The Sun.
London, England, 1846-11-23 00:00:00

THE BISHOP OF EXETER V. LATIMER.

Mr. MONTAGUE SMITH applied, on the part of the
Bishop of Exeter, for a writ of certiorari to remove an
indictment which had been found against Thomas Lati-
mer, the proprietor and publisher of a newspaper called
the Western Times, in the city of Exeter, into this
Court. The Learned Counsel stated that the libel was
one of a most scandalous nature upon a dignitary of the
Church, and attempts had been made by the defendant
to prejudice any chance of a fair trial in the city of
Exeter. The circumstances to which the libel
had reference arose out of a speech made
by Lord Seymour to the electors of Totues,
with reference to the dismissal of a gentleman named
Shore from the cure of a chapel. The language of
the libellous article was very strong and personal• The
affidavit on which the motion was made was from Mr.
Gibson, the Bishop's attorney, and stated that a true
hill had been found against the defendant; and that upon
the indictment the circumstances relating to the pe-
tition of Mr. Shore and the speech of Lord Seymour,
and also some transactions between the Bishop of Exeter
to the Duke of Somerset would be brought into question,
with other matters of very considerable importance, and
fit only for the judgment of a special jury. The affidavit
also stated that the paper of the defendant was circu-
lated amongst the class of persons who formed petty
juries in the city of Exeter, and that several articles had
appeared in it calculated to prejudice any fair or un-
biassed decision on the indictment.—Rule granted.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

LIABILITY OF PROVISIONAL COMMITTEEMEN-WYLD V.

HOPKINS.

Mr. MARTIN resumed the arguments in this case,
which were in part heard on Saturday. The scheme in
question was the Nottingham and Peterborough Junc-
tion Railway, which was provisionally registered on the
4th of Sept., 1845. On the 29th of the same month a
prospectus of the company was registered, containing
the name of Hopkins, the defendant, " Director of the
Staffordshire Potteries and Manchester Direct Railway."
On the 10th of October a letter was addressed by
the defendant to the secretary of the company, desiring
him to allot him his full number of shares as a
provisional committeeman. The .order for the work
was given to the plaintiff by the solicitor to the com-
pany, and this was given, he would contend, on the
authenticity of the provisional committee, of which the
defendant was a member. The questions left to the jury
by the Lord Chief Baron, at the trial, were—First, did
the members of the provisional committee acknowledge,
by the insertion of their names in the prospectus, that
they were to be responsible for those expenses necessary
for the formation of the company? Secondly, did the
defendant authorise his name to be so used? Thirdly,
did the defendant authorise his credit to be pledged for
those expenses? Fourthly, was the work done on the
credit of the defendant? He would now contend, in
answer to those questions, that by the defendants placing
his name on the provisional committtee, he became a mem-
ber of a quasi parnership, and that by doing so he had
pledged himself for the payment of those expenses ne-
cessarily to be incurred under the 27th sec. of the 7th
and Bth Vict., and that the fact of his permitting his
name to be used was evidence to go to the jury of his
giving to the party ordering the goods authority to
pledge his credit for the same, and further, that in per-
mitting his name to be inserted in the prospectus was
sufficient proof, that he was willing to pledge him-
self for such expenses, and that the liability was not
thrust upon him against his consent.
Mr. Baron PARSE—IS there any evidence to show
that he bad authorised his name to be inserted in the
prospectus ?
Mr. MARTIN—I apprehend there is, my Lord.
Mr. Baron PARKE—A man may consent to be a
member of a provisional committee, but it is a very dif-
ferent thing to give his consent to have his name go
forth to the world upon a certain printed paper in con-
nexion with certain statements, such as are contained in
the prospectus of this company.
Mr. MARTIN—He had written letters to the secretary
subsequently to his name appearing on the prospectus
acknowledging the fact of his name appearing there, and
made no objection to it. The Learned Counsel pro-
ceeded to quote a number of cases in support of his
argument of the liability of provisional committeemen.
Seven of the judges of Westminster hall had adopted
that view of the question, juries had always taken the
same view of it, and it would be going contrary to the
commonest dictates of reason and understanding to dis-
pute the point at the present period.
Mr. BARON PARSE—Is there any evidence to show
that, by the party permitting his name to be used in the
prospectus of the company, he meant anything more
than merely
~to recommend the scheme, or to say in effect
this is a bona fide scheme, and not a mere bubble got up
for improper purposes ?
Mr. MARTIN—His name being in the list on the pro-
spectus is, in my opinion, an acknowledgment of his
liabilty to bear his part of the expenses incurred prior to
obtaining the Act of incorporation.
Mr. WILLES was heard against the rule.
Mr. WATSON than proceeded in support of the rule.
There was no analogy between the case of a co-part-
nership and the case of a provisional committee, and the
sole question with which the Court had to deal, was
whether there was a contract between the plaintiff and
defendant. And upon that he would say, that there was
clearly no contract whatever, neither was there any
evidence to show that he had given authority to
any person to enter into any contract on his behalf.
All the defendant ever did was to sanction his name
being used as a provisional committeeman. He never
attended any meeting, and that for the best of
all possible reasons—because there never had been any
meeting. The order was given by the solicitor without
communicating with the defendant, or either with any
other member of the committee. It was well known
that the solicitor had no power whatever to bind his
client ; his business is to do certain work, for
which he is to get paid by his client. The mere
fact of being a provisional committeeman was
not in itself sufficient to render a person liable.
It would be absurd to suppose, in the case of a committee
appointed to adopt measures for obtaining a repeal of the
corn-laws, or, as in the sister island, for the repeal of the
union, that one member of the committee could bind
another. There were numerous expenses required, such
as parties advertising prizes for essays, &c.; but it surely
could not be supposed that one member of a committee
could offer 1,000/. for an essay, and by such offer make
another member of the committee liable. A case was tried
lately, in which a member of the Society for promoting
Christianity among the Jews gave orders for a new
translation of the New Testament, but it was ruled that
the committee was not liable.
The COURT postponed their decision until the hearing
of the other railway cases.
WYLD V. SLOAN.

Upon the trial in this case it appeared that the plaintiff
was not in fact interested in the issue, he having merely
lent his name to the managing committee, and that up-
wards of forty actions bad been brought in his name by
the solicitor, to compel some members of the provisional
committee to pay their share of the expenses. A ver-
dict was returned for the plaintiff—damages, one shilling.
Mr. MARTIN now showed cause against the rule ob-
tained a few days since by Mr. Hoggins. His argu-
ments were not brought to a conclusion when the Court
ose.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

MACEY V. THOMAS.

Mr. Sergeant NVIL7iINS moved fur a rule nisi for a
new trial ii; this case, on the grounds that the verdict
was against evidence and surprise. The action was
tried last week at the Guildhall, and the verdict was for
the defendant. It was to recover 1001. on two bills of
exchange, and were for the purchase of the good-will of
a coffee-house in Bishopsgate-street. The defence was
that the extent of the business had been misrepresented
by the plaintiff, and this defence, which came upon the
plaintiff by surprise, was alleged by plaintiff to be un-
founded. Rule nisi granted.

KENT V. THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.
Mr. Serjeant TALFOURD proceeded to show cause
against a rule nisi obtained the present term, calling on
the master to revise his taxation of costs in this action,
which was brought by the plaintiff, a carrier, against the
Great Western Railway Company, and in which he re-
covered a verdict. The defendants objeeted to allowing
the costs fur serving the notice of action, and preparing
and delivering the particulars of plaintiff's claim.
The Court, having heard Mr. Sergeant Channel in
reply, ordered the rule to be discharged with costs.

IN RE MRS. SHUTTLEWORTH.
Mr. O'BRIEN moved a writ of habeas corpus, directed
to Dr. Milligan, ordering him to bring up the body of
Anna Maria Shuttleworth, an alleged lunatic. A mo-
tion of a similar purport had been moved for in the Bail
Court in the present term, and the writ was argued be-
fore a full Court of Queen's Bench, when the rule was
discharged on technical grounds. On that occasion Mr.
Justice Erie was reported to have stated that the certifi-
cates did not enter into the question of sanity or insanity.
These, therefore, were not raised fully then, but now he
was prepared with affidavits to meet that question. He
had the certificate of Dr. Quail, who) had known her for
five years. He stated his opinion that during the whole
of that period, at the time when she was taken into
custody, she was not insane. He had also the affidavit
of a Mr. Dyer, who had known her for thirty years, and
which also denied the alledged lunacy. An affidavit to
the same effect was likewise put in by a lady named
Caroline Beachey.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—On whose behalf do you
app
Mrl ?
y . O'BRIEN—On behalf of Dr. Quail, with whom
she resided when taken.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—Take a rule to show Cause
on the whole merits.

BANKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner SHEPHERD.)

IN RE DINGLEY.

Charles Bingley, described as of Charles-street, Spital-
fields, trimming-manufacturer, was brought up in cus-
tody to pass his last examination.
He was supported by Mr. Stammers as counsel, and
opposed by Mr. Hudson as solicitor to the assignees.
It appeared that no accounts had been furnished by
the bankrupt to the assignees, but Mr. Stammers con-
tended that under the Act of Parliament the assignees
were bound when the bankrupt was in prison to send in
an accountant, and afford the bankrupt access to his
books. Mr. Hudson, in reply, argued that the Act was
not compulsory on the assignees, but merely permissive,
and that under all the circumstances of the case they
would not have been justified in doing so.
The Learned COMMISSIONER acquiesced, especially
as it appeared that the bankrupt had engaged some
person to make out his accounts. His Honour said he
must adjourn the examination until the accounts were
furnished.

Mr. HUDSON said this was a very complicated case,
and he had, on behalf of the assignees, to put it forth as
one of gross fraud. It appeared that he had been for a
long time carrying on business in different places, and
latterly was married to a Mrs. Davis, who carried on the
same business. He was not only married to her, but it
would, no doubt, be proved that he had several other
wives, and that there had been a regular conspiracy.
Just previously to the bankruptcy, the bankrupt had
obtained goods to a large amount from different persons,
some of which had found their way to Mrs. Davis's place
of business, but she, after assigning certain property
and debts to a person named Mitchell, who had
married her daughter, absconded with the property
or proceeds sent in by the bankrupt. The
police had been after her for some time, but without
success and the bankrupt was taken by them in the act of
flight. Mitchell, to whom Mrs. Davis had made the
assignment, had been examined, and that was the only
account of the bankrupt's affairs which had come to the
assignees.
The Learned COMMISSIONER asked whether they had
not succeeded in taking any property?
Mr. Hudson said, when the bankruptcy took place the
messenger went to the place he had been inhabiting with
his supposed wife, but all the property had been got
away; but, after the bankrupt's arrest they took advice,
and seized some of the property assigned by Mrs. Davis,
on the ground that if bankrupt was married to her she
could not assign the goods being sent in by bankrupt,
although the business was carried on in her name.
The bankrupt was then examined, but refused to say
whether he was married to Mrs. Davis or not.

The Learned COMMISSIONER said that the bankrupt
was not bound to answer, if the answer would criminate
him.

Mr. Hudson put his question in another form, and re-
quired to know whether his wife had told him of the
disposal of the property, either before or after his arrest?
The COMMISSIONER—You must not say " his wife,"
but ask whether it was Mrs. Davis, or the woman he called
his wife.

Mr. Stammers objected that even such a question
might lead to a criminal inference, and be collateral
evidence of the bankrupt was indicted for bigamy, and,
on the authority of the ease "Re Kirby," in Montagu's
Report, a bankrupt was not bound to answer a question
to obtain indirectly that which could not .be got in evi-
dence directly.
The Learned CommissioNEn said that it might be
taken so far as the civil effect of the answer went, though
not to be used criminally.
The bankrupt was then examined as to the disposal of
his goods, and he declared, that although he had heard
where some goods were taken to within a fortnight, and
had the address written for him, he could not remember
it. His memory was " that bad," he could not remember,
and he was a bad scholar, and could not read without a
good light and plenty of time. He had given up the
address to his accountant. He could not say who had
given him the address.
The Learned Comtism/En said he was on that oc-
casion inclined to commit the bankrupt, but perhaps a
private examination would give
.him the opportunity to
refresh his memory.
The examination was adjourned for a fortnight.
Bankrupt admitted that he was daily supported in
prison from the proceeds of the sales by " his wife."

CRIMINAL COURT-(ThIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

These sessions, the first of the present mayoralty,
commenced to-day before the Lord Mayor (Sir George
Carroll), the Recorder, the Sheriffs, and other of the
civic dignataries. According to the Calendar, there are
139 males for trial, and 32 females, whose offences may
be thus stated :—Lareeny, grand and petit, 53 ; cutting
and wounding persons, with intent to murder, 4; stab-
bing and beating, with intent to no bodily harm, 2 ;
manslaughter, 3; burglary in dwelling- houses, ware-
houses, &c., 6; forgery, and uttering forged instrnments,
2; embezzlement by clerks and servants, 12; feloniously
uttering counterfeit coin, 2 ; unlawfully possessing the
like, with intent to utter, 1; housebreaking and lar-
ceny therein, 8 ; stealing goods and money in dwelling-
houses, 5 ; stealing goods and money from the person,
16 ; robbery by domestic servants, 34 ; receiving stolen
property with a guilty knowledge, 1 ; robberies on the
public way with violence, 6 ; robbery on the river
Thames, 1 ; ditto in public docks and ports of entry,
1 ; obtaining goods and money under false pretexts,
2 ; conspiracy, with intent to commit fraud, 2 ;
assault on constable in the execution of duty, 1 ;
ditto, with intent to violate and carnally know, 1 ; ditto
and endeavour to excite to commit a misdemeanour, 1 ;
beating and wounding with intent to do bodily harm, 1 ;
rape upon children, 3 ; having moulds in their posses-
sion for the purpose of coining, 2 ; misdemeanors of
various kinds, 3 ; shopbreaking, and larceny therein, 1;
robbery and breaking out of dwelling-house, 1.
The grand jury having been sworn, and
The ItEconDER having delivered his charge to them,
observing upon the different offences contained in the
Calendar, they retired to the performance of their duties,
and the Court in the meantime proceeded to swear in
the petit jury.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(THIS DAY.)

The November general sessions for the trial of
offences committed within the district of Westminster,
commenced this day at twelve o'clock.
The grand jury having been sworn, the Assistant-
Judge charged them very briefly, and after the lapse of
a considerable time a true bill was sent in against
Thomas Jones, who was indicted for stealing half-a-
crown and three shillings, the property of Mr. J. Well-
spring, chemist and druggist, of No. 3, Chandos-street,
Charing-cross.

It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutor and
his apprentice, that on the 15th inst. the prisoner entered
the shop while there was no person there, and, leaning
over the counter, drew out the till, from which he took
the above sum, and then ran away. He was, however,
followed by the apprentice, who never lost sight of him
until he was taken into custody, at the corner of Hen-
rietta-street, Covent-garden.
The prisoner was co.ivicted, and sentenced to six
months' imprisonment, with hard labour, six weeks of
which were to be solitary.
Edward Bishop, a well-known pickpocket, was con-
victed of stealing a silk handkerchief from the person of
Thomas Lock, and was sentenced to six months' impri-
sonment, with hard labour.
Margaret Macarthy was found Guilty of stealing three
and another.
shawls, the property of Charles Tomkins
She was sentenced to four months' imprisonment.
Henry Williams pleaded Guilty to an indictment
charging him with stealing 10s., the property of Harriet
Evans, with whom he lodged, and was sentenced to
three months' imprisonment.

411111,amilion.
MARLBRO'-STREET—(THIS DAY.)
T. M. Wheeler and John Whithorn were charged with
assaulting William Rogers, in Dean-street.

The complainant r aid he was passing the defendant
Wheeler's door, in E lean-street, this morning about one
o'clock, in company with his wife and a friend, when
Wheeler grossly ins ;ulted him, and then knocked him
down among some t nicks and rubbish.
Police-constable C 57, saw a crowd of about 50 per-
sons come out of a. public-house about one o'clock, and
the defendant Wheeler, after passing some way along
the street, knocked the complainant down. When he
had Wheeler in custody, the other defendant, Whit-
horn, attempted to rescue him. The constable said
there was a Chal let Society there, which met every

mpeumbbliecr-shoofuwseh,icahn,dacftererattehdeir_zp
eat: _ - ._‘..,m
?
..0..,-...--
iSnugn,
adjournedday eN • enin gt ,0
the
th
deal of disturbance in Dean-street every Sunda 7: ,''', : '- .''
_'
and Monday morning.
..47 -i.7!'
%... .-',c_l; '‘'--3
The defendant Wheeler said the prosecutor lb , . - ' 24 r 4
charged him with robbing the funds of the sccie ...Pr. . , , l''',. . -...
perhaps he was irritated, but he denied striking
.. .! • "'. ~---1----- 1
, ,,14
had been stated. .. , , ~
r. , s. -
Mr. HennwicK—What are you? Wheeler— r' e-----4,
~,,,v
tary to a land society for the purchasing of allotment& \''''-'l--. re
The prosecutor denied having charged him with'-----.4:1%,
robbing the society.
After hearing various witnesses, whose evidence did
not seem to throw the least light on the subject,
Mr. HARDWICL said the violence made use of was not
justifiable. He tined the defendant Wheeler 4/.., or one
month in the House of Correction; and Whithorn, for
the assault on the :police, 2/., or fourteen days in the
House of Correction.

THE BRAZILS.
FALMOUTH, Nov. 21, NINE P.M. The Penguin
packet, Lieutenant Leslie, came in this evening at about
seven o'clock from the Brazils, bringing mails and dates
from Rio Janeiro to the 3d of October ; Bahia, the 15th;
and Pernambuco, the 22d. The following are passen-
gers by her—viz., Mr. and Mrs. F. Grigg and four
children; Mr. Petty, Mr. de St. Dames Mr. Hadfield,
Mr. Banziger, Mrs. Virtue, and Miss dray, from Rio
Janeiro; and Mr. Davenport from Bahia; and she has
on freight about 16,0004 in gold and precious stones.
Exchange at Rio, 274 and 28 • Bahia, 27f ; and at
Pernambuco, 28. At Rio the coffee supply was abun-
dant; and sales, the fortnight prior to the departure of
the packet, amounted to 70,000 bags, leaving a residue
of 40,000 bags stock. Sugar, although scarce in the
market, was expected to be a large crop. Freights at
Rio firm, at 50s. and 5 per cent. ; but few vessels in
port. _ _

At Bahia, freights ranged from 40s. to 50s.
Her Majesty's brigantine Griffon had arrived at Rio
on the Ist of October, in thirteen days, from Monte
Video. Political affairs remained in the same state as
when the Gorgon left on the 13th of September.
The Penguin left at Rio her Majesty's ship Crescent,
Curacoa, Swift packet, and Dido ; the Spider was ex-
pected there daily from the River Plate en route to Eng-
land, and her Majesty's brig Grecian had sailed from Rio
for the River Plate and China.

The Antelope steamer, from Liverpool, arrived at
Bahia on the 12th of October, and pfoceeded on the lath
for Rio Janeiro.

The Craven packet, from Falmouth, arrived at Bahia
on the 15th of October, and her Majesty's steamer De-
vastation had sailed from that place for Ascension.
The hired barque Palestine, from New Zealand, having
on board Sir George Gipps and lady, as also Lieutenant
Wharton, and part of the crew of her Majesty's late brig
Osprey, touched at Bahia on the 15th of October ; and
the hired barque Posthumous, having on board Com-
mander Patten and the remainder of the crew of the
Osprey, arrived at Rio on the 30th of September.
The Penguin has made a quick passage home, but ex-
perienced very bad weather the last three days.—Times.