The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-29 00:00:00

went. It that eontract could not be enforced in Bruns-
wick, neither could it be enforced in England. If it had
been an ordinary person who had made a contract in
Brunswick, the plea would have been bad, but that was
a plea of privilege. An ordinary individual would be
bound to submit to the judgment of that Court, but a
Sovereign was not bound.
The COURT took time to consider their decision.

JUDGES' CHAMBERS, April 27.
(Before Mr. Justice MAULE )
POWELL V. BRADBURY AND EVANS.
Mr. HUDSON, the plaintiff's solicitor, applied for an
order to inspect a document, and also for a copy to be
supplied. The plaintiff was a sub-editor of a paper be-
longing to the (let-tridents, called the Daily News, and
had brought an action to recover damages for the breach
of an agreement for two years. which had been mutually
entered into. The plaintiff having received from
the Bristol correspondent of the Daily News a re-
port of a case in the District Court of Bankruptcy of that
place, in the course of his ordinary duty had revised and
abridged it for insertion. This insertion formed the pre-
text for the plaintiff's dismissal, the defendants pleading
in reply to the action that the abridged report so inserted
was an unfair, partial, garbled, end improper report.
The plaintiff and his solicitor had made a joint affidavit,
swearing that an inspection of the original copy was
material to the case.

The defendants' solicitor contended, that in all cases
where inspection and copies had been granted the
plaintiffs had been a party to the document, which was
not so in the present case.
Mr. HUDSON relied upon the case of" Blogg v. Kent,',
(6 Bing. 664), where a party being trustee, or in the cha-
racter of trustee, was compelled to grant inspection of
the document; and he submitted that the defendants in
this case were quasi trustees, as newspapers were com-
pelled by Act of Parliament to keep the originals of
matter insem ted for twelve months, for the bemtit of the
public, in case proceedings should be taken in the mean•
time.

Mr. Justice MAULE said he saw no reason for the ap
plication, and should not make the order.

Mr. HUDSON hoped his Lordship would, if he had
any doubt, allow an application to the C mrt.
Mr. Justice MAULE said he could not prevent the
parties from applying to the Court, but he had no doubt
there was no ground for the application.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, April 28.
(Sittings in Banco.)
GRANDON AND OTHERS V. NEWMAN.
The Court was occupied nearly the whole of the morning
in hearing the arguments on a demurrer in this case, which
arose out of a bill of exchange, but the particulars possess no
interest but to the parties concerned.

COURT OF BAAKRUPTCY, April2B.
(Before Mr. Commissioner EvANs.)
KNIGHT V. WALMSLEY.
In this case the defendant was summoned under the Small
Debts Act, to show cause why he did not pay a debt of 3/.los.
due for rent.
The defendant said he was unable to pay or make any
order as he had filed a petition in insolvency, and obtained his
protection.
Mr. HUGHES, for the plaintiff, contended that as the sum-
mons had been taken out before the schedule was filed, that
the protection would not stand against an order under the
Small Debts Act, as the plaintiff had not had notice of the
intention to apply to this Court, and if his Honour would
make the order, the plaintiff would take the responsibility on
himself of acting on the order.
His HoNoun said that he could not make any order in
defiance of the protection which was from all arrests for debt.
The order was therefore refused.
IN RE D. MACLEAN.
To-day was appointed for the adjourned last examination
of this bankrupt, who was formerly M.P. for Oxford. An
application, however, had been made previously to enlarge
the time for the bankrupt's surrender, and the business of the
day was pro forma merely.

SECONDARIES' COURT, April 28.
Before Mr. Secondary POTTER.
WILD V. KAY.
This was an action to recover the sum of 11/. 10a. for
one quarter's rent of premises in St. Martin's-le-Grand.
Mr. Tnomis appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, and
called witnesses to prove the occupation of the house ;
but a difficulty arose as to the production of an agree-
ment, as the plaintiff had not been able to find the at-
testing witness, although an expense of 6L had been
gone to to get it stamped, so that it might be put in
evidence.
Mr. HORRY called a witness who happened to be the
one in request, as he admitted that he was present when
the agreement was made.
Mr. THOMAS said, that if the witness could have been
found, the case might have been tried without the extra
expense of the stamp.
The jury gave a verdict for the amount claimed.
There was only one other cause tried OR an I. 0. U.,
which was undefended, and not of the slightest interest.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

William Medhurst, otherwise John James Parker, was
charged with stealing a prismatic compass, the property of
Mr. Curtis, civil enginear, of 14, Robert-street, Adelphi.
It appeared that the prisoner had called at Mr. Curtis's
cham'Jers to seek employment, being a surveyor. On Sa-
turday last, and shortly after he left, a compass which had
been seen safe on the sideboard a short time before, was
missed. Suspicion did not fall on the prisoner until Mr.
Swift, a pupil of Mr. Curtis, heard from Mr. Denham, ma-
thematical instrument maker, that a person whose descrip-
tion answered that of the prisoner, had sold a compass to
him which corresponded most minutely with that lost. He
then with some difficulty traced the prisoner (who had given
the name of Medhurst to Mr. Curtis, and Parker to
Mr. Denham, and had given false addresses to both).
and left a message for him, that it be would
call at Mr. Curtis's he would get employment. The prisonet
called and was taken into custody. He was imrnediatell
identified by Mr. Denham as the person who sold the compa;
to him.

Mr. Curtis, who alone can identify the instrument wit
certainty, being out of town, the prisoner was remanded f
a week.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

ll'illiara Macqueen was brought before Mr. Bingham
charged with assaulting a young lady of the name of Woods,
residing at No. 6, Marluorough-read, St. John's-wood.
It appeared that on Tuesday night,about 11 o'clock, tk e com-
plainant, accompanied by two other young ladies, were pro-
ceeding along Tottenham-court-road, when the detendan
went up to them, and seizing hold of complainant, exclaimed
"I'll have this one," and caught her up in his arms in such a
manner that she had the greatest difficulty in getting from
his unwelcome embraces. After a severe struggle, she at
length got away, when the prisoner again caught hold of her,
struck her in the mouth, and said he would give her in
charge for attempting to rob him. She then called a police
constable, and gave him in charge.
Ann Furby and Mary Anne Jones, the two young ladies
who were in company with the complainant, corroborated
her evidence in every particular.
The defendant said, he was extremely sorry for what had
occurred. He was in liquor at the time, and did not know
what he was about.
_ _

Mr. BINGHAM said, respectable females were not to be
annoyed and insulted by every man who chose to plead in-
toxication as an extenuation of the offence. He should fine
him 31. for the assault; and trusted that it would act as a
warning to him in future.
Harriet Wiltshire, a middle-aged female, was placed at the
bar, charged with intermarrying with George Baker, her
fJetner husband, Thomas Wiltshire, being still alive.
George Baker, grocer, No. 3, Bruton-street, Berkeley-
square, stated that he was married to the prisoner at Stepney
Unurch, on the 11th of June, 1843. She had previously re-
presented to him that she was a widow, and that her former
husband bad been dead for some years. Upon those repre-
sentations he married her.
The certificate of the former marriage was produced, and
the prisoner, who declined to make any answer Wale charge,
was remanded till Monday next, in order to procure the
attendance of the witnesses who were present at the marriage.