The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-06 00:00:00

MINES.

EAST GRINSTEAD BRANCH.

This was another petition presented to the House of Com-
mons by the London and Brighton Company, for leave
to bring in a Bill to make a branch to East
Grinstead ; and the Committee, after hearing the
customary formal evidence, and ascertaining that the objec-
tion in the former case did not apply to the present one, de-
cided that the standing orders had been complied with.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.)
The House sat to-day at 10 o'clock to hear Scotch appeals.
Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell, were
the Peers in attendance.
➢IACPIIERSON V. CRAIGIE.
The further arguments in this appeal occupied their Lord-
ships the whole morning.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prins, before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN and a
Common Jury.)
The Court was occupied the greater part of this day with
the investigation of a case similar to that of yesterday,
namely, personal injury from alleged negligent driving.
The case was of no interest except to the parties concerned.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
Sittings at Nisi Prius' before the Loup CHIEF BARON and
Special Juries.)
THE ATTORNEY-GENIIRAL V. PYM AND OTHERS. _

This was an information filed by the Attorney-General
against the defendants, for the recovery of penalties they
were alleged to have incurred. in an evasion of the Excise
laws in the article of paper.
The Solicitor-General and Mr. Wilde appeared for the
Crown, and Mr. Valentine Lee for the defendants.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated the facts of the case.
The defendants were paper manufacturers, and had a mill
for that purpose at Wickham. . On the 4th day
of April, 1844, five quantities were sent out from the mill
which were not entered in the book which is provided for
that purpose according to law, and did not pay the duty
legally chargeable thereon agreeably to the provisions of the
2d and 3d Vict. chap. 23. These quantities were carried to
London and delivered to Pym and Arnold, the fathers of the
defendants, in London. Another count charged defendants
with defacing the labels on the paper. Witnesses would
prove these facts, and he had no doubt but upon their careful
consideration the jury would consider the Crown entitled to
a verdict.
James Devereux, supervisor of Excise at Wickham, was
then examined, and deposed that he surveyed the paper-
mill called Ashmill for several years. Knew Thomas Pym,
Edward Pym, and Mr. Arnold, the proprietors of it. On the
4th April, 1844, he made the seizure of the paper (which was
produced in Court). What made him suspect that the de-
fendants were acting illegally was the number of hours the
mill was at work, and the state of the engines. On the 4th
April he saw a waggon near the dwelling-house of defen-
dants (the Pyms), and saw Edward Pym. and Francis Xym
bring.papenefrom the mill. He had made a survey that
morning, and found no uncharged stock ; 34 small reams of
51bs. each was the stock then charged. Of the reams
put into the waggon there was none of less
weight than 351bs. He followed the waggon a short dis-
tance. The reams in question were those now before him.
Previously to this time there were eleven reams charged of
the same weight, and there was nine of that kind then in
stock. That was the 23d of March. The wrappers and
labels of the paper seized did not appear as fresh or with the
same appearance as if they had been just prepared. He
made a remark to Edward Pym and asked him why the
labels were defaced. lie replied that he had done it to
prevent them being used again.
Witness was subjected to a long cross-examination by Mr.
VALENTINE LEE.

Thomas Burrell, a carrier of goods between London and
Wickham, proved the carriage of the paper from the mill to
London. About a month after he commenced carrying the
paper he was in the habit of taking 'the paper to the Rose
Inn, Farringdon-street, but was afterwards told by Mr.
Bedford Pym to take a load to Adam and Eve-court, near
Oxford- street, where he saw Mr. Arnold. He was also in
the habit of taking it to different dealers in London. His
directions at the mill were always to take the paper to
Adam and Eve-court, from which he was afterwards
told to take it to different stationers in London.
He was in the habit of taking back different articles from
London. Among these was a box, which was always de-
livered to him by Mr. Arnold, at Adam and Eve-court. The
box was always lighter going down than it was coming up.
He asked Mr. Arnold one time what the box contained, who
replied that it was sample paper. He generally took the
paper from the dwelling-house near the mill, except once or
twice. He brought up once 16 cwt., some of which was
stamped with a black mark and some was not.
Blackwell, another carrier, gave similar evidence to that
of the last witness.

Mr. W. A. Howard, a paper cutter, employed by Mr. E.
Pym. Had worked in Ashmill before defendant had it—his
hours of work were longer under defendants than his previous
employers. There were nine reams taken away in a waggon
on the 11th March, without paying duty.
(The case was proceeding when our report left.)