The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-05 00:00:00

ASSIZE IN TELLIGENCE.

ROME ClRCUlT.—Chelmsford, March 4.
The Commission of Assize for the county of Essex
was opened on Tuesday, by Mr. Baron Alderson.
There were only forty-two prisoners for trial, and on
the civil side twenty-three causes, four of which are
special jury cases.
Both Courts proceeded to business this morning, the
Lord Chief Justice presiding in the Crown Court, and
Mr. Baron Alderson at Nisi Prius.
(CIVIL SlDE.—Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
DEW V. BURGESS AND OTHERS.
This was an action brought by Mr. John Henry Dew
against the defendant, Capt. Polhill, M.P., and another
gentleman, as the responsible members of the provi-
sional committee of a projected railway, called the Great
Leeds and London Direct Railway, to receive compen-
sation for his own services,, and . for money he had
expended on behalf of the company, to their use.
Mr. Montague Chambers and Mr. Hawkins were for
the plaintiff. Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. Hance ap-
peared for the respondents.
Mr. CHAMBERS, in addressing the jury for the plain-
tiff, said that this was one of a very numeious class of
cases that would in all probability engage the attention
of courts of law and gentlemen in their position. The
defendants were sued as:the projectors of a line of rail-
way branching from the Eastern Counties line to Leeds,
and which was called the Great Leeds and London ,
Direct Railway, and the project was brought before the
notice of the public in August last. The jury were
aware that at this period there Was very great excitement
in the public mind upon-the subject of railways, and a
number of lines•were projected, the names of noblemen
and gentlemen of influence being, in many instances,
added to the prospectuses solely for the purpose of giving
apparent stability to the undertaking, and inducing the
public to take shares. He did not propose to trouble
the jury with going through a detail of the particulars
stated in the prospectus of this company; it would be
sufficient to state,' that they represented here were no
engineering difficulties, that the gradients were remarkably
easy, that there were no ornamental properties to be in-
terfered with, and that, in fact, it was to be one of those
lines which at that period were so full in ',promise, and
which was to cost very little, and to yield a very large profit
in the shape of interest upon the capital expended.
The effect of these measures upon the mind of the
public was such that he believed a sum of no less than
30,0001. was received in the shape of deposits, and the
.line was marked out, and every thing went on swim-
mingly. Offices were engaged in London, and the
original provisional committee, es it was termed, re-
placed by a committee of management or board of
directors, and several meetings took place in furtherance
of the objects of the company. At those meetings the
defendants all took an active part, and they were now,
thefore, sued by the plaintiff as the parties responsible
to him on behalf of the Company generally for the sums
he had incurred, The Learned Counsel then proceeded
to state that in accordance with the standing 'orders of
Parliament it was necessary that certain plans and books
of reference should be deposited with the clerks of the
peace for the different counties through which all pro-
jected lines of railways were to pass, and like-
wise at the office of the Board of Trade by
the 30th of November, and therefore great exertions
were required to prepare the necessary documents. The
plaintiff in the present action was employed to make up
the books of reference, and he was empowered to en-
gage all the assistants that might be necessary to enable
him to complete them before the 30th November, and
accordingly he engaged a number of persons, and was
prepared to commence his duties, when, on a sudden,
the directors of the projected railway resolved upon
abandoning their undertaking, and making an amalga-
mation with some other line ; at the same time de-
clining all their own contracts and undertakings, and
instructing their solicitor to make the best terms he
could with the parties who had been engaged.
In consequence of this, the plaintiff was obliged
to arrange as well as he was able with the per-
sons whom he engaged, and he got off his bargain
with them by giving a guinea to each man, and treating
them all to a supper ; and he expended about 281.
for this purpose, imagining, and very reasonably, that
he had settled the business very advantageously. Upon
his applying, however, for the money he had actually
expended, and also for the amount to which he was
himself entitled for the breach of contract by the com-
pany, they refused to give him a farthing. Under those
circumstances, he was compelled to bring the present
action, and he (the Learned Counsel) must say, that he
thought the gentlemen, who had received no less a sum
than 30,000/. from the public in reference to this under-
taking, were badly advised when they refused to pay a
man who, he considered, had rendered them important
service, and who had actually expended his own money
in their behalf.

Mr. J. B. Gibson' deposed that he acted as solicitor to
the company while it was in existence, and that the de-
fendants were members of the provisional committee,
and took a part in the subsequent proceedings relating
to the company. In November the plaintiff made a
proposal to prepare the books of reference for the Com-
pany at the rate of 11. 10s. per mile, and his proposal
was accepted by witness on their behalf, and he at the
same time told him to have contracts ready, so that the
work might be completed in time to comply with the
standing orders of Parliament. There was no particular
portion of the line assigned to the plaintiff, and he was
merely to attend to what might be given to him. This
arrangement was made on the 17th of November last,
on the Monday following the directors resolved to
"amalgamate" with another line, and all further pro-
ceedings were abandoned.
By Mr. Baron ALDERSON.—No specific portion of the
line was assigned to the plaintiff. He might have been
called upon only to do the books of reference, on a half,
or a quarter, or one-eighth of the. distance. .
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said he thought this evidence
would not support the•first count in the declaration, that
there had been a certain contract between the parties.
All that was proved was, that there had been an uncer-
tain contract for a certain amount.

Mr. Sergeant SHEA said, that by the contract as it
appeared, the company were to entrust what portion of
the line they pleased to the plaintiff, and it appeared
they had not thought fit to entrust him with any of it.
How, therefore, could they be liable ? . The only thing
that seemed to have been done in the matter was eating
the supper.--(A laugh.)
Mr. CHAMBERS said he should submit that the evi-
dence supported the pleas for money paid for the use of
the company.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said, in his opinion, there was
no legal proof of the money being paid to the use of the
defendants. It was as though a person employed
another to build him a house, and that person engaged
others to perform the work, and he afterwards changed
his mind and would not have the house built—ia that
case those persons who were so engaged would have no
legal claim upon him. . • .......

Mr. CHAMBERS submitted that there was this differ-
ence, that the solicitor to the company acted responsibly
on their behalf.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said that all that was proved on
this point was, that the solicitor was to get the parties to
make the bestil bargain they could. lie was of opinion
that in law the plaintiff had no case, and so should,
direct the jury. If he was wrong, he might be set right
hereafter.

_
After some further observations by Mr. Chambers,
;he plaintiff was non-suited.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Durham, March 3.
The assizes for the county of Durham commenced here
this morning. Their Lordships, after attending Divine ser-:
vice, sat at 12 o'clock, Mr. Justice Patteson on the criminal
side, and Mr. Justice Coleridge on the civil side. There
are 21 causes entered for trial, none of which, however, it is
believed, are of very great interest. The calendar is unusu-
ally heavy, both in point of numbers and in the nature of the:
offences with which the prisoners are charged. There are
four in custody for murder (three, however, in one case), five
for rape, one for arson, six for highway robbery, five for
cutting and wounding, and three for manslaughter.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice C0....T "'RIDGE.)
Eight cases were disposed of in the course of the day,
either by being withdrawn, or a verdict being taken by con-
sent.

BREACH OF FROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
MUTH v. LINDSAY.
This was an action in which the plaintiff sought to recover
compensation in damages for' a-breach by the defendant of
bib undertaking to marry her.
Mr. Granger' and Mr.-Robinson were for 'the plaintiff;
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Atherton for the defence.
Mr. GRANGER stated the case, and called Elizabeth.
Smith, the mother of the plaintiff, from whose testimony it
appeared that the defendant is a farmer in the neighbour-
hood of Durham, a member of a family who are reputed
well to do in the world. The plaintiff is one of three daugh-
ters, and is now about 26 years of age. She has two brothers.
,Her father has a farm of about 130 acres. In the latter part
of the year 1844, the plaintiff, who had befota that time
been knoWn but by sight to the witness, called at her house,
and :stated that his housekeeper had left, and that he would
feel much obliged if the witness would allow her daughter;
the plaintiff, to come and fill that office, at least for a short
time. It was finally agreed that she should go till the May
following, it being understood that she was then to return
home, as her father had,-during the summer, sufficient em-
.ployment for all his children on his own farm. When May
arrived, however, the defendant was still unsuited with
another housekeeper, and the plaintiff still remained in his
service.' During this period she and the defendant were, it
would appear, the only 'inmates of his house. This con-
tinned until November, 1844, when witness again required
that her-daughter should return home;:: and besides that
she herself-called for this purpose, other members of the
family did the same. To them the defendant said that they
must make up their minds 'to do without her, as she was
abont to become his wife. She remained at the defendant's
until May, when she went home, and was then, as subse-
quently proved to be the case, pregnant. Betbre her the
return
home, in the course of the conversations he h with
of her
plaintiff's mother, he said that the circumstance
difference, as
daughter's having no fortune would make no
be was a man of property, and the
Plaintiffwas
herself, and had saved him.
considerably
in his housekeep-
ing.
a fortune in
Subsequently to the time of rethuerrn home
he called at her mother's house. By e
preg-
nancy_ bad been discoyered. He had an mt allow with the