The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-19 00:00:00

(The case was proceeding when our reporter left.)

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the LOftD CDIKF BARON and
Common Juries, at Westminster.)
CLARKE V. HENLEY.

This was an action brought to recover some uncertain sum
of money, less than 571.45.
Mr. Bramwell appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Lush for
defendant.

It appeared that the defendant carried on business at Chel-
tenham, in stationery and other articles of a miscellaneous
kind, and that he had had numerous transactions with the
plaintiff in this case, who supplied him occasionally with
goods, which were sent from Warwick lane to
the Bull and Mouth, and forwarded from thence
to his address in the country. The correspondence
commenced in the year 1840; and, after being interrupted in
the two succeeding years, was again renewed in 1843, and
has eontinued down to the present time. It was admitted, on
the part of the plaintiff, that his books were in such a state as
not to show the exact sum which the defendant was in-
debted to him.

Mr. Luau, for the defendant, put in several post-office
orders paid at Cheltenham in favour of the plaintiff; and
the defendant being the only correspondent which he
had in that town, these orders had of necessity
been remitted by the defendant. They amounted
together to upwards of 394 and this sum, with a 5/. note,
which the defendant had paid, and two disputed items of
the account being struck out, left no balance which the
plaintiff could now claim.

The LORD CHIEF BARON said that the case was one
which should have been decided by an arbitrator; and it
was extremely wrong to consume the public time by ex-
amining long and confused accounts which, after all, in such
a case as the present, could not lead to a satisfactory de-
cision.

The Jury, without hesitation, returned a verdict for the
defendant.

BANKRUPTCY-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner Groussuazi.)
IN RE JOHNSON AND MANN.
To-day was appointed for declaring a final dividend under
the estate of these bankrupts, who were bankers at Romford,
and Aldgate, Whitechapel.
Mr. BATHE, of the firm of Bathe and Bingley, appeared to
prove for an account for engraving notes, and cheques for
the bank. He said that when the failure took place, the
bankrupts wrote for the account, but it appeared they had
not inserted it in the balance-sheet.
The CObIMISSIONER-110W came you to drive it up to the
last hour? The fiat was issued two years ago. There has
been a dividend of 6s. in the pound, and the present one is to
be final.—Mr. BATHE said they had had so many other
things.
The COMMISSIONER—Such things as these ought not to be
driven off.
The bankrupts not being present to explain, the Learned
COMMISSIONER said he could not admit the proof uncorro-
borated, nor did he feel disposed to assist persons who left
such matters to the last, and he must reject the proof.
Proof to about 701. was admitted.
The dividend will not be more than 214 d. in the pound, and
will be payable in a few days.

SECONDARIES'.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Secondary ej AMISS.)
DAWES V. FAGG.

The plaintiff in this action sued by her next friend to re•
cover the sum of W. 55., for services rendered. The de.
fendant is patentee of carpets, and has a manufactory at
Holloway—he denied his liability.
_ _

From the facts it appeared that the plaintiff was the grand-
daughter of one of the workmen in the factory, named Jen-
nings, who in 1842 introduced her into the place, where she
continued for about two years; but, according to Jennings's
evidence, he then took her away because he could not get any
money, but, one of the foremen sent ,him a guinea
on account ; after seven weeks she went back again, under
an agreement to be paid 9s. 6d. a week, which she received
up to the time she finally left, in March, 1846. Nothing was
then said as to any arrears, and one of defendant's foremen
swore that he told Jennings the girl was not there on de-
fendant's account, but might stay to assist Jennings, and she
should be taken on as soon as the patent was in work, and
she was wanted. She had, however, been occasionally set to
light the fire and other little jobs.
The SECONDARY said it was a rule laid down in
law, that when wages were paid regularly every week up
to the termination of the agreement, the
e, however,
be that everything had been paid. vssucmasption should
there did not appear to have been any
of was given by
ded when the
probably the guinea spoken jistin
way hoifrigurgal uai tnyd.
It was curious that no settlemefinftt
eewnasmdoerthasn should since
parties left, and also that
have elapsed before law proceedings
were brought. The jury
would, however, say
whether there bad been any engage-
ment, and what were the value of the services.
The jury found for the defendant.

-------
Sir James Grahams we hear from good authority,
ele,ated to the Peerage by the title of Lord
Preston. This 1
will be immediately m
if his friends are going out of office.
Lord
Francis Egerton is, we understand, to be elevated
to the peer ;P by the title of Lord Ellesmere.
A RcHDEACONRY OF BRISTOL—The Venerable Arch-
deacon Thorpe intends holding his next visitation according to the
followi arrangements :—July 9, at Bristol; July 10, at Chipping
Sudbury; July 13, at Chippenham ; July 14, at Malmesbury ; July
IN it Byrill4l/ ; JOY 161 lit circlnlttre

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE and Alderman TsomrsoN.)
PERJURY.--Mr. BODKIN, on the part of Miss Coutts Bur-
dett, applied to the Court this morning that the amount of
bail might be fixed which it would be necessary for Mr.
Richard Dunn, described as a member of the Irish bar, to
give that ho would surrender to take his trial on the charge
of perjury. We understand that a true bill was found yes-
terday before the grand jury against Mr. Dunn for perjury,
in an affidavit which he filed in the Court of Bankruptcy,
swearing that Miss Coutts Burdett, as a partner in the firm
of Coutts and Co., owed him the sum of 100,0001. The pro-
cess, we understand, was entered upon, which in due time
would, if unimpeded, have duly ended in Miss Coutts Bur-
dett finding herself in the Gazette.
The COURT ordered Mr. Dunn to enter into his own re-
cognisances in 1001., and two sureties in 50/. each, to appear
at the next sessions.

POST OFFICE.— John Tarnur was placed at the bar on four
charges of robbery committed on the Post-office carriages
on the South-Eastern and London and Birminghamßailways,
and another for robbing the Post-office at*Grave,end.
The prieor er pleaded Guilty on the first four charges.
The ATTOILNEY-GENERAL, who appeared to prosecute, said
that, unwilling to occupy unnecessarily the public time, he
would not press the remaining charge.
As there is a woman implicated in the same charges, who
will be tried next sessions, the Court deferred sentence till
the particulars were then laid before it. _ _

John Charles Young, described as a chemist, was placed at
the bar, indicted for stealing a post letter, containing a hidf-
sovereign, and a shilling, the property of the Postm:Ater-
General.

Mr. W. Scalthorpe, one of the presidents of the Londm
District Post-office, said, in consequence of some suslleioas
he posted two letters at the Aldgate receiving-office, one of them
directed lo "Mary Donoughue, Mr. Doolan's public-house,
Sackwell-street, Dublin, Ireland," and containing a half-
sovereign and a shilling, marked. Another of the letters
was addressed to "Miss Coventry, North Brixton." If these
had been posted at the Aldgate receiving-office before 8
o'clock in the morning of the 20th, they ought to have
reached the General Post-office about 25 minutes past 8.
Witness was at the General Post-office that morning, and
examined the letters sent from the Aldgate receiving-office,
and found Miss Coventry's letter on the top of the bundle of
paid letters; to the Irish letter two stamps had been af-
fixed, and that letter was not found at all. The bill ac-
companying the letters should give an account of the
stamped letters, and that was found to correspond with the
letters sent. The witness, taking with him the letter in-
spector who posted the two letters, and a constable, went to
the Aldgate receiving-office, where he found the prisoner, to
whom the witness discovered himself, and said that there was a
letter which had not been sent. "Oh yes," he said, " I
sent it; Miss Coventry's was sent." He was asked what had
become of the Dublin letter, which had been dropped into the
box, but made no reply. He was immediately searched, and
the marked half-sovereign and shilling, together with the
letter, the seal of which was broken, were found upon the
prisoner.
Other witnesses were called, who confirmed the testimony
already given.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clarkson prosecuted, and Mr. Ballan-
tyne was retained for the defence.
A technical point of law was raised on the wording of the
indictment, and the circumstances of the case, as compared
with the terms of the Act of Parliament. The question
raised was, whether the letter in question was a post-letter,
in the terms of the Act, the address being fictitious.
Baron ROUE reserved the point for ,the opinion of the
Judges, and directed the jury to find a general verdict
against the prisoner of stealing half-a-sovereign, which, ac-
cording as the Judges decide will be, of stealing from a post-
letter, or of stealing a half-sovereign, the property of Mr. W.
Seal thorpe.
The jury found accordingly, and sentence was deferred.

RAILWAY COMMIT ITES.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

DIRECT LONDON AND PORTSMOUTH.
GUILDFORD, CHICHESTER, PORTSMOUTH,

AND PAREIZAIVE.

Their Lordships met this morning, as usual, at eleven o'clock, in
Room A (New Houses of Parliament), Lord Beaumont in the chair.
All the Members attended.

Mr. ALEXANDER then addressed the Committee on the part of the
landowners petitioning against the Bill.
Mr. Cubitt was recalled, and examined by Mr. TALBOT, as to the
practicability of ajunction between the proposed line and the London
and Epsom, which he said could be made within the limits of devia-
tion of the plans of last session, but not within the limits of the plans
of this session. The reason why the junction was not practicable
was, that the levels of the two lines would be different. It would be
practicable to hoist the goods, &c., from one line to the other. He
was not aware of any difference in the levels until his attention was
drawn to it by the evidence of Mr. Lock.

Mr. COCKBURN then proceeded to address the Committee on the
part of the Guildford and Chichester.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
GROUP XVII.
11ICANCHESTEIL AND SOUTHEUVIPTON.

The Committee met this morning at the usual hour, the Eton. E
Yorke in the chair.

Mr. HATEEFTON commenced the opposition of the South-Western
to this project by calling
_ _ .

Mr. J. Iloughton, farming about 347 acres of land, at Broom-hall,
Sunninghill, Berks, about seven miles from the Woking station of the
Great Western. He said sheep did not go in great quantities from
Weyhill and other fairs to the ncrth, their course being from east
to west and vice versa. Driving sheep was preferable to sending
them by railway, and if the railway were made, ke did not think it
would be used for their transmission. He did not use the Great
Western for this purpose on account of his objection to sending them
by railway. Driving did not injure them, in fact. Sand obtained
from the Isle of Wight, he considered, would not be conveyed to the
north by the proposed line as the least expensive mode would be by
Gloucester.
The Cu&t&MAN inquired of the witness, if a gentleman carrying on
business in the Potteries bad stated that he should save several
hundreds in the course of a year by having sand transmitted to him
from the Isle of Wight by the proposed line, whether he should con-
sider him a madman or a lunatic?
The witness said if he had stated this, he should certainly consider
him out of his senses.