The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-08 00:00:00

SHERIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL.)
HIBON V. PALMER AND ANOTHER.
This was an action for breach of covenant. 29$
The facts of the case were briefly these :—ln 18 ,
lease of some property in Dalton-road, near Croy J,
was granted by Mr. Edward Bullock, deceased, .t°o
Palmer, deceased. There was the usual covenant id°oo
lease for the payment of rent. In 1844 the chafe° oes
as representatives of J. Palmer, assigned their inter 1,
the lease to the plaintiff, in consideration of 401, coven
ing in the assignment that all the covenants in the origtilio
lease had been fulfilled. It however appeared thame
covenant for payment of rent had been broken, lot
before and after the death of Palmer, and that, In
an action of ejectment was pending at the time they
signment was made, and plaintiff was subsequently
possessed of his property. • hle
A surveyor said that the ground was very eligl-
building on, and worth, for that purpose, 2001. . „„i
The jury gave a verdict for plaintiff—Damages Yv
BUCKLAND V. GREGORY. tesdl
The plaintiff in this action is a brewer, at Haler to
and the defendant is Mr. Barnard Gregory. The scoodi
was brought to recover the sum of 131. 10s. for goor
sold and delivered to defendant's wife before her
riage. The defendant denied his liability. qd
Mr. LUSH stated the case. The amount claimed
for goods supplied to defendant's wife between there lty
of June, 1844, and January, 1845. The present
Gregory was a Mrs. Labarre, niece to Mr. 'Thon3lssoso
gentleman residing at the Priory, at Hampstead. ,bd
Labarre resided with her uncle up to the time 0' 0
death in March, 1843. A dispute then sr°,,,isero
to the will, Mrs. Labarre claiming the PrprrEopt.
but Mr. Gregory also held a will which was in his la'athe
Mrs. Labarre, however, continued in the house, s°l,oe
servants looked upon her as mistress. UltimatelY„tPer
ever, the rival claimants settled the dispute by Ins 'IL,
In une, 1844, Mrs. Labarre wrote to a tradestini
Hampstead, stating that she was about returning op
seat at Hampstead, and desiring goods to be suPP,bd
her credit, as the law-suit would soon be settled Ill„,00
favour, and desired the servant who took jt to esll,lo
plaintiff, and show the note, and order ale to be sel3loo
the Priory. There could not, therefore, be any ~`",:gs,
as to the liability of Mrs. Gregory before her Insr;" tY
and consequently of the subsequent liability °'
defendant.
Peter Archer, 'gardener to the late Mr. Thositi'
o
was examined at great length ; the material fact
that on being served with notices that Mr. 6,,re4
claimed to be master, Mrs. Gregory said " T'431.0
from Gregory's party, what the ,devil have WI og
to do with it ?" She was mistress, and witness lo
to obey her ; and that in June 1844 she paid hini
on account of wages. He could not say whell
marriage took ploce.
Mr. Gregory appeared on his own behalf, all doe
Lewis claimed to be heard on the part of Mrs. Gre:s
The UNDER-SHERIFF said that both could 0-
heard ; defendant and his wife were " one" now. ittJ
Mr. LEWIS cross-examined the witness, and e'rlfo
that he had demanded his wages from Mr. Gregeri!,ol
had raised his wages immediately after Mr. Tbote_r;orl
death ; he, however, always considered Mrs. 617,050
his mistress. He was in the habit of taking vegettbel
Mr. Gregory's house, in North Audley-street, 'AO
Mrs. Labarre also resided when in town, but fre(l°
went to dine at the Priory.
M. A. Clarke, housemaid to Mrs. Labarre, Iv° der
and proved giving the order for the beer and i"ltost
instructions on the part of Mrs. Labarre, as telid
Witness, however, had frequently been paid her "ntte
by the coachman as from Mr. Gregory, but dia131044
member receiving any money from him after Jun ;00
when Mrs. Labarre said that she was mistress. 11--
was not told to show the note to plaintiff. fits
r James Joiner, clerk to plaintiff, proved the ordeoti
delivery of beer. In July, 1844, Mrs. Labarre sent‘ooo
not to supply any more beer at the Priory, for it
not be paid for.
Cross-examined—Never looked to any one e'si,
money than Mrs. Labarre, but was told by the coeforfil
Tomkins, that it was for the servants on Mrs,
credit.
0111
- - - -

Mr. Hammond, attorney for the plaintiff, pro. ttiO
the first witness, Archer, called on him to bring i'lldribie/
against Mrs. Labarre, but understanding there 11°
a marriage, witness wrote to Mr. Grego* lite
Gregory called, and witness thinking he bad ea del'
pay, said that if defendant gave a cheque for the br.,
he would take it without coats. Witness, hoWevdel
a writ in his desk. Defendant refused to pay, est:
that if any proceedings were taken, Messrs. Pe
stir,
,
sir
Ely-place, were his solicitors, but, as he became '1,1"„s"
witness took out the writ and served it on defend-
(Laughter.) t
'Mr. LEWIS, for the defendant, contended 0*(04
goods had been negligently sent in on the order °oy,
servants, for if Mrs. Labarre wrote a note to one ti
otill
man she would have written to another; and im° ehes"
she heard that there was a dealing in her name, 5'1700!
notice not to supply any more. He also raised a
that there wss no proof at what time the martleg, be
place ; therefore the plaintiff's case had 11°'
made out.

(The verdict had not been returned when our repent

'4114
CRIMINAL COURT.—(THIS P
OLD COURT. ;5
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN and Mr. Justiceo V 0
SMASHING.—The greater part of the for,.oll,%iou'd
occupied with the trial of John Thomas, for le' fest!,
uttering a counterfeit sovereign. There was 11° rigO
in the case warranting special notice, and the 13' •,
eliv
having been found guilty, and a previous coa,vl;o4
being proved against him for a similar offence,
sentenced to transportation for ten years.
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE.— Thomas Smith .n
Jones were charged, the first with robbery accolo",
with violence on Thomas Phillips, and stealing fr°.eo,,
a bank note, value 101., his property ; and the
with receiving the same, well knowing it to 10'4;4
stolen. The case, at the time it transpired, was alraitvi
ported in the newspapers. The robbery was 03w,hijki
on December 14, at the house of Mrs. flaravg,
Catherine-place, Camberwell, where Mrs. Phill`P
lady in question, was on a visit.
Mr. CLARKSON appeared for the prosecutioo9o
having briefly stated the case, he called the f°l/°
witnesses,
tr
Sarah Ann G

..)arah Ann ollavin was examined, and dePestucil
on the evening of December 14, the male prisolle,rol
to her mistress's residence, and asked to see the '601411
the house, saying he had a letter for her. WitlietiA
the letter to her mistress. It contained a threatfor.
a sum of money was not immediately given, be#ll;
plunder the-house. Mrs. Hamblin was in gre.ratr.
and not being able to find any money, went to Dade,
lips, her brother-in-law, who was on a visit, 900,5,
him the letter. Smith was standing all the time ja
sage, and drew out a large pistol, stating, once 0r
,01" i
that if his demand were not conceded, he shotilu,oolo
other men who were lying in wait. Witness at
Mr. Phillips give the prisoner something, on iv'
went away.
Caroline Hamblin examined—She said that on tb ay
in question the letter was put into her 11)00;
the servant. The letter contained a threat that
d
of money was not immediately produced, he We hoti,
in his men, twelve in number, and plunder the dr
The letter produced was the one received. Beieg,he
fully alarmed, and having no money at hand, "pi
about to go out to try and get some, but was stoliri4
the prisoner, who threatened violence if she stirOuelii,j
the house. She then went to Mr. Phillips, and OJAI
the letter, on which he went to the prisoner, and
from him, that unless 10/. was immediately Prrise.
the house would be at once plundered. The P„ bol;
accompanied this threat by pulling out a hag'
pistol with one hand, holding a dirk or daggermit
other. Mr. Phillips at last gave the prisoner Tr't 10,1
demanded, and he went away. She would lea,
consented to the prisoner getting any money had
been in terror of her life.
116 Mr. Thomas Phillips corroborated the prefie•fe
donee, and added, that when he objected to glorefol
money to Smith, he called in another from the 101,
who was similarly armed to himself. He gave ~e
at last from fear of the house being plundered, 11"
lence done to the inmates.
The prisoner was clearly identified by all tbe
nesses.
tho)01
Several other witnesses were called, proving it)
male had been seen lurking about that evenil*„'ford
the evidence of Mr. Attenbury, a pawnbroker, e.e!",j,
that the female had passed the 101. with him in re fete,
ing some pledges, and that when the alarm was, 001
and he questioned her about how she came by
ftP 04di
she gave evasive and unsatisfactory answers. ''5,5017
last traced to the male prisoner, whom she rePr
to be her husband, and a labourer in the countrY'
The note was here produced and identified. e r
This closed the case for the prosecution ;
soners were undefended. to
On the prisoners being asked what they had
ae
in answer to the charge, Jones declared that "
t he 'll,ll
innocent of any criminal intention, She was oci
of the other prisoner, and it was her duty to g° 4
the note changed when she was sent. e
Justice:EaLE then summed up the evidence'
minutely over all the facts adduced in evidenVOtoipt
the jury, after consulting for some time, fool. fe
Guilty. A verdict of Not Guilty was returned 1,
be
of the female prisoner.
ej
The former was then sentenced to be transport
yond the seas for the term of his natural life. itl; To,
We have been informed that the prisoner Sroo
transported for burglary last year, but escaped,.:slo,
transport ship at Woolwich ; and the police state ecr
is suspected of having committed a robbery very r
in Northamptonshire.

NEW COURT. bw
(Before the RECORDER.) niger;lll
EXTENSIVE ROBBERY.—Mary Bayrat, is lie
looking Woman, aged 35, who appeared at the uhvioled
an infant in her arms pleaded Guilty to a eio,
stealing twenty-five gallons of wine, value e Geo
ninety three bottles, value Bs., the property
Barker.
e l
In answer to some :questions by the Court, the
tutor said that he is a wine-merchant, res'huPtelfi
Bishopsgate-street, and the prisoner and herniedil,"
were tenants of his, and occupied a house io'titfrAoti
over his cellar. In consequence of large Vtieleleilf
wine being constantly missed, his suspicion 16; to
the prisoner and her husband, and be vven'hotb, 01/
house on the 29th December. He saw them Sac 0
told them that he wished to look over the If; s0"oe,
opening a closet be found four bottles of will"'aejoi
the woman seeing them she pointed to
closet, and opening it witness found that thetbe cep"
had been removed so as to allow a passage into
of q et°
The woman admitted having taken a quantity ~010 ,f 0
Her husband was present when she made that elvitt;:e
and did not appear to control her in any way' the 0,1
missed twenty-five bottles from the bin undefoo,4o
ing. There was a case in the cellar which hauwilial
seven dozen and four bottles of Madeira, but -