 b. . (Esling) 4 1 1
Mr. Monk's Nominee, 4 yrs
Sir. Shepherd nd Maid Marian, 6 yrs, 9st 21b
Mr. Jenkins's Kate Kearney, 5 yrs, Bst 121 b 3 3 dr

Won easy.
The Hurdle Race ; 1 Ist each : one mile ; was Won in two
heats by Mr. Woodhouse's Gorsebush, beating three others
easily.

HUNTINGDON RACES—THuRsDAY.
The Huntingdon Stakes of 5 goys. each, with 15 added, for all
ages. The winner to be sold for 120/., &c. Heats, once
round.
Mr. W. Edwards's fby Plenipo, 3 yrs, ist 51b (Cotton) 1 1
Mr. Burcham's Diana, 3 yrs, 7st 71b 3 2
Mr. Booth's Hahneman, syrs, Bst 121 b... 2 dr
The Members' Plate of 501., for three-yrs-old, &c. Heats,
once round. The winner to be sold for 2501.
Col. Peel's I-am-not-Aware, 5 yrs, Bst. 131 b (Nat) 2 1 1
Mr. Booth's Lobelia, 5 yrs, 9st 71b 1 2 2
Lord Sandwich'. Normanby, aged, 9st 51b 3 3 3

A-goria race.
Match for 25 sovs., last half mile.—Col. Peel's Huon, 2 yrs,
7st (sat), beat Lord Sandwich's Normanby, 6 yrs, 9st 71b.

CRICKET.
KENT v. ALL Esor.allo.—The county of Kent boasts, and
justly too, of the finest cricketers in England. They have tried
their hand this week with eleven players, selected from all
England, and have come off victorious, as will be seen by the
subjoined score. The game was to have commenced on Mon-
day morning, but owing to the heavy rains it did not begin till
five o'clock in the afternoon, and was not over till Wednesday
evening. Filch, the pride of the Kent eleven, did great things
with his bat, although he had the two great bowlers of the
north and south of England, namely, Lillywhite and Redgate,
to contend with, and also the inimitable Sussex cricket-keeper,
Box, whose activity excites general admiration in the cricket-
ting world.

England—First Innings, Byes 12, wide balls 1, 13 ; Total
80. Second Innings—Byes 3, wide balls 3,6; Total, 74,
Kent—First Innings, Byes 4, wide balls 6, 10; Total, 110,
Second Innings, Bye I ; Total, 45.