The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-30 00:00:00

WEBB V. BONNEY.

This was an action brought to recover the sum of 201.
for rent of premises in Pimlico.
The defence was that there had been a joint tenancy
on the part of the defendant with a person named Beaks,
and that they had become bankrupts; and it was sub-
mitted that the present action would not lie.
Mr. TURNEII, the plaintiff's attorney, said that ought
to have be en pleaded in abatement.
The UNDER•SHERIFF said the decimation was that
the defendant was indebted, and it was clear he was; and
in the absence of a specific plea a verdict must go for the
plaintiff for the amount.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURV.

(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN. ,td
MANSLAUCIIITER.-John Donnovan, 18, escribed in
the calendar as a labourer, was indicted or the man-
slaughter of Christopher Broderick, on the 26th of June
last.
Mr. RYLAND appeared for the prosecution; and hav-
ing shortly stated the case to the jury, called the follow-
ing witnesses:—
Charles Sexton—On the 26th of Juno be and his
wife were in the Poplar-road, about six o'clock in the
evening Saw the deceased, Christopher Broderick,
there, who was rather intoxicated. The prisoner was
also there. Witness saw him knock the deceased's bat
off ; the deceased did not attempt to pick up
his hat, but kicked at the prisoner, _ who
appeared to fall on his head. The prisoner, on getting
up, struck at the deceased, when he fell right down.
The prisoner then ran away. Witness then stooped
down and picked up the deceased. There was a wound
on the right side of his forehead, which was bleeding.
The deceased was then insensible. The side on which
the deceased lay was the one on which the wound was
in his head. Witness took him to a medical man, and
afterwards to the Loudon Hospital. Witness, about
three weeks afterwards, saw the body of the deceased at
the hospital, and at once recognised it as the body of
Christopher Broderick.
Cross-examined by Mr. PAYNE—CouId almost swear
to the prisoner as the man that struck the deceased.
Had pointed out another man as the one who struck the
deceased; but it was dark when he did so. The prisoner
worked at the same place with the aims!.
Re-examined by Mr. RYLAND—The prisoner was
the man who struck the deceased. . . . ..

Mary Ann Sexton, the wife of the last witness, cor-
roborated his statements. _ _

Robert Westfield, a policeman, stated that he was on
duty in the Poplar-road on the night of the 26th of
June. Saw the deceased fall on his left side. Saw the
prisoner and another young man go down a court close
by. Witness went after them, but could not
overtake them. Saw enough of the prisoner
to know he was one of the men. Took the
deceased to the doctor's, and afterwards to the London
hospital, where he died. Donnovan gave himself up to
witness's sergeant last Saturday night.
Cross examined by Mr. PAYNE—Witness took a man
of the name of Mahoney into custody in consequence
of information he received from Sexton. This was at
the-latter end of July, or the beginning of August. It
was dark at the time that Sexton pointed out Mahoney
to the witness as the man who had knocked down the
deceased. In a minute afterwards Sexton said ho was
not the man.
Hands, an inspector, stated that the prisoner gave
himself up to him on aturday last. He said it was an
unfortunate affair.. He was very sorry about it, and
wished to be tried for it. On witness reading the coro-
ners' warrant to the prisoner he said he did not strike
the deceased, who came squaring up to him, and he
pushed him with his open hand, when he fell down; he
then saw blood coming from his head, and he ran off
down the court, as he was frightened.
Mr. Peter Gowland, the house-surgeon of the
London Llospital, recollected the deceased Christopher
Broderick Leirtg brought to the hospital on the 26th
of June. He had a severe wound over the left eyebrow,
but not a serious one, He went on well for some time,
when inflammation supervened attended by erysipel is
which ended in death.
By Mr. Justice COLTMAN—SUCh a wound as that
upon the head of deceased might have been occasioned
by a fall.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. PAYNE addressed the jury on behalf of the
prisoner, contending that the charge in the indictment
had wholly failed. The prisoner was charged in the in
dictment with causing the death of the deceased by
striking him on the head with a brickbat. There was
no evidence whatever that any brickbat was used, and
the probable thing wes that the deceased, who was in-
toxicated, came reeling tup against the prisoner, who
pushed him away with his hand and caused him to fall,
when the wound was inflicted that caused his death.
Unless the jury were satisfied that the prisoner had a
hard substance in his hand with which he struck the
deceased, the charge fell to the ground, and no twelve
men could convict him of manslaughter.
Several very respectable witty ases gave the prisoner
f a most excellent character for humanity and peaceable

conduct.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN summed up et some length.
The jury Acquitted the prisoner of the charge.of man•
slaughter, but found him guilty of en assault; and
Mr. Justice COLTMAN sentenced him to one month's
imprisonrnt'nt and hard labour.
FORGERY.—Edward Culijord, 24, described in the
cal. nder as a lithographer, was indicted with forging a
bill of exchange for 231., with intent to defraud a person
of the name of .Swinford, a lithographic printer, by
whom the prisoner was employed.
Mr. Robinson conducted the case for the prosecution;
and from his statement, and the witnesses that were
culled, it appeared that the prosecutor was a lithographic
printer in the Strand, and the prisoner was employed by
him. The prisoner bad also loans from the prosecutor,
and he had discounted bills for him. On the 13th of
last March, he produced the bill in question, and asked
the prosecutor to let him have 201. for it. It purported
to be accepted by Mr. Paul Bedford, and to be endorsed
by Mr. Manhy, the secretary of the institution of civil
engineers. The prisoner stated that he bad received the
bill from Mr. Bedford in the settlement of an account.
The prosecutor then gave the prisoner two 10/. notes
for the bill. On the 2d of June the prisoner wrote to
the prosecutor from Gravesend, stating that he was