The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-13 00:00:00

RAILWAY DEPOSITS.

The following deposits were ordered to be paid ou
of Court, to the under-mentioned railway companies:
32,5001, to the Exeter and Great Western Branch, re
jected ; 18,9741. to the Bristol and South Wales Junc•
tion, passed ; and 10,4491. to the Dover and Deal Rai'
way, passed.

(Before Sir K. BRUCE.)
♦TTORNEY-GENERAL V. PEARSON.

His Honour delivered judgment in this case, which
had been previously argued. It was an information
filed at the relation of two persons named Jos. J. Rae
and Richard Thain, against certain persons forming
part of a public body of officers acting as trustees under
the Acts of Parliament for regulating the affairs of the
parish of St. Mary, Islington, complaining that a sum
of 4001. had been wrongfully applied by the defendants
as trustees under the Act, and praying that they might
be decreed to repay the same. It appeared that about
three years ago, a person named Eliot, resident at
Islington, being considered by the trustees as a dan-
gerous lunatic, had been forcibly carried to the work-
house by order of the defendant, and there confined
In a strait waistcoat. He was afterwards discharged,
and thereupon brought actions against the parties who
had been concerned in his removal. Actions were
brought against Allen, Tyas, and Western, in respect
of the personal aggression, and against Hicks, the re-
lieving officer; Ellis, the master of the workhouse; Simple,
the parish surgeon ; and Beavan, another officer of the
parish. Another action was also brought against Older-
shaw, the clerk of the trustees, and another person acting
under him, in respect of the removal of his goods. In
the former of these actions Eliot recovered 4001. damages,
and in both actions he recovered costs. The damages
and costs had been paid by the defendants out of the
poor-rates, and the question was whether this was a legal
payment. His honour, after going through the facts of
the case at great length, said, for the purpose of deciding
this question, he must look at the particular evidence
now adduced with respect to Eliot. First came the in-
terval between the 26th of November, 1842, and his
being brought to' the workhouse ; secondly, his stay
in the workhouse ; and thirdly, his transit to the Court
of the police magistrate, and the proceedings which took
place there. As to Eliot's apparent state of mind, his
Honour had carefully considered the evidence, and he
was satisfied, from his language and conduct before and
on the 28th of November, 1842, and on former occasions,
and in the interval between that day and the time of his
liberation at the police court, that he was in a state of insa-
nity, likely, if unwatched and unrestrained, to do some
mischief, and quite unfit, both on his own account, and for
the sake of others, to be left to himself. Another point
was as to his means at the time. On that subject he
was convinced, from the situation he was in, and the
circumstances which happened at the time of his recep-
tion into the workhouse, he was in such a state of po-
verty and destitution as would render him liable to re-
ceive parish relief, and that the order for his admission
into the house was both reasonable and unavoidable,
and he believed it was issued without any unlawful or
improper intention. On the contrary, he thought the
granting of it was praiseworthy and commendable. He
should now consider narticularly the first period of time
he had mentioned. fn that respect he was satisfied that
neither the trustees nor Mr. Oldershaw, Mr. Sim, or
Mr. Hicks directed or authorised the placing of Eliot
under restraint, for the purpose of removing him to the
workhouse ; nor did he think he was bound judicially to
believe that Ellis had any participation in that act. If
this view were correct, might it not be said that if Eliot
had not been admitted, the trustees or the other per-
sons he had mentioned, might have been properly sued
by Eliot for not admitting him ? He should say, yes ;
and he thought it was quite proper to have received him
into the house. Then as to his stay in the workhouse.
He did not think that he had been treated with either
inhumanity or neglect. Whether the continuance of thy
restraint was strictly justifiable in point of law was a
question he had not fully determined upon, but he
thought all the proceedings were taken from the most
proper motives. From all the circumstances of this
case he much doubted whether the action of Eliot and
Alien ought ever to have been brought, and he consi-
dered the damages given by the jury were prodigious.
His Honour thought the resolution of the board of trus-
tees, by which they authorised a defence to the action,
was reasonable and just. Another resolution of the
board authorises the payment of the costs and damages
out of the parish rates. The • object of this in-
formation being to compel the defendants to re-
fund the sums which had been paid out of the parish
rates, the question was, whether the Court ought to en-
force that claim. Before the information was filed two
vestry meetings were held, but at neither of these were
the rates repeated out of which the costs and expenses
had been paid. His Honour thought, under the general
law applicable to rates and overseers' accounts, it was
quite right to provide for these expenses. It was evident
that Oldershaw acted as the officer of the trustees ; they
had many public duties to perform, out of which ques-
, ions might frequently arise ; numbers of persons were
placed under their care, and it had happened that one was
.Ifflictel with insanity—a complair.t from which neither
he rich nor poor were exempt. The authority to be
esed in such cases was very hazardous ; but how were
the trustees to act ? If steps were not immediately
taken some fatal extravagance might be com-
mitted. The duty to be performed on such
occasions ought not to be considered slight. It was
contended that relief must be granted against the de-
fendants upon the authority of the case of Attorney-
General v. Compton, decided by himself. He thought
however, that that case did not in any manner rule
or govern this. The facts of the two cases were mate-
rially different. He thought this information ought to
be dismissed. He should dismiss it because he con-
sidered the acts complained of were acts of trustees of
the parish of Islington, and done without any wrong in-
tention, either on the part of themselves or their agents.
For his own part he firmly believed that they had all
acted justly in the execution of their duty, and with
judgment, diligence, and honesty. As to costs, he should
dismiss the inibrmation with them, unless there was an
intention to appeal ; if there was (and he should neither
countenance nor discountenance an appeal), then he
thought it would be right to dismiss it without costs, un-
til such appeal were decided ; whatever might be the
fate of the information on appeal, he trusted that means
would be found in this opulent parish to cover the ex-
penses of the suit. It was subsequently elected that the
appeal should be dismissed without costs.

INSOLVEN7' DEBTORS' COURT, July 11.
Mary Morris, au old woman' was opposed by Mr.
Cjoke for Miss Alice Phillips. She was undefended by
counsel.

Tho complaint was, that the insolvent was indebted to
Miss Phillips, the owner of a board and lodging-house
in Foley-place, for damages recovered in an action for
libel. The action was tried in February, 1844, from
which period until October last, the insolvent had been
residing In France, to elude the execution at the suit of
the plaintiff in the action.
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER, in pronounehg judgment,
said the damages were considerable. The libel was a
serious one, and he was empowered by the Act to delay
the discharge for a period of two years. The insolvent
had been in prison since October last, but the vesting
order, from which the judgment would proceed, was
made in May last. The judgment of the Court was,
that the insolvent should be discharged when she had
been in prison for a period of seven calendar months
from the vesting order, for the damages awarded in an
action of 141, The Learned Commissioner intimated
that the effect of the judgment would be to keep the in-
solvent some months in prison, which, with the im-
prHonment she had airel,,dy undergone, would make a
pc! iQd of fifteen months, at the suit of the complaining
Fa ty.

Among the pensions
.-.4rantecl by Sir liqbert Peel before
retiring from office, were 100/. a-year to M. Bernard Barton,
and a pension c..f the like amount
the Quaker poet ; 504 each to two aged sisters of tlo line Taylor, killed in the
tolajtehre-Oideanuearbatielk,l:Gotaliskreicliitiler.oeuerai
late warn India.,,tibserver.
Lord John Russell has appointed Lieut.-Colonel the
Hon. George Keppel, the son of the Earl of Albemarle to Ve
cue of his privata nontarieoe—Observerk

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
G UILD HALL._ , •
On Saturday Andrew Fa:elects, an inngerian, Ras
brought up for the purpose of putting in bail for nii
appearance at the next Londcn Sessions, to answer
the follosving most outrageous assault on two unfortua
nate females.
03 last Tuesday night he was wandering about Far"
ringdon-street in rather a merry mood, and making
friends with Mary Ann Jones, a girl of colour, hiring, --
on Saffron-hill, and Margaret Mitchell, both unfortn"
rates. He invited them into a public-house to partake
of some refreshments. There they had sundry draughts
of rum, gin, ale, stout, &c., and on leaving, about one
o'clock in the morning, he invited them both home to
his lodgings, in Albion-buildings, Bartholomew-close,
to which place they retired ; and in the morning, when
they asked him for some money, he flew to his razor,'
9 case and threatened to cut their throats. The girls
made their way out of the window, the door being
locked, on to the parapet ; and a policeman seeing one
of the females hanging from the parapet, made his wet
up stairs, rescued the woman, and took the prisoner
into custody.
The prisoner stated that he used the violence owing
to the girls atttempting to steal some silver spoons and
his money.
This statement the girls most positively denied. t
Sir P. LAURIE said it was one of the most atrociouS
cases that he had ever met with, and the prisoner mio
be thankful that the poor girl had not fallen from the
parapet.
The prisoner was then liberated on heavy bail to aP'
pear at the ensuing London sessions.
MAR YLE B ONE.
On Saturday, an Irish labourer Wand his wife, named
He were charged with having, on the 2d install"
used the most brutal treatment towards their daughter
Mary lleffernon, a child of about nine years old. The male
prisoner was accused with having tied a cord round her,
neck, and attempting to strangle her, and that not beillb
able to effect his purpose, he doubled the cord twice o'ber
and flogged her very severely, and afterwards tied he,
to the bed-post. The female prisoner was accused wit
dipping the child into a large tub of water five or t
times. Owing to the absence of some important wit
nesses, against whom warrants have been granted
secure their attendance, the case was adjourned not,
' Wednesday next. The child is at present at the Marl
lebone workhouse.

CLERKENWELL.
On Saturday, a police constable named Shore
charged an unfortunate female with improper condtici
was himself proved to have been guilty of the condile
which he made a ground of charge against the fetes':
It was because she refused to return him a silk han:t
kerchief which he gave her that he made the comPls':,
in question. The prisoner denied this, but his wife 10"
called, and she identified the handkerchief as her 11115'
band's property.
Mr. GREENWOOD discharged the female, and tlic:
policeman's conduct is to be reported to the Poi'
Commissioners.

CROYDON. nal
On Saturday a good-looking young woman, appar_e„ By
not more than eighteen years old, named Julia bY'O,
was brought before Messrs. Lucas, Kemmis and Wilk
son, the presiding magistrates, on a charge of felonious
intermarrying with Charles Wells at the parish chi.
of Croydon, her husband, William Egan, being alive- el.
Julia Coles, the daughter of the sexton of ,fn,
Sepulchre's Church, deposed that, on the 13th of 7„5
tember, 1845, the prisoner, accompanied by a man, cis
to her father's house and gave notice of their mteut3,
to be married on the following day. They were seit,
cordingly married, and as they stated that they W"01)
disappointed in not having the attendance of a Pe'', 0
who was to be bridesmaid, they wanted her to o'o
such, and she did so. She was sure the prisoner 1/0
the same person who was married at the tinie
question. • take°
The prisoner declared the witness was pals ,
There was no truth in what she had stated. eo,
William Coles, the sexton, father of the last W 1
confirmed her statement with regard to the marrisCsy
Charles Stevens said he was an acquaintance 01. j
parties, and he remembered meeting the prisonert7eo
Egan at the London terminus, and he accompanied tor
to the church, and saw them married, and spent the
with them. _ lot

The prisoner here again declared it was all
She had never been married but once. r
Charles Wells, the second husband, deposed tbs.,. t,

was married to the prisoner on Sunday, the sth -
at Croydon Old Church.
By the Bench—The prisoner was taken into cult
r
immediately after the ceremony, upon the chat
bigamy.
William Egan, the first husband, being asked bilasetl
Bench to give some explanation of this extraore.,ol4
affair, said that he and the prisoner had kept enc" 0011,
together for some considerable time before last ea, foia
ber, and in that month they agreed to be marri; ge
the ceremony, as had been stated, took place at d
pulchre's Church. At that time he was emploYe tit tr
mail cart driver, and as he was not in a position 00,
moment to provide a home for his wife, they 02°A
agreed that the marriage should be kept secret, aniftig
she should go to service, and endeavour to save tbei
money, and he agreed' to do the same, and whe'ta Of°
had got enough to provide furniture, they were
together.
ply
The Magistrates inquired how long they were
each other after the marriage ceremony? cotere
The'husband said they stayed two nights at a -or
shop, and they then agreed to the plan of ternr_dete
separation. He added, that in pursuance of "I.
ment they parted; and when he had saved some
eed
he took an apartment, and bought furniture for
.itsci 001
the prisoner came to live with him, but they, Duet sir
been together many weeks before the prison
sconded, having previously made away with
the property, she could lay her ban,: Of,
and he sold off the rest, imagining that he shoulu_ack
hear any more of his wife, and resumed his old °fee
tion of a mail cart driver. From the further
of the husband, it appeared that a few days egthe,
route had been changed from Woolwich to Stree 011
and very soon afterwards he received some infer:trifS
which led him to Croydon, where he actuallY "rrieFi
almost at the moment of the completion of the Is, el,
ceremony between the prisoner and the man We lia•
the information ho thereupon gave to the police'
the apprehension of the prisoner.
dr
ee
The prisoner, at the conclusion of the evl.a en Ate
dared positively that the witnesses were mistake.
trot,
regard to the first marriage, and she *as not the ralrii
vi - The magistrates said they did not see how it
sible that there could be such a mistake, and they
their duty to commit her for trial.
te
NOTlCE.—Messrs. Ferguson, of Holme Sea .s
(trading under the firm of Joseph 'Ferguson), having 700 0
time obtained an injunction in the Vice-Chancellor 001,,,
against the use of their trade marks upon Silesian' beit',
having been deposed to at the trial that other house°,os"o
the defendant had so used them, Messrs. Ferguson g,iorlor
public notice, in the hope that it will be a sufficient of A
to the parties in question, and obviate the necessitY,o
ther proceedings. Holme Head Works, near Carlis'
30,1846. At
PLUNDERING THE BODY OF A MURDEREII.oup
recent West Kent Quarter Sessions three young men, wil,4
women were indicted for stealing from the body odsivdf
Weeks, the fratricide, ten sovereigns, three shillings. sl,l,OKs
moneys, laid In the indictment to be the property of It'io•ve
Bishop of Rochester. It may be remembered ti filled
autumn of 1844 a young man named Weeks was 0 I'io
his elder brother, by being stabbed with a knife, at 02
called Weavering, a few miles from Maidstone. fbe 0
instantly decamped, and the result of the coroner's,.
gallon on the body was a verdict of " Wilful murder' • 170
him. Nothing, however, was heard of him until leis;
wasmore ftehuanndfoiunrtaeepnomndil,esnefarormthtehNevilslcaegnee ofof
tßhreen2neA%-eatitn,
appears that immediately after theamoney,
different
ffnrmeoe r
onyu
odftaeenar
fear
d nameho
fet bie
eor
or
ft
ip:Pri
atandun
rda
lbassuming
labourer.
saving
mowsa.eoyni
dtteoadsßear(enniniaepgharineill:o
conducting himself, he got a very excellent charane
neighbourhood. By some circumstance, however'oo.:ll
induced to draw the money he had amassed, alia„,/, ;(10
night of his existence he drank rather freely at a,woci,jet
shops, and on his return home tumbled into a pona _ voix
drowned, His description, circulated amongst tbf,,boP,J
led to the supposition that the corpse was that of
sconded fratricide. The friends were instantly sent4d
by a variety of circumstances satisfactorily ident:lo
body. the prisoners first discovered it lying in a mfr
and, according to one of their statements, took '"theo/1%
from the pockets of the dead man. Fortunately for 060.01
objection was mooted on their behalf, and proved sulsbe,
The property was said to belong to the Lord
Rochester, but as the diocese of the county recently' u:,f
hands, the indictment was quashed, and the prisOlie'
discharged. Pi?
DREADFUL ACCIDENT IN A MINE—FORTf,'
Max DROWNED.—TRuII.O, FRIDAY. Jura. 10.—Voecotf
fearful mining calamity ever known in this county 10„#
yesterday afternoon, at East Wheal Rose lead miu,tberiii()
parish of Newlyn, eight miles from this place. A,clll,
storm of unprecedented violence, attended with a fiv-tbaffiAfv,
resembled rather the bursting of a waterspout -toP#
heaviest rain, broke over the neighbourhood. Thee fro'
pouring from Newlyn Downs collected towards thaoo,
where the mine is situated, and rushing in torrents Am it°
shaft quickly filled every level. Some of the Ptr
were alarmed at the first flow of water, made the'ferf
the surface and escaped, but we believe they were bit''
Others reached so near as to be seen from the surfaee'pd;ol
'misted by their previous exertions to hasten up tll,,erty#
were beaten down by the torrent and perished. •ry
were drowned in the mine. if.looo
On Sunday a fire burst out in the wood °et,.
tuna continued burning until the next day. Aboutlbe TO,
tares (about 20 acres) of timber were c:ensunied. 0 tliottis
attributed to malevolence, as thise-second 0110
wood of Valmy has been set on fire within a fell'
Grrlignani,
111
BIRTHS.
On the 9th inst., at the Parade, Poole, Dorsetshire'
of Alfred Crabb, Esq., M.D., of a daughter. /sTell
On the 9th inst ,at Albert-place, Kensington /V
ot.P
Mrs. Charles Deinhard, of a daughter. g,
On the 9th inst., Mrs. Parsons, of Lower Too .r
On the 10th inst., at Cambridge-square, IlYde. of 13''
Robert Lloyd, of a SOD. 504
On the 10th inst., the wife of G. H. Lewes/
ford place, Kensington, of a son.
ye A 0
HARRIED. ' CO of
On the Bth inst., at Chigwell Church, 1,0
Parry, M.D., of Liverpool, to Eliza, eldest daughn
'ev. John Bontete Innes. .

Goo„
DIED. „cell, 40
On the 28th ult., at Britonferry, near SW 3"- Car
Farquhar Cameron, Esq., aged 43. „t or(1'
On the 30th ult., at the Trinity-ground, Deptford'
cel
Robert Dawson, aged 83. BAjl, terra
On the let inst., at Great Malvern, Mr. rl‘'
,trY,
On the 4th inst., Samuel Prest, Esq., ' —l4
r
Cambridge. I";egellt'°'
On the 7th inst., at Titehfield-terrace,
Major Roderick Fraser, aged 84.

2'4
•••••moo., f tgroli
Tv;
London: Printed and Published by WIRD() Y,'"a 7,410
Straud.Prlater, at The Sun Office, N 0.112, Strom ' 260
of the Snyoy, 1u the County of mid 4101024
131 1846.