The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-20 00:00:00

Sub-Committee No. b.

BIEVIINGIZANI AND oxrona carstivuNG-
HAlM EXTENSION), AND EIRIVIINGNADI
AND OXFORD 3-UNCTION RAILWAYS.
(Continuo(' from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)

Mr. Cavendish having been sent for to attend the Sub-Committee
No. 1, Mr. Shirley took his place.
The petition of the Earl of Warwick, for which also Mr. Carter ap-
peared, alleged that the stati,n at Birmingham was described as
" adjoluh; the Grand Junction Raiiway Station in the parish of
Birminshani," whereas the stations of the Grand Junction Rail-
way was in the parish of Ashton-junta-Birmingham.
Mr. Btaan admitted that there was an inaccuracy in this respect,
as the station was not in the parish of Birmingham, but it was in
the borough of Birmingham, and the mistake was merely a substitu-
tion of the word parish f r boron li.
The CHAIRMAN observed that this was not an Inaccuracy by which
any one could be misled.

Mr. CARTE' then called the clerk of the peace for Worcester to
prove a discrepancy between the plans and sections, and said that, as
the discrepancy did not appear except on the sealed plans, lie must
request the Committee to order the witness to open the sealed plans.
The Committee gave the order required.
Mr. BURKE inquired whether these plans had ever been opened
before?

The Clerk of the Peace replied that they had not, and proceeded to
open the " virgin documents" for the inspection of the Committee.
The plans having been opened, the alleged discrepancy was
" non est inventus."
Mr. Buaas observed, that his friend had found a "mare's nest,"

and recommended that the plans should be sealed up agate.
The next allegation fell to the ground.
The next petition taken alleged that there was no oontinous plan
of the railway deposited with the clerks of the peace. This

allegation was founded upon the fact that certain property was
omitted in the plan, and a reference was made to an additional and
enlarged plan This point had previously been argued tat great length
upon previous petitions.
A witness was called to prove the omission of certain property
from the plans.
Mr. BraaE observed that he thought his friend had iso right, upon
an allegation that there was no continuous plan, to g 4 Into a ques-
tion as to the correctness of any particular part of the Van.
A discussion here ensueit, which ended in the point being reserved.
It was next alleged that the mileage was not merited from the
station of the Grand Junction Railway where the line was said to
begin, tut from the station at Charles-street., Birmingheunn.
This allegation was admitted by Mr. Burke.
The next allegation, which also had reference to :the point as to
the additional plans, was withdrawn.
It was next alleged that the datum line was not the name through-
out, the distance between the datum line and the line of rails being
four feet greater at the beginning of one sheet than .at the end of the
sliCet preceding.

Mr. Burke admitted the discrepancy, but submitte d that the alle-
gation was not proved, as the datum line was in fact the same.
The Committee determined to report that the standing orders were
not complied with, inasmuch as the distance between thn datum line
and the line of rails was incorrectly marked. They con sidered that
the datum line was the same throughout, and that the error was in
the making of the gradient.
Tke neat allegation had reference to an inaccuracy I n the datum
line, which in one of the plans was not krill:ht. It was represented
on the other side that the crookedness of the line was owing to the
shrinking of the transfer paper used in engraving the glans, and that
the distance between the rails and the datum line was c orrect.
The Committee haying heard evidence on both sides, decided that
the allegation war not proved.

Upon the allegation that a carriage-road, passing thre ugh the tleld,
marked No. 27, on the plans, was not marked, the CV ,nimittse de-
cided that the standing orders were not complied with.
The Committee were discussing a question as to whet her a certain
road was a public carriage way or not, when Mr. Speal :er was an-
nounced at prayers, and the Chairman having re-seals 1 the plans
which had been opened fer the purpose of ezhibitint :Mr. Carter's
" mare's nest," as Mr. Burke had termed it,
The Committee adjourned till to-morrow.

STANDING ORDERS' COMMITTEE.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of ye et erday.)
DONCASTER, WAKEFIELD, AND LEEDS RA ILWAT.
This was the next case which occupied the attention of the Com-
mittee, who, after an extremely lengthened investigation , decided that
the Company had complied with the standing orders.
HUNTINGDON AND WISBEACH RAILW)
After hearing the usual evidence, the Committee decidle d that the
Company had not complied with the standing orders.
LYNN AND ELY (EXTENSION TO MARC E.)
In this case the committee decided that the Ce q, pany had
complied with the standing orders.
ELY AND HUNTINGDON RAILWAY (BEDFORT) ; EXTEN-
SION).
The Committee declared that the Company had compiled:• with the
standing orders in this case.
LYNN AND ELY EXTENSION TO SFALTANG.
A like decision was also given in this case.
The Committee adjourned at Live o'clock.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
fIOUSE OF LORDS, March 19.
The Rouse eat to -clay to hear Scotch appeals. !Chet Peers
present were—Lord Cottenham, Lord Brougham, ,and Lord
Campbell,

Tins rEoFFEFS OF TRUST AND GOVERNORS OE .IC6RInT'S
The arguments uosPITAL V. ROSS.
and concluded to- In
this
part-heard appeal well rosumed
the right of the a day.pp jhe question in this case: wAsas to
tion to be admitted into 11 reject the respondent'. s applica-
tion
Hospital. Thi Court of
Session decided in favour of hso
respondaeptlpte,alaendd. I rom that
judgment the governors of the he.
Their Lordships, at the conclusion t argum es its, gave
judgment, reversinc Court belowthe decision of the

' •
on
COURT OF CHANCERY, m
arca isi ~
ARCHER. v. HUDSON.
ectsi The arguments in this part-heard appeal from the, d
of the Master of the Rolls were resumed and conch ded to.
day. The bill was filed by Thomas Archer and Frances, his
wife, formerly Miss Kendrew, against G. Hudson an d win.
Scawin, the registered officers of the York Union Bea ik, and
Christopher Daniel, the uncle of the plaintiff, Mrs. A: her, to
restrain proceedings at law on the part if the bank, c/a a pro-
missory note for 5001. in which Mrs. Archer before In .r mar-
riage had joined as surety with her uncle,Christopher .. Daniel,
in giving to the bank as a security for his balance to ith the
bank. Miss Kendrew had lost her father at three ;rears of
age, and her mother at nine, and being entitled to ce] .7 Lain real
and personal estate, which was in the hands of trut (tees, she
was put to school, and there continued until the r tit'e of 17
years, passing her holidays with her uncle and aun ,t Danie:.
After that period she altogether resided with her u acid until
her marriage in 1841, haying attained the age of 2 I year in

November, 1837, and her uncle was paid for her maintenance
out of the income of her property. Mr. Daniel, some time
in December, 1837, had overdrawn his account with the
bank, of which one Mr. Hauxwell was the manager, to the
amount of 701. Daniel and Hauxwell and their families were
on intimate terms, and Daniel applied to Hauxwell to allow
him to overdraw his account to the extent of 5001. Haux-
well required security, and Daniel proposed that his niece,
Miss Kendrew, should join with him in giving a promissory
note to that amount. Daniel afterwards told Hauxwell
that his niece was willing to join in the note, which was
drawn up by Hauxwell, and in the first week of January,
1838, taken by him to the house of Daniel, where he and
his niece signed it. The bank, sone time in the month of
December, 1841, shortly after the marriage of Mrs. Archer,
without any communication with her, placed the amount of
the note to the credit of Daniel, who in 1843 took the benefit
of the Insolvent Act. Upon the evidence which was given
in support of these circumstances, the Master of the Rolls,
who heard the cause, decided, that as against the plaintiff,
Mrs. Archer, the note of 5001. was void, ab initio, having
been obtained by the undue influence of a party standing in
loco parentis towards her ; and that on another ground the
transaction could net be supported as sought by the bank.
The note had been given by Daniel and his niece as his surety,
by way of a guarantee for any floating balance to be due from
time to time by Daniel; the bank was not justified, without
his niece's consent, in placing the amount of the note to the
credit of Daniel, and that such an act was a violation of the
original contract; and the Master of the Rolls restrained the
bank by perpetual injunction, from suing the plaintiffs on the
nets. It was from the whole of this decree that the de-
fendants, who represented the bank, appealed.
The LOAD CHANCELLOR postponed his judgment.

DAGGETT V. MKUX.
The arguments in this part-heard case, also an appeal
from the decision of the Master of the Rolls, were concluded
to-day, and

The LORD CRAWCILLOR gays judgment, dismissing the
appeal with costs.

SHERIFFS' COURT, March 19.
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL.)
BEAN V. JOHNSTONE.

The plaintiff in this action is the landlord of the Greyhound
Inn, at Croydon. The defendant is a lady, who appeared in
person to defend the case. The demand was for 121.125. 2d.,
for board and lodging during the last assizes.
On the part of the plaintiff, it was stated that the defen-
dant went to the Greyhound, represented that she was en-
gaged by the Duke of Brunswick to make arrangements
for witnesses, who were to be examined in a case to be
tried at the assizes. She, ii company with a lady, oc-
cupied a bed-room and sitting-room for eleven days, and
was during that time supplied with dinners, teas, and other
refreshments. The defendant had admitted her liability,
but disputed the amount, contending that the charges were
exorbitant. The charge was half a guinea a night for the
bed-room.

William Herbert Morris, head waiter at the Greyhound,
was called, and preyed the occupation of the rooms through
the assizes. He considered the charges in the bill ♦ery
moderate. The defendant said if the Duke did not pay she
would.

William Fooley, waiter at the Greyhound, said that the
defendant had both a bed-room and sitting-room ; a common
charge was a guinea for a bed the first night, but no charge
was made for the second night ; half a guinea a night was
charged even when the party remained for a fortnight.
The witness was cross-examined by the defendant, with a
view of showing that she had no sitting-room exclusively
appropriated to her use, and that one of the rooms was a
mere lumber-room. The witness admitted that it was a
large room, generally used as a refreshment-mom when
balls were held. He thought tea ;shillings a night very
reasonable, particularly as there were two of them; 4s. 6d.
was charged for one chop, but defendant might have had
more if she had thought proper; 2s. 6d. was charged for tea
when meat was had. All the charges were of the usual
kind. He had been waiter at the Greyhound for eighteen
or twenty years.
The defendant then addressed the jury, and said that she
wished to correct the statement that she had been engaged
to look after the witnesses for the Duke of Brunswick.
She was there on her own account, and distinctly told
the plaintiff so. There was only one lady at the inn who
had anything to do with the Duke of Brunswick's case, and
defendant had been asked to lie with her, as her presence
would not have been agreeable to other witnesses.
The defendant put in letters, showing that she had
offered to pay 71., which she considered was a fair
charge. That sum was refused by Messrs. Drummond,
who issued a writ, but afterwards offered to take the 71.,
and V. for costs. The defendant complained of being
put to an expense, and offered to pay half the costs.
This offer, however, was rejected, and the action was carried
on. She contended that the charges were very unreasonable,
and that it was not usual to charge night after night for the
bed when the party lived in the house.
Mrs. Ellen Fludder was called, and proved that she was
with the defendant. They had no sitting-room, but were
sent from one to the other. The bed-room was very scantily
furnished. There were no chairs fit to sit •n, and one had
only three legs. She considered the charges very high for
the accommodation.

Mr. Fowler was called, and said he had been a special ju-
ryman at Chelmsford, and was only charged three guineas
per week for every expense.
The UNDER-SHERIFF said it was entirely a question for
the jury whether the charges were fair for the first inn in an
assize town, at assize time.—Verdict for the full amount.

ASSIZE IN TEL LIGENCE.
HOME CIRCUIT, Lewes, March 17.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN.)
Thomas Denyer, gamekeeper, who had been admitted
to bail, surrendered to answer an indictment, charging
him with the manslaughter of Benjamin Remnant.
After hearing the evidence for the prosecution,
Mr. CLARKSON submitted that there was no evidence
to go to the jury in support of the charge of man-
slaughter. The evidence appeared to him to make out
a case of excusable homicide.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE expressed an opinion that
the case ought to go to a jury.
The Learned Counsel having, accordingly, addressed
them, and the Lord Chief Justice having briefly summed
up, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
Sarah Wathen, 23, single woman, was indicted for
the wilful murder of her female illegitimate child, by
cutting its throat, on the 16th of August last, at the
parish of Brighton.
It appeared that the prisoner, who is a very good..
limiting c, youn woman, entered the service of a gentle-
man named ''Hammond, who resides in Brunswick-
,,quare, Brighton, in April, 1843, as lady's maid, and
resided with the family in that capacity until the 10th
or August. For some time previous the prisoner had
cotnplained of tooto-ache and other illness, but not the
slightest suspicion was entertained of her being
in the family way. On that day, however, she
complained ito a fellow-servant, named Boreham,
that she was too ill to wait upon her mis-
tress at her toilet, and requested her to do so for
her, and she then returned to her own room, where
she was shortly afterwards heard to groan most pite-
ously,
and this fact caused a suspicion of her condition.
The prisoner soon afterwards came down into the kit-
chen, and in consequence of what had transpired, a
search was made in her bed-room, where such appear-
ances presented themselves as left no doubt that she
had recently been delivered of a child ; and, on the
bed being ( xamined, the dead body of an infant was
found between the mattress and tho sacking of the bed.
There were several slight cuts upon the body and arms
of the infant, but the mortal injury had been in-
flicted upon the neck of the child, which was
nearly severed from the body, and merely hung to the
trunk by a few of the integuments, and the injury ap-
peared to have been inflicted by a pen-knife which was
found in tho room, and the blade of which was covered
with blood. There was no distinct proof of the unhappy
infant being born alive, the testimony of the medical
gentlemen who were examined merely going to the ex-
tout of expressing an opinion, from tests which they ap-
plied to the lungs of the deceased child, that it had
breathed, but they could not take upon themselves to
state the necessary facts to show that in law the infant
was born alive.

The LORD CRIMP JUSTICE, when the evidence bad
been gone through, expressed an opinion that the ca-
pital charge could not be sustained, and the only ques •
tion that remained for the jury would be whether there
was a concealment of the birth.
Mr. CLARKSON said that upon this part of the case he
felt he could not expect to obtain a favourable verdict,
and he should therefore decline to occupy the time of
the Court by addressing the jury.
The prisoner was then found guilty of misdemeanour,
and was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)

BONINGTON V. WOOD.
This was en action of trespass of no interest but to
the parties, but the following incident deserves to be re-
corded :