The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-15 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 14.

Lord Chief Justice Wilde and a special jury were
engaged the whole day in the trial of an action for an
alleged illegal distraint under a fiat, of bankruptcy. The
case, which was of no interest except to the parties con-
cerned, was not concluded at the rising of the Court.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

The second session of the present mayoralty was
opened yesterday morning.
Mr. Samuel Taufor, of 2, George-court, Drury-lane,
printer of the Patents Journal, was indicted for the
publication of a libel on Mr. Vincent Price, late the
secretary of the London Mechanics' Benefit Institution,
ascribing to him motives of personal interest in the
establishment of the society, and describing him as unfit
from ignorance for the situation which he held.
Mr. Ilorry was retained for the prosecution, and Mr.
Robinson for the defendant.

Mr. Thomas Henry Smith, of Rider's-court, Leicester-
square, an ivory turner, stated that he was a member of
the committee of the London Mechanics' Benefit Insti-
tution, and testified his belief that the description which
appeared in the report that emanated from Mr.
Taylor's printing-office could only refer to the founder,
Mr. Price, and no one else. To Ltr. Robinson's cross-
examination, he replied that he was a member
of the committee, but that several secessions had
been made from the society since his installation in
office, so that the committee could not be identified.

George Henry Brankes, a member of the committee,
said that, though constant in his attendance, there were
three or four members that he hag never met with.

The policeman proved the identity of Mr. Taylor as
the printer of the libel.

The publication of the alleged libel having been
proved,
Mr Ronnisox submitted that Mr. Price had neither
!proved that he was the secretary of the society, nor
that the society itself was a legal society. To make it
the !cater, it ought to have been registered under 7th
and Bth Victoria, c. 110, s. 2. ; but this objection being
overruled by the Judge, Mr. Robinson addressed the
jury for the defence. He was prepared to prove that
the libel was inserted in the journal, if libel it was, with-
out any countenance, or even partisanship, or the de-
fendant. This was a sufficient defence both in
law and equity ; but there was a further proof in the
readiness of the defendant to give every information that
could be desired by the prosecutor, so as to enable him
to get at the real author. Mr. Taylor had printed only
two or three numbers of this journal, and could not
possibly have either interest or motive to prejudice the
character of the prosecutor. He then called
Geot ge Wilson Bartlett, clerk to Mr. Warnford, tht:
prosecutor's attorney, who proved that he had called upon
Mr. Taylor, at the instance of Mr. Price, to complain of
the libel, when the former stated that he was quite ready
to give up the name of the author, but must first have an
interview with him. At a subsequent meeting- with Mr.
Warnford, on the 3d of saitober, in fioNorn, Mr. Taylor
had expressly stated who was the author, and that
two persons in his employment could prove the hand-
writing of that gentleman, as exhibited in the copy of
the libel.

Thomas Payne, a compositor in the employment of
Mr. Taylor, who had been employed on this j+•urnal,
proved that the copy came into the office on a Wednes-
day evening, when Mr. Taylor was away from home.
Mr. Simpson, the overseer fur Mr. Taylor, confirmed
the evidence of the last witness.
Mr. Holm- replied.
• - •

The COMMISSIONER summed up, stating that the jury
must be clearly satisfied that there was a mischievous
intention in the defendant, as also that he was the actual
printer and publisher, before they could convict.
After a short consultation the jury returned a verdict
of Not guilty.

Johnßroon, William Reynolds, and Robert Rose, were
jointly indicted for a conspiracy to defraud Thomas Stiff
of 45L, by means of false pretences. The two first-
named defendants were surrendered, Rose did not ap-
pear to take his trial.
Mr. Ballantine prosecuted ; Mr. Clarkson defended
Brown, and Mr. Parry-appeared for Reynolds.
From the evidence adduced in support of the charge,
it appeared that the prosecutor is a job master in
Quebec-mews, Portman-square, and on the 6th of Octo-
ber, the defendant Rose went to him and told him that
Brown, who is the landlord of the Three Tans public •
house, Oxford-street, had a horse in his possession be-
longing to a gentleman to whom he had advanced a sum
of money, and that he was anxious to sell the animal,
which he described as being worth eighty guineas, but
which he said he could offer for a much smaller sum.
The prosecutor accompanied Rose to Brown's house, when
a very fine showy animal was brought out and exhibited,
but he declined at that time to enter into any negotia-
tion for the purchase of it, expressing a wish to see the
gentleman to whom it belonged, or, at all events, to be
satisfied that Brown had his authority to dispose of it.
A few days after this, Rose again called upon him, and
said they had got the gentleman's authority ; and upon
the prosecutor's going to Brown's public-house, that de-
fendant showed him a letter, signed G. A. Smith, which
authorised Brown to sell the horse ; and upon this the
prosecutor consented to give 451. for the animal, which
was then sent t;) his stables, and he very speedily dis-
covered that it was a regular " screw," being a r )arer,
and badly broken winded ; in:fact, perfectly useless ex-
cept as a means of fraud, for which, however, its showy
and grand appearance rendered it peculiarly applicable ;
and it appeared that only a few days before
the present prosecutor was bit, a gentleman in
Finsbury-circus had purchased the same ani-
mal for thirty guineas from Brown, and upon
discovering its worthlessness, he sold it to him back the
same day for 20/., resolving to lose the difference. The
only evidence against the defendant Reynolds appeared
to be that he had written the petitioner's letter in the
name of G. A. Smith, but this fact was not clearly esta-
blished.

The jury returned a verdict of Guilty against Brown,
and acquitted the other defendant.
A number of respectable witnesses were then exa-
mined to show that Brown had borne a good character
previous to this transaction.
Mr. But.r.ocx sentenced him to be imprisoned for six
calendar months.

The indictment found at the last sessions against seve-
ral individuals for havicg illegally trafficked in the sale
of cadetships, has been removed by certiorari from this
Court to the Queen's Bench.

WINTER ASSIZES.
NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Dec. 11.
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
ROBBERY AT WARRINGTON. Samuel Bell, 31, was
indicted for having, on the 19th August last, feloniously
broken into and entered the warehouse of John 'Tickle,
at Warrington, and stolen a large quantity of tea, to-
bacco, and other articles, his property.
Mr. POLLOCK stated the case to the jury. On the
morning of the 19th August the warehouse of the pro-
secutor was entered, and a large quantity of grocery
stolen, under circumstances that showed that several
persons had been concerned in the robbery, and that
they must have had a horse and cart. The evidence
against the prisoner was, that he was seen in a spring
cart of a peculiar description, at Warrington, on the
night of the robbery, and it-was discovered that the cart
came from Liverpool, and had been hired under pre-
tence that he wanted it to fetch a chest of drawers from
a place called Kirby, and the prisoner was traced to and
from Warrington on the night in question. Upon the
prisoner's cellar being searched, a tea chest belonging to
Mr. Tickle was found, and it was proved that the pri-
soner and another man had sold a quantity of tobacco,
similar in quality to that stolen from Mr. Tickle.
A long written document was read, purporting to be
a confession by the prisoner, in which he stated that he
was engaged by two men at Liverpool to go to Warring-
ton, and that they brought back a quantity of tea and
other articles, which the other men took away.
Mr. ATHERTON addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that the prisoner had nothing to do with the
robbery, and that he had merely been hired by the
other men, in the ordinary course of his business as a
porter.

The prisoner was found Guilty, and
His LORDSHIP sentenced him to seven years' trans-
portation.

CHARGE OF BIGAMY.—James Chadwick (not in the
calenthr) was indicted for having, at Manchester, on
the 23,1 of March, in the present year, intermarried
with Eliza Bnstock, his former wife, Ann Chadwick,
formerly Ann Fisher, being alive.
Mr. T. C. Foster appeared for the prosecution, and
Mr. Monk for the prisoner.
The facts of the case were as follows:—Some years
ago the prisoner married a female named Hannah
Fisher, who died. In the month of September in last
year, he married Ann Fisher, the sister of his de-
ceased wife, with whom he lived only a short time,