The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-25 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT, Jan. 23.

BAIL COURT Ja:. 23.
The Court was occupied during the whole morning in
disposing of motions possessing no feature of public interest.

PRIVILEGES OF 'FOREIGN AM-
BASSADORS AND ENVOYS.
LORD MAYOR'S COURT, Guildhall, Jan. 23.
(Before the lion. C. E. LAW, Recorder.)
MURPHY (EXECUTRIX) AGAINST DON JOSE THOMAS

MURPHY, MEXICAN ENVOY.
The consideration of this important case, which, so far
as relates to the privileges granted by the statute of the
7th of Anne, cap. 12, to ambassadors, envoys, and ac-
credited representatives of foreign courts, their domes-
tics and servants, in this country, was, during the sitting
of the Court, again brought before the Recorder, but with
the essception of the question of privilege the particular
facts of the case present no feature of public interest.
It appears that on the sth December last the plaintiff
issued a plaint, and obtained the customary attachment
out of this Court, which possesses the peculiar privilege
in conjunction with the city of York, of attaching
money, goods, or chattels belonging to a debtor,
in the hands or possession of a third party. The
amount attached was 3,8001., which was in the
hands of Messrs. Schneider and Co., merchants, in
the City, and on the 16th of December Mr. Locke moved
fur and obtained a rule nisi to dissolve the attachment
under the provisions of the statute before referred
to, viz., the 7th Anne, cap. 12, which not only protects
the liberty of the person and cha. tels of the representa-
tive in this country of any foreign Power, but renders
the parties issuing or causing to be issued any writ or
proceeding against any such representative liable to
punishment, according to the discretion of the Lord
Chancellor, Lord Keeper, or any of the Judges of the
Court of Queen's Bench, on representation to them of
any such infringement of the Act, which Act is a decla-
ratory one, and passed in consequence of the Russian
Ambassador having been seized, arrested, and forcibly
taken from his carriage for debt a short time previous,
and this country being at peace with Russia it was con-
sidered to be against the law of nations.
Mr. RYLAND, in showing cause, contended that the
attachment ought to remain, inasmuch that the de-
fendant was not de facto at the time of the issuing of the
attachment the accredited representative of the 'Govern-
meni of Mexico, he having been recalled on the 29th of
September, although his successor, General Don Jose
Mendoza did not arrive until the 20th of December.
The LEARNED RECORDER held that the defendant
was entitled to his privileges up to the 20th of December,
and dissolved the attachment.

withßK AB
being
whato sAcLaLIEI
POLICE INTELLIGENCE,
i
111ANSION-HOUS E.
theGED
'RA
FRAUD.
—erAal btoadllythoif:
man, of military appearance, whose name appeared in the
ed by
chaßrgEerdA
charge list as James Edward Carnegie, was put to the bar,
tradesmen a common sWindler.
Mr. Wilkins (a solicitor) appeared fur the prosecution, and
Mr. Morgan, from Mr. Humphrey's offices, attended for thr
defence. The prisoner, who was introduced to the justice
room as Captain Carnegie, was stated to have b. en connected,
as a provisional committee-man, with several of the evanes-
cent railway companies.
Mr. Andrew Smith, of Wallington-place, Commercial-
' road East, engineer, said, " In the early part of 1845, the
prisoner ;called on me at my office in White Lion-court,
Cornhill, and having represented himself to me as Captab.
Carnegie of the Royal Engineers, and the cousin cf the llon.
Captain Carnegie of the Royal Navy, and of the Hon- Fox
Maule, borrowed of me the sum of 5/. He said that hf
would introduce me to the two gentlemen above-named, and
I lent him the money, which he promised to return in a few
days, and which he borrowed upon the pretence that he had
left his purse at home, in consequence of his allege 1 relationship
to those distinguishcd individuals. I afterwards learne,.
that there was no connexion at all between him and them.
I met him first in a public coffee-room, and he introduced to
me a lady as his wife, whom ho described as the Countess de
Beaumont, and related to the blood-royal of Spain.
Mr. Morgan—You do not svialc of your first meting?
Mr. Smith—No; I had met him previously. He borrowed
three sovereigns of me on the 30th of November, 1814, at
a public dinner. . -le Ttold,
me it was the amount of the con
tribution he intended to give to the charity; but I do no;
be:ieve that he paid
told me that he had considerable property in Spain and
Portugal, and the East Indies, and he introduced me to
several respectable persons, who, it appears, became acciden-
tally as I did, for they were all
tally acquainted with him imposed
upon by him.
bit'. Morgan—Of that you know nothing.
Alderman GIBBS—He seems to know something about it;
we shall see by and by.
Mr. Andrew Smith—l accompanied him to the Society of
Arts, as he wished to go there to see the apparatus of l'i!
brow's Patent Atmospheric Railroad, and I w:ts a inendie

of the society.
Cross-examined by Mr. Morgan—l was first introduced to
him in I.T9yember, 044. I dined with him on St. Andrew'a

- - -
COLEMAN V. THE EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY COMPANY.
An injunction had been obtained in this case by the plain-
tiff under these circumstances :—The plaintiff was a pro-
prietor in the Eastern Counties Railway, and the directors of
that company were desirous of constructing a railway from
one of their termini to Harwich, and by that means obtain-
ing a communication with the sea, and thence with several
important sea-ports on the coast of France, Holland, Sec. The
plaintiff refused to embark in the undtrtaking, it being
alleged by the defendants that he was induced to oppose it,
because he was a proprietor in another steam-packet, which
the proposed railway would seriously injure.
An application was mane to-day, on the part of the de-
fendants, to alter the form of the injunction, which his Lard-
ship refused to do. •

IN R.
There were. two petitio E nsPENDEN
in this case, the first for
the confirmation of the Master's report, and the latter to im-
pugn the finding of the Master in reference to some items
in a bill which he bad disallowed. The parties were soli-
citor and client, and the accounts had reference to profes-
sional services rendered by the former, the charges for which
the Master considered exorbitant.
Mr. Turner and Mr James appeared for the appellant,
whose case was not concluded till the rising of the Court.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jan. 23.
The whole of the day was occupied in hearing argu..
ments and authorities on a demurrer out of the Crown paper,
which had no public interest.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Jan. 23.
BOUTON V. MILES.
This cause, which was in part heard yesterday, was an
action in which the plaintiff sought to recover the sum of
100/., alleged to be due to him for one year's wages as captain
of a yacht of which the defendant was the owner:
Mr. M. Chambers and another Learned Gentleman ap-
peared for the plaintiff; Mr. Crowder and Mr. Udall for the
defendant.

The plaintiff was, it appeared, employed by the defendant
at the rate of 1001. a year, as the captain of a yacht,
the property of the defendant. It was resolved that a trip
should be taken to Gibraltar and the Mediterranean in the
yacht, the plaintiff being the captain. Soon after the return
of the yachting party to England, the plaintiff requested
payment of his year's salary. The sum of 91. was tendered
to him on behalf of the defendant, that being the amount of
the balance due upon his wages for six months. This, how-
ever, the plaintiff refused, and brought the present action to
recover the whole amount of a year's wages, on the ground
of the engagement having been made for twelve months,
and that in consequence of the fatiguing nature of his occu-
pations, caused by the continued disturbances on board by
the various members of the yachting party and their fair
companions, his health had become so impaired, that upon
his return home he was totally unable to enter into any other
engagement.
The defeadant resisted the claim on the ground that the
defendant had discharged himself from his employment; he
could not be held liable for the payment of the wages of the
plaintiff for the term of twelve months.
Several witnesses were called on both sides, and the
Learned Baron having summed up, the jury retired,
After an absence of considerable length, ibe jury returned
a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of 59/. Is., as the
balance due upon twelve months' wages.
CO U

—RT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jan. 23.
PHILLIPS V. NAIRN AND OTHERS.
The Court was occupied the most of he morning with this
case, which was an application for a new trial, on the ground
of misdirection from the judge on the trial. The question
was between the owner.; and the underwriters of the ship
Broxbourneburg, which received damage in a severe storm
at sea off the coast of India, so as to be compelled to run into
Port Louis, in the Mauritius. The timbers of the vessel, when
she came to be repaired, were found incapable of refastenings,
and were many of them replaced, which increased the expense
of the repairs to about 8,000/. The defendants, the underwri-
ters, refused to pay more than 50 per cent. of this amount,
averring that the rest arose, not from perils of the sea, but
from the unseaworthmess of the ship.
Sir F. THESIGER contended against a new trial, and had
not concluded his argument when the Curt rose.