The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-30 00:00:00

CIVIL SIDE.

Mr. Justice Coleridge took his seat upon the bench this
morning at nine o'clock.

LIABILITIES OF SHAREHOLDERS nr JOLT-STJCK BANKS.-
LUCAS V. BUTCHER.

In this case Mr. Martin and Mr. Robinson appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Watson for the defendant.
Mr. MARTIN stated the facts of the case. Mr. Lucas, the
plaintiff, was a gentleman living in the Isle of Man, and
the defendant, Mrs. Alice Butcher, was living at Bowness,
in Westmoreland. The action was brought to recover 5001.,
and interest, from May 1843. Mrs. Butcher was sought to
be fixed as a partner in the Isle of Man Bank ; and the
manner in which she was sought to be made liable was this:
—The bank in question was a joint-stock bank, in which
her husband was a proprietor, and held fifty shares. He
died in 1839, after which time she received the shares, and
drew the dividend upon them until 1843, when the bank
stopped, and his (Mr. Martin's) claim was that Mrs. Butcher
thereby became a partner in the bank, and was therefore re-
sponsible for its transactions. Mr. Martin then proceeded
to dilate upon the law bearing upon the case. The joint-
stock bank was formed by a deed, in which Mrs. Butcher's
husband was a partner, and the Court would lam that an
executor, before coming to a dividend, was bound to give
satisfactory evidence of title ; and this lady seemed to have
taken the usual course, by sending the probate of her hus-
band's will to the manager of the bank. It appeared from
the documents that would be produced, that in 1839 the de-
fendant was required to pay a call ; and on the 28th of De-
cember of that year she again wrote to the manager, re-
questing the dividend to be paid to her. In August of that
year the dividend became due ; and upon the Ist of Decem-
ber, 1840, the dividend, warrant was made out and sent to
her. This was transmitted to her through the means of
Messrs. Wakefield and Crewdson, of Kendal. Upon the sth
of September she wrote to know what price she could get
for her 50 bank shares, supposing she sold them. On the
9th Mr. Forbes wrote an answer, stating he considered the
shares at that time would not fetch more than 61., or 61. 2s.
each. On the 26th she wrote again ; and on the Ist July of
the following year another dividend was declared, and sent
to her in the ordinary way. In the January following she
again wrote, wishing to know if she could sell her shares.
From this correspondence it was perfectly clear that she was
a partner in the bank.
Witnesses were then called to prove these facts.
_ _

. _
Mr. WATSON then addressed the jury for_ the defendant,
contending that Mrs. Butcher could only be considered as
the executrix of another, and not a partner in the bank.

The Learned JUDGE then summed up, and the jury gave
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 559/. 7s. 3d.

MONEY CLUB.—DEBT.—HOOD AND OTHERS n. LANGFIELD.
This was an action for the recovery of certain sums of
money borrowed from the members of a money club holding
its meetings at a temperance hotel, in Portland-street, Man-
chester, which had been stipulated to be returned by instal-
ments, but some of which the defendant had failed to pay.
Verdict for the plaintiff for 231. 10s., subject to a rule nisi
applied for.

MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Warwick, March 27.
CIVIL SlDE—(Before Mr. Justice TINDAL.)
ACTION FOR LIBEL—SIBLEY V. CHAPMAN.
Mr. Whitehurst, QC., and Mr. Hayes were for the plain-
s tiff; Mr. numfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Miller, for the defendant.
The plaintiff is a coach and omnibus proprietor, and, on
the occasion of some steeple chases that took place in
Southam, in February last, he engaged to carry passengers
to and from the ground at the rate of ss. per head. The
races being over, an account of them appeared in the Sunday
Times, and at the end of that account was the following para-
graph, forming the libel complained of :
" But we cannot close our remarks without exposing as
gross an act of coaching rascality' as was ever perpetrated.
A fellow of the name of Sibley chartered a coach for the
occasion, and was engaged by a party of nineteen to con-
•vey them to and from the ground for ss. each. The
fare was paid at the time of taking places. On arriving at
Southern, however, the fellow stopped at a small inn, and
coolly observed, that he should stay there about an hour, al-
though it was then close upon the time appointed for the
first race to come off, and the ground was a mile and a half
beyond that place. Expostulations being useless, most of
the party proceeded on foot, and expected, of course, that at
the conclusion of the sport the coach would be in waiting
to convey them back; the fellow, however, sneaked off with
a fresh load before the second match was run, and the party
left behind had to hire other conveyances from Southam to
Leamington, a distance of nearly eight miles. We feel it
our duty to call the attention of the local magistrates to this
gross case of cheating, and trust they will do their duty by
punishing the fellow as the law directs."
The evidence showed that besides two steeple-chases,
which were alone marked on the card, there were two
matches, one being between Sir William Don and Mr.
Mitton, for 5001. aside. It was contended, on the part of
the defendant, that the coach was not to return till the last
match had been decided, while the plaintiff said it was to
return after the last race named in the list had been run.
The coach leaving at the conclusion of the second race was
the occasion of the writing of the paragraph in question.
The jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 501.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
ROBBING A BANK.—Elisha 'George Blaney was charged
as an accessory after the fact in the robbery of one hundred
101. promissory notes, stolen on the 4th of January last, from
the Warwick and Leamington Bank.
Mr. Waddington and Mr. Mellon were for the prosecution ;
Mr. O'Brien for the defence.
This case, and another connected with it, occupied the
time of the Court the whole day. The facts were these.
The prisoner had a brother, not now in custody, a clerk in a
branch of the above bank, at Warwick. In the month of
July, two parcel, containing a number of notes of the above
bank, were made up and delivered to the prisoner's brother
to put into the pest; they were addressed to Mr. Smith, of
Southern. One containing one hundred ten -pound notes,
the other three hundred five-pound notes. Only the latter
parcel reached Mr. Smith.
From the evidence of a man named Archer, it appeared
that he formerly lived at Leamington, in Warwickshere,
though now residing at 13, Trinity-lane, London. This man
stated that the prisoner came to him in April last, at Isling-
ton, and said he bad something to say of a money-getting
concern. This turned out to be an intended robbery of the
bank. A man was to go to Leamington, and the prisoner's
brother was to hand over 8001. or 1,000/. This was subse-
quently done, and the property was passed to a firm of the
name of Myers, and 1501. received for it. During the time
the transaction was going on, the prisoner went by the
name of Brown. Archer admitted that he had been in gaol
several times.
The prisoner was found Guilty, but sentence was deferred.
George William Jenkins and Joseph Myers were charged
with receiving the notes, knowing them to have been stolen.
The jury found Jenkins Guilty, but Acquitted Myers. Sen-
tence deferred.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—Bodmin, March 27.
CROWN COURT.—(Befere Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
Joseph Willeock was indicted for having, on the 4th March,
at the parish of Lanreath, unlawfully and maliciouslystabbed
and wounded Thomas Meitch, with intent to do him some
grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Oxenham conducted the prosecution.
It appeared that a quarrel had taken place between the
prosecutor and the prisoner, and that the latter inflicted upon
the former two severe wounds with a carving knife. The man
was laid up for a fortnight, and the surgeon pronounced that
he had been in considor4ble danger.

The medical officer at the gaol said that the conduct of the
prisoner had been so extraordinary, as to lead him to think he
was insane. He was still of opinion that the man was not of
mound mind.

Mr. Baron ROLFE left it to the jury to decide whether the
prisoner was guilty of the charge, or whether he was insane
at the time.

The jury having consulted for a few minutes, the foreman
said—" Our verdict is' Insane.' "
The Clerk of Assize having construed this into a verdict of
"Not guilty on the ground of Insanity,"

The Learned Junta ordered the Prisoner to be removed
to the gaol.
Thomas Pearce, aged 17, was indicted for burglariously
breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Eva,
of Truro, and stealing a coat, waistcoat, and trousers.
Mr. Oxenham conducted the prosecution.

It appeared that the prosecutor was absent from home with
his family, and that he left the key of his house in the pos-
session of his son-in-law, who examined all the doors and
windows on the 20th of February, and found that they were
properly secured. On the 24th of February he again went
to the house, and he discovered that one of the windows had
been broken open, and a variety of things were scattered
about the floor of the front parlour. The rooms upstairs had
also been entered, and the drawers ransacked. Two days
afterwards the prisoner enlisted as a soldier at Devonport,
and on the following morning, being desirous of paying the
"smart money," he pawned some clothes for that purpose.
These clothes proved to be the property of the prosecutor,
and the prisoner was apprehended. Whilst in gaol, he en-
tered into conversation with a sailor lad, who was incar..e-
rated for deserting his ship. The prisoner told this person
that he and a man named Coutts had had a spree ; that
they went together, between nine and ten o'clock, to the
house of Mr. Eva ; and that he (prisoner) was the first to
enter. They took away several things, and drank a large
quantity of wine and spirits which they found on the pre-
mises ; and what they could not drink they removed from
the house.

Mr. Baron Ror.sm told the jury that, as there was no evi-
dence, except the prisoner's own statement, that the house
had been broken into at a time which would make the offence
au act of burglary, it would be better for them to consider
whether or not he was guilty of the minor offence of house-
breaking. The prisoner, not being aware of the importance
which the law attached to the particular time necessary to
be proved in cases of this nature, might have misstated the
hour through heedlessness or inadvertence.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty of housebreaking, and
he was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment; the
Learned Judge observing that he should have inflicted upon
him a more severe punishment, had it not been proved that
there was no person in the house at the time the robbery was
committed.

(Before Mr. Justice ERLE.)
Thomas Laing was indicted fur the commission of a rape
on the wife of a man named Westlake, at the parish of
Davidstow.

Mr. Moody prosecuted, and Mr. Slade defended.
The prisoner and the husband of the proseentrix were
small farmers, living on terms of the closest intimacy, and
fib! Affonee was :chid to bovo boon oomtnitted nitiht Mrs.
Westlake and the prisoner were returning from market.
The trial occupied several hours, and the result was looked
for with some anxiety.
Mr. Justice ERLE having summed up the evidence, the
jury turned round to consider their verdict. After the lapse
of about ten minutes, the foreman said, "We can't agree,
my Lord, here's one sticks out fur the capital offence."
The Learncd JUDGE intimated that the law h"ft abolished
capital punishment in cases of rape.
The jury then retired, and after an absence of an hour, re-
turned into Court with a verdict of " Guilty of a common
asaault."—Sentenced to two years' 4rnprlsonment.
Saturday, March 28.
Henry Barrett was indicted for killing Ann Barrett, a'ias
Ann Fowell, by throwing a poker at her head on the 10th
of December, at Saltash,

Mr. Saunders was for the prosecution ; Mr. Whyte for the
priFoner.

•
The prisoner and the deceased lived together as man and
wife, and the present case was one of the numerous in-
stanees in which death has been the result of a quarrel be
tween persons in their condil ion. The man, it seems, was
drinkira, at a public-house and the woman went to fetch him
home, but he refused to go, and desired her to leave him.
In the course of a few minutes, however, they went home
together, and shortly after a scream was heard by people
residing In the same house, and also by the landlady of the
public-house, which was opposite the prisoner's lodgings.
Several persons immediately entered the room, and seeing
that the deceased had received a very severe wound on the
head, they exclaimed, " Good Good ! who has done this ?"
The prisoner replied that ho had done it, but he aftewards
appeared very sorry fur what had passed, and on a subse-
quent occasion he stated that he did not intend to strike the
deceased with the poker, but to throw it at the crockery
on the dresser. The woman died about a fortnight after the
occurrence.

The deposition :made by the deceased before the magis-
trate was put in, and it appeared from this statement that
the poker struck her as she was in the act of preventing
the prisoner from destroying the crockery—that the blow
was the result of accident, and that her husband was tipsy
at the time.

Mr. WHYTE addressed the jury for the prisoner, and the
Learned Judge, in summing up the case, left it to the jury to
decide whether the prisoner intended to strike the deceased,
or whether the blow was accidental ?

The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
(Before Mr. Baron Rocrx.)
Mary Pearce, a widow woman, of most respectable appear-
ance, was indicted for having, on the 18th of July, whilst in
tl e employ of the public service at the post-office at Strat-
ton, embezzled one penny, which had been intrusted to her
in her official capacity.
Mr. Rogers and Mr. Poulden conducted the: prosecution.
Mr. Slade defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prisoner was deputy-postmistress at
Stratton, and evidence was given to show that in three in-
stances, besides that mentioned in the indictment, the stamps
had been removed from letters received at that office, and
affixed to other letters for which a penny had been paid to
the prisoner ; and it was inferred that she had appropriated
the money to her own use,
Mr. SLADE, on the part of the prisoner, urged that it was
most probable the frauds in question had been committed by
some other person who had access to the post• office.
Several witnesses were called to speak to the prisoner's
character, and the Learned Judge summed up the case.
The Jury having returned a verdict of Guilty,
Mr. BARON ROLFE said he had a painful duty to perform,
but it was absolutely necessary in cases like the present that
the offenders should be severely punished. The sentence was,
that the prisoner be transported for seven years.
The prisoner was in great distress when removed from the
bar. It appeared that she was the mother of three children,
and her husband had been dead eight years.
Bethuel Hutchings, aged sixty-nine, was charged with a
similar cffence, at Bude, on the 14th of July. This man was
said to be a cousin of the prisoner in the last case.
The Jury retired to consider their verdict, and after an ab-
sence of about half an hour they found the prisoner Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE said that, notwithstanding the ad-
vanced age of the prisoner, he was bound to sentence him to
seven years' transportation.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Mr. Thomas Reginald Kcmp, of No. 11, Abchurch-
lane, appeared before Aldermen Gibbs and Farncombe,
in answer to the Joint Stock Companies' Act, for un-
lawfully acting as director on the 19th of December,
1845, and the sth of January of the present year, of the
Metropolitan Railways' Junction Company, not holding
at the time in the said Company a single share, whereby
he had rendered himself liable to a penalty not exceed-
ing 201.

`Mr. Wire appeared for the defendant ; and Mr. George
Jones, the chairman of the meeting of the shareholders
recently held at the London Tavern, attended to conduct
the case. The court was crowded by gentlemen inte-
rested in the decision.

Although the inquiry lasted from half-past twelve
o'clock until four, the facts adduced in evidence are very
brief. A clerk from the Register of the Joint Stock
Companies' office proved that the Company was regis-
tered on the 10th of July, and on the 25th of October a
list of provisional committee-men, signed by the respec-
tive parties, consenting to act in such officei, and to take
a certain number of shares to qualify them for such
duties, was alto received at the office, and duly regis-
tered. In this list was the signature of the defendant.
The proof, however, of the defendant's being a director
on the day mentioned in the summons, solely depended
upon the fact of his having sat with the directors at
public meetings of the Company en those days, and ad-
dressing the meeting in the terms and language of a
director.

After a lengthened and wearisome discussion, which
gave rise to many objections on the part of Mr. Wire,
and which were chiefly overruled.

Mr. Alderman GIBBS consulted with Mr, Alderman
Farncombe, and Mr. Tesgue, the chief clerk, and then
observed, that although the inference might be that the
defendant was in the capacity of a director at the meet-
ings alluded to, still there was no legal proof that he
was, and accordingly the summons would be dismissed.
It was understood that the subject would be again
tried in a superior court.
WORSHIP STREET.

Frederick William Zabell, the elderly German who
was charged some time since with having caused the
death of his wife by a continuous course of ill-treatment,
was plaeed at the bar to-day. It was originally alleged
that he actually caused her death by certain blows ; but
since the last examination, a post mortem examination of
the body has taken place, the result of which shows that
typhoid fever carried her off. Under such circumstances
the mag;strate said, although it had been proved that the
prisocer had adopted a system of brutal ill-usage towards
his aged wife, still, as that did not actually cause her
death, he felt it his duty reluctantly to discharge him.
He was then released from custody.
A DESPERATE Unctini.—A youth, twelve years of
age, was brought up in custody for having Attempted to
bang himself. It appears that his mother, who is a
poor widow, has doni everything in her power to bring
him up religiously and morally, but that, unfortunately,
all her efforts were perfectly useless, inasmuch as he
pursued a course of viciousness quite incredible for his
years. He contintfally stole from her, as well as from
the neighbours, and had actually attempted to stick a
knife into her person. 'A few days since he stole some
pigeons, when, in order to punish him, his mother
locked him up in a room, telling him, at the same time,
that he would be transported. Fired with the spirit of
contradiction, he fastened his handkerchief to a hook,, in
the ceiling, and suspended himself to the other end of
it, where le was found in a state of total insensibility,
and it was difficult to reanimate him. _

In an to the charge, the little rascal stated that he
was determined he would not be transported, so he had
tried to hang himself.
Mr. BuounuToN considered prison discipline might
be beneficial, and consequently remanded him for a
week.