The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-04 00:00:00

Mr CROWDER objected, considering that the question
had no other foundation than the lively imagination of
his friend. _ _

Mr. Sergeant SHEA.— Surely it is something more
than mere lively imagination to infer, that a woman of
no occupation is found drunk and incapable in the streets
at twelve o'clock at night, might be a prostitute.
Mr. CRowDEß—(after looking at the police sheet)—l
see they take the ages of persons at the station-house,
and in that charge Trings, the woman, is stated to be 56
years of age.--(Laughter.)
The witness went on to state that the defendant said
be had lost some envelopes, and that he would take those
found and see if they corresponded with those that re-
mained in his possession.
Mr. Taylor, formerly one of the clerks at the Queen-
square Police-court, produced the charge-book, and
read the examination of the plaintiff on the charge.
A young man named Keane, apprenticed to Mr. Cad-
bury, a butterman, and Mrs. Gray, a milliner, proved that
the plaintiff called at their places of business on the night
of the 24th of November, and the young man Mason
swore to making the plaintiff a present of half-a-crown's
worth of stamped envelopes, in order that she might
communicate with him. She could neither write nor
read writing, and got others to write her letters and to
read those she received to her.

Mr. CROWDER, Q.C., addressed the jury for the de-
fendant, and conti-nded that he was perfectly justified in
giving the plaintiff into custody. The finding of the
envelope confirmed his suspicions, for he was well aware
that the plaintiff could not write, and could• have little
use for them. He denied that he was actuated by any
vindictive motime, and held that, on the whole of the
facts, the defendant was entitled to a verdict.
No witnesses were called for the defence. _ _

Mr. Justice ERLE summed up. He said they
could not hold the defendant responsible for
the detention of the plaintiff in custody after
his first appearance before a magistrate, be-
cause that was the act of the law, and its officers, and
not the defendant, were responsible. It was a valuable
privilege for a person improperly charged with a crime
to be able to appealto the laws of his country for com-
pensation, - but it was a privilege which might be
abused, and it was the duty of juries to see
that it was not. After commenting upon the evi..
dence, and instancing the finding of the envelopes as
likely to cause suspicion in the defendatt's mind, and
the observation of the policeman as some inducement to
hini to give her into custody, he left it to the jury to
say whether the defendant was, or was not, justified in
the course he had adopted.
The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and
returned into Court, after an hour's deliberation, with a
verdict foa the plaintiff—damages, 25/.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

BELL AND OTHERS, ASSIGNEES, V. SAMUEL.

This was an action (in part heard yesterday) brought
by the assignees of a bankrupt of the name of Pike, who
carried on business as a jeweller at Brighton, to recover
the sum of 1,2691., the value of goods obtained by the
defendant on the eve of the bankruptcy of Pike.
Mr. Whitehurst and Mr. Hoggins appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. M. Chambers for the defendant.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel for the
plaintiff, it appeared that the bankrupt and the defendant
were upon the most intimate terms, and that the former
acted upon many occasions as the referree of the bank-
rupt, and represented to various tradesmen, from whom
goods to a large amount were obtained, that he was a
perfectly respectable and honest man, and that he did
not owe him a farthing. A person of the name of
Leveson was among those who were induced by these
representations to part with goods to the amount of
upwards of 300/., for which the bankrupt gave him bills;
upon these bills becoming due they were dishonoured,
and Leveson waited upon the d. fendant, who then told
him that the bankrupt was indebted. to him in the sum
of 1,2691. Within a few days froin the date of this
interview the defendant issu4d execution upon the goods
and stock in trade of the bankrupt, and obtained posses.
sion of it all. It was now contended that the whole
transaction was a fraudulent one concocted by the par-
ties for the purpose of defrauding the rest of the cre-
ditors.

A number of witnesses were called on the part of the
plaintiff in support of the above statements.
Mr. CHAMBERS called witnesses for the defendant to
prove that the whole affair was perfectly bona fide, and
the various proceedings in the action, under which exe-
cution was obtained, were put in, for the purpose of
corroborating their evidence as to the genuineness of
the transaction.

Mr. WHITEHURST having replied to the evidence,
The LORD CHIEF BARON summed up to the jury,
going through the whole of the evidence with great care
and minuteness.

The jury consulted together for a few minutes, and re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of 1,2601.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

BROWN V. SMITH.-STEAM-BOAT COLLISION.

This was an action brought by the Waterman Steam-
boat Company against the proprietors of the Bee steam.
boat, to recover damages for the litter boat striking
No. 7 Waterman, whereby she was seriously injured,
and sunk in the River, on the evening of the 13th of
November last.

Mr. S. Wortley and Mr. Miller were for the plaintiff,
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Brown for the defendant;
The evidence was, as is usual in such cases, of the
most conflicting character, and the case was not likely
to conclude to-Right.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
IN RE CASS.--.RIGHT OF CREDITORS TO INVESTIGATE

PROCEEDINGS.

This was the day appointed for choice of assignees
under the estate of this bankrupt, who was a draper at
Colchester.

Mr. FRASER, a solicitor, appeared on behalf of Mr.
Morley, of Foster-lane, to prove a debt, and sought to
invalidate the proceedings, on the ground that the act
of bankruptcy had not been proved, the witness to the
declaration being the petitioning creditor.
The Learned CO3INISSIONER said, in the first place, it
was wrong for the usher to have shown the proceedings.
No one creditor had a right to see any but the public
proceedings ; the private proceedings of opening the
fiat ought not to have been shown. The officer of the
Court, therefore, had committed a breach of duty, and
Mr. Fraser had, no locus standi to discuss the validity
of the proceedings.
Mr. FRASER said he considered he had a right to see
who was the petitioning creditor, as in the Gazette his
(Mr. Fraser's) name appeared as solicitor to the com-
mission.

The Learned COMMISSIONER said that was an error
at the Gazette-office, or of the messenger, but it did not
give a right for Mr. Fraser to dispute the adjudication;
in fact, the ground urged would not hold good, for the
proof of the signature to the declaration of bankruptcy
was not required by the twenty-second section of the Act
sth and 6th Victoria, but some of the Commissioners
wished to have an affidavit that it was the right party,
for in one case proceedings were taken against a John
Smith, of Oxford-street, and there appeared to be lour;
but by Lord Denman's Act any person was a competent
witness NA ho was not a party to the second, and in this
case he was not; and in exparte " Hills and others v.
Montague," Lord Eldon said, that when there was in-
competency, it was only a subject of objection at the
time, and did not invalidate the proceedings.
Proof of debts were taken, but, several being disputed,
the choice of assignees was adjourned.

SECONDARIES'.—(THIS DAY.)
There were two undefended causes on bills of ex-
change, which did not possess the slightest interest.

DUTTON V. FEESMONGER.

This was an action to recover the amount of a bill of
costs. The defendant pleaded that he was not indebted.
The plaintiff said his principal witness was not present,
and wished that he might be called on his subpoena pre-
vious to the jury being sworn in.
The Learned SECONDARY said he could not allow that
to be done. The plaintiff might withdraw the record if
he thought proper ; but if he did, the witness could not
be called on his recognisance.
Mr. DUNCAN, who appeared for the defendant, said
the plaintiff might as well take a nonsuit at once, which
must be the case at last.—(Laughter.)
The SECONDARY---We must not decide that without
the jury being sworn.
The plaintiff then withdrew the record.

BO
and boy, and Mary Ann Russel,
Charles Metcalfe, err
Bodmin, tailor, of the Strand,
servant of all work to Mr.
W-STREET.—(THIS DAY.)
were charged before Mr. Jardine with stealing, at various
charged with receiving
and a woman, named Evans, wasttohebier
stolen.
yer's shop
remanded.
o
had been twice rem
tt ihmeie,shst:o al
prisonersen quantitygoo ds, know o gwoi dgs them from
strongly inculpated Russel and E
Jardine, on being in-
formed that
ttha himt thaserae
affect the boy Metcalfe ; and Mr. .
The evidence given on the former bearings,
hthotoumguhoiht
service
He stated that he had been in Mr. Bochum s
Rus-
sel told him one day that she had no money, and asked
could
about seven months. About two months ago, Mrs.
kedwwitaosesnsoagf
au
ir
othstertheevi
otherdence,de
,t
prisoners.ermined
him where she was to get some ? He said he
not tell. She then told him to go up to the room of Mr.
Day, a lodger in the house, and take away
his trousers, which he did. He gave her the trousers,
and she said she would take them to Mrs. Evans. A
few days afterwards she told him to take a waistcoat
piece from the slop, t ,i(e it to Mrs. Evans, and tell her
to pawn it, and she (Russtsl) would call for the money
in the evening. He went to Mrs. Evans (whom he had
known for about three months) and gave her the mes-
sage. In the course of the evening, he himself went
again to Mrs. Evans, and told her Mrs. Russel could not
come out. She then gave him 2s. 6d., which he gave to
Mrs. Russel. He afterwards brought, at various times,
trousers' pieces, waistcoat pieces, and another pair of
trousers of Mr. Day's, for which Mrs. Evans got various
sums from ls. to 35., which he gave to Mrs. Russel, occa-
sionally receiving Is. himself: This went on until Thurs-
day, 26th November, when he was stopped by policeman
Pocock, F 14, just as he was leaving Mrs. Evans.
after giving her a trousers' piece. He told the
constable that he had left a trousers' piece with Mrs.
Evans, and on being taken back to her place pointed her
out to the officer, She said that it was sent to her by
Mrs. Russel to look at.

Joseph Donaldson, shopman to Mr. Bassett, pawn-
broker, of Great Queen-street, produced several waist-
coat pieces, a trousers'-piece, and a -pair of trousers,
which were pawned at several times in the course of
October and, November, in the name of Evans.

Mr. Day identified the pair of trousers as his pro-
perty.
Several pawnbrokers' shopmen produced other waist-
coat and trouser pit ces, &c. Some of which were also
pawned in the name of Evans, and other in the name of
RusEel, the greater part of which were identified as
having been stolen from Mr. Bodman's shop.
Mr, JisszetE coulnutted the prisoners for trial, •