The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-18 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE-April 17,

COURT OF EX.IIIIEVER.
DARBY V. OUSELEY-LIB;L

Mr. Baron Bramwell—Do you mean that you may put
that quedion to every Roman Catholic, in order to show
that their credit is not good, and that they are unworthy
of belief ?
Mr. Kenealy thought that he might, if it should be ne.
ves.sary to show that he belonged to au illegal society. The
third piece of evideuce'whicliwas rejected was an extract
from the Liverpool Herald, which would have explained
the defendaues reasons for his comments ou the plaintiff.
The Chief Baron said it was the province of a judge to
exclude documents which ought to have been proved iu
evidence.
The learned counsel submitted that the extract was ad-
missible, as it was contained in the same number or the
paper from which an extract was read by Mr. Sergeant
Wilkins, the learned counsel for the plaintiff, and, in sup-
port of his contention, cited the case of •• Cook v. Hughes"
(Brian and Moody, p. 115). With respect to the second
Fround on which he applied for a new trial—the improper
interference of the judge when he was addressing the jury
—he would state that the interference and interruption
were so great that his equanimity was disturbed, and he
was thrown out and stopped.
Mr. Baron Alderson-1 don't think it would be very
easy to stop you. (Laughter.)
Mr. Kenealy assured their lordships that in that instance
it was. He was about to read to the jury the Austrian
Concordat, to show that there was amongst Roman Catho-
lics certain stringent regulations subversive of freedom,
when Mr. Justice Willes observed that as the defendant
was not about to adduce evidence, the Court could not
listen to the Concordat, which was totally irrelevant. The
leaned counsel apprehended thAt the judge had no right
to stop him in the middle of his speech.
The Chief Baron—You had no right to state the terms
of the Concordat, or to comment on it, unless you intended
to give it in eviden,

lienealy sidd he next proposed to quote the canons
and decrees of the Councils of Lateran, of Trent, of Arles,
and of Sons, to show that they were recognised as thy:
canons of the Church of Rome, which showed in what way
heretics were t. he sought out and destroyed, which would
have clearly explained the sense in which " traitor" and
" rebel' should have been interpreted by the jury. lie
had also proposed to real extracts from a book which was
writteu by a priest, and published in 1522, but his lord-
ship would not permit Mu]. The learned counsel, in sup-
port of his case, stated that, at O'Cuiluell's trial, Mr.
Whiteside hart read long extracts from the Morning Post
anti Dublin Evening Mail, and various other papers.
Mr. Baron Aluersou—lt is not because one irregularity
is permitted that it is to be made a precedent of and acted
upon.

The Chief Baron--If you slated anything which you
were not in a position to prove, you were irregular, and it
was the duty of the judge to control you.
Mr. Kenealy said he must bow to their lordships' deci-
sion, but he had carefully searched the reports where in any
one instance a counsel was prevented quoting from or read-
ing a book, and except in a case where it was required to
prove when Charles the Firth ablicated, Ju.4e Jeffreys
designated the book "a little lousy history." (Laughter.)
The Chief Baron—Ho was a bad man, although an able
lawyer. We must give him credit fur having on that oc-
casion decieed rightly.
The learnedoounsel having cited various authorities in
support of his argument, referred to the question of misdi-
rection. The learned judge .11ad stated that there was no
evidence of the plaintiff having been a member of the so
ciety, notwithstanding countet for the plaintiff having ad-
mitted the facts. The jury were also told that the plea of
justification having been thrown overboard, they were
bound to rind a verdict for the defendant. He contended
that even if the plea of justification had not been substan •
timed his lordship was not warranted in making that re-
mark, us the plea of " not guilty" raised everything in is-
sue, and the matter was one for the decision of the jury.
The last point with which he would trouble their loreshiee
was the improper influence exercised by the judge over the
jury. From the commencement of the trial Mr. Justice
Willes had done all in his power to bring it to a close by
suggesting that I should make an apology.
Mr. Baron Alderson—l suppose ou behalf of your client,
not on account of the leneth of your speech. (Laughter.)
Mr. Keuealy observed that at that time he had not
opened his lips. He regretted to say that great impatience
was displayed by the learned judge, who stated that the
defendant's counsel was about to make a Protestant speeeh,
but that it would not be listened to. This, no doubt, had
the effect of prejudicing the minds of the jury. The learned
judge, in alluding to the defendant, said he belonged to a
class of people "Who see more devils than wide hell can
hold." When utterance was given to this, a sensation was
created, and murmurs ran through the court which doubt-
less had an effect on the jury.
Mr. Baron Alderson—You don't do the jury justice.
The learned judge meant ihat. the language of the libel was
greatly ex,ggerated, and that it was a mere " mare's nest."
Mr. -Kenealy said reflections were cast on his client
which were not warranted, and the judge had, in his sato-
ming up, constantly repeated his arguments, which was the
more remarkable, as the speech of Mr. Sergeant Wilkins
was in no way commented upon.
Mr. Baron Alderson—Perhaps there was no necessity.
The Chief Baron—lt is the duty of the judge not to
leave a single matter unexplained to a jury which is capa-
ble of explanation.
Mr. Kenealy conteeded that the summing up was an in-
road, and trenched upon the province of the jury. 13etrusted he had satisfied their lordships that he was entitled
to a new trial, end in conclusion he disclaimed imputing
to the learned judge before whom the case was tried any
object for the course ho had pursued, but considered that
his lordship was guilty of indiscretion.
The Lord Chief Baron said he was of opinion, and with
that opinion the Court fully concurred, that there ought to
be no rule fora new trial in this case. His lordship having
gone through the whole of the arguments adduced by the
learned counsel in support of the application, said that
none of the points presented any grounds upon which the
Court ought to grant the rule. The 'ejection of the evi-
dence was right—the conduct of the learned judge was
right—the direction to the jury was right; and ho entirely
disegreeti with Mr. Kenealy as to the view taken by him
as to what was the duty of a judge, which lay in calling
the attention of a jury to unexplained matter., so as to ca-
ble them to arrive at a just conclusion.
Rule refused aceordiegly.
Mr. Baron Martin sat at nisi prius in the adjoining
court, and disposed of a few common jury causes, which
were alone of interest to the parties concerned.

ADMIRALTY COURT.
(Before Dr. Lushington.)
THE VIVID—DAMAGE.
This was an action brought by the late brigantine Henry,
89 tons, against the mail steamer Vivid, 300 tons, for a
collision which took place in the Dover•roads on the night
of the 11th August. The ves,el while proceeding on her
voyage with a cargo of coals, from Newcastle to Dover, had
anchored about a mile from the entrance to the Dover
Harbour, where she was run into and sunk by the steamer
as she was leaving this country for France. Three of the
brigantine's crew of five were drowned, but the other two
were picked up. The defence was that the Henry had
neglected to show a proper light.
The Trinity Masters having stated their opinion upon
the nautical points involved in the case,
Dr. Lushington pronounced the Vivid to blame.
PRIZE. •

A quantity of Swedish iron for which no claim had been
given in was condemned as a lawful prize.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioncr Evans )
IN RE ALFRED LANGFORD.
The bankrupt was a brewer and maltster of Lewes. This
was a meeting for the choice of assignees. The bankrupt
was adjudicated on the 26th ult. on the petition of Messrs.
Pannett, corn, coal, and hay merchants of Lewes. Debts
'to the amount of about 6,0001. were proved at this sitting,
one of the principal creditors being Mr. Charles. Langford,
an uncle of the bankrupt. whose debts amounted to 2,000/.
Mr. Edward Beard, of Lewes,was appointed trade :,,ssiguee.
The official(3 s a,ssainldneßeoivirsyAeli area the solicitors to the estate.r. P. Johnson, and Messrs. Law-
rance, 1,
The examination meeting is fixed for the 19th May.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Phillips.)
IN RE ROBERT SUTTON.
This insolvent applied under the Protection Act, and a.
person. named. Barmyd, who described himself as formerly
a jockey, appeared.to Oppose. Mr. Denney was counsisbfor
the insblvent.`) •
It was-alleged by Billiard that the insolvent owed him
upWards of MOW., but the insolvent denied that be owed

Mr. Kenealy moved, on behalf of the defendant, for a
rule to show cause why a new trial should not be had in
this case on four grounds--First, the improper rejection of
evidence by the judge ; Secondly, the improperiuterference
of the judge with the speech of the eotinsel for the defen-
dant; thirdly, misdirection ; and fourthly, for the impro-
per influence exercised by_ the judge (mi. the jury.
Mr. Baron Alderson—You state two grounds for a new
trial which I never'heard of before.
Mr. Kenealy said there was a precedent for the lash The
plaintiff was a tide-waiter in the customs at Liverpool, and
the defendant was the proprietor, editor, and publisher of
the Live rpool Herald, and the action, which was tiled at
the last Liverpool assizes, before Mr. Justice Willes, was
brought to recover damages for an alleged libel publiShed
in the defendant's paper. The jury returned a verdict for
the plaintiff, damages 451. The libel complained of, which
was headed " A Popish rebel in. the customs," imputed to
the plaintiff that he was a member of a society formed
under some Roman Catholic priests, that he was a " rebel,
a traitor, and a villain, and was not to be trusted with the
property of the crown, as he was acting under the Foreign
Enlistment Act to enlist under the banner of a foreign po-
tentate." It would be necessary to mention that the defen-
dant had pleaded not guilty and a justification. What
called forth the alleged libel was the circumstance that the
plaintiff had dropped a certificate of his membership in a
Roman Catholic society, which was picked up and given to
the defendant, who at the trial pleaded justification, urging
that he was warranted in commeuting as tie had done iu his
paper, as he had acted without malice, being unacquainted
with the plaintiff, and believing that the certificate was a
treasonable document, and to call attention to what he
considered a treasonable society. The first question he
would call the attention of the court to was the improper
rejection of evidence. When at the trial he had asked the
plaintiff if he had signed his name to a certain book in
which were enrolled the names of the members of the so-
ciety, the learnedj edge had decided that the question could
nut be put unless the book were produced. He contended
that he was justified in putting the question, as, under the
24th section of the Common Law Procedure Act, a witness
might be cross-examined to prove a statement relative to
the subject matter of the case, which was the object in
this case, as, had the question been answered in the ailir-
mative, it would have shown that the plaiutiff was a mem-
ber of the association.
Mr. Baron Alderson—The question is totally indecent.
How can you ask a witness if his nisa,e is inscribed iu
book?
Mr. Kenealy said there was some evidence that the plain-
tiff was a member of the association, and this question,
which he contended was pertinent to the point at issue, was
put in order to establish the fact. However, the plaintiff
having admitted that he felt himself bound by the canons
of the Church of Rome, and that he believed in the
infalli-
bility of the Pope, was asked if he felt himself bound by
the notes and comments in the Rhemish Testament.
Mr. Baron Alderson—Did you ask him if he had ever
read them? I dare say there are many persons in this
court professing the Protestant religiuu who have never
read the Thirty-nine Articles.
Mr. Kenealy—The learned judge ruled that the question
was not to be put, notwithstanding that it was imperfectly
relevant, as it would have had the effect of showing the
nature of the man, and that he was net worthy of belief.
Mr. Baron Bramwell— What is the Rhemish Testament?
Mr. Kenealy—lt is a book which was published 15 years
after the Popish plot, and was circulated principally in
Ireland.

him anything ; on the contrary, he considered that he owed
him 2001.

Mr. Denney said the alleged claim by Barnard was a
"mental delusion."

Mr. Commissioner Phillips, after a long discussion, re-
ferred the matter to the registrar, and adjourned the case
to Monday.
IN BE SARAH MEDLEY—THE " BENIFIT OT A LIFE
POLICY.
Mr. Dowse applied for the assistance of the court under
peculiar circumstances. In 1849 the insolvent was dis-
charged under the act, having previously deposited a policy
on her life in the Law Life office with a Mr. Beresford for
.500.,.0wing him 401., He had paid .1501. as premiums,
and was now tired out. The debt, with interest, was 207/.
6s. Bd. The insurance office offered him 98/ for the policy,
and the provisional assignee, to join in the conveyance,
wanted something for the other creditors. Mr. Beresford,
to get rid of the affair, was willing to pay 301. into court.
He had paid 201. a year premium for upwards of 8 years
on his original debt of 401.

Mr. Commissioner Phillips suggested that the offer shoul I
be made to the provisional, assignee, and the application
granted.

POLL"( E INThLLIGENUE.-April 17.

MANSION-110IISE.—George Frederick Lillicrap, who
was charged with having removed, concealed, and embez-
zled certain goods, being part of his estate as a bankrupt,
to the value of 101. and upwards, with intent to defraud
his creditors, was brought before Sir Henry Muggeridge
for final examination.

Mr. Parry app ared for the prosecutor, and Mr. Hum-
phries for the defence.

The former evidence was read by Mr. Goodman, the
chief clerk, and copies of the evidence given before Mr.
Goulburn, the commissioner of bAnkruptey, we►e handed
in by Mr. Dallman, the solicitor to the assignees.
Mr. Dollrnan said that, at the commencement of the exa-
mination before the commissioner, the prisoner swore th:.t
ha did not remove any goods, and iu the latter part he ad-
mitted that he did remove some of the goods. some of the
goods Po removed had been subsequently recovered by the
assignees.

Alfred Jacobs, clerk to Mr. Nicholson, of Basinghall-
street, official assignee, produced the books of the bankrupt.
Some additional documentary evidence was produced. A
broker to the Bankruptcy Court said he took an inventory
of the goods in the bankrupt's shop and house, and he also
took an account of a quantity of pepper, cloves, and other
grocery goods, at the house of Mr. Green.

- Mr. -Burn, accountant, of Basinghall-street, said he pre-
pared a balance-sheet at the instance of the prisoner, under
the bankruptcy. He did not prepare the additional balance
sheet ; he declined to do so. Having observed several alte-
rations, he asked the prisoner what he had been doing with
the accounts, an.' told biro that he had upset all the state-
ments, and he (witness) must decline going any further into
them.

Mr. Humphries (for the prisoner) said he did not consider
it necessary to make any observations upon the case, as ho
know the aldermen would not decide upon the point of law
on which it would be necessary to make objection.
The prisoner, upon being asked whether he wished to say
,nything in his defence, said, " I leave it in the hands of
my solicitor."
The prisoner was then committed for trial, but was ad-
mitted to bail.

GUILDHALL.—Richard Reynolds, a young man of re-
spectable appearance, was charged with obtaining two
photographic lenses, value '3O/., from Mr. Horne, of New-
gate-street, by means of false pretences.
Mr. Horne said that on Monday week the prisoner called
upon him at 52, Newgate-street, and said he wanted two
good lenses. Witness took him to the glass room, and
took a portrait of himself with each of them. He said he
wanted one for an order and one for his use, and as wit-
ness knew him to be an artist and very respectably connec•
ted, he made no difficulty in letting him have them. He
knew him to have been in the service of Mr. Fenton.
After they were tried at his request they were -ent off at
once to Regent-street, and prisoner stayed to select more
goods. They were addressed to Mr. Lewis, 241, Regent-
street, who was an intimate friend of the prisoner's father,
and he had taken advantage of that circumstanc to get
them sent there. His father was a most respectable man.
The prisoner gave his address at Regent-street, but he did
not live there. Witness identified the lenses produced.
George Lewis, an assistant to Mrs. Smith, a pawnbroker,
at 98, Edgeware-road, produced various lenses, pawned by
the prisoner, among which were the two belonging to the
prosecutor, which had been pledged for 101.
The prisoner was further charged with robbing his for-
mer employer, and was committed for trial.

WESTMINSTER.
Henry Charnell, late butler in the establishment of Mr.
IL T. Fisher, was brought up for re-examination charged
with stealing his master's plate, value 300/.
In addition to the former testimony, which has already
been detailed, T. M`Glavin, 27, Doyley-street, Chelsea, was
examined. He stated that he had been in the habit of job-
bing at the house, and 'was there in the evening before the
robbery, from 6 till 10 o'clock, during which time he did
not notice anything particular; but just before he came
away a young man, whom he was told was a butler in the
neighbourhood, came to the house to see the prisoner, and
was asked into the pantry, which was his private room,
..vheie he saw any friends who might call. The key of the
plato closet was generally kept in the door when it was
open, and he saw it open that night. The plate used at din-
ner was washed in the ordinary way, and put in the closet
on a tray. It was not the practice to put it in the chest,
and he did not see it put in the chest that night, nor could
say whether the prisoner locked the door. When witness
came away, the young man, whom he had seen at the house
two or three times before, was in the pantry with the pri-
soner, but he saw nothing iu the conduct of either to create
any suTicion. The mode of access to the house by servants,
or their friends, was to go down the area and ring the bell,
and the area-door was opened from within. The area-gate
was unlocked when witness went out.

On the question being put whether the area door could
not be unlocked from the outside the police replied iu the
iffirmative.

Mr. Paynter said he sh3uld remand the prisoner for a
week.

Mr. Willing addressed the magistrate for the prisoner,
urging that he bore an irreproachable character, that he
had never attempted to leave the house after the discovery
f the robbery, but Muratori his master of it. He (Mr.
Wilding) thought the case a very slight one against the
prisoner.

Mr Punter observed that he was far from thinking it
alight, and had made up his mind to commit the prisoner
f a trial at the Central Criminal Court.

L A.MB E ITI. —Mrs. Elizabeth Wright, a decent-looking
young woman in widow's weeds, applied to Mr. Elliott
for some assistance for herself and her children.
The applicant said that her husband, who had formerly
been a ,entleman's coachman, had been employed for up-
wards of two years at the Crystal Palace as a time-keeper
,iver the workmen. There being no further occasion for
his services, he in the beginning of December last joined
the " Army Woks uorps," under Sir Joseph Paxion, and
-iailed for the Crimea ou the 19th of that month. Previous
to his going her husband signed a document which entitled
her to the payment of eighteen shillings a week, and this
amount she regularly received up to about five weeks
since, when it was stopped. In tomtit ten days after the
stoppago of her money she received a letter from a friend
in the Crimea, stating that her husband had been burned
to death on the night of the 17th of March, with about 17
or 18 others, while asleep in his tent, and this (to her)
melancholy news was confirmed by a letter wliich she
handed to his worship for his perusal, and which was as
follows :

"Army Works Corps-office, 13, New-street,
Spring.gardens, April 5, 1856.
"Elizabeth Wright—l am directed by Sir Joseph Pax-
ton to communicate to you the sad intelligence which he
has just received from the Crimea, that Joku Wright has
lost his life by a fire, which broke out in the camp of the
commissariat branch of the Army Works Corps at Kadikoi
on the night of the 17th of March last. Sir Joseph Paxton
wishes me at the same time to express his deep regret at
this most unfortunate occurrence, and his sympathy with
the loss you have sustained.—l am your obedient servant,
"(For Fred. Wragge) JOSEPH THORPE.'
The applicant further stated that in the last letter she had
from her husband he stated that he ha i saved up at that
time 4/ , and as soon as he made it Cl. he should remit that
amount to her, to provide for her approaching confinement.
She had not, however, received any remittance from him,
and she had very little doubt that at the time of the sad
and fatal accident her husband had the money on his per-
son, and that it had been destroyed.
In reply to the questions of Mr. Elliott, the applicant
said she resided at No. 7, Rosemary-terrace, Peckham ;
that she had two children living, little gills the one five
and the other two years of age' and expected' a third in a
short time.' She also said that, having received nothing
for nearly five weeks, her means were quite exhausted, and
she scarcely knew what to do.
Mr. Elliott. deeply commiserated her unfortunate situa-
tion, and ordered her a sovereign from the poor-box for
her immediate ueces.ittes, a kindness for which the poor
woman expressed her gratitude.

[AnvEarisEmExrd—The science of health and pathology has
cycles of centuries been involved in such obscurity and
contradictions—so many unsuccessful effurts' have been made
in every age, to produce something that would eradicate ex-
isting d sease, without creating still greater evils, that we aro
predisposed to take a desponding view of all endeavours to
effect an improvement upon the old and imperfect systems of
treatment. But when we find the spontaneous testingly of
men of the most exalted rank and character adduced in
proof of the remedial virtues of a given therapeutic agent-..
when we see such men attesting their personal experience,
and their gratitude for the relief they have received when
labouring under disease in its most harassing form—w, have
facts which it would be absurd to doubt or dispute. Incre-
dulity itself must give way before such declarations as those
of Lord Stuart de Decies, Archdeacon Stuart, Capt. Bingham,
R.N., dle., &e., in grateful acknowledgment of the benefits
they- have .derived from the use of Du Barry's i.;evalen'a
Arabica Food. And 'when, of the myriads who owe the
blessings of recovered health to this preparation, no less
than fifty thousand persons have performed the duty of de-
scribing its effects upon themselves, we feel that it is alto-
gether removed from the ordinary category of what are called
" patent medicines," and that it is entitled to take rank
amongst the most substantial blessings that have yet been
conferred upon our species. Amongst those thus relieved
are persons of ail ages and professions, and individuals of
sedentary habits, a, well as of the classes engaged in active
occupations. In numerous instances the disorder had been
of very long standing, ranging from three to upwards of 60
Years ; and amongst the more prominent of the maladies sue-
ce,sfully dealt with, have been dyspepsia (indigestion), consti-
pation, functional irregularity, obstructions, acidity, cramps,
spasms, fits, heartburn, diarrhoea, nervousness, biliousness,
affections of the liver and kidneys, flatulency, distention, pal-
pitation of :the heart, nervous headache, deafness, noises in
the head and ears, gidAness, pains between the shoulders,
and in almost every part of the body, chronic inflammation
and ulceration of the stomach, eruptions on the skin, scurvy,
fever, scrofula, impurities, poverty of blood, consumption (if
not beyond human aid), dropsy, rheumatism, gout, influenza,
grippe, nausea, and vomiting during pregnancy, after eating,
or at sea, low spirits, spleen, genersl debility. paralysis, cough,
asthma, tightness across the chest, phlegm, , inquietude,
sleeplessness, involnutary blushing, tremors, dislike to society,
unfitness for study, delusions, loss of memory, vertigo, blood
the he.ad, exhaustion, melancholy, groundless fear, indeci-
sion, wretchedness, thoughts of self-destruction, &c, hen
facts such as we have referred to are palpably and i spu
proved, we feel bound to admit that at length a pal advance
has been made towards the groat object of effectually combat-
ing some *of the worst ills which flesh is proverbially heir to.
In canisters, 51bs. 11s.; 121b5., 225. The 121bs carriage
free, bn receipt of post office order Barry dii parry and
Co., 77, Regent-street, London ; Fortnum, Mason, and Co.,
Purveyors to her Majesty, Piccadilly; also a$ 60, Grace.
church-street; 3:39 and 451, Strand; 4, Cheapside; '6B,
Coruhill • 49,- Bishopsgate-street;. 55, Charing-omi; $4,
17pper iaker-otreet ;03 and 150 ,Ozfordilizeeti,