The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-08 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 7.

MELVILLE •. DODGE.
This action was tried at the last sittings in London,
before Chief Justice Wilde, when a verdict was found
for the plaintiff for 447/.
Mr. COCKBURN now applied for a rule for a new trial
on the ground of misdirection, and that the verdict was
against the bulk of evidence. A young man named
Chedley entered into the service of the National Pro-
vincial Bank at Bideford as clerk, and the defen-
dant was surety for his good behaviour and honesty.
Whilst so employed, the young man was sent to a
customer of the bank residing ten miles distant from
Bideford to fetch some money ; he received the amount
for which the ♦erdict was found, and on his way home
lost it. Mr. Cockburn contended that the surety was
not liable for the loss of the money, on the ground that
it was not the proper duty of the youth to fetch money
from a customer, and that the bank had no right to im-
pose such a duty upon him. He also contended that
the bulk of the evidence did not justify the jury in find-
ing a 'verdict for the plaintiff. It appeared that the jury
accompanied their verdict.with an expression of opinion
that it was not within the regular scope of-the young
man's duty in the banking business to be so employed ;
and the Learned Counsel now held that he was acting not
as the agent of the bank, but as the agent of the customer
at the time in question.
The COURT did not take the same view of the case.
Notwithstanding the jury found that it was not the
custom of bankers in that part of the country to send to
their customers, the Court was of opinion it was part of
the banking business; and the services of the young man.
in being so employed, were perfectly legitimate, and were
such as his surety would apply to. The Court was of
opinion that the clerk received the money and held it as
a servant of the bank, and, in that ♦iew of the case,
thought there was no ground for a rule. With regard
to the evidence there was some difficulty, but although
there was nothing affecting the charscter of the young
man, the Court thought there was on his part some in-
advertence and neglect.—Rule refused.

COURT OF BAaKI(UPTCY, Nov:7.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HoLRoYD.)
JAMES WALTER'S lANKRUPTCT.)
The bankrupt, who was described as of Now Kent•
road, bookseller, came up for the Court's decision on the
question of certificate.
The point of the bankrupt's trading having been dis-
cussed,

Mr. Commissioner HoLnoyD gave judgment. He said,
looking at the bankrupt's balance-sheet, which com-
menced in August, 1846, it appeared that his trade trans-
actions literally amounted to nothing. For a certain
time it seemed he had made jast sufficient to cover his
expenses. Unfortunately be did not confine himself to
the business in which he realized some profit, and for
which it appeared he had some talent. Previous to Au-
gust, 1846, he carried on the business of a stockbroker,
and at the time the balance-sheet began he was stated
to be possessed of several shares in the South-Eastern
Railway Company, amounting in value to about 12,0001.
At the same period he was indebted to Davies and Co.,
of Liverpool, to the extent of 4,0002 The shares, which
were lodged with the above-named firm as security, were
gradually disposed of by them with the consent of the
bankrupt, but still there was a large loss. The bankrupt
came to London in March, 1846, nominally as a book-
seller, but he had no trade creditors, and since then he
had been employed on the South-Eastern Railway Com-
pany. In a transaction of the bankrupt with Messrs.
Carden and Whitehead, stockbrokers, in 1848, a con-
siderable loss was sustained in the purchase of 200 South-
Eastern shares, occasioned by the events of February
last, which produced a decline in all kinds of railway
stock, and the result was that the brokers were creditors
to the amount of 1,4001. Taking all the facts into con-
sideration, his Honour said he thought the justice of the
c
t iafias ce would
d be satisfied by suspending the bankrupt's cer-
An _r Biz months, from the date of the meeting in
gust last
Protection was granted from month to month.
EN BoYD'S BANKRUPTCY.
The bankrujp°tnea
hadlk manufacturer, also came up for
his certificate.
named Chrees, traded in connexton with a per-
sonwas severely whose conduct in pledging property
animadverted upon by the Cow t. Although
in business for a period under 12 months, the debts
amounted to 5,573/,besides the property which creditors
held as security for. advances.
The asssets available for
distribution were estimated at about 1,0001.
Mr. Commissioner
HOLROYD, after shortly reviewing
the features of the-
cafte, the
redeeming circumstance
being the bankrupt's nly
moderate personal expenditure,
of
the
ordered an adjournmentcertificate for 12 months,
without protection, and should he hereafter be incarce-
rated the Court would only perruit his release after he
had undergone six months' imprisonment..

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 4.
(Before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER.)

IN RE THOMAS WILLIAM MA.VINHE O'KEEFE.

This insolvent, a literary and dramatic writer, was
opposed by Mr. Hughes on behalf of the assignees, of
Mr. Swan, a solicitor, who claimed 1211. as costs in a
Chancery suit.
The insolvent, upon examination, stated that he had
written articles for the Court Journal and other papers.
He was now;connected with the Sporting Life in London,
a recently-started rival to Bell's Life in London. He
had also written twenty-three dramatic pieces, and his
income from that source averaged about 60/. or 80/. per
annum. He knew Miss Stanley, who was a public
character—an actress. He was not married to;her, be-
cause he was already a married man.
The insolvent here complained of the introduction of
such matters, which he said were only brought forward
to annoy him and bring the lady's name before the public.
Examination resumed—Miss Stanley now resided at
58, Conduit-street, Regent-street, where he also had
resided. The furniture at that place all belonged to
Miss Stanley, and never had belonged to him. His debts
amounted to 9501., contracted since 1838. lie brought
over the Pyrenean singers to this country from France
last year, but had paid them all that was due to them.
Mr. HUGHES said, as his oppoj,tion had been princi-
pally with a view to discover if there was any property
belonging to the insolvent, who now swore he had none,
he should not press the examination any further.
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER asked insolvent if he pro-
posed to set aside any part of his future earnings for
the benefit of his creditors?--The insolvent said he was
about to publish a new work, the first number of which
would appear to-morrow, and if that should succeed he
would be most happy to make an offer. .-
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER said it would be creditable
to the insolvent if, be did so at the next hearing. The
30th inst. was then named for the consideration of the
final order.

(Before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS.)
IN RE GEORGE LINDSAY.
This insolvent, a dealer in horses on commission, ap-
plied t• be discharged. His only debt was 161. 7s. 6d.,
and he had a good debt of 101. due to him. He had
been in prison 16 weeks.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS asked how the insolvent,
with such a small debt, had remained so long in prison?
Insolvent said, be had bought a horse for 131., receiv-
ing a warrantry of soundness, but ending it unsound,
returned it, and commenced an action to recover the 131.
Before proceeding to trial, however, his attorney re-
quired to be paid 201. on account of his costs, which he
could not do, and, consequently, he was nonsuited in the
action. He was now in custody upo❑ an attachment for
the costs, and had only been enabled to apply to this
court by the kind assistance of the Governor of White-
cross-street Prison.
Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS said it was a most extra-
ordinary case, and ordered the insolvent to be discharged
forthwith.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MARYLEBONE.

The Baroness St.-Mart, a fashionably attired :lady,
who was accompanied by her husband and her mother,
the Countess Grabouskii was brought before the sitting
magistrate, Mr. Broughton, by Police-s: rgeant Hocka-
day, lb S, charged, under the following extraordinary
circumstances, with having stolen two valuable diamond
rings, the property of Sir J. Hare; of 26, Royal Cres•
cent, Bath.
The prosecutor, on being sworn, said—ln April, 1847,
the Baroness, who was then Miss Todhunter, was on a
visit to me at my residence in Bath, as was the Baron, to
whom she was about to be married, and also the Coun-
tess, her mother. On the 26th of that mouth I had
written some letters, and was going to a party in the
evening, at which I was to introduce the. Baron. Prior
to my leaving home I opened a portable desk, from
which I took out a ring and put it on my finger ; the
prisoner, the Baroness, asked me to lot k at it, and
gave it into her hands. From a small casket I took
another ring, which she also asked to look at. I gave
it to her, and she put it on her finger, as she did
the first. After a few- minutes I said to her,
" Give me those again," and she said, " No, I shall
keep them." I pressed her very much to return them, but
I could not get them from her; and being anxious to save
the post I quitted home with my letters, the Baron walk-
ing with tee to the post-office. This was on the Tues-
day, and on the next Thursday the Baroness, the Baron,
and the Countess left, and I had forgotten all about the
rings till they were gone. On the next day (Friday) I
came up to London to recover, if possible, the articles
which I had missed, and repaired to their residence in
Thayer-street, Manchester-square, having been invited
to be present at the wedding of the Baroness and Baron
which was to take place on the Saturday. Tho Countess
pressed me eagerly to stay dinner, and as soon as tut
opportunity was afforded me I spoke to the Baroness as
she was going up stairs, having called her aside for the
purpose, and asked her for the rings; she made no ob
servation, but went up. In the course of five minutes
she came down and said, "What were you saying to me
just now?" To which I remarked, that I had asked her
to bring me the rings. She affirmed that she knew
nothing whatever respecting them. Some altercation
ensued, and the Countess also denied that her daughter
the Baroness had the rings in question.
Mr. BROUGHTON—Have you seen the rings since?
Sir J. Hare—l have not, sir.
Mr. BROUGHTON—What do you consider to be the
value of them? Sir J. Hare—l should say at least
40 guineas.
Eliza Russell, through whose information the Baroness
was ultimately apprehended, said—l lived in the service
of the Countess three years, and left lkst Saturday week.
Mr. BROUGHTON—Have you at any time been em-
ployed by the Baroness to dispose of rings? Witness—
Yes, sir. Last May twelvemonth she gave me two rings
which she desired me to pledge for 10/. at Mr. Boyce's,
Lisson-grove North. I obtained that amount upon
them, and gave the money into the Baroness's own
hands. Immediately she received the tickets from me
she tore them up.
The Baroness—Now tell me, what did you leave my
mother, the Countess's, service for? Witness—You
thought I had opened your jewel-box and made free
with its contents; but I was quite innocent of anything
of the sort.
Francis Best said, lam assistant to Mr. Boyce. I
remember two rings being pledged by a woman, whom I
believe to be the last witness, for 101.
Mr. BaoutauTors—Have you the rings, or either of
them, by you? Witness—No, Sir; they were taken to
Debenham and Story's, where they were put up by auc-
tion, and bought in by Mr. Boyce, by whom they have
since been disposed of.
Mr. BaououToN—Describe them if you please. Wit-
ness—One had a large diamond in the centre, set round
with smaller ones, and the other had an emerald in the
centre, also set round with diamonds.
Mr. Fell, the chief clerk (to Sir J. Hare) —Does the
description which you hear given by the last witness
agree with that of the articles which you have lost? Sir
J. Hare—Exactly.
Sergeant Hockaday, 15 S, said, this afternoon I was
with Sir J. Hare, and met the Baroness in a street near
this Court, and by the direction of Sir John I took her
into custody.
Mr. BROUGHTON—Did you tell her what she was
charged with? Witness--I did, Sir. She observed that
she was innocent, and that the matter had been discussed
before.

Mr. BRONORTON (to the prisoner)—Now, if you wish
to say anything, I am ready to hear you.
Prisoner—l have been in the habit of meeting Sir J.
Hare, and he has been .a very kind and good friend;
while lodging in the Champi Elysees, at Paris, with my
mother, we had the use of his carriage, and having
learned that I was about to be united to the Baron on
our return to London, he said he should act as papa at
the wedding, and invited as down to Bath. We went
thither, and although he knew I was engaged to the
Baron, he made me an offer of marriage himself, at the
same time telling me that he should make a much richer
husband for me than the one I had fixed on. On the
Wednesday or:Thursday he speaks of, we were all in the
parlour, when Sir John took a ring from a box, saying.
" This is a beautiful ring," and he put it on my finger;
he also put upon it another, raying, " This belonged to
my dear departed angel." I gave them to my mother
to look at, having done which she gave them back to me,
and I gave them to t1443..8ar0n, who returned them both
to Sir J. Hare. •

Mr. BROUGHTON—You have heard what the pawn-
broker has stated—what do you say .to that?
Prisoner—lf he has had the rings,.it was not through
me, Sir.
Mr. BROUGHTON (to Sir J. Hare)—Now, Sir John, I
need scarcely remind you that you are upon your oath ;
did you ever make an offer of marriage to this lady, the
Baroness ? Sir J. Hare—Never. I can swear it.
Mr. BROUGHTON—Did you ran the rings passed to
the Countess ? Sir J. Hare—l did not. The Baroness
retained possession of them herself....
Mr. BROUGHTON—It'II rather a curious circumstance
that you should not have demanded the rings back be-
fore the party left your house.
Sir J. Hare—lt does seem rather strange. but it hap-
pened to escape my recollection.
Mr. BROUGHTON (to the prisoner)—Sir John swears
that there is no truth as to his having made you an
offer.

Prisoner—He really did, Sir ; what I have stated ii
the fad,.

The Countess here stepped forward, and said, Sir
John was very attentive to my daughter upon all occa-
sions, and as she was not in the habit of rising early, he
would go to her bedroom door, clap his hands, and say,
" Missy, missy, come down to breakfast."
Mr. BROUGHTON, after remarking upon the evidence
adduced, and giving it as his opinion that he could see
no reason for doubting the truth of the statement made
by the witness Russell, remanded the Baroness till Tues-
day next, in order to afford time for Mr. Boyce, the
pawnbroker, to do all in his power with the view of
tracing the rings; he was willing to take bail for her
future appearance, the Baron, her husband, in 2001., and
another surety in half that amount.
The Countess here addressed the prosecutor, saying,
"Sir John, with grey hairs, such revenge is unworthy
of you."

ihe required recognizances were entered into, and the
parties quitted the Court.

WESTMINSTER.
Mary Heak, a woman of the town, and Thomas John-
son, a well known associate of reputed thieves, were
finally examined, charged with ill-treating and robbing
Allen Hembrow, a respectable-looking young man, of his
silver watch.

The circumstances of the case are briefly these :
The prosecutor and a friend were inveigled by a woman,
on the night of the 30th ult., into an infamous house, in
Duck-lane, where they were joined by the female pri-
soner. The male prisoner shortly afterwards made his
appearance, and insisted upon the prosecutor and his
friend sending out for some liquor ; and as the female
prisoner locked the door, and declared that they should
,not leave unless the request was complied with, prose-