The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-02 00:00:00

Vbtril Vbition

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the LOUD CHIEF
B•RON and a Special Jury.)
THE QUEEN V. GOOCH AND ANOTHER.

This was an information, on the part of her Ma-
jesty's Customs, to recover from the defendants,
Messrs. Gooch, Cousins, and Co., woolstaplers, Steel-
yard, Dowgate-hill, penalties to the amount of 3,0001.
The Attorney-General, Sir F. Thesiger, Mr.
Watson, and Mr. Wilde, appeared for the Customs;
Mr. Martin, Mr. Sergeant l'alfourd, and Mr. Jones,
appeared on the part of the defendants.
The penalties were sought to be recovered on the
ground of the defendant having caused considerable
quantities of wool to be delivered from the Custom-
house at a less duty than prescribed by the Act, 3
and 4 William IV., ch. 8, which enacted that wool,
under the value of one shilling per pound, should be
chargeable with a duty of one halfpenny per pound,
and above that with a duty of one penny per pound.
It appeared that the wool, which formed the subject
of the present information, had been imported from
Odessa upon five different occasions, the first of which
took place in the month of April, 1841, and the last
in February, 1842, and had been passed, upon the
statement of the defendant that the value of the wool
was under one shilling, upon the payment of one
halfpenny per pound duty.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD, on the part of the de.
fondant, contended that, according to the statute of
8 & 4 Will. IV., ch. 8, sec. 18, which directed how
the duties were to be collected, the defendant, if liable
at all, was not liable for the payment of the penalties
but of the difference in the amount of duty actually
paid, and that which was alleged to be due. But, in
point of fact, the defendant was not liable to pay any
additional amount beyond that which had been paid
upon clearing the goods, because the officer at the
Customs had himself, according to their usual mode
of transacting business, certified that the value of the
wool was approved upon the warrant authorising the
delivery of the goods to the defendant.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL apprehended that the de-
fendant had not proved whether he was bound to
prove, viz., that he had paid the full amount of duty.
The LORD CHIRP BARON said that prima facie the
defendant had paid the full and proper amount of duty,
inasmuch as the delivery of the goods had been ob-
tained in the usual manner, and the defendant had
gone through all the usual forms of obtaining the
same.

The ATTORNET•GENERAL, in addressing the jury
on the part of the Crown, said that it was fortunate
for the defendant that the present proceedings had
been instituted at this lapse of time, as had the fraud
been discovered within three years from the time of
the delivery of the goods, he would have been liable
not to the paltry amount now sued for, but to pe
nalties exceeding half a million. In the present case,
from information which the customs had received
they had applied to the party sending the wool, who
forwarded the pass-book, between himself and the de-
fendants, which showed that the wool already cleared
from the Custom-house by the defendant as being under
a shilling in value was charged as being above that
value, and charging with a duty of one peney, the
"me goods as had been cleared at one halfpenny. If
be should be able to prove this case he was sure that
the jury would feel no hesitation in giving their ver-
dict for the Crown.
J. A. Priest, examined by Sir F. LIESIGIR—Said
that he was employed by the defendant for several
years in his warehouse. He remembered the arrival
of a cargo of fine Merin, wool for defendant in the
ship Rambler. At the same time another cargo arrived
in a ship called the British Queen of an inferior quality.
Both of the cargoes were packed in the warehouse,
When the orders came for the delivery of the wool
from the Rambler, the bales belonging to the British
Queen were shown to the surveyor. The marks upon
the bales of the British Queen were cut out by the
witness, under the direction of Mr. Oddinott, a per-
son in the employ of the defendant, and the marks of
the Rambler placed on the bales instead. The marks
were cut out of the bales after the locker had left the
premises. Witness obtained an entrance into the
premises after they were locked up, by drawing out
the asp to which the padlock was attached. He was
in the habit of entering in this manner late at night,
or upon Sundays, when they were very busy. He
also marked thirty bales belonging to the ship Mar-
garet with other marks, to represent the cargo of
another vessel, which was of coarser wool. Mr.
Cousins, one of the defendants, was there at the
time, and also when the surveyor passed the bales.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD—it
was about a twelvemonth since he first mentioned the
circumstance of marking the bales to a Mr. Howe, a
gentleman connected with the Customs. He left the
employ of the defendant in the year 1845. When the
marks were cut out of the bales the hole was either
Covered with other pieces of cloth, or some of tke
Wool was pulled out, in order to give it the appear-
ance of having been torn on board the ship.
Re-examined by Sir F. TILESIGER—In order to
take away the appearance of freshness from the marks
which he put on the bales, he was in the habit of
throwing dust over them, which gave them the ap-
pearance of having been made for some time.
James Lloyd, examined by Mr. WATSON—Was in
the employ of Mr. Byan. Recollected the arrival of
the British Queen. It was his duty to mark the bales
of wool. Several pieces of cloth produced as cut out of
the bales were his marking.
Various other witnesses were called by the Crown
in support of the case, the purport of whose evi-
dence went to show that the duty of ld. per lb. had
been charged by the defendant for the same parcels
of wool as the sum of id. only had been paid upon.
(The case was proceeding when our report left.)

SOLVENT COURT—(THIS DAY.)
COMMITMENT TO PRISON.-IN RE JAMES FRBNCM.
This insolvent, who had been an omnibus pro-
prietor at Bexley, Kent, was heard this morning, and
obtained a day for the final order. On reaching
Chancery-lane he was arrested by an officer of the
Palace Court, on a warrant issued under the Small
Debts Act, for his commitment to iNtaidstone Gaol
for thirty days, for contempt of court. The insolvent
produced his protection from this Court, and the
officer attended the Court at the instance of the in-
solvent. Mr. Commissioner Phillips examined the
documents, and ascertained that the order for com-
mitment by the Palace Court was issued on the 31st
of December, and the insolvent filed his petition in
this Court on the Bth of January. It was urged on
the part of the insolvent that it was a summons
under the Small Debts Act, and net by an order of
the County Court.
His Holum,. (Mr. Phillips) was clearly of opinion
that he had no power to interfere. On reference to
the second clause of the Small Debts Act, he found
that no protection by this Court, or certificate in
bankruptcy, Would set aside an order of commitment
under, that statute.
The insolvent left in custody to be taken to Maid-
stone gaol, on the warrant of commitment by the
Palace Court.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.
OLD COURT.

_ - -
(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
FORGERY ON THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.,
Leylbe Aronson, Jacob Fredeburg, Raphael haul=
'ten,. and Solomon Illuscovit , the first described as a
wlne-merchant, the second as a furrier, the third as
printer, and the fourth as a turner, were indicted
for feloniously having in their possession certain
pieces of
for the paper, being part of a certain foreign note
pa 3 ment of money of a foreign state, to wit,
of the Emperor of Russia. Another count in the in-
dictment charged the prisoners with feloniously
having in their possession the lithographic stones from
which the spurious notes had been struck.
The first and the last named prisoners pleaded
Guilty ; the other two Not Guilty.
The two prisoners who had pleaded Not Guilty
elected to be tried by an Er glish jury.
Mr. CLARRSON stated the 'case for the prosecution,
remarking that he had been retained to do so by the
Russian Consul, who aeteu on behalf of the Emperor
of Russia. No doubt the jury were aware that the
Emperor of Russia issued notes within his dominions
representing in value from one to twenty-five roubles,
and the Emperor made the property of his state, as
well as his private property, chargeable for the pay-
ment of these notes. Within the last few months it
had been discovered that a quantity of spurious one
rouble notes had got into circulation, and the Russian
Government had since been busily engaged in at
tempting to discover the guilty parties. From infor-