The Sun.
London, England, 1870-01-12 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

TEE BRIDGWATER ELECTION COMMISSION.—An important
point was discussed on Tuesday in the Court of Queen's
Bench. It was raised by the Lord Chief Justice mention-
ing the case of Mr. Lovibond, who, by counsel, called
upon the Commissioners of the Bridgwater Election
to show cause why they should not indemnify
him by certificate for the evidence given before
them. His lordship said they had heard the argument
as to :whether Mr. Lovibond had answered the questions
satisfactorily or not; but there appeared to the court
another question, whether, assuming Mr. Lovibond had
answered satisfactorily, it was competent for the court to
decide or take a different view from that which the com-
mission had takenas to whether Mr. Lovibond was entitled
to his certificate. If their lordships had been clearly of
opinion that the answers were unsatisfactory, it would have
been unnecessary to discuss the second question, and,
therefore, they took time to consider the first branch of
the question ; and having considered it, they thought it
was necessary to hear further argument on the legal point
as to how far this court has jurisdiction over the Com-
missioners.—The Solicitor-General: The Commissioners
have sent in their report, and they now cease to exist ; and
that may affect the argument. The Lord Chief Justice:
I think the commissioners ought not to have put an end
to their existence.—The Solicitor-General said they could
not help themselves, as the Act of Parliament obliged
them to report. Until the whole of the particulars were
sent to the Home Office perhaps they should not be able
to get what they wanted. On the part of the Crown he
would say, however, that no unreasonable objection should
be made to having what they wanted.—The matter then
dropped.
MR. PEABODY'S WILL.—In the Court of Probate, on Tues-
day, an application was made by Dr. Deane, Q.C., arising
from proceedings that took place before the Registrar in
reference to the will of the late George Peabody. The con-
ditions of the will were that there should be two sets of
executors. The executors were authorised to act indepen-
dently of each other, but the testator hoped they would work
harmoniously together for the interests of the estate. The
English executors were, after paying certain properties, to
hand over the residue to the American trustees, and this
was to be done in or before May 1873. When this was done the
American executors were to pay, half-yearly, certain legacies
to certain parties named in a family trust. The difficulty
which arose was in the practice of the registry with refer-
ence to trustees acting in a foreign country. According to a
case decided by Dr. Lushington, the executors were
to be incorporated in the will ; but considerable
difficulties arose therefrom. Lord Penzance said
the executors might be allowed to take probate on
bringing an affidavit to identify the deed, with the names
of the executors. The affidavit should state that it related
to the will of an American citizen whohad a domicile here.
THE " SAURIN v. STARR " CASE.—In the Court of
Queen's Bench, on Tuesday, the re-hearing upon points of
law of the convent scandal case should have come on. The
Solicitor-General applied for its postponement. Mr. Mel-
lish, Q.C. (he said) who represented the convent authori-
ties, was too ill to appear; some of the superiors were out
of the country ; and the time was in every respect incon-
venient. " I may add," remarked Sir John Coleridge,
"that there is every chance of the case going off if it
were allowed to stand over." The court granted the
application as requested.

A RAILWAY CASE.—A motion has been made in the
Rolls Court, on behalf of Mr. Healey, who hail obtained an
order for payment of £23,516 2s. Bd., against the Chichester
and Midhurat Line. The motion was that execu-
tion might issue against the London rnd Brighton Rail-
way, who hold 9,000 shares in the Chichester line for
the balance of the debt. The Master of the Rolls said the
Brighton Company must have an opportunity of defending
themselves, but that he must order the execution to issue
to the extent cf the unpaid up capital on the 9,000 shares,
unless cause were shewn to the contrary, on the second
seal day after term.

A PATENT ACTION.—A Manchester manufacturer, named
Wight, has brought an action against Messrs. Hitchcock
and Co., the drapers in St. Paul's Churchyard, for the
infringement of a patent for the manufacture of frills or
ruffles. The trial took place before the Lord Chief
Baron, in Middlesex, when the jury found a
verdict for the plaintiff. A rule was obtained for a
new trial which has been argued in the Court of
Exchequer. The question was whether the sale of articles
made by a patented machine amounted to the infringe-
ment of the patentee's right. Mr. Baron Martin thought
that the Patent Laws protected not merely machinery but
the articles made by it, and that consequently the defen-
dants had rendered themselves responsible to plaintiff by
the sale of the articles in question. The rule for a new
trial was therefore discharged.

MR. BRADLAITGII AS PLAINTIFF.—The case of Bradlaugh
v. De Kin has been brought before the Court of Common
Pleas. Mr. Bradlaugh brought an action on some bills
which had circulated in France. It was tried more than
two years ago, and the verdict was entered for the plaintiff
subject to a point reserved connected with Frenchlaw. The
case afterwards came before the Exchequer Chamber, when
the defendant's counsel objected to the oath being adminis-
tered to Mr. Bradlaugh, on the ground that he was incom-
petent to take it. It was replied that the Evidence Act
provided an exemption, but the counsel objected that Mr.
Prentice, Q.C., the referee, was not a presiding judge,
within the meaning of the statute. The plaintiff in per-
son, therefore, moved the Court of Common Pleas for a
rule, directing Mr. Prentice to take the evidence. The
Lord Chief Justice said, as that court had made
no order of reference, he could have no juris-
diction in the matter. The plaintiff suggested
that an order to refer should be made, but the Lord Chief
Justice objecting that some affidavits were wanting, the
plaintiff said he must trouble their lordships again, and
left the court, followed by a large crowd who had attended
him all the morning.

BENEFIT SOCIETIES.—TWO labouring men applied to the
magistrate at the Thames Police Court for advice. Their
mother had been a regular subscriber to the Integrity
Life Assurance and Sick Benefit Society, but on
her death they were unable to obtain the burial
money. Mr. Lushington, after asking many
questions on the subject, advised the applicants to give
notice to call the arbitrators, and if that produced no satis-
factory results, to sue in the county court.

ACTION BY MADAME CELESTE.—Madame Celeste, the
well-known actress, has brought an action against Mr.
Smith, manager of the Bradford Theatre, for £7los. She was
playing for a week at his theatre on an arrangement to
take one-third of the receipts for every night but Friday.
As the receipts were very small, however, a change in the
arrangement was made; but some dispute arose, and
Madame Celeste threatened to stop the performance, upon
which the defendant gave an lOU, which he now held
was not binding. Verdict for the plaintiff.

MURDER BY A Mon.—Seven men have been tri..f. at
the High Court of Justiciary, Scotland, for murder. The
deceased lost his life in a riot between Orangemen and
Catholics, but as there had been a regular melee in which
all parties were to blame, the prisoners were dismissed,
the charges being " not proven."

The public health returns from twenty of the more
important cities and boroughs in the United kingdom are
now included in the Registrar General's weekly publica-
cation. Last week the aggregate mortality was at the rate
of 30 per 1,000. In London 2,431 births and 1,697 deaths
were registered, the former having been 101 above, and
the latter 2 below the estimated number. The moan tem-
perature was 45*2, or 8.9 above the average.

THE DUNDONNACIHE ARRESTED. A telegram
from a correspondent at Dundee reads as follows :
" Alexander Robertson Dundonnachie, made famous by
the Dunkeld Bridge postage agitation, was apprehended
to-day and lodged. in prison, charged with slandering
Sheriff Barclay, of Perth. The apprehension` is at the
'instance of the Lord Advocate. Dundonnachie accused
Sheriff Barclay of being a corrupt judge in connection
with certain

THE SPEECH or FlGUltES.—Figures of speech
are common in all languages, but in Persian there appears
to be a usage which may bo more properly called the
"speech of figures." In the last number of the Journal of
Philology, Mr. E. Palmer, the well-known Orientalist who
accompanied the Sinaitic expedition, has written a
short paper in which he has solved a riddle which had
completely baffled all preceding scholars. It occurs in
a satirical poem by Firclausi, and is expressed in the fol-
lowipg mysterious language :—" The hand of Sh(th
Mahnnid, of noble origin, is nine times nine and three
times four." Performing the arithmetical operation indi-
cated we find that the hand of ShAh Mahmild, of noble
origin, is 93, and are as wise asbefore. M. Mohl conjectured
that the allusion was to some game, but Mr. Palmer
conclusively *thews that this is not the expla-
nation. " The allusion," he says, "is not to any
game, but to a particular method of counting
with the lingers This notation is much
used in the East, especially by Persian horsedcalcrs as a
means of conducting a business transaction privately be-
tween two parties, the price being named and agreed upon
while apparently merely shaking hands." According to
this notation, which -Mr. Palmer fully explains, "to ex-
press 93 the hand must be entirely closed, and a 'close
fist' in Persian is synonymous with niggardliness, just as an
g open haud' is the symbol of liberality. To say, then, that
the Shah Triahmud's hand is 93, is merely equivalent to
caning him 'close-fisted or miserly." And a very deli-
do= it.—Tagi Owt
, ITU it ill) thialc) of g