The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-01 00:00:00

CIVIL SIDE.

Mr. Justice Coleridge took his seat upon the bench this
morning at nine o'clock.
•

LIABILITIES OF SUAREMOLDERS IN JOINV,z7oCK BANKS.—

LUCAS V. BUI/CHER.

In this case Mr. Martin and Mi. Robinson appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. Watson for the defendant.
Mr. bIARTIN stated the facts of the case. Mr. Lucas, the
plaintiff, was a gentleman living in the Isle of Man, and
the defendant, Mrs. Alice Butcher, was living at Bowness,
in Westmoreland. The action was brought to recover 5001.,
and interest, from May 1843.. Mrs. Butcher was sought to
be fixed as a partner in the Isle of Man Bank ; and the
manner in which she was sought to be made liable was this:
—The bank in question was a joint-stock bank, in which
her husband was a proprietor, and hold fifty shares. He
died in 1639, after which time she received the shares, and
drew the die idend upon them until 1843, when the bank
stopped, and his (Mr. Martin's) claim was that Mrs. Butcher
thereby became a partner in the bank, and was therefore re-
epoin,iole for its transactions. Mr. Martin then proceeded
to dilate upon the law hearing urn the case. The joint-
etock bank was formed by a deed, in which Mrs. Butcher's
late3beed was a partner, and the Court would know that an
executor, before coining to a dividend, was bound to give
satisfactory evidence of title ; and this lady seemed to have
taken the usual course, by sending the peebete of her hus-
band's will to the manager of the bank. It appeared from
the documents that would be produced, that in 1839 the de-
fendant wes required to pay a call ; and on the 28th of De-
cember of that year she again wrote to the manager, re-
qiaesting the dividend to be paid to her. In August of that
year the dividend became due ; and upon the Ist of Decem-
ber, 1840, the dividend warrant was made out and sent to
her. This was transmitted to her through the means of
Messrs. Wakefield and Crewdson, of Kendal. Upon the sth
of September she wrote to know what price she could get
for her 50 bank shares, supposing she sold them. On the
9th Mr. Forbes wrote an answer, stating he considered the
shares at that time would not fetch more than 61., or 61. 2s.
each. On the 26th she wrote again ; and or. the Ist July of
the following year another dividend was declared, and sent
to her in the ordinary way. In the January following she
again wrote, wishing to know if she could sell her shares.
From this correspondence it was perfectly clear that she was
a partner in the bank.
Witnesses were then called to prove these facts.
Mr. WATSON then addressed the jury for the defendant,
contending that Mrs. Butcher could only be considered as
the executrix of another, and not a partner in the bank.
The Learned JUDGE then summed up, and the jury gave
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 5591. 7s. 3d.

MONET CLUB. DEBT.—HOOD AND OTHERS r. LANGFIELD.
This was an action for the recovery of certain sums of
money borrowed from the members of a money club holding
its meetings at a temperance hotel, in Portland-street, Man-
cheater, which had been stipulated to be returned by instal-
ments, but some of which the defendant had failed to pay.
Verdict for the plaintiff for 23/. 10s., subject to a rule nisi
applied for.

MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Warwick, March 27.
CIVIL SlDE—(Before Mr. Justice TINDAL.)
ACTION FOR LIBEL—S/BLEY v. CHAPMAN.

Mr. Whitehurst, Q.C., and Mr. Hayes were for the plain-
tiff; Mr. Humfrey, Q.C., and Mr. Miller, for the defendant.
The plaintiff is a coach and omnibus proprietor, and, on
the occasion of some steeple chases that took place in
Southam, in February last, he engaged to carry passengers
to and from the ground at the rate of .ss. per head. The
races being over, an account of them appeared in the Sandal
Times, and at the end of that account was the following para-
graph, forming the libel complained of :
" But we cannot close our remarks without exposing as
gross an act of ' coaching rascality' as was ever perpetrated.
A fellow of the name of Sibley chartered a coach for the
occasion, and was engaged by a party of nineteen to con-
vey them to and from the ground for ss. each. The
fare was paid at the time of taking places. On arriving at
Southam, however, the fellow stopped at a small inn, and
coolly observed, that he should stay there about an hour, al-
though it was then close upon the time appointed for the
first race to come off, and the ground was a mile and a half
beyond that place. Expostulations being useless, most of
the party proceeded on foot, and expected, of course, that at
the conclusion of the sport the coach would be in waiting
to convey them back; the fellow, however, sneaked off with
a fresh load before the second match was run, and the party
left behind had to hire. other conveyances from. Southam to
Leamington, a distance of nearly eight miles: We feel it
our dUty to call the attention of the local magistrates to thit
gross case of cheating, and trust they will do their 'duty by
punishing the fellow as the law directs."
The evidence showed that besides two steeple-chases,
which were alone marked on the card, there were two
matches, one being between Sir William Don and Mr.
Milton, for 5001. aside. It was contended. on the part of
the defendant, that the coach was not to return till the last
match had been decided, while the plaintiff said it was to
return after the last race named in the Ii I had been run.
The coach leaving at the conclusion of the second race was
the occasion of the writing of the paragraph in question.
The j'ry Bond for the plaintiff—Damages .501.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice COLT MAN.)
11',13131NG A BANK.—EVsIta George Blaney was charged
as an acces,ory after the fact in the robbery of one hundred
101. promissory notes, stolen on the 4th of January last, from
the Warwick an'. Leamington Bank.
Mr. 'Waddington and Mr. Mellon were for the prosecution ;
Mr. O'Brien for the defence.
This ca-q•, and another connected with it, occupied the
time of the Court the whole day. The facts were these.
Fhe prisoner had a brother, not now in cit,tody, a clerk in a
branch of the above bank, at Warwick. In the month of
July, two pircelF, containing a number of note:: of the above
bank. were made up and delivered to the prisoner's brother
to put into the post; they were addressed to Mr. Smith, of
Southam. One containing one hundred ten pound notes,
the other three hundred five-pound notes. Only the latter
parcel reached Mr. Smith.
From the evidence of a man named Archer, it appeared
that he formerly lived at Leamington, in Warwickshere,
though now residing at 13, Trinity-lane, London. This man
stated that the prisoner came to him in April last, at Isling-
ton, and said he had something to say if a money-getting
concern. This turned out to be an intended robbery of the
was to go to Leamington, and the prisoner's
ton hand over 8001. or 1,000/. This was subse-
quentlynbanma
brotherke. A
was
done,
of mrs,
yse
and the property was passed to a firm of the
and 150/. received for it. During the time
the transaction was going on, the prisoner went by the
name of Brown. Archer admitted that he had been in gaol
several times.
The prisoner was found Guilty, but sentence was deferred.
George William Jenkins and Joseph Myers were charged
with receiving the notes, knowing them to have been stolen.
The jury found Jenkins Guilty, but Acquitted Myers. Sen-
tence deferred.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—Bodmin, March 27.
CROWN COURT.—(Befere Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
Joseph Wi'tench was indicted for having, on the 4th March,
at the parish of Lanreath, unlawfully and maliciously stabbed
and wounded Thomas Meitch, with intent to do him some
grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Oxenham conducted the prosecution.
It appeared that a quarrel had taken place between the
prosecutor and the prisoner, and that the latter inflicted upon
the former two severe wounds with a carving knife. The man
was laid up for a fortnight, and the surgeon pronounced that
he had been in considerable danger.
The medical officer at the gaol said that the conduct of the
prisoner had been so extraordinary, as to lead him to think he
was insane. He was still of opinion that the man was not of
sound mind.
Mr. Baron RoLVE left it to the jury to decide whether the
prisoner was guilty of the charge, or whether he was insane
at the time.
The jury having consulted for a few minutes, the foreman
said—" Our verdict is' Insane.' "
The Clerk of Assize having construed this into a verdict of
"Not guilty on the ground of Insanity,"
The Learned JUDGE ordered the prisoner to be removed
to the gaol.
Thomas Pearce, aged 17, was indicted for burglariously
breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Eva,
of Truro, and stealing a coat, waistcoat, and trousers.
Mr. Oxenham conducted the prosecution.
It appeared that the prosecutor was absent from home with
his family, and that he left the key of his house in the pos-
session of his son-in-law, who examined all the doors and
windows on the 20th of February, and found that they were
properly secured. On the 24th of February he again went
to the house, and he discovered that one of the windows had
been broken open, and a variety of things were scattered
about the floor of the front paileur. The rooms upstairs had
also been entered, and the drawers ransacked. Two days
afterwards the prisoner enlisted as a soldier at Devonport,
and on the following morning, being desirous of paying the
"smart money," he pawned some clothes for that purpose.
These clothes proved to be the property of the prosecutor,
and the prisoner was apprehended. Whilst in gaol, he en-
tered into conversation with a sailor lad, who was incarce-
rated for deserting his ship. The prisoner told this person
that he and a man named Coutts bad had a spree ; that
they went together, between nine and ten o'clock, to the
house of Mr. Eva ; and that he (prisoner) was the first to
enter. They took away several thing,, and drank a large
quantity of wine and spirits which they found on the pre-
mises ; and what they could not drinkthey removed from
the house.
Mr. Baron Rourv: told the jury that, as there was no evi-
dence, except the prisoner's own statement, that the house
had been broken into at a time which would make the offence
an act of burglary, it would be better for them to consider
whether or not he was guilty of the minor offence of house-
breaking. The prisoner, not being aware of the importance
which the law attached to the particular time necessary to
be proved in cases of this nature, might have misstated the
hour through heedlessness or inadvertence.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty of housebreaking, and
he was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment ; the
Learned Judge observing that he should have inflicted upon
him a more severe punishment, had it not been proved that
there was no person in the house at the time the robbery was
committed.

(Before Mr. Justice EnLE.)
Thomas Laing was indicted for the commission of a rape
on the wife of a man named Westlake, at the parish of
Davidstow.
Mr. Moody prosecuted, and Mr. Slade defended.
The prisoner and the husband of the prosecutrix were
small farmers, living on terms of the closest intimacy, and
the offence was said to have been committed whilst Mrs.
Westlake and the prisoner were returning from market.
The trial occupied several hours, and the result was looked
for with some anxiety, evidence u the
Mr. Justice ERLE having summed p ,the
jury turned ronnd to consider their verdict. After the lapse
of about ten minutes, the foreamn said, "We can't agree,
my Lord, here's one sticks out for the capital offence."
The Learned JUDGE intimated that the law had abolished
capital punishment in cases of rape.
The jury then retired, and after an absence of an hour, re-
turned into Court with a verdict of " Guilty of a common
a.ssault."—Sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
Saturday, March 28.
Henry Barrett was indicted for killing Ann Barrett, alias
Ann Fowell, by throwing a poker at her head on the 10th
of December, at Saltash.
Mr. Saunders was for the prosecution ; Mr. Whyte for the
prisoner,

The prisoner and the deceased lived together as man and
wife, and the present case was one of the numerous in-
stances in which death has been the result of a quarrel be-
tween persons in their condition. The man, it seems, was
drinking at a public-house and the woman went to fetch him
home, but he refused to go, and desired her to leave him.
In the course of a few minutes, however, they went home
together, and shortly after a scream was beard by people
residing in the same house, and also by the landlady of the
public-house, which was opposite the prisoner's lodgings.
Several persons immediately entered the room, and seeing
that the deceased had received a very severe wound on the
head, they exclaimed, " Good Good ! who has done this?"
The prisoner replied that he had done it, but he aftewards
appeared very sorry for what bad passed, and on a subse-
quent occasion he stated that he did not intend to strike the
deceased with the poker, but to threw it at the crockery
on the dresser. The woman died about a fortnight after the
occurrence.

The deposition :made by the deceased before the magis-
trate was put in, and it appeared from this statement that
the poker struck her as she was in the act of preventing
the prisoner from destroying the crockery—that the blow
was the result of accident, and that her husband was tipsy
at the time. _ _

Mr. WmrrE addressed the jury for the prisoner, and the
Learned Judge, in summing up the case, left it to the jury to
decide whether the prisoner intended to strike the deceased,
or whether the blow was accidental ?

The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
(Before Mr. Baroa Roira.)
Mary Pearce, a widow woman, of most respectable appear.
ance, was indicted for having, on the 18th of July, whilst in
the employ of the public service at the post-office at Strat-
ton, embezzled one penny, which had been intrusted to her
in her official capacity.
Mr. Rogers and Mr. Poulden conducted the; prosecution.
Mr. Slade defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prisoner was deputy-postmistress at
Stratton, and evidence was given to show that in three in-
stances, besides that mentioned in the indictment, the stamps
bad been removed from letters received at that office, and
affixed to other letters for which a penny had been paid to
the prisoner ; and it was inferred that she had appropriated
the money to her own use,
Mr. SLADE. on the part of the prisoner, urged that it was
most probable the frauds in question had been committed by
some other person who had access to the post•office.
Several witnesses were called to speak to the prisoner's
character, and the Learned Judge summed up the case.
The Jury having returned a verdict of Guilty,
Mr. Baxem ROLFE said he had a painful duty to perform,
but it was absolutely necessary in cases like the present that
the offenders should be severely punished. The sentence was,
that the prisoner be transported for seven years.
The prisoner was in great distress when removed from the
bar. It appeared that she was the mother of three children,
and her husband had been dead eight years.
Bethuel Hutchings, aged sixty-nine, was charged with a
similar offence, at Bude, on the 14th of July. This man was
said to be a cousin of the prisoner in the last case.
The Jury retired to consider their verdict, and after an ab-
sence of about half an hour they found the prisoner Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE. Said that, notwithstanding the ad-
vanced age of the prisoner, he was bound to sentence him to
seven years' transportation.

WESTERN ClRCOlT.—Bodmin, March 27.
NISI PRTUS COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice Path.)
Ettward Williams was indicted, under 7 and S Geo. IV., cap. 29,
sec. 36, for having feloniously stolen a quantity of of stars from an
oyster laying, the property of John Tya.:ke.
Mr. Greenwood conducted the prosecution; Mr. Slade defended the
prisoner.
Mr. GREENWOOD, having stated the facts of the ease to the jury,
called
John Tyacke--I am the lessee and occupier of an oyster fishery
in Helford harbour. I am tenant to the Duke of Leeds, and have
had the fishery thirty years. Part of it is in Porthnavos creek. In
1844 I laid down forty bushels of oyster brood. It cost me 2001.
The bed is marked out by poles stuck in the sell. The oysters are
exposed at low water. In May, 1845, I took up some that were
saleable, and moved them to another bed, which was also marked
out by stakes. I keep a man to watch the beds at low water.
At high tides, from time to time, I employ dredges to take the
oysters.
Cross-examine by Yr. SLIDS —I have no lease from the Duke of
Leeds. My tenancy is a yearly taking. I have often been troubled
by persons picking oysters off this ground. I have had the prisoner
and his wife tried for picking on this ground. They were acquitted.
I have heard that the prisoner offered to try the civil right to take
the oysters.
Mr. SLADE addressed the jury for the prisoner, and contended that
no case of felony had been made out against the prisoner, but that
his taleng the oysters was done to assert a right, and with a view
of trying the question, by civil action, of whether there was any
exclusive right in the Duke of Leeds to the fishery of the lower
water, and if 311% Tyacke felt aggrieved he might bring his action for
trespass.
Mr. Justice Ens slimmed up the case to the jury, and left it to
them to say whether the prisoner, at the time he took the oysters,
knew that he had no right thereto, or whether he did so intending
to assert a tight to take oysters in the place in question, and without
any felonious intention.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of—Not Guilty.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Kingston, March 30.
CIVIL SlDE—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN and a Special
Jury.)
PRMBERTON V. COLL&
This was an action for slander, brought by the Rev. Mr. ?ember-
ton, the vicar of Wandsworth, against the Rev. Mr. Coils, citrate of
St. Anne's, Wandsworth, for slander. The declaration alleged special
damage by means of the plaintiff having had his name erased from a
certain ecclesiastical communication. in consequence of the slander-
ous language Imputed to the defendant, and also that George Cock-
rell, curate to the plaintiff, had been unable to act cordially with the
plaintiff in the spiritual affairs of the parish, for the same reason.
The defendant pleaded, generally, not guilty, and also that no spe-
dal damage had been sustained by the plaintiff, as he alleged.
Mr. CHAMBERS said the plaintiff was formerly minister of the
Chapel, Royal, at Brighton, and in the year 1844 he was installed
in the vicarage of Wandsworth. The defendant was also a doctor
of divinity, and in the course of the same year he was appointed
by the plaintiff to the curacy of St. Anne's Chapel, which was
one of ease to the parish church of Wandsworth. The de-
fendant came to the parish in the month of November, 11144,
The plaintiff discovered that his parishioners began to treat him very
coolly. In the course of the month of October, 1845, he was enabled
to discover what he (Mr. Chambers) must call the gross misconduct
of the defendant. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to state that
a gentleman named Cockrell officiated as curate to the plaintiff, at
his own church, and it appeared that to this gentleman the slander in
question had been spoken by the defeadant. It appeared that the
defendant had to this gentleman charged the plaintiff with having
upon his Bret arrival at Wandsworth to undertake the curacy, sent
for Min to his house to dinner, and that he gave him two glasses of
wine which must have been drugged, for immediately after he had
taken them he felt completely stupifled, and while in that state the
plaintiff induced him to sign a promissory note for the sum of 2,5001.
This was the slander of which the plaintiff complained. The plaintiff
now, therefore. was compelled, fur the purpose of vindicating his cha-
racter in the eyes of his neighbours aid parishioners, to appeal to a
jury, and to ask their opinion, whether there, was any foundation for
the charges made against him ; and if he satisfied them that there
was not, he looked for such an amount of damages as would make it
manifest to the weed that the defendant was, in point of fact, guilty
of the slander which was imputed to WM. The Learned Counsel then
called several witnesses.

The Loin CHIEF JrsrieE summed Up, and
The jury, after 4 short deliberation, returned a ♦erdict for the
plalutiff—Darr.ages, 2001.

.MIDL A,V.O CI R C UIT.— Warwick, March 30.
(Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
BrIGLABT WITII VIOLENCE.—George Hart, Edward Watsgrare,
James Carr, and William Overton, were chrirged with breaking into
the house of H. E. Lander, Esq., on the 28th of February. at 'retch-
brook, near Warwick, and floating therefrom two gold watches, some
money, and a considerable quantity of plate.
For the defence an a:oi was attempted, but failed, the alai being
that they were out poaching,
They were all found Guilty.—Sentence deferred.

THE CHANNEL FISHERIES BILL.

The following Bill has just been passed by the French
Chamber of Deputies:—
Art. 1 declares that "all infractions of the regulations of
June 23, 1843, relative to the Channel fisheries, committed
by a French subject, or any other individual on board a
French vessel, shall be tried by the correctional police of the
arrondissement, in which is situated the port to which the
boat of the offending party belongs."—Art. 2 states that" the
proceedings can only take place on the complaint of the
Commissary of the French maritime inscription, or of the
English consular agent acting fur his countrymen, without
prejudice to the right of the civil party to bring forward the
matter by direct summons "—Art. 3. "All acts and proceed-
ings shall be on unstamped paper, and the assignations and
acts shall be delivered free of cost."—Art. 4. " The employ-
inept of nets or other implements of fishing, the dimensions,
weight or meshes of which shall be in contravention to the re-
gulations established for:each kind of fishing, shall warrant the
seizure of such articles, and render the offending party liable
to a tine of from 10f. to 75E and an imprisonment of from
two to ten days."—Nrt. 5. "All persons contravening the
measures of precaution and interdiction expressed in the
general regulations, relative to the numbers and names to be
painted on each boat, the distances to be observed in fishing,
the casting of spillers or nets, the lights displayed, &c., shall
he liable to a fine of from 10E to 125 f., or to an imprisonment
of from five to fifteen days."—Art. 6. " Other infractions
shall be punished :-1. By the seizure and destruction of the
nets and fishing implements, improperly used; 2. By a fine
of from 10f. to 250 E, and an imprisonment of two days to a
month."—Art. 7. " In case of recidive, the punishment shall
be doubled. The case will be considered one of recidive,
when the person so offending shall have been condemned
within the preceding two years."—Art. 8. " Whenever
fishermen shall have committed at sea acts of violence
against other fishermen, or shall have wilfully caused them
damage or loss, the tribunal can condemn such offenders
to an imprisonment not exceeding twenty days, or a fine
not going beyond 125 f. Should there be, at the same time,
contravention to the regulations respecting fishing, the fine
or imprisonment inflicted for such offence may be cumu-
lated on the punishment of the other offence."—Art. 9.
" When the case is brought before the correctional police,
the amount of damages civilly claimed must also be stated."
—Art. 10. "All civil actions for damages brought on account
of contravention of the general regulations not proceeded
with in virtue of Art. 2, or for acts relative to fishing between
French fishermen, or between French and English fishermen,
shall be carried, whatever the amount, before the juge
depaix of the residence of the defendant."—Art. 11. " Every
nation, whether relating to the offences provided for by the
regulations, or to civil disputes relative to fishing, shall be
prescribed after the lapse of three months, dating from the
day when the Act shall have taken place."—Art. 12. " Every
individual on board a French fishing-boat, accused of having
committed, against an Englishman or a Frenchman, in the
seas lying between the coast of France and those of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, an act qualified as
crime by the French law, shall be tried in the ordinary forms
by the Court of Assizes -of the department in which is si-
tuated the port to which the vessel belongs."—Art. 13.
" When an English subject shall be arrested and taken to a
French port in execution of Arts. 64, 65, and 66 of the ge-
neral regulations, the infraction shall be ascertained by the
juge depaix of the canton ; this magistrate shad proceed, in
conformity with the provisions of Art. 49 of the Code of
Criminal Instruction."—Art. 14. " When an English subject
shall be arrested and carried into aFrench port, in conformity
with Art. 89 of tha general regulations, for contravention of
Art. 76 and the following of the said regulations, he shall be
tried by the Tribunal of Correctional Police, within the
jurisdiction of which ie situated the port to which he has
been carried, and shall be punished, if found guilty, bya
fine not exceeding 250 f. In case of non-payment, or in
place of this tine, the Court can order the vessel to be detained
for a space of time not exceeding three months. The forms
of proceeding in this case, shall be the same as in respect to
French subjects, and the dispositions of Arts. 2,3, 9, and 11
of the 'resent Bill shall be applicable."—Art 15. " In case
of an appeal to the Court of Ca;sation, the fine to be marked
down shall be reduced to half the amount fixed by Art. 419
of the Code of Instruction."

PROSPECTS FROM TIME REPEAL OF TILE CORN-LAWS.
--On Tuesday, the grass parks attached to the mansion-house of
Barr, the seat of Colonel M'Dowall, Lechwinaoch, were let by public
roup, and the yearly rent obtained for the same amounted to no less
than 1261. above the sum for which the same ground was lot last
year. Similar advances have taken place in various parts of the
country.—Edinburgh Witness.
THE LATE CAPTAIN CAMPBELL.---By the latest ac-
counts from India, information was received of the death of Lieu-
tenant Campbell, who was stated to have been slain in the engage-
ment of the 21st of January last. The officer alluded to is now
ascertained to be Captain Arthur Wellington Campbell, second
son of his Excellency Sir Colin Campbell, now Governor of Ceylon,
and brother of Lieutenant-Colonel Campbell, of the Scots Fusilier
Guards, and of the lion. Mrs. Edmund Phipps. This fine young
officer being on sick leave from Ceylon, had been sent to India for
change of air. There his milltary ardour induced him to proceed to
the army of the Sittlej as a.volunteer. At the time he fell he was on
his way to join the Governor-General as his Aide-de-camp. At the
commencement of the action he was struck by a cannon ball while
advancing by the ride of General biz* nary Smith. His death was
ltistantaimas,

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
BRISTOL, MARCH N.
SToca Exenarms.—The sales are— Bristol and South Wales Junc-
tion, 1 8-16—Caledonian, B%—Ditto, New, I%—Midland, sew,
28%—Taff Vale, New, 1%.