The Sun.
London, England, 1841-01-18 00:00:00

LOSS OF THE BUFFALO.

We regret to learn that accounts have been received
in town of the loss of her Majesty's ship Buffalo, on
the 28th July last, in a gale of wind, in Mercury Bay,
New Zealand. It appears that a party were on shore,
cutting wood for the colony, whea a gale sprung up,
and the vessel was wrecked. Two men were lost,
named Moore and Corney, both of Chatham. The
remainder of the crew were encamped on shore, until a
vessel arrived to relieve them. This has been done.
The Buffalo was only a sort of lumber-ship, or provi-
sion-tender to the Colony.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JAN. 16.

iN RE THE LAND-TAX OF THE PARISH OF UTLEY, IN TUE

DISTRICT OF SAFFRON WALDEN.

Mr. WORDSWORTH showed cause against a rule obtained
in November last, calling upon the Land-tax Commis-
sioners to show cause why they should not make a new
assessment of the bland-tax upon all property in the above
parish in an equal manner. The application was
made on the part of Mr. Lake, a gentleman residing
in London, but holding property in the above parish. He
complained of the inequality of the rate last made, 293
acres belonging to the Rev. Mr. Raymond and other pro-
perties, were wholly omitted from the assessment, in con-
sequence of which inequality he and other occupiers in
the parish were compelled to pay more than their just pro-
portion.
The COURT said it was perfectly clear from the affidavits
on both sides that the Commissioners had not come to any
decision on either the first or second occasions, they de-
sired information and gave time for its collection, at the
last hearing the appellant did not appear, and the appeal
was dismissed. Under such circumstances the Court had
no power to interfere.—Rule discharged.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JAN. 12.
GOING TO LAW.—William Hall, a newsvender,
bookseller, &c., was opposed by Mr. Woodroffe, on the
part of Mr. John Cumberland, the well-known pub-
lisher of plays, and supported by Mr. Cooke.
This case shows the result of going to law, and the
enormous expense incurred by a creditor in attempting
to recover a sum of 121. It appeared that Mr. Cum-
berland was the holder of a 121. bill of exchange
drawn by Mr. Berger, the publisher, of Holywell•street
on and accepted by the insolvent, who owed him the
money. The bill was in the course of business paid
away to the present holder, and an action was brought
against the insolvent to recover the amount, when, by
his attorney, he pleaded, and one of the pleas was, that
it was an accommodation bill. The action being un-
der 201. could be tried before the Sheriff, but that pro-
ceeding was resisted, and, on account of the pleas, it
was tried in the superior court. It was tried before
Mr. Baron Gurney, and he termed it a " disgraceful
defence." A verdict was obtained for 121., the amount
claimed, and it was proved that in getting the barren
verdict the taxed costs of Mr. Cumberland amounted
to no less a sum than " thirty-seven pounds," and the
only satisfaction derived was, that the insolvent-had
been taken in execution. The costs, if the defendant
had not pleaded, would have been under 6/., and now
they were 371.!
Mr. Berger stated that the bill was not an accommo-
dation one. The insolvent owed him the money, and it

was a renewal.
The insolvent confessed that there was no pretence
for saying it was an accommodation bill. He left the
business to his attorney who had pleaded.
A long inquiry was made respecting the insolvent's
business, which was carried on by his wife. He had
been out on bail.
Mr. WOODROFFE made some strong observations
on the conduct of the attorney who had pleaded to the
action. The Court could not touch him, and could
only remand the insolvent.
The Chief COMMISSIONER, in giving the opinion of
the Court, said that the defence was most vexatious,
and when the case was perfect, the insolvent would be
remanded at the suit of Mr. Cumberland.
The case was adjourned, and the insolvent ordered
to be taken to prison.
It was subsequently proved that his wife was seri-
onsly ill, and said to be dying,
The COURT, under the circumstance, humanely ol-
lowed him to remain out on bail, and adjourned the
case to the 15th February.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.

CHARGE OF FORGERY.--.-Mr. Wm. Latham, an ex-
tensive draper, residing at Halifax, in the county of
York, was brought up by Inspector Harrison, of the
city police, before Aldermen Pirie and Farebrother, to
answer a charge of having forged the acceptance to a
bill of exchange for 173/. 135., and with uttering the
same, knowing the instrument to be forged. Mr. Lloyd,
a solicitor in Cheapside, appeared for Messrs. Leaf and
Co., the prosecutors, and the senior clerk of Mr. Hum-
phreys was in attendance for the prisoner.
Before the witnesses were examined the bill was put
in. It was dated Sept. 15th, 1840, drawn by the
prisoner for 173/. 135., at three months after date, and
purported to be accepted by Thomas Pearson. The
prisoner as the maker of the bill, was also the first
indorser.

John Wesley Barrett deposed that he is clerk to
Messrs. Leaf, Smith, and Co., extensive silk mercers
in Wood-street, Cheapside. He took the bill now pro-
duced from the prisoner several months back, in liquida-
tion of a debt of more than 3001., which was owing to
the firm. It is drawn on a ss. stamp, and is in the
same state now as when he took it, excepting the addi-
tional indorse and the notary's ticket. The body of
the bill and the indorsement were doubless in the
prisoner's hand-writing, but he was not prepared to say
that the name" Thomas Pearson" (the acceptor) was his.
Mr. Alderman PutrE—ls not the charge that he has
forged, the acceptance ?—ls the acceptor here ? If not,
how are we to proceed ?
Mr. Lloyd said that the prisoner was only given into
custody on Friday night, and owing to distance they were
not prepared to get the acceptor, but he (Mr. Lloyd)
had some letters, which he put in.
Alderman FAREBROTHER—You must get Pearson
the acceptor up here, and then he will be bound to
swear whether it be his aceeptance or not, on that the
charge hinges.
The prisoner (who was allowed to stand at the table)
said he hoped that he should be admitted to bail, with
which he was quite prepared ; he requested it, because
he had an extensive business which required his atten-
tion.—The Magistrates could net agree to the request.
Mr. Inspector Harrison said he had 301. in bank-notes
and a gold watch which he had taken from the prisoner,
and he requested to know whether he was at liberty to
return the property.

. .
Mr. Lloyd said he had no objection, when the watch
and notes were given to the prisoner.
The Inspector then said he had a pocket-book which
contained a great number of bills of exchange, and va-
rious memoranda. He was requested to hand them
to the Bench, where the papers were closely examined,
and appeared to be of some importance, particularly as
there were some other bills over due, which were ac-
cepted by Thomas Bennett, and which appeared not to
have been negotiated.
The prisoner declared the acceptance to be genuine,
and said that he had given 3001. in good cash for them,
and others of a similar description. He said that Mr.
Lloyd presented an assignment of his (prisoner's) estate
and effects to the prosecutors for the benefit of his cre-
ditors, and because he did not sign it, the threat which
had beenheld out was carried into execution, and he
was dragged to a police station. Had he signed an in-
strument he had not read or was prepared to expect,
this charge would not have been made. He considered
that he had been harshly dealt by.
Mr. Lloyd denied that the prisoner was menaced, but
he admitted that an assignment was requested, and that
proceedings had been instituted against Pearson.
Mr. Alderman FAREBROTIIER said that being the
case, he thought that if the prisoner was committed
without stronger proof, no jury would convict him.
Prisoner—Mr. Lloyd said, " Unless you sign this
paper, I'll give you in charge of an officer," and one of
the Mr. Nevilles, of Carey-street, was present at the
time. He proceeded to state that he had been in busi-
ness at Halifax nineteen years, and that his stock in
trade at this moment exceeded 4,0001., beyond a large
sum in book debts. One of his objects in coming to
town was to request a little time, but to ask no favour
by offer of compromise.
It was finally arranged for the case to stand over till
Thursday next, in case Pearson arrived in London by
that day.
Mr. Borridale, attorney, whose office is at No. 20,
King's Arms-yard, Coleman-street, came into the office
with his face discoloured, and said he had been violently
assaulted a few minutes ago in his own office, and he
expected that his assailant was forthcoming to answer
the charge.
Mr. Mortimore,and several gentlemen connected with
the London Joint-stock Bank Company, soon made their
appearance.
Mr. Borridale stated that he and the defendant were
shareholders in the London Joint-stock Company Bank,

and Mr. Mortimore came into his office this morning,
and closed the door after him, and then coming up to
witness, said, " Now, Sir, I shall punish you for in-
sulting me." I said, You don't mean to assault me ;"
and he said, " Yes, I do ;" and he gave me me two,
three, or four violent blows on the nose and mouth (the
marks were apparent). I grappled with him, until my
clerk came to my assistance.
By Mr. Baker, solicitor for the defendant—He did
not come and demand an apology. I remember meet-
ing him and a Mr. Nicholson some time since, when
they solicited my vote for the election of a director to
the bank company alluded to. I remember putting
some questions as to whether he (defendant) had written
a letter (anonymous) reflecting on a Mr. Philpotts, a
candidate ; and whether it was him who had brought
forward a Mr. Farrant to succeed the director who was
going out by rotation ? He replied in the affirmative ;
and then I said, " It's dirty, shabby conduct, and I'll
have nothing to do with those who are a party to it."
I did not say, " You are a dirty, shabby fellow, and I'll
not associate with you." I never had an apology de-
manded, directly or indirectly. Farrant, whose cause
Mr. Mortimore espoused, was the successful candidate ;
so, after " licking " me at the election, he must come
and lick me at my own office.
,Thomas Collison, clerk to the prosecutor, stated that
he obeyed his master's call, and when he entered the
private office he saw the two gentlemen scuffling, but
he saw no blow struck. He could not tell who struck
the first blow. He heard Mr. Mortimore say, after he
(witness) went into the room, " I'll teach you to call
me a dirty fellow."
Mr. H. Nicholson, of No. 7, Shoreditch, was called
on the part of the defendant. He stated that they were
out canvassing for Mr. Farrant, and happened to meet
Mr. Borridale in the street ; and, knowing him to be
a large shareholder, they solicited his vote. Some
questions were put and answered (as already stated),
and Mr. Borridale said to Mr. Mortimore, " You are
a dirty, shabby, shuffling fellow, and I will not associate
with you publicly or privately." I afterwards saw Mr.
Borridale, and besought him to retract the words, as
Mr. Mortimore I know to be a high-minded and inde-
pendent man ; and I expressed a fear that something
unpleasant would occur after the election was over.
By the defendant—At the election he (Mr. Borri-
dale) used similar expressions in a general way, and
threw out insinuations.

Mr. Mortimore begged to state that he did not deny
the charge ; but he felt himself grossly insulted, and as
he had waited long enough for an apology, he went this
morning and had an interview, which led to the ren..
contre. He said that when he found Mr. Borridale
he (Mr. Borridale) put up his arm as if to strike.
He (Mr. Mortimore) knocked away his guard, and then
some blows followed, in which Mr. Borridale was
worsted, but had he (Mr. Mortimore) been vanquished,
the Magistrates would have had no trouble.
Alderman PIRIE said that if the blows bad been
struck in the street when the words (which were,
to say the least, ungentlemanly) were spoken,
the case would have been different ; but here four-
teen days had elapsed, and one gentleman goes to
the house of another, and takes the law into his own
hands ; as he had done so he must take the conse-
quences, but it was a pity they did not meet together
before, and mutually explain what had been inadvertently
said in the effervescence of an election contest. He

(Alderman Pirie) wished to know whether the defen-
dant would like to go to the Sessions ? Mr. Mortimore
—l'd rather it should be disposed of at once in a sum-
mary way. . .

A second Alderman was sent for for that purpose,
but ere his arrival, Mr. Alderman Pirie (always a
peace-maker), said he hoped it would meet the appro-
bation of both gentlemen that Mr. Mortimore pay 2/.

to some charity.
The defendant bowed assent, and the prosecutor
elected that it should be given to the fund for the
houseless poor.
The defendant's solicitor said as there had been no
conviction, Mr. I3orridale, perhaps, would bring his ac-
tion for assault and battery.
Alderman PIRIE—No, no, no.
Mr. Borridale—Certainly not, that I pledge, and
I'll take care not to meet Mr. Mortimore again except
on " dividend day."—(Laughter.)