The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-03 00:00:00

REGENT'S CANAL COMPANY.

A general meeting of the Regent's Canal Company
was held yesterday, at their offices at the Canal Basin,
City-road, J. E. D. Bethune, Esq., in the chair.
The report stated that the profit balance to 30th Sep-
tember last was 13,6701. 13s. lid., including 6001. ss. 4d.
remaining from the last account, which, after the pay-
ment of the dividend proposed to-day, would leave a
sum of 8191. Os. 10. to the benefit of the next half-yeah
All the documents for the Bill for the railway
were deposited with the proper officers, and the direc-
tors were quite prepared to go on with the scheme.
A further sum of 4,4741. 9s. 4d. had been borrowed
from the reserve fund for the formation of the new en-

trance to the Limehouse Dock, and to pay for the pro-
perty required for that purpose. The committee were
happy to say that they were now in possession of the
property, and that the plans and sections for the work
were ready, so that it could be commenced early in the
next spring. Inasmuch, however, as stabling would be
required for the horses in the first instance, it was in-
tended to charge a sum not exceeding 3,0001. for that
object.
The report of the auditors stated that the profits of
the half-year amounted to 27,4151. 4s. 14d. Both the
reports were adopted by the meeting.
A resolution was then put to the effect that a dividend
of twelve shillings a share for the last half-year should
be declared, and that the transfer books should be closed
for its payment from the 19th December next to the 11th
of January following. The motion having been se-
conded, after a short discussion, the resolution was
adopted.
_ _

In reply to an inquiry as to the origin of the increase
of the rents from 1,600/. to 2,100/., the CHAIRMAN stated
that it arose partly from the increase of business, and
partly from the payment of old arrears. The former
came chiefly from the North Western Railway Company.
In answer to another question, the CHAIRMAN said
that the tonage on the canal had increased from 844,000
to 1,082,000 tons, between 1842 and 1845. The permits
would give little information as to the number of vessels
which had passed on the canal; for while the barges were
formerly 45 tons on an average, they are now generally
of 50 tons burden. The number stated in 1842 was
12,448, and last year 16,500. Since 1836, the dividends
had risen from 12s. to 21s. per year.
To other inquiries, Mr. BETHUNE replied, that the
shares of the contemplated railway were to be offered in
the first instance, to the shareholders, in proportio❑ to the
number of shares held respectively by each. But there
was to be no compu'sion, and the shares declined were
to be offered afterwards to the public generally. The
8,000/+ to be paid to the Regent's Canal Company by
the Birmingham Railway Company was contingent on
the latter company getting their Act, and not on the
formation of the railway. The company had obtained
their Act, and the money would be due on the 6th of
February next. The directors did not apprehend much
opposition to the getting of their Act, and under any
circumstances it was decided to keep the waterway of
the canal uninjured.
The meeting received this announcement with great
approbation, and

_
Mr. GREEN wished it to be particularly understood
that he went heat t and hand with the undertaking, and
trusted that if there was any one connected with the
press present this would be noticed.—(Hear, hear.)
A formal resolution was then passed for the next
general half-yearly meeting, on Wednesday the 2d of
June next, the day appointed by Act of Parliament.
Thanks were voted to the chairman and committee, and
the meeting was dissolved.

LAW IN TELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dec. 2.
PIDDOCK V. FITZGERALD, KART.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, an attor-
ney, to recover from the defendant, Sir John Fitzgerald,
Bart., the sum of 601. 9s. 4d., due to him for professional
services rendered by him on behalf of the London and
Manchester Direct Railway. The defendaat was a
member of the acting committee of management of the
railway in question.

The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
601. 9s. 4d.

CROCKFORD V. LORD MAIDSTONE.

This was an action brought by Sarah Frances Crock-
ford, the executrix of the late well-known Mr. Crock-
ford, to recover the sum of 961., due by the defendant for
subscriptions and entrance money, and also for dinners
and wines supplied to his use by the plaintiff, at
Crockford's Club House, Pall-mall. The defendant had
paid into Court the sum of 371. 17s. 6d., and pleaded as
to the residue that he was not indebted, and as to the
remainder that the house in question was a common
gaming-house, and that therefore he was not entitled
to pg.

M. Humphrey and Mr. Reeve appeared for the
plaintiff; Mr. James for the defendant.
Mr. HusiPastEv, in opening the case, said that the club
in question was projected in the year 1824, that it
consisted of four or five, hundred persons, including
some of the highest and most respected portions of the
nobility. Lord Maidstone was elected a member of the
club in the year 1840, the subscription money was
ten guineas a year, and the entrance fee was ten guineas.
A large sum was also due for dinners and wine supplied
to his Lordship at the club, and also to a house in Bol-
ton-street, at the residence of a lady with whom his
Lordship was upon the most intimate terms. With re-
ference to the plea of the defendant that the club was
a common gaming-house, he thought that seme of the
members of the club would be rather surprised to hear
that Lord Maidstone had placed upon record
that the club kept by Crockford was a
common gaming-house, and that in this said gaming-
house Mr. Crockford " did unlawfully cause and pro-
cure certain idle and evil disposed persons to congregate
together and come to play." Among these idle and evil-
disposed‘ persons were the Dukes of Wellington, Rich
mond, Buccleuch, Argyle, Cleveland, Rutland, and Lords
Saltoun, Scarborough, Stuart De Rothesay, and
numerous others. With reference to the payment
into Court of the sum of 37/., that would not even
pay for his dinners and wines at the club, setting
aside the subscription-money and the entrance fee,
and he was quite at a loss to account for the present
conduct of the defendant, connected as he was with one
of the noblest families in the peerage (the Earl of Win-
chilsea), and wondered how he could have been so mis-
led as to place upon the record such a plea as a defence
for not paying for his dinners and wines. His Lordship had
attended the club repeatedly, find had during his visits
done everything but paid. In fact, during the whole
period of his connexion with the club he had never paid
a farthing for anything that he had either eaten or
drank.

Several witnesses were then called, who proved
his Lordship's attendance at the club, and the several
occasions of his dining there, from the books of the club.
The case was not concluded when the Court rose.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 2.
WAREHAM V. PEARCE, NASH, AND ANOTHER.
THE GREAT WESTERN ROBBERIES.

The evidence on behalf of the defendants having
finished last night, on the opening of the Court this
morning

Mr. Sergeant WILKINS replied.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE then proceeded to sum up
the case. The action was brought by the plaintiff,
Thomas Wareham, against the defendants, to recover
damages for an alleged illegal imprisonment from four
o'clock in one day till the morning of the following. The
imprisonment must be admitted as proved. To the
declaration of the plaintiff there were several pleas,
but the material ones were four, six, or seven.
The fourth plea wac, that previous to the trespass com-
plained of, Garratt had feloniously stolen a certain
writing case, and that the plaintiff well knowing its
having been feloniously obtained and received, comforted
and harboured the said Daniel,Garratt. The sixth plea
was, that previous to the alleged trespass, Maynard had
committed felony in receiving stolen property from
Garratt, and acting as his accessory after the fact, and
that the plaintiff, knowing this to be the case, received,
harboured, and comforted the former. The seventh plea
was compounded of the two former, with the addition that
he aided and assisted Garratt and Maynard in
negotiating for the return of stolen property.
Such was the justification set up on the record. The
Learned Judge proceeded to sum up the evidence very
minutely. From the whole evidence adduced, he left it
to the jury to decide whether Wareham could have
acted in the manner he bad done without a knowledge
of the felonious transactions of Garratt and Maynard.
If they were of opinion that the plaintiff had such a
knowledge, then a verdict must be given for the defend-
ants on the pleas stated; but, if they thought he had not
such knowledge, then they must consider the amount of
injury inflicted by the imprisonment, and the circum-
stances under which it had taken place, and award the
damages accordingly.
The jury, after consulting a short time together in the
box without agreeing, retired to ccnsider their verdict.
After an absence of about two hours they returned a
verdict for the plaintiff against the two defendants, Col-
lard and Nash, damages, one farthing; for the defendant
Prance, Not Guilty.

The celebrated Miss Harriet Martineau, whose
arrival we last week mentioned, left Malta on the 16th
ult. by the Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer
Ariel. Miss Martineau, during her short stay here, was
visited by many persons of distinction, anxious to pay
their homage at the shrine of talent.—Malta Paper.
Yesterday morning, at an early hour, a man, whose
name is at present unknown, was found dead in Tooley-
street, Southwark, in a doorway apparently asleep. He
was carried to St. Thomas's Hospital, where life was
found to be quite extinct.
DEATH OF JOHN BARNEBY, ESQ., M.P. FOR
EAST WORCESTERSHIRE.—We have to record the de-
cease of John Barneby, Esq., of Brockhampton, Here-
fordshire, M.P., who expired on the 30th ult., at his town
residence in Portman-square, after a lengthened and
painful illness. In 1835 Mr. Barneby first entered the
House of Commons, having been elected for tie borough
of Droitwitch, in Worcestershire. He was subsequently
chosen to represent the eastern division of the county,
the representation of which is now vacant. In his native
county he was much esteemed by all parties, and was
the chairman of the Herefordshire Quarter Sessions, and
held the office of deputy-lieutenants