The Sun.
London, England, 1851-01-23 00:00:00

THE INCOME-TAX.

If any tokens were wanting to denote the approach
of the Parliamentary session, they would be supplied
in abundance by the numerous meetings which are
being held throughout the country with the view of
obtaining relief from this or that particular tax. One
financial reformer would pluck one plume from the
wings of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; another,
another. The result would be, if the demands of all
claimants were satisfied, that Sir Charles Wood
would hare but an empty till to show when the public
servant applied for his quarter's salary, or the public
creditor for his half-year's dividend. We are not,
however, about just now to discuss the merits of
these various applications.. On proper occasions
we have not been slow in declaring our convic-
tions upon the policy of extending relief from taxa-
tion rather in one direction than another, whenever
the circumstances of the country do, in point of fact,
admit of the extension of relief to the overburdened
tax-payer. We would rather once again call atten-
tion to the propriety of modifying the method of
assessing one tax in particular during the course of
the ensuing session. Within a few weeks Sir Charles
Wood and his colleagues must again meet the House
of Commons upon the question of the income-tax.
It appears tolerably clear that no Government will
feel justified in allowing so important a head of in-
come altogether to slip through their fingers—they
will demand a prolongation of their powers in this
respect. Nor should we feel disposed to resist their
appeal if the assessment of the tax were not carried
through in a manner revolting to common justice
and common sense. The time has arrived for de-
claring once, again that the private income of the
Minister issuing from real property or from the
funds—or no matter from what source, so it be in
fee-simple—is not identical for purposes of taxation
with his official- salary, even upon the assumption
that for the time being they are represented by
equal money valuee. Tne hardy 5,0001. per annum
which has cast its roots deep into the soil of an
English county, and the fugitive 5,0001. per
annum which depends on the numbers of a slave-
squadron division in the House of Commons, or
upon the general vicissitudes of public life, are
very distinct matters. The point, however, is one
which affects the welfare and comfort of that class
of society in England which is destined to the
largest share of struggle and anxiety. We defy all
contradiction when we assert that in England the
cares of life fall with most force upon professional
men of moderate practice in their particular lines—on
tradesmen of the third or fourth-rate classes—on
clerks and employes of all descriptions whose means of
livelihood are dependent upon the will or caprice of
their employers, or upon the continuance of their
own health and strength. Without pretending to affix
absolute limits with the affectation of exact precision,
we would say that in England the struggle for a
livelihood and a position
.is the sharpest and most
constant amongst men whose income, issuing from
a profession or a trade, varies between 2001 and
1,0001. a year. Every turn of public opinion, every,
caprice of fashion, every accession of scientific know-
ledge, every legal or commercial reform, affects
some one or other section of persons so situated. As
a class there is little doubt that in England generally
they are living beyond their means. This circum-
stance certainly supplies no motive for granting them
any immunity from their fair share of taxation, but
as certainly it affords no justification for taking them
above measure, and aggravates their inability of sup-
porting financial injustice.
The usual argument in favour of the present
method of assessment is stated in a few words. In-
come is only taxed: while it lasts; the assessment,
therefore, is fair. Let us now suppose the case of
a general practitioner in medicine—of a man who, by
the most unceasing labour, by the utmost anxiety
and carefulness, is earning his 5001. or 6001. per
annum in a country neighbourhood. We will give
him every professional advantage—he shall be me-
dical adviser in ordinary to the union in which he
resides, he shall have contracted with the Grammar
School and the young ladies' boarding establishment
in the adjacent town to keep the systems of the
pupils cool and comfortable for an annual sum cer-
tain. He shall be well with the squire ; a sound
Churchman, and en dining terms with the rector ;
but yet no violent party man, lest the Dissenting
pneumonia of the country side should fly for relief to
the opposition brass-plate in the county town. He
can calculate the exact money-value of the
zymotic, and strike an annual average upon the
sporadic disease within his beat. Altogether he is in
as comfortable and permanent a position as any
member of his class can occupy. There is nothing
wanting to complete his felicity. He occupies a
square white house neatly slated, with a little pill-box
of brick and mortar attached, in which he himself or
his assistant—who has paid him a premium—spreads
the " bergamy" pitch plasters, and " exhibits" the
aloes and jalap. Behind the house is the stable
with two stalls, whose inmates are never destined
to enjoy each other's society, as Mr. Camomile
drives one about all day and rides the other round
the country all night. Now, at the end of the
year, with all his riding and all his pill-rolling, the
unfortunate practioners just manages to make both
ends meet, for the time has come when little
Johnny must go to school to be initiated in the
niceties of Roman versification, with a view to
making his way in the world at a subsequent
period. The eldest daughter, Anna Maria, too,
mustxcis,
bee gentlyd b lede i
the direction of Cramer's
er
instructed in the art of hem-
minges
pocket-handkerchiefs. Poor Camomile, whoann
l
entertain the local dining club once a year at
Was born with a kindly,, genie soul, cannot but
Podeldoo-lodge, when the planned furniture of
dining and drawing-rooms is divested of its
brown-h 11an d epidermis and even the tissue-paper
which had been pinned round the broad gilt frame
0 ,
of Mrs."Camonilles portrait for fear of fly-blows is
removed for that night only. The expense of (that
entertainment, which
over-payment to the income-tax is probably
come-tax,
the only expense throughout
exactly equals Camomile's
not bear the strictest iuv it helps,
with his necessary outlays,
tatigation, but
. the year which will
great politicians would readilyat
life no doubt is a bard ono e, pull him down. The
harder one than
while health lasts it is-tolerable,
compensations to a man of honest and without its
nirgine, but still
tmiane tem-
perament. But the night comes when
Camo-
mile, who has been roused from his sleep peooora C.st at
amo-
a premature birth, at some seven or eight
tance from his own house, rides there !through-
the pelting rain, and sits during the anxious night by
the bed-side of his suffering patient in his wet clothes.
A cough follows; he cuts off hie dinner, but con-
tinues his rides ; his symptoms become aggravated
by exposure to the weather, and in a fortnight he is
beyond the reach of his own skill, and in a fortnight

and a day beyond saving by any physician upon earth.
He goes where we all must go, but Mrs. Camomile,
and Johnny, and Anna Maria awake from their
dream of security to find that their means of support
are gone as well. They must content themselves
with being—as political economists would phrase it
—absorbed into the population. That is to say,
when the two horses and the planned and other fur-
niture, and the house and the stock of drugs, and the
galley-pots are sold up, there is just enough to clear
scores all round, and pay for the only spot of earth in
which Camomile had known the peaceful rest of an
hour since the day he first established himself at
Opodeldoc-lodge. Why did he not insure his life for
a few hundred pounds ? will be the comment of many
a strong-minded person upon this faint outline of a life.
Simply because it pleased the Finance Minister of his
country for the time being playfully to suppose that his
income would inure to his children after him, and to
mulct him accordingly. To be sure he might have
dropped his annual entertainment to the members
of the Hawthorn Dining Club—but then some of
us come from one side of the Tweed, some from the
other.

It would be idle to contrast with such a career
as the one we have so briefly indicated that of a
quiet country squire in a small way, or of a fund-
holder from his youth upwards with an income
equal to that of our friend Camomile. Such an
one needs but put his hand in his pocket, and it
invariably comes into contact with a sovereign, with
no necessity fur exertion on his own part beyond that
of fingering the coin. As it was with himself, so it
will be with his children after him. All they have to
do is to keep clear of vice and folly, to eschew Capel-
court and its manifestoe9, and the golden goose will
regularly perform its act of incubation on their be-
hoof. Yet we are to be told when it is proposed to
introduce the system of direct taxation into the coun-
try that it is equitable and honest to tax the pre-
carious income of the professional man in the same
ratio as that of his more fortunate countryman.
Income is income—that is true, no doubt—but if in-
comes from all sources are to be considered equiva-
lents for purposes of taxation, then it is an income-
tax the most impolitic, the most cruel, the most un-
just tax with which a working population of a country
was ever afflicted.— Times.

THE LATE BOILER EXPLOSION AT
WIGAN.

On Friday morning last an inquest was held at the
Bowling-green Inn, Wigan-lane, before Mr. Grim-
she w, on the bodies of Jeremiah Price and Ann Turton,
who had been killed by the explosion of the boiler at
Mr. Wood's colliery on the previous Thursday morn-
ing. John Winnard, the engine. tenter who had had
charge during the night, and Thomas Topping, the en-
gineer who took charge in the morning, were examined,
but their evidence threw no light on the cause of
the explosion, as they both declared that they bad
found all right when they severally examined the
boiler, and that they could assign no cause for its
bursting. It was then agreed that the inquest
should be adjourned till half-past five o'clock in the
evening, and that in the meantime Mr. Peter John-
son, the foreman of the jury, together with Mr.
Atherton, Mr. Swift, of the firm of Tickle and
Swift, ironfounders; Mr. Brack, holler-maker ;
er•d Mr. Joseph Heely, manager for Mr.
Woods, should examine the boiler and report their
opinions as to the cause of the explosion. The jury
re-assembled at the hour appointed, when Mr. John-
son stated that he and the gentleman above-named had
examined the boiler. They bad collectively arrived at
the opinion that as the lead plug at the top of the flue
had not been melted there had been a sufficient
supply of water in the boiler when the explosion
took place, and that, therefore, the men employed
were innocent of any charge of neglect upon that
head. Although the boiler had been worked beyond
the usual time of cleaning out, they did not think that
that fact had in any way contributed to promote the
explosion, as the boiler was not more filthy than
boilers usually are after being worked for two months.
As regarded the cause of the explosion, they were of
opinion that there had been a collapse of the tube cr
flue, caused by the vacuum inside the flue. The crude
or black smoke emanating from the other two boilers
might have ignited, as it appeared that they had all
been fired in rapid succession, and the one that had
exploded had been fired last. In reply to the jury,
Mr. Johnson said that he had repeatedly worked
boilers four months without cleaning. Working
641 b. to the inch upon the lever would increase the
pressure to 79 on the extremity of the tube ; but the
boiler was sufficient to resist this pressure if the iron
was good. The jury, after a short consultation, re-
turned a verdict of Accidental Death.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEENS BENCE], Jan. 22.
(Sittings in Banco, at ‘Vestminster, before Lord Chief
Justice CAMPBELL, Mr. Justice PATTESON, Mr.
Justice COLERIDGE, and Mr. Justice WIGLITMAN.)
A BARER FINED FOR REFUSING TO WEIGH HIS BREAD.

THE QUEEN V. KINGSLEY.

In this case the defendant, who carried on the bu-
siness of a baker, at Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, had
been convicted and fined by two of the county magis-
trates for refusing to weigh some bread which had
been purchased of him. This refusal to weigh the
bread was contrary to the provisions of the 24th sec-
tion of the 6th and fith Will. IY., c. 37. The defen-
dant appealed against the conviction of the justices to
the Court of Quarter Sessions, and that Court con-
firmed the conviction. A rule was subsequently ob-
tained to remove the proceedings by writ of certiorari
into this court.

Mr. Hawkins now showed cause against, and Mr.
O'Malley, Q-C., and Mr. Parnell supported the rule.
Lord CAMPBELL gave judgment, and said there was
jurisdiction in the magistrates to inflict a penalty of
5/. cn a baker for refusing to weigh his bread, when
requested to do so. The 6th and 7th sections of the
Act provided that the baker should weigh the bread
sold in his shop, and also the bread carried out to
be sold. The. 7th section was the one which in-
flicted a penalty upon a baker refusing to weigh
bread. With regard to the distinction as to the amount
of penalty to be inflicted on a London and a country
baker, there was some difficulty; but the Legislature
might have had some reason for making the difference.
It was an absurdity to say, as it had been contended,
that there was an enactment against the baker for
having false weights and measures, and to say that
there was no provision for his being punished for hav-
ing no weights at all. Reference had been made to
" the London Act" upon this subject; but that Act,
in his opinion, did not affect the present question. The
exceptions which had been taken to the conviction
could not be maintained, and looking at all the cir-
cumstances the rule must be discharged.—Rule dis-
charged accordingly.

BAIL COURT, Jan. 22.
THE QUEEN V. LATIMER.

Mr. COLLIER moved for a rule to show cause why
the Rev. Mr. Prinn should not pay the costs in this
cause in pursuance of the Master's allocation. A
criminal information had been obtained on behalf of
Mr. Priori, against the defendant, as the publisher of
the Plymouth Journal, for an alleged libel. The
matter was tried at the last Exeter assizes, and a ver-
dict found for the defendant. The costs in the cause
bad been taxed by the Master, who had issued his
allocation.—Rule granted.

PETRE 77. DIINCOMBE.
In this case a rule nisi had been obtained, calling
upon the plaintiff to show cause why the damages
upon a writ of inquiry before the Under-Sheriff,
should not be reduced in the amount of interest,
whieh formed a part of those damages. It was an
action upon a covenant in a deed entered into on the
28th of February, 1822, and was brought by the per-
sonal representative of the Hon. Edward Robert
Petre. The deed set forth that Mr. Duncombe had
sold for 5,0001. an annuity of 6001. to a Mr. Down,
and that the plaintiff had joined Mr. Duncombe as his
surety in covenanting to pay the annuity, and that
Mr. Duncombe had agreed to indemnify Mr. Petre
for his share in the covenant. Certain property
was also conveyed to Mr. Petre on the trust that be
should indemnify himself from all costs in the trans-
action. The plaintiff covenanted to pay the annuity.
In 1841 it was agreed that 5 per cent. interest should
be charged upon the amounts which Mr. Petre had
advanced in payment of the annuity. It appeared that
he (Petre) had paid almost the whole of the annuity.
The point at issue was, whether, as a surety, Mr.
Petra could recover that interest as damages for a
breach of the covenant ; and, if so, whether the inte-
rest ought to be at the rate of 6 per cent. The ver-
dict of the jury was at per cent., and amounted to
3,4441.

Mr. Wiziis showed cause against the rule, con-
tending that the plaintiff was entitled in point of law
to recover, and that the amount settled between the
parties in 1841 rendered the defendant liable for the
interest.

Mr. E. JAMES and Mr. Roma, in support of the
rule, argued that there were two points ; first, whether
by the proper construction of the instrument the
plaintiff had a right to recover interest ; and, secondly,
what was the effect of the amount of 1841. To have
entitled the plaintiff to recover 5 per cent. he should
have commenced proceedings within a reasonable time.
It was then contended by the Learned Counsel that
the plaintiff could not recover.
Mr. Justice ERLE said he should take time to con-
sider his judgment.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jan. 22.
(Sittings in Banco, before Chief Justice JERvis,_ and
Justices MAULE, CRESSWELL, and WILLIAMS •)
THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY V. BRETT.
Sir F. THESIGER applied to the Court to know
when it would be convenient to their Lordships to
deliver judgment in dila case. The reason for aßking
the question was, that an application had been made
for an enlargement of the time for which the patent
was to exist and the Privy Council had fixed the loth
of February
for lleariog the matter.

Mr. Justice MAULS doubted whether they would
be able to give judgment by the 10th February.
There was a great deal of evidence and some confu•
..ion in the cese. As the late Chief Justice had left
the court, they could not communicate with him, and
when they would be able to settle the matter he could
not tell. He had read a great many books and papers
upon the subject, but he did not seem to get on
much. No doubt if they were locked up until they
agreed, they would come to a speedy conclusion— (A
laugh)—but otherwise he was doubtful.
Sir F. THESIGER—If he had the power to use the
remedy suggested he certainly would do so.—(Re-
newed laughter.)
Mr. Justice MAULS had thought of appointing the
20th of February for giving judgment, as on that day
the Court would hear the appeal from the County
Court. The parties must give them some indulgence,
or from the nature of the thing the matter could not
be properly done.
The Court was occupied nearly the whole day with
the new trial paper, but no case was taken which was
worthy of being reported.

COURT OF lALAND REVENUE, Jan. 22.
(Before THOMAS HARRISON, Ebq., C. J. HERMES,
Esq., and ALFRED MONTGOMERY, Esq.)
John Perkins and Mary, his wife, of Long's-
buildings, St. Luke's, were jointly charged o❑ an in-
formation with removing spirits, with the intent to
defraud her Majesty of the legal duty thereon.
Mr. Inspector Brennan stated that he held a com-
mission as an officer of Excise, and on the 22d of
September last, at about eleven o'clock in the morn-
ing, he was proceeding towards the defendant's resi-
dence, which is a marine store shop, and the defen-
dant himself was standing at the door. As soon as
he saw him he rushed into the house and passed into
a back room by an inner door. He then saw the fe-
male defendant, with a decanter and a quartern mea-
sure in her hand, and immediately behind her on the
floor he found a bladder filled with spirit. He
snatched the decanter from her, upon which she ran
to a pot of water which was boiling on the fire, into
which she dipped the measure, for the purpose, he
believed, of destroying all trace of what it had con-
tained. The decanter contained a pint and the blad-
der upwards of a quart of spirits, which were of illicit
manufacture.

The CHAIRMAN said the Court had no doubt what-
ever that the defendants had the spirits in their pos-
session, and should give judgment against them in
the penalty of 1001.
John Stanley, of No. 14, Wellington-street, Covent-
garden, coffee•shop keeper, pleaded guilty to two in-
formations, charging him with retailing spirituous
liquors on the mornings of Sunday, Oct. 13 and 27,
without licence, and
.at a period when the licensed
houses were closed. _ _ _

The COURT gave judgment in the mitigated penalty
of 201.

The defendant requested that time might be allowed
him to pay the money, but
The COURT refused to grant it, and said it must be
paid forthwith.
Thomas Drain, a coffee-house keeper, of No. 4,
Leicester-street, Leicester-square, pleaded guilty to
a similar information. He said that he had no re-
membrance of the occurrence, and had been in the
house but four months.

The COURT gave judgment in the penalty of 101.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

William Farinator was charged with stealing a
coat from the Bankruptcy Court, on Tuesday, the 7th
of January the property of a Mr. Tebbot, of
the Isle of Wight, and who was then undergoing his
examination as a bankrupt before the Commissioner.
The prisoner was remanded.
Mr. Charles Joseph Byrne, the well• known emi-
gration agent. lately carrying on business under the
firm of C. J. Byrne and Co., of Pall-mall East, and
San-court, Cornhill, emigration agents and merchants,
appeared in answer to a summons charging him with
an assault upon Mr. Richard March, the editor and
proprietor of the Natal Journal and South African
Reporter.

Alderman COPELAND-I'll settle this case very
quickly as far as I am concerned. The defendant
must enter into his own recognizances of 201., and
find two sureties of 101. each, to appear and answer
this charge at the sessions, but he must keep the peace
in the interim.
Defendant—Will your Worship have the kindness
to bind me over to keep the peace ?
Alderman COPELAND—I have no evidence before
me to induce me to think such a course necessary'

Mr. March—He threatened to charge me some
time since, and I dared him to go to the Mansion-
house and do it, and he then said he would forego
prosecuting me if I would not put his name in my
journal.
Defendant—This man, who was formerly my
clerk, has done all he can to injure me by sending a
copy of this journal, with libellous articles in it, to
the Commissioner during the hearing of my ex-
amination. He has also sent copies to Sir George
Grey and the heads of the Government as well as to
the colony, where I have no means but through that
same journal of refuting the accusations made
against me.
Mr. March—That is entirely untrue, Sir.
Alderman CorEnAND—I can do no more in this
case now ; you must settle the difference between you
at the sessions.
In the course of the morning bail was forthcoming,
and Mr. J. C. Byrne was accordingly bound over to
keep the peace, and to appear at the sessions.
BOW-STREET.

John Cobb, a solicitor, was placed at the bar
before Mr. Henry, charged with forging a cheque for
121. 15s. _ _

Mr. Ribton appeared for the prosecutor, and Mr.
Wontuer, solicitor, defended to prisoner.
William D. Dickesson stated that he was landlord
of the Exeter-ball Hotel, in the Strand, and knew
the prisoner, who was in the habit formerly of visit-
ing his house. On Saturday evening, the 12th of
May last, he called on witness, and, showing him a
cheque upon the London and County Bank for 121.
155., said, " Have you any cash to spare, as this is a
cross-cheque, and must be paid through a bank ?"
He owed witness 181. 10d. at the time, and he pro-
posed that this amount should be deducted, and that
the witness should give him half a sovereign—the
remainder to be paid to him on the following Monday.
Witness gave him half a sovereign, and executed an
order for a bottle of wine and a luncheon for two, which
were sent to the prisoner's chambers on Sunday morn-
ing. He never afterwards called at witness's house,
although he had once or twice seen him, since that
time, in the streets. During the conversation about
the cheque the prisoner asked witness where he
banked. Witness replied, "At the London and
County." He then observed, " That is singular, as
I bank there myself." The cheque was signed
" William Charding," and was made payable to Mr.
Cobb ; but, on being presented, it was returned with
an intimation that no person of that name had an
account there. _ _

Cross-examined—l have been promised that this
prosecution should not cost me anything. Mr.
Martin, who has got it up, was formerly the clerk
of Mr. Cobb, the prisoner. I do not know that he
was dismissed from Mr. Cobb's service. The prisoner
has been through the Insolvent Court since the trans-
action in question. I did not appear against him, as
my claim was too small; but I gave the cheque to
Mr. Pullen, who opposed his discharge. I used to be
very friendly with the prisoner. I and my wife have
been to the Opera with him.
Thomas Windsor, a clerk in the London and
County Joint-Stock Bank, stated that no one named
" William Charding" banked there. The prisoner
never bad an account there either. _

The prisoner—Why, I banked there for two
years, as you may learn on inquiry of the secretary.
John Pullen, a tailor, of the Strand, said he had
known the prisoner for many years, and used to be
very intimate with him. He identified the prisoner's
writing on the cheque produced. When the cheque
was shown to the prisoner in the Insolvent Debtors'
Court, he declared that he knew nothing about it,
and never saw it before.
Cross-examined—He did not
give any explanation
respecting it to the Commissioner.
Mr. Wontner said he had a complete answer to the
charge, but reserved it for the trial.
Mr. HENRY committed the prisoner to Newgate,
and refused to take bail.
John K. White and William Roberts, a potboy,
were charged with stealing 601. from the Sun and
Punchbowl, in Holborn.
The case was further remanded owing to the con-
tradictory evidence elicited from the several wit-
nesses. Roberts was traced to Canterbury by Ser-
geant Thompson, and apprehended with 401. of the
money in his possession ; but White called six of his
fellow-lodgers in the model lodging-house, King-
street, Drury-lane, who slept in the same room, and
swore that he was in bed at the time of the robbery
in qaestion.

Mr. HENRY said the requisite time must be taken
for further inquiry.

WORSHIP-STREET.

William Bores, the proprietor of a scholastic esta-
blishment in Shacklewell-lane, Kingsland, who stood
charged with a series of infamous assaif.ts upon little
girls, the daughters of persons residing in the same
neighourhood, was brought up before Mr. Arnold for
final examination upon those and other charges.
Mr. ARNOLD said that the cases gone into involved
such a serious violation of public morals and decency
that he felt it his duty to send the prisoner to meet
them before n jury, and he should therefore require
him to produce approved securities t the amount of
1201. for his appearance on that day week, that the
depositions might be formally cr•ilpleted against him.

LAMBE
Philip Tuffnell, a smart young fellow, the son of a
respectable shoemaker L'eckham, was charged before

Mr. Elliott with being in the house of Mr. Solomons,
in Rye-terrace, Peckham, for an unlawful purpose.

FT-Otil the statement of Mr. Solomons, who is a
fruit salesman, and who was accompanied by his
solicitor, it appeared that on the preceding afternoon
at about half-past three o'clock he and his wife ar-
rived at their house in Peckham-rye from their shop
in Covent-garden market, ani in the back kitchen,
concealed behind a cupboard door, he found the pri-
soner. He at once demanded his business there, and
the prisoner in a confused manner said he had come
to take the measures of two young ladies, his daugh-
ters, for two pairs of boots Believing this to be a
falsehood, as his daughters had no authority from
him to order boots, he (Mr. Solomons) at once
charged him with being in the bous.e with a felonious
attention, and gave him into custody. In reply to
the questions of the magistrate, Mr. Solomons said
the prisoner, when he found him, had a blue bag in
his hand, and on telling him that he had come to
measure his daughters, asked to be allowed to leave
the house, but he refused to permit him. He (wit-
neso did not ask the family then whether they had
employed the prisoner, but concluded he had told au
untruth, as his daughters had no authority to employ
him.

Mary Daniels, the servant of Mr. Solomons, de-
posed that Tuffuell had frequently called at her mas-
ter's house to inquire if tilere was anything for him
to do, and the witness had given him orders for two
pairs of boots, which he had made for her. On the
day before the prisoner came to the house and was
admitted, but had riot been there more than ten mi-
nutes when Mr. and Mrs. Solomons came home, and
her master found him in the back kitchen. Both her
young mistresses had seen the prisoner in the house,
and she (witness) understood the young ladies had
sent for Tuffnell to tell him, as she believed, that he
was not to come there again. Both the Misses Solo-
mons spoke to the prisoner on the day before, after
he had been admitted into the house, and this was not
the first time they had seen and spoken to him in the
kitchen.

The accused here exhibited a letter which he had
received from one of the Misses Solomons, inviting
him to call, and it was only in deference to the wishes
and feelings of the young ladies that he concealed
himself, and not from any fear of being seen.
Mr. ELLIOTT did not think there was the slightest
pretext for giving the young man into custody on
such a charge; for had Mr. Solornons only given him-
self the trouble to make a few inquiries from his ser-
vants and daughters, he must have been satisfied the
prisoner was not in his house with any criminal in-
tention, and in giving him into custody, and locking
him-. up, he had rendered himself liable to an action
for false imprisonment.
The father of the accused expressed his determina-
tion at once to proceed against Mr. Solomons by action
for false imprisonment, and the accused was immedi-
ately discharged. _ _