The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-03 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

CROCKFORD V. LORD MAIDSTONE.
This case, which was in part heard yesterday, was
resumed this morning by calling
Mr. Lawrance, the cellar-waiter, who deposed that the
defendant had had upwards of forty dinners, and that
upon every occasion he had wine with them, and a large
quantity of wine was also sent to Bolton- street, by his
Lordship's orders.
John Hunt, who had lived eighteen or nineteen years
in the employ of the plaintiff, deposed to the fact of the
dinners and wine licivr i-itt to Bolton street, and also
that his Lordship dii, ett d one shilling to be paid upon
each occasion to the rorsun taking it. He also stated
that the lady residing in Bolton-street, whose female
servant took in the dinners, gave at Christmas a Christ-
mas-box of five shillings to the waiter.
Mr. Laugh= deposed to having received from Lord
Maidstone an order for six „, zen of sherry.
Other witnesses were c aO. d, who gave evidehce of a
similar nature, and it al that the diallers were
supplied to Bolton-street e years after the peried of
his Lordship taking the dinners at the club-house.
The case for the plaintiff having been brought to a
conclusion,
Mr. JAMES addressed the jury on behalf of the
defendant in a most eloquent and forcible speech, con-
tended that his client was not liable to pay in the present
action, and that so far from deserving to experience
severe regret, as intimated by his Learned Friend,
he was entitled to the greatest credit for having
come forward at the head of a number of young noble-
men to defend the present action, which was only one
of a number of similar others. It was admitted by the
Learned Counsel for the plaintiff, that the house in
question was a gaming-house. According to the rules of
the club, persons who played did not pay the subscrip-
tion, nor was it ever intended that it should be paid ; no
application had been made for the subscription during
the lite time of Crockford. The jury would not be led
away by the high sounding names which had yesterday
been paraded before them by his Learned Friend. The
splendid house which Crockford used significantly to
style " bis hell," and over which might be inscribed the
language of Dante, "Farewell hope to all who enter
here," fitted up with all the allurreents and fascinations
of elegance, was equally a gaming-house in the eye of
the law, as any place which was devoid of those extra-
neous adornments. And if the Duke of Wellington or
other noble personages should play at unlawful games in
that house, he was in the eye of the law an "evil dis-
' posed person," and was equally guilty with the
poor wretch who, at Epsom or ut Ascot, staked
his last shilling at thimble rig. Lord Maid-
stone had lost immense sums in that place, and
it was as " false as dicers oaths" to say that he
did everything there but pay, as the Learned Counsel
for the;plaintiff had asserted. There could be no doubt
at all that this was a common gaming-house, within the
meaning of the Act. The rules of the club stated that
the proprietor should find, at his own cost, a cold supper,
the choicest wines, and the choicest fruits of the season,
every night. Who then was to pay for this ? why it was
clear that, as at the booths at Ascot or at Epsom, where
the young and unsuspecting dupes were called in to take
a glass of sherry for nothing, the victims of their fell de-
signs paid it. He would therefore leave the case to the
jury, trusting to their good sense to return a verdict for
the defendant, who had been already nearly ruined by
his connexion with the club.
The LORD CHIEF BARON, in summing up to the jury,
said, that in his opinion the house in question was not a
" common gaming-house" under the meaning of the Act,
there being no evidence to prove it, the only evidence
going to show that several members of the club did at
various -times play among themselves for a considerable
amount, and that the custom existed to a most deplorable
extent. The questions for the jury to consider were,
first, whether they were of opinion that the plaintiff was
liable
~,to pay his subscription of ten guineas as his
entrancelee, and ten guineas for his subscription for
1841 ; and secondly, whether the dinners and wine were
sent to the house in Bolton-street, and if so, how many,
and whether they were sent by his Lordship's orders.
The -jury retired, and after a short consultation, re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount.
The Court was crowded to excess during the trial by
a number of persons who seemed to take considerable
interest in the result.
Upon the jury giving in their verdict for the full
amount in the above case,
The LORD CHIEF BARON said that he thought it a
duty to call the attention of the Counsel in the case to
the very loose manner in which the verdict had been
returned. The verdict was for the full amount; but for
a great number of the items in the hill of demand there
was not a tittle of evidence in support thereof. He
would, therefore, advise the Counsel upon both sides to
strike out from the amount of the verdict such articles
for which no evidence had been given. The same reck-
lessness appeared in the jury in an undefended case yes-
terday, where the jury returned a verdict for the full
amount, without a particle of evidence in support of the
majority of the claims of the plaintiff.
The proposition of his Lordship having been acceded
to by both parties, the verdict was entered by consent
for the reduced sum of 541. 14s. 6d., exclusive of the
sum paid into Court.

COMMON PLEAS.--(THIS DAY.)
LEES V. NICHOLSON-SOUTHERN COUNTIES UNION

RAILWAY.

gentleman
residing
street, to recover 1001., being
residing in Manchester-street,
luiga
mh t
Nicholson,
Mr . Charles rlgeos
n of debt, which, it was alleged,
the defendant's proportion surTvheyi-so rw, aasgaainnst actionM r. Wi;
Union Railway, be
wholeow
bill charged was 3,2501.,
sur-
veyed the line. The .
ment of 1,350/. The
nof the provisional direecdtotorstohfethpleaiSnotuifftl,iewrnho
Coun-
ties
a s
oneU
and :dr. Lush appeared for the
Mr. Sergeant Byles
dMr.
Atherton for the defence.
dwehfiecnhd ahna td pleadedb e
plaintiff ; Mr. Martin an
en rednuocteidndbeybwthde. pay
the employ of Mr. Wells,
George Pollit, a clerk in
:
having stated the case, called
theMforiloSweringgeawntitnßeirssLeEss
the solicitor to the company, deposed to the receipt of a
letter
accepting
froma
nMr.umNbei crhooflson, shares.accepting
and a l as
also
one of the provisional directors of the company,
J. B. Wells, the solicitor, gave evidence as to the
origin of the company, and the appointment oaand surveyor.am
r
The company was first formed by himself.
Gadsden. They were the company for a h
Several gentlemen met together at his office, conducted
time.
o cond_u_octerde
the company's affairs, and issued a prospectus. There
was no regular committee of management formed till the
2d of October. Prior to that the surveyor had been
arranged with. There were eleven gentlemen present
at the meeting. The provisional and management com-
mittees were then definitively appointed. Mr. Sheriff
Chaplin being nominated chairman, and Mr. Alderman
Hughes Hughes, Deputy-chairman. Power was agreed
to fill up vacancies. Mr. Nicholson gave his assent in
writing, before these proceedings, to be one of the provi-
sional directors. He had nothing to do with the actual
engagement of Lees. That was done by Mr. Lucas,
another provisional director, some days prior to the first
regular meeting.
Cross-examined—Mr. Lees, the plaintiff, was witness's
brother-in-law, as was also the solicitor who brought the
action. In all there was about 250 provisional directors;
out of which 100, along with Mr. Nicholson, gave their
consent. About 150 paid in their shares.
Joseph Lees, a sharebroker, of Manchester, deposed
that the firm with which he was connected were share-
brckers of the company, and that he had showed Mr.
Nicholson the prospectus with his name on it. The
note produced, with Mr. Nicholson's name written in it,
was filled up by witness, but he did not see that gentle-
man sign it.

George Street, eh rk to Mr. Charles Barker, of Bir-
chen-lane, advertising agent, produced several London
and provincial papers, in which the prospectus, with Mr.
Nicholson's name, appeared. The secretary, Mr. Gadsden,
gave the orders.
Mr. Bennett, of Manchester, proved that all the prin.
cipal papers of the kingdom came to the Manchester
Exchange, and that Mr. Nicholson attended there, and