The Sun.
London, England, 1848-12-21 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dec. 20.

(Sittings at Nisi Pri us, in London, before the LORD CHIEF
BARON and Special Juries )
GURNEY V. LORD INGESTRE.

Mr. Unthank and Mr. bio,rn appeared for the plain-
tiff; and Mr. Chambers and Mr. Bramwell for the de-
fendant.

Tnis was an action to recover back the sum of 1901.,
as portion of the deposit paid by the plaintiff on 100
!shares in the Marseilles and London Railway, and Dock
Company, to which the plaintiff was entitled, according
to the prospectus of the company. It appeared that the
plaintiff had paid the company. 21. upon each share, and
the prospectus held forth that every shareholder should
have back the amount of his deposits, less 2s. per share,
in the event of the project not receiving the sanction of
the French Chambers, which ultimately turned out to
be the case. The present action was now brought to
enforce the observance of the promise contained in the
prospectus, the defendant being sued as a member of the
provisional committee, on the authority of the well-
known case of Walstab v. Spottiswoode. The plaintiff.
however, failed to prove that the defendant was a number
of the company prior to the 11th of March, 1846, when
the shares in question were allotted, and Au conse-
quently obliged to submit to a nonsuit, in which the case
terminated.

GILLARD (HKECUTRIX) V. THE LANCASHIRE AND YORK.

SHIRR RAILWAY COMPANY.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Dec. 20.
(Before Mr. Commissioner LAW.)
IN RE JOHN BAKER.
The insolvent, an officer to the sheriffs of Middlesex,
applied to bz. discharged.
Mr. Snow appeared to oppose, on the part of the
Duke of Brunswick, and Mr. Cooke supported the ap-
plication.
The case was before the Court on a former occasion,
and reported in our columns. The insolvent had ap-
plied to be discharged on sureties, and the Duke of
Brunswick opposed, on the ground that he was indebted
to him in the sum of 1021.-40 s. damages, and 1001.
costs, in an action of slander, on which opposition the
application was refused. An objection was now taken to
the opposition, on the plea that notice had not been
given in the proper manner.
Mr. SNOW admitted that notice had not been given,
and asked whether he was precluded from opposing.
He appeared for the Duke of Brunswick, to oppose for
the damages in an action of slander.
Mr. COOKE objected to his Learned Friend saying a
word. According to the practice of the Court, there
could be no opposition allowed.
His HONOUR said he had no authority to hear the
opposition. Ile had refused to discharge on sureties,
according to the practice of the Court, and he must, ac-
cording to the established practice, decline to hear the
opposiiion. The omission was no doubt to be accounted
for by the circumstance that opposition was made on the
former occasion but as there was no rule to the effect
that opposition then made was notice for the hearing,
the Duke of Brunswick could not oppose.
The case was ultimately adjourned for better ac-
counts.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Ycrh, Dec. 19.
(Be'ore Mr. Justice MAULE.)
Henry Hunt, Isaac Jefferson, William Angus, Na-
thaniel Frith, David Lightowler, Joshua Waddington,
William Gurney, and George Hirst, were severally
found guilty on charges of attending unlawful meetings,
drilling, and training, in various parts of the county.
Hunt, Angus, Jefferson, Lightowler, and Frith were
then placed at the bar for judgment.
Mr. Justice MAULE, addressing them, said—With
regard to your plea of ignorance, although you may
have been ignorant of the Act of Parliament on which
the indictment is framed, and that would have excused
you to a considerable extent had the object of such
drilling been harmless; yet we cannot shut our eyes to
the fact of the object being to prepare yourselves to
effect by physical, what you had failed to eff et by
moral force. In that you have, it was true, failed, and
I hope you will continue to fail in such ()Wets, for it
would be far better to live under a despotism than to
hold life and property by the uncertain tenure which
would result from the accomplishment of your objects.
I believe the great majority in this country wish to live
in peace, and that they will be able to keep down, by
force if necesary, those who entertain vague notions of
bettering ,heir conditions by means they hardly them-
selves know what. I hope. however, a better spirit now
prevails; hut I canner- f ir;.7,et that your drilling was t 4
a very mkchievous object, and I mu,t ti-eat your ()notices
severely. I have tak-n into consAiiraiion that you have
already been irepris,n• d s+. me ~f pal a long time, and
have reetil +tea your sentences with ref. rence to it. His
Lordship then 91.-n., need Hunt to be impiisoned eight
calenda- months. Ancus ten calendar months, Jefferson
four calendar months, I.i.,htowler calendar mouths,
and Frith el-v,.n calendar months.
George If ebber, aga d 26, stated to be imperfect in
education, pleaded anilty to an indictment fir sedition,
committed at North Bierley, in th-e West Riding, on the
15th of Julr.
It ftpP ea
rt,tl from the statement made by Mr. Phipps, I
that there was a gre tt gathering of the Chartists on
that day, arid the prisoner, who said to be a very I
lot
man, which way fully bornes out by the parts
of his speech r,ari by ylri.TPehipsna, m ide a very violent
aLd exoiiing ipetch•
shu,,,redh his heas of the
wotdeiful events corning, andpilies
hoped to see an as- '
Sernb!y of 500,000 men with
,s etc. should he aPhrril'eswpii:leilic., hem
that Lancashire and York,t.'
•
As he htd tren four in niths in prison, L')RDSHIP
sentenced him to be further imprisoned four calendar
months.

LIVERPOOL WINTER ASSIZES.
At the sitting. of the Court yesterdsy movninz, jo.
asph Barker,• who was found guilty of sedition and blas-
phemy, was brought up, and, after some very foreiful
and pointed remarks from his Lordship, showing the
enormity of the offence of which he was convicted, his
Lordship remarked—lt is my duty to endeavour, by a
penal example, to impress upon all those who, by listen-
ing to you, may have a tend( ncy to follow your ex-
ample, that they will by so doing reap to themselves
more misery and distress. The practical administra-
tion of the law limits the sentence which I am en-
abled to pass in your case to two years' imprison-
ment; that at the end of that time you find security
in two sureties in 201, and yourself in 1001., for
your good behaviour for a further space of two
years ; end that you be imprisoned until you find
such securities. After the above sentence had
been pronounced the trial of the Manchester
jChartists was proceeded with, and about one o'clock the
ury came into court, finding the prisoners Grocoat, Ran..
kin, Donovan, Leech, Nixon, and Cropper Guilty of
conspiracy at Manchester; and the prisoners West and
White Guilty of attending unlawful meetings. His
Lordship shortly after addressing the prisoners, sentenced
Grocoat, Rankin, Donovan, West, White, and Cropper
to twelve months' imprisonment, and at the expiration of
that time to enter into recognizances for two years,
themselves in 1001. each, and two sureties in 25/. each;
Leech to nine months, with similar recognizances;
Chadwick and IVlLDonough, who had pleaded guilty, to
six months' imprisonment, and to enter into recogni-
,,„--zaeces for two years in the sum of 5001.; and Nixon to
0,.. fOnrittontbs'imprisonment and similar recognizauces.
psoceedings in one of the courts having terminated,
Baion64 I d ers on and the Attorney-General returned to
t"T*-fl

' - --Weiegret to learn that the young Hugh
("Ivan, -who was severely injured by the fall ofman
a parapet
wall duriag the gale of Friday night, has since expired,
113 died on Saturday morning.— Glasgow Paper.
---
`'N i
•P_ITS-N

This action was brought under the provisions of the
Deaths by Actitlent Comptinsatiiin Act, to recover
attainst rh Lancashire anti Yorkshire Railway Company
compensation for the loss sustained by the plaintiff, in
consequence of the death of her husband in an ao-ident
upon the defendants' line, which she alleged to have oc
curred through the negligence of their servants. She
sued as executrix of her husband, and the defendants
plea fed generally not guilty.
Sir Frederick Thesiger, Mr. Cockburn, and Mr. Un-
thank were counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Montagu
Chambers and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins for the defendants.
the
It appeared that the deceased, who, at the time
accident occurred, was only twenty-seven years old, and
had not long been married to the plaintiff, held the
situation of inspector of instruments in the office of
the Manchester and Leeds Electric Telegraph Com-
pany. Shortly before the accident he had gone to
live at Wakefield, and on the II th of September in
last year he went to Manchester, from which place
he was returning when the unfortunate accident oc-
curred in respect of which :he action was brought. Ile
travelled in the last carriage of the express train, which
left Manchester at one o'clock that afternoon. Mr.
Weston, the Surveyor-General of Customs, Captain
Ellis, and his Secretary, Mr. Nixon, were riding in the
same carriage. When the train reached the Ludden-
bush station, the oscillation of this carriage increased to
a great extent, and two miles beyond that place it came
off the rails. It was then dragged through a tunnel on
the common road to the Swinley-bridge Station, on
passing through which it was dashed against the down
platform, which carried off the hind-wheel ; and about
forty yards further on it plunged into an ash-pit, when
the others flew off. It was then discovered that Mr.
Weston was thrown out, and killed on the spot ; that
the deceased was dying ; and Mr. Moon insensible.
Under these circumstances the present action was
brought, the circumstances of negligence charged against
the defendants being various; the principal being that
the permanent way was too slight, and improperly main-
tained ; that the ash-pit ought not to have been upon
the main line at an intermediate station ; that the
guards were inside the carriage to shield themselves from
storm, which was just then at its height ; and that the
last carriage was not such a one as the regulations of
the company prescribed. On the part of the defendants
it was contended that the accident was unavoidable, and
attributable solely to a broken rail upon the line ; that
every precaution had been taken for safety; and that the
guards themselves, and the :engine-drivers and stokers,
had stopped the train.
The LORD CHIEF BARON, at an early period in the
course of the plaintiff's case, ruled that the intention of
the Act was only to award compensation for absolute
pecuniary loss, in contradistinction to what might be
termed "fanciful damage," which it meant to exclude,
such, for instance, as injured feelings, lost society, or
in short, anything other than absolute pecuniary loss.
Mr. Baron Parke had ruled the same way on a pre-
vious occasion, and the defendants now contended that
damages, supposing the company liable from negligence,
were reduced to a mere matter of calculation of the plain-
tiff's share of the deceased's probable earnings during his
lifetime.
The LORD CHIEF BARON adjourned the court at half-
past five o'clock, when the defendant's case had only been
part beard.