The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-24 00:00:00

attorney, ho had lived for soma time in the howe of
pliuntiff, who together with his wife assisted by Lig
WO daughters. kept a lo‘lging house in Etuswcrth. Ic
Was S
e Part of Mins h s irlock slaty to wait u:Jon the (1,-
enCnt while he was so lodging in her father's house;
and after he had lived with the family for six or eght
ftu
o months a connexion took place between the defendantbud
Shirlock, which ultimately terminated in the
'"f a child, and led to her leaving the roof of her
eitrenle• At the trial the girl gave her evidence most
ereetlY, and, although she undera eta a severe cross-
tnit.zen •
„ a ion relative to a baker with whom it was alleg d
litue had been intimate, there was nothing elicited to shake
ds plyreerveioptiust tiens,timony, which was corroborated by her
JO - •
linger sister. In addition to this evidence, two let-
tersthe first of which was written by the
trendant to the plaintiff's attorney, in which he denied
0114 he was the father of the child, and insinuated a
sere of felony against the plaintiff and his family; but
ultimately turned out that there was no ground for the
deputation, 'I he second letter was anonymous, but evi-
hence was put in to show that although the style of the
o:ndwriting differed from that of the first. yet there were
tOtill characteristics about it which induced the plain-
it' a attorney and his clerk to give it as their belief that
~143 written by the defendant. The lettet recommended
'4° plaintiff to t his daughter out of the way, the
:triter promisinggeto provide tor her until she obtained a
tauationi and enclosing 10s. as an evidence of his being
e:l"est• This letter was proved, as already stated, to
the defendant's handwriting, and in his summing
tit; toe Learned Judge left it for the jur to say
,whether
'3' credited that proof, ebserving that if they did not
el ,e look very much like an attempt at deception on
el': Part of the plaintiff's attorney; but if they did, of
tour", added to the evidence of the girl, it would be
The to justify their finding a verdict tor the plaintiff.
to Learned Judge called the attention of the jury
letters, tho
difference in the handwriting of the two
at the close f te charge, he placid
,dle two letndtersa in their hands,o andh asked them to decide
ether or no they were both written by the same hand.
e° tattisfied was he (the Learned Counsel) that the
Elnerdiest would be in his favour, that he actually in-
ti;erst,e,cl.his brief in anticipation of the jury finding for
e`tuntiff. It was the second time he had done so in
hee course of his practice, and it should be the last; but
self
committed
credibly informed that the Learned Judge hita-
40,,eeturnitted the same error, for he wrote upon his
ItLB `'Verdict for the plaintiff," before the jury had
jja"" uP their minds. To the amaz-ment, however, of
11: bar and the bench, the jury found for the defendant,
de doubt under the misdirection that the result ought to
teend upon the anonymous letter, and hence had anima
I,Present applicatien.
themelle LORD CHIEF JUSTICE could hardly think that
lli,,hes any misdirection, since the Learned Counsel
an-blelf admitted that he was not deceived by the sum-
hal IV, but rather that it led him to conclude before ,
hand that the verdict would be for the plaintiff.
air; unOWDER would not contend that it was a mis-
ale ettuu in point of law; but still the manner in which
deubP°int Was put was calculated—unintentionally, no
Th"--..tu mislead the jury.
spit-ectioah CHIEF JUSTICE said the Court would con-
de • tne Learned Judge who tried the case before it
°Wed the motion.

AIL COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
Trit (Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
• "ERN.V THE CLERK TO THE MAGISTRATES OF
KINGSTON-ON-HULL.
etilttj• WATSON applied for a rule to show cause why a
0 1411121 information should not be filed against the clerk
for:. magistrates of the borough of Kingston-on-Hull,
of ti.37lBeoßdUCt in his office. It appeared that a person
to name of Jackson bad been repeatedly convicted
lteen magistrates under the Health of Towns Act for
iah~biPigs in a manner injurious to the health of the
gather 'ante, and fined sums varying from 1/. to 51,, to-
the with costs. The guardians of the union in which
Ittbill„tii.isance existed applied to the clerk of the magis-
o4,C tor the'purpsef baying the cnvictions drawn
aend carried iato Dell' ect, and the particular mal-
lkro "C5B complained of by the guardians were that he
done this, and had thrown other obstacles in
ulwaY to prevent the proper carrying out of the Act.
granted.
1tc4,0,80/‘ V. THE CHARING.CIVSS BRIDGE COMPANY._
teIIah;O4:II.E:COCK applied for a rule to show cause. why
ZNieation and the demurrers to pleas in this case
be set aside on the ground of certain Mot,
The action, which has reference to a contract
the into by the liongerford Market Company for
bee Purchase of the Suspension•bridge, has previously
W. before the courts of law at Westminster.
LORDSHIP granted a rule.
Jizatt,

,IFFS' COURT —( THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under• Sheriff BuuctiELL.)
THE ROYAL BRITISH BANK V. COX.
fi„"418 was ai action to recover the sum of 121. 10s. on
-4 overdrawn account.
trfir. James, the cashier of the Strand Branch Bank,
oved that the defendant had kept an account with the
6,.41114, and on the payment of a cheque his account was
Yerdrawn and notice was given to him, but another
41411 cheqiue was honoured, but defendant did nut mike
4119 further deposit or pay the balance.
The jury gave a verdict for the amount.
This was the only case tried, and the Court did not
I,lt ten minutes. In some of the other eases the at-
`°tneys arrived just after the Court Was adjourned.

_IIDDLES EX SESSIONS.
)dr (THIS DAY.)
• Sergeant Adams sat this morning and took bail
9, of which there were seven on the paper.
tiNr John Hare surrendered to an indietment charging
let with violently assaulting, on the 27, of February
tee' 11 . Mrs. Ann Fairchild, wife of a veterinary surgeoe
U at Paddington.
hit the case being called, a surgeon's certificate was
flit tiled to the Court, praying that the case might be
ittl6-""1 adjourned, as the complainant was unable to
nd through illness.
tf thP',,,l3oDain, who appeared for the defendant, begged
vtitne ''otirt not to further adjourn the case. He had
1141-33eS in court who could prove that the complainant
beep seen walking about the street during the last
orte,
Zhe
the a nephew of the complainant was then examined by
%tint hub°, E., and in answer to the Court stated that his
tteeti l' not been out during the last week. He had
gee te-er in bed on Sunday and Monday last. The sur-
Airs certificate was given yesterday.
,hitts ;isa)Ditisr called two witnesses, who stated that they
ire ,eoMplainant walking about on Monday and
'N e
• 'mit at the hours stated by the nephew that she
vhs
.t'Dhe,.arned JUDGE having further examined the
telly. -4 laid he had a good mind to order him into ens-
The was wall a gross case.
kr. defendant having pleaded not guilty,.
theta t,""Reant ADAMS addressed the jury. and directed
lilsto return a verdict of not guilty. They could see
hritici whet the case was, and it was Evident that they-
Sal:lj° adjourn it, fur it was true that the c(ln-
,,uLad been seen walking about during the present
aye,'ere was something behind which did not meet
1,
i. 17 then returned a verdict cf Not Guilty, and
,I,qaout
was
crowded.
endart
odnedce. discharged from custody.
14 •
I'—THIS( DAY.)
MISTAKE.—Mary Ann Eaton, a fashion-
-147.11!ct. wcinan of the town, was charged with
;4144 and abusive language towards
.Ali
ttlbas "v'ffencli, a gentleman attached to the Egyptian
trh 61.-
h e(4o 1
3 . P tumult stated that on the previous night he
lite • oltie
g cigar at the door of a divan in Regentn-
er- When the defendant, whom be had never see
eatn,,
th."l,hei 1)P and called him a vulgar, stupid, dirty
b.."cebtr. took no notice of her at the time, but as
t.Z.titiTtillyttiltlpg up ad down before the door, and re-
a.bove and other filthy expressions, he called
),,,-.4.4f And gave her in charge.
Za4.ttkeietibee the accused said she had made a slight
tta,lea hogle Person of the gentleman, whom she had.
saiA''actine few nights ago partaken of her hospi-
teac'itriollo".lia return had treated her very smelly.
relytookuLl'eas and appearance of complainant, she
for that individual, and in the heat of
alt. 'l4 might have used the language imputed
kl"alef
thaPtlie '4clat was advised not to be guilty of such a
1)41(14.4(1in,rt and was fined 75., which she immedi-

SPORTINGLLNOTEeA
1)4
41`11) ENDNS(IFXROM NEWMARKET.

.
OF THE SUN.
t 'ilk-. 2'o TILE FDITOR
, t th,„ nt of five
y On
1.11°440;:11?)4 )eat:tedits'takelsy and
d 0
one
produced
seapoornarteteahleVijacenaairOddb. Itllitt: the, shortest bill of fare fora
head-
of
can recollect havingthlyseen during the
pen to the interests
" dare'''3oB that I have devoted my
t: 4rtitheilig world. The four- year olduacToolt,hblys
year to
uY Mulatto out of Lunacy, is for a SOL Plate
°►e raw, and la .at him in a canter,
receiviag 1 7lbs.,
alio 10 Qt.ssr w h course; Nutmeg,
a bad third.
exit f e lte
winner, was D.M.,
basteor sex, from the
-'4(l' ' Lotus° who gave the .
;hak„W°ll the other 501. thePlate,ovwerinner Bit,As ,
t
„u„ trashy ""
Or-q 1
Asa tio„ d , r'
11"11.1f .Ifs tioi racing „., anneals
unimportant -
positiontb e
a
t tc)ti Rh g his
h,, taler for ems maintained
sberough
' o 1 • Rua
the
, h: the Chester Cup,
was on
j" riii-elrta outlay advanced to at
t 0
6tot
more than
thattr -I,44aLti his Price at midnight Was
1; 'nlutatlian
4-'1 RI the
Outi.ide;dlll.onstaagnouye,relvtirotodlswpaao,
11114 as very tin t ' and The
Sauter
L'''e I,6ator Were : Ya9t previous quotations.
six points,
17 1.°41i: 4114 elariasarnwere inquired after at. 2.5 aantdtre
"lei 0-f" Prinietliaistar maintained his position at
was,
hovim, tiffaira for the Derby, at 6 to 1 ;Tedd ifingernald_e_iz:
~r)O4 ,h'iklollgticla of him at the same figure; 'ttLloen-,„°ll,tlity of seven or eight hundred pounds,
_. au
.1.14 :' eto 1 ; Theseus also advanced to 20 to tilor4l siting in ty and at the West-en , tohoi!
trshe site,!, 01l the Chester Cup and Derby, is pretty h
l'etillae'" at Newmarket yesterday, but, on the M 1,009
Guineas *st 43,„ MA. Newmarket Stakes, is as follows:-1,000
"44 e------6 to 5 ngst Iris • 5 to 4 apt Aphrodite; 5 to 1
05,„.. ~.- ,
ss-6 to elect; 10 Havel .get Phlogra. Diewmarket S.'talies.
to 194 B'r Z.. ey's lot; °Veil on The Confessor ,
4,,,!'alapMidss and 800.
1110 resitin,f teoeired numerous requests for my opinion on
l'eltotdLlt Of the 50 sous. Stakes, A.F., walked over for
ere "IV, by Artisan, for which the following horses
kNvithl enteredz--Aitisan (the winner), Gincvra (..take
ekir,"4ll), !lease • Walburg (paid forfeik), 1300, and
l‘tro,-I.lattt it is as follows:-The last-named couple
Irks a',1:',12417 nominated, the conditions stating tbot it
4tak, "aao for colts " not engaged in.
_the 2,V110 .'Guineas
4;4 both of these having entered and run for that