The Sun.
London, England, 1846-11-26 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 25.

The Right lion. Charles Buller, M.P.. was this tnorr
ing called within the bar as one of the Queen's Counsel

RE lIEMSWORTH.

The defendant. who bad been attached for contempt
in refusing to deliver up certain wine warrants, in com-
pliance with an award which had been made an order of
Court, was this morning brought up for judgment.
The LORD CHIEF Jusuce said the present case came
before the Court on the report of the Master, in which
the defendant was taken up on an attachment
for a contempt of Court. With regard to the
interrogations on which that attachment proceeded, it
was shown that the defendant, formerly the plaintiff in
the case, out of which the present proceeding had
arisen, had been in repeated instances guilty of a con-
tempt of this Court, acting on the advice, it would
appear, that he could defeat the award the Court had
previously ordered to be made. The defendant, how -
ever, would find any attempt of his impotent to defeat
the enforcement of the award, and that he was utterly
mistaken in supposing the Court had not full power to
vindicate its rules and orders. It was their determina-
tion to render the law effective in such cases as this as
far as the Legislature had given them power
to do so. Though it was to a certain extent
uncertain whether the Court should fix a certain term of
imprisonment, or order the confinement to be continued
till the award, for the contempt of which the defendant
was in custody, was fulfilled ; still they were strongly of
opinion that any term of imprisonment they might order
would not liberate the defendant from the contempt of
the Court, but that he would still be liable to be brought
up and committed for the same. The defendant was
charged not with one act of comtempt, but for continued
contempt, and any term of imprisonment would not ex-
punge the liability, which could only be removed by the
completion of the award, or by the payment of the value
of the wine, spirits, warrants, sic., with the costs incurred,
Looking at all the facts of the case, the Court were of
opinion that the defendant had possessed the means of
completing the award, and his not doing so, but acting
in continued contempt, called for no consideration on
their parts. With the object, therefore, of vindicating
the authority of the Court, and giving effect to such
awards, protecting the civil right of the parties interested
therein, the judgment on the defendent was, that he
he imprisoned for a period of two years, or until such
time as he bad paid the value of the property made in
the award with the costs since incurred. _ _ _

The defendant was then removed in the custody of the
officer of the Court.

EDWARDS V. SIIAW.

This was an action brought by an attorney resident
at Birmingham against the plaintiff, as Vice-Chairman
and provisional director of a railway company, for work
and labour done on behalf of the said company. The
action was to have been tried at the last Warwick assizes,
but before the case came on, it was arranged between the
parties that the bill of particulars should be amendei, so
as to give the defendant credit for 5001., which he had
paid. The action would then be for 3001., the balance
alleged to be due. The defendant denied the liability,
and through some mismanagement, which the plaintiff;
in his affidavits, attributed to the neglect of the attorney
of the former, the case as amended, was not entered in
time for trial. A rule was moved this term, on behalf
of the plaintiff, to change the venue to Middlesex, and
to have the declaration and issue amended.
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Mellor appeared this day
against the rule ; Mr. Sergeant Channel fur it.
Rule made absolute.

JACKSON AND ANOTHER V. MAGNAY-HEREFORD AND

MERTHYR TYDVIL RAILWAY.
This was an action brought against Sir Wm. Magnay,
as one of the board of management of this line of rail-
way, to recover for goods sold and delivered on its be-
half. SlL)rtly after the action was brought a note was
sent from the company's attorney to the plaintiff's at-
torney, intimating that if a fresh bill was made out, with
the costs incurred in bringing the action, the company
xouli discharge the same. With this understanding the
record %vas withdrawn, and now the defendant moved
for a rule to enter a nonsuit on his behalf. Mr. Lush
moved for the rule on a previous day, alleging that
plaintiff was no party to the arrangement with the com-
pany, and that he denied his liability.
Mr. White was heard to-day against the rule, and Mr.
Lush in reply.
The matter was arranged that the rule should be
discharged on the plaintiff giving a peremptory under-
taking to proceed to trial in the next term, and the
Court so ordered.

SECONDARIES' COURT, Nor. 25.
The whole of the cases this morning were undefended,
chiefly on bills of exchange, and none were of the
slightest public interest.
The Learned SECONDARY said that much unnecessary
trouble and expense was saved by the plaintiffs obtain-
ing ajudge'sorder on the defendants to admit their sig-
natures to bills, as in a great number of cases the de•