The Sun.
London, England, 1824-08-26 00:00:00

PO I,ICE- ELLIG ENCE.

IMPORTANT DECISION IN THE SILK TRADE.
Wo as II ir ST EZ T.—Yesterday Elizabeth Castles appeared
before Mr. BEVILL, in answer to a summons obtained against
her by Mr. Wm. Hill, a respectable manufacturer' of (Gun-
street, Spitalfielda, for unlawfully damaging a piece of silk
which she got to weave.
It appeared that a few days before the defendant in this came
summoned her employer for the balance of wages which. had
been stopped for the injury done to the silk; the Magistrate
then decided that he should pay her the wages due, and then
summon her for the alleged injury.
Yesterday the silk was produced in the office. and a clerk in
Mr. Hill's employment pointed out the damage done. Mr.
Hill stated that the lowest price he could charge for the Injury
would be ten shillings.
A person in the silk trade, unconnected with either of the
parties, stated, that he believed the injury to have arisen front
accident, but that a charge of one yard would be sufficient rom.
pensation.
The defendant stated that it was completely an accident, she
having at the times child in her arms and a cup of broth in her
hand, when the child suddenly started, and threw part of the
contents of the cup over the silk in the loom.
Mr. BEvILL, after consulting the General Silk Act, said he
was afraid he could render the complainant no relief.
Mr. Hill (somewhat astonished)—No relief, Sir? •
Mr. Bxelet.—No, Sir; for the Act only authorizes Magi-
strates to punish where the deed was done—" wilfully, wicked-
ly, and maliciously, with intent to injure," which was not then
the ease, as it was clearly proved it was an accident.
Mr. Hill—And how am I to do ; for it was always the prac-
tice to stop out of the wages for the injury done ?
Mr. BEVILL—You can have your action.
Mr. Hill—How am Ito proceed ?
Mr. lirviet.—Your Attorney will be the hest person to
consult upon that subject.—The parties then withdrew.

FURIOUS DOGS.
Lastnvrit-STAloET.—Vesterilay Mr. Brooks, an extensive
black ash manufacturer, residing on ltow Common, Appeared
before Jouw H ARDW I C N., Esq• under the following charge :
Mrs. Gooding, rather a respectable looking woman, the wife
of a merchant in the neighbourhood, with a child about niae
months old In het arms, stated that a few days before as she was
coming from the baker's, with three lottive hcr arm, and in
'Jagging Mr. Brooks 's gate, a largo dawrreittissi uut her
and toru
in ;hocking manner; the hack other Opt hand and fingers
were'handaged up from the effects. She also produced a stuff-
own which she wore at the time, which was rent to pieces.
~rtla child she hail in her arms presented a shocking spectacle,
from its having contracted a disease in consequence of the
dreadful state of agitation under which its mother • laboured
since the ;Accident occurred.—Mr. Brooks in his defence said
that the dog did belong to him about two years, but he had
sold him to a butcher, and that it was only when it wanted food
that it came to his houset however, as the accident occurred
there, he was willing to pay any exPences, and would destroy
the dog if necessary, which was all the complainant wanted.He was discharged, and an officer sent with hint to shoot the
dog.