The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-04 00:00:00

STOCKER V. GRIFFITI!S.-ALLEGED ILLEGAL DISTRAINT.

This was an action of trespass, arising out of the defen-
dant having obtained a warrant of distress in the Palace
Court against the plaintiff, and in virtue of it having made a
seizure of goods on the premises of the plaintiff; under the
impression that the furniture in question was his proper.
The defendant in the Palace Court action was Mr. Stocker,
senior, and the goods were seized as his, for a debt, and the
expences of the action ; but now Mr. Stocker, jun., instituted the
present proceedings, on the allegation that the father in 1844,
about a year before the seizure, conveyed the goods by a deed
to him, and that the seizure was in consequence illegal. The
whole point therefore at issue was to whom the goods be-
longed.

Evidence was called to show the execution of the deed; in
opposition to which it was contended, and to some extent
supported by cross-examination and counter evidence, that
the transfer was made from improper motives, and that no
money passed between the parties. The answer to the latter
point, however, was, that a debt of 98!. was standing between
the parties, and the goods were assigned as a consideration
for it.

At the close of the examination the jury retired, and,
after an hour's absence, returned a verdict for the.plaintiff—
Damages, 141.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. CommEssioner Ewa.)
irr RE WALKER.

This bankrupt, who had carried on business in Oxford-
street as a boot-maker, came up to pass his last examination,
and was opposed on the ground that his balance-sheet was
not prepared.
On the part of the defendant it was alleged that the bank-
rupt had been unable to do so in consequence of the official
assignee having refused-to allow him to have access to cer-
tain books which had been seized by the messenger of the
Court.

Mr. Johnson (the official assignee) said that the bankrupt
denied that the books he required to see were his own.
The bankrupt's solicitor said that in reality they were
not, but they were books kept in business by his sons. The
official assignee had threatened to have the bankrupt pro-
secuted for mutilating his books, .and he was therefore
anxious to get an order of the Court to inspect the books he
had mentioned.

The Learned COMMISSIONER said that if the bankrupt
would swear that they were his books, he was entitled to see
them.

The attorney said !that the defendant could not do so, but,
nevertheless, an inspection of them was necessary. If they
were not considered to be the books of the bankrupt, there
was no right to seize them.

Mr. LAWRENCE, for the assignees, said that a sum of money
bad been paid into Court to cover damages in any action of
damage for the seizure.
The Learned CommtssioxEn said he could not make any
order, unless it was shown to him that they were the bank-
rupt's books; but, as the balance-sheet was not ready, the
bankrupt could not pass his examination.
The examination was then adjourned, with protection to
the bankrupt, to enable him to go through the accounts with
the official assignee.

SECONDARIES.-_(T HIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. SECONDARY POTTERY.)
CHELTENHAM V. SMITH.
FALSE IMPRISONMENT.—This was an inquiry to assess
damages for a false imprisonment, the defendant having
suffered judgment to go by default.
Mr. HAWKINS stated the case. The plaintiff is a sliip-
broker at Limehouse, and transacted business at the Stock
Exchange. On the 9th of July last the defendant met
plaintiff near that place and gave him a bill of ex-
change, requesting him to discount it, but he declined
and returned the bill to defendant. The next day.
whilst plaintiff was in Capel-court, in conyersatien

with the captain of a vessel, defendant went up
and said, " Where is the bill you robbed me of yes-
terday?" Plaintiff said he had certainly had the bill, but
returned it, and told defendant to look in his pocket-book and
he would find it. Defendant refused, and said Mr. Sander-
son (the landlord of a tavern close by) knew that he (plain-
tiff) did not give it back. They went,to Mr. Sanderson, who
said he knew nothing about the matter, and it was then
agreed by all parties to go to the Mansion-house and have
the case decided by the Lord Mayor. On reaching there,
however, it was found that his Lordship was
not there, and defendant then said he would give
plaintiff into charge, and actually did so. Plaintiff
was taken to the office of the Superintendent of
Police, where defendant opened his pocket-book, and almost
the first thing he pulled out was the bill, between two cards.
The charge was, of course, abandoned, but the defendant did
not then make, nor had he since made the slightest apology, al-
though by suffering judgment to go by default he had ad-
mitted that he had acted illegally and • unjustifiably. He
(the Learned Counsel) believed defendant had busines on the
Stock Exchange.
The jury assessed the damages at 501.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice WILLIAMS and Mr. Justice CRESWELL.)
Fredsric. Tyler Russell, a surgeon, aged 23, was charged
with feloniously forging and uttering an order for 551., with
intent to defraud the Governor and Company of the Bank
of England.,
The prisoner pleaded Guilty. There were other indict-
ments against the prisoner for the same offence.— Judgment
was postponed.
Henry Bushell pleaded Guilty to feloniously uttering a
forged cheque for 375/., with intent to defraud William Henry
Smith and others.—Sentence deferred.

:'James Thomas, described as a labourer, and George Green, a
soldier, were indicted for an unnatural offence.
Mr. BALLANTINE applied to hare the case postponed, in
consequence of the absence of the necessary witnesses. There
was every,reason to suppose that the prisoner Thomas, who
was supposed to be a man of fortune, had bought the wit-
nesses.—The case was ordered to stand over for the present.
Thomas Russell, Ann Russell, and James Scott, w ere in-
dicted for having in their possession counterfeit coins, and
implements for coining. It appeared that information had
been conveyed to the authorities of the Mint, that coining
was extensively carried on in the house occupied by the
prisoners, in John's-lane, Westminster. They, therefore, in-
structed the officers of police to take measures to ascertain if
such information was well founded. Acting on these orders,
they proceeded to the house in question, burst open the
door, and found the prisoners actively engaged in coining.
Several counterfeit shillings And false dies, as weil as a gal-
vanic battery, were found in the room.
A verdict of Guilty was returned against the male
prisoners, and the female was acquitted.—Sentenee deferred.
TRIAL OF CAPTAIN JOHNSTONE FOR WILFUL