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

attorney, who had lived for some time in the lictue of
the plaruliff, who, together with his e fe assisted by his
two dauoare, b. kept a ieogine iie ure in Ealswortto I.;
was part of Miss 6hirlock s duty to wait upon the d -
fencLut while he was so lodging in her father's house;
and after he had lived with the fa ad!y for six or eight
months a connexion took place between the defendant
banirdth of
Miss Shirlock, which ultimately terminated in the
a child, and led to her leaving the roof of her
Parents. At the trial the girl gave her evidence most
discreetly, and, although she underwent a severe crees-
examination relative ton baker with whom it was alleg-d
the had been intimate, there was nothing elicited to shake
her previous testimony, which was corroborated by her
Younger sister. In addition to this evidence, two let-
ters were put in, the first of which was written by the
defendant to the plaintiff's attorney, in which he denied
that he was the father of the child, and insinuated a
charge of felony against the plaintiff and his family ; but
it ultimately turned out that there was no ground for the
imputation. The second letter was anonymous, but evi-
dence
was put in to show that although the style of the
handwriting differed from that of the first, yet there were
Certain characteristics about it which induced the plain-
tiff's attorney and his clerk to give it as their belief that
it was written by the defendant. The letter recommended
the plaintiff to get his daughter out of the way, the
writer promising to provide for her until she (brained a
situation, and enclosing 10s. as an evidence of his being
,in earnest. This letter was proved, as already stated, to
be in the defendant's handwriting, and in his summing
aP the Learned Judge left it for the jury to sey whether
they credited that proof, observing that if they did not
Lt would look very much like an attempt at deception on
the part of the plaintiff's attorney; but if they did, of
course, added to the evidence of the girl, it would be
sufficient to justify their finding a verdict for the plaintifi.
The Learned Judge called the attention of the jury
to the difference in the handwriting of the two
letters, and at the close of the charge, he placed
the two letters in their hands, and asked them to decide
Whether or no they were both written by the same hand.
Se satisfied was he (the Learned Counsel) that the
verdict would be in his favour, that he actually in-
dorsed his brief in anticipation of the jury finding for
the plaintiff. It was the second time he had done so in
lae Course of his practice, and it should be the last; but
he Was credibly informed that the Learned Judge him-
self committed the same error, for he wrote upon his
notes " Verdict for the plaintiff," before the jury had
.inketie up their minds. To the amazement, however, of
bar and the bench, the jury found for the defendant,
to doubt under the misdirection that the result ought to
depend upon the anonymous letter, and hence had arisen
presentttheerewasan
aypplicatien.
h
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE could hardly think that
misdirection, since the Learned Counsel
himself admitted that he was not deceived by the sum-
IT, but rather that it led him to conclude before-
hand that the verdict would be for the plaintiff.
Mr. CROWDER would not contend that it was a mis-
qjrection in point of law; but still the manner in which
the Point was put was calculated—unintentionally, no
doubt—to mislead the jury.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said the Court would con-
sult the Learned Judge who tried the case before it
decided the motion.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
7414 QUEEN V. THE CLERK TO THE MAGISTRATES OF
KINGSTON•ON-HULL.
er Mr. WATSON applied for a rule to show cause why a
urinal information should not be filed against the clerk
to the magistratesof the borough of Kingston-on-Hull,
for
misconduct in his office. It appeared that a person
Of the name of Jackson had been repeatedly convicted
i
• 1.7 the magistrates under the Health of Towns Act for
keeping pigs in a manner injurious to the health of the
'nhabitants, and fined sums varying from 11. to 51,
e to-
gether with costs. The guardians of the union in which
nuisance existed applied to the clerk of the magis-
trates for the purpose of having the convictions drawn
°llt and carried into effect, and the particular mal-
tractices complained of by the guardians were that he
tla. not done this, and had thrown other obstacles in
ir via—
,' to prevent the proper carrying out of the Act.
Rule granted.
• 'Tai.i-CKSON V. THE CHARING-CROSS BRIDGE COMPANY.
r- PEACOCK applied for a rule to show cause why
the4l
replication and the demurrers to pleas in this case
should not be set aside on the ground of certain infor•
Italities. The action, which has reference to a contract
entered into by the Hungerford Market Company for
the purchase of the Suspension bridge, has previously
been before the courts of law at Westminster.
LORDSHIP granted a rule.

SHERIFFS' COURT —(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under- Sheriff BuucliELL.)
THE ROYAL BRITISH BANK V. cox.
This was an action to recover the sum of 12/. 10s. on
an overdrawn account.
Ur. James, the cashier of the Strand Branch Bank,
Proved that the deiendant had kept an account with the
bank, and on the payment of a cheque his account was
overdrawn, and notice was given to him, but another
areall cheque was honoured, but defendant did not make
any 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
sit ten minutes. In some of the other cases the at-
torneys arrived just after the Court was adjourned.

MIDDLES EX SESSIONS.
(THIS DAY.)
Mr. Sergeant Adams sat this morning and took bail
eases, of which there were seven on the paper.
..Sir John Hare surrendered to an indictment charging
him with violently assaulting, on the 27th of February
last, Mrs. Ann Fairchild, wife of a veterinary surgeon
residing at Paddington.
Oa the case being called, a surgeon's certificate was
banded to the Court, praying that the case might be
further adjourned, as the complainant was unable to
attend through illness.
Mr. BODKIN, who appeared for the defendant, begged
of the Court not to further adjourn the case. He had
'witnesses in court who could prove that the complainant
had been seen walking about the street during the last
day or two.
The nephew of the complainant was then examined by
the JUDGE, and in answer to the Court stated that his
aunt had not been out during the last week. He had
seen her in bed on Sunday and Monday last. The sur-
te"'s certificate was given yesterday.
Mr. BODKIN called two witnesses, who stated that they
1.1%* the complainant walking about on Monday and
Ras in last, at the hours stated by the nephew that she
"'",,111 bed.
b.'1.110 Learned JUDGE baying further examined the
--Puew, said he had a good mind to order him into cus-
tody. It was a gross case.
The defendant having pleaded not guilty,
their. Sergeant ADAms addressed the jury. and directed
PI to return a verdict of not guilty. They could see
valillY What the case was, and it was evident that they
~Ell,ted to adjourn it, for it was true that the corn-
elant had been seen walking about during the present
the There was something behind which did not meet
The •
the „ ury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty, and
eiendant was at once discharged from custody.
The court was crowded.
1.4

ARLBRO'-STREE r-(THIS DAY.)
Vo SLIGHT MISTAKE.—Mary Ann Eaton, a fashion-
tuiceressed woman of the town, was charged with
g insulting and abusive language towards Ali
Man Effendi, a gentleman attached to the Egyptian
i,
The J•
Ivas complainant stated that on the previous night he
etre smoking a cigar at the door of a divan in Regent-
hefoets When the defendant, whom he had never seen
forel.:' came up and called him a vulgar, stupid, dirty
the Or. He took no notice of her at the time, but as
pear ept walking up and down before the door, and re-
, a ,04111 the above and other filthy expressions, he called
slahle and gave her in charge.
elistarre,ace the accused said she had made a slight
ea id 'he in the person of the gentleman, whom she had
talit ea had some few nights ago partaken of her hospi-
, ProlW had
in return had treated her very scurvily.
411„ the dress and appearance of complainant, she
the", took him for that individual, and in the heat of
to h:oment might have used the language imputed
eliatakqqendant was advised not to be guilty of such a
etel Paid again, and was fined 75., which she immedi-
, "

SPORTING NOTEE4
ODDS No. XLI.
—0 AND ENDS FROM NEWMARKET.

ST,. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.
for '`Oat of five stakes and one match on the card
.14
-brut
yesterday only two produced a race, which
tie-ernt the shortest bill of fare for a day's sport at hea
-Itevhters that I can recollect having seen during the
Af tt;Years that I have devoted my pen to the interests
-date",,racing world. The four-year old colt, by Promo-
ttrodh' 'mai by Mulatto out of Lunacy, gave
for
ahisscraprlare
aver ,show, and beat him in a canter,
alle,„."a Cesarewiteh course; Nutmeg, receiving 171bs.
was a bad third.'
Va.,lag for sex, from the winner,
81is ,
taei,r won the other 501. Plate, over the D.M.,
ead-hg Borneo, who gave
I. the
winner
trashy de-
ecru" half a dov-ti anlitiaA.,
dposition a..
ttarhat. If the racing wai uhnisimo.ppfroordttlhis..ent the betting
l're,„llat; Rhesus maintained
bp,,,—ler for the Che
--. Et 1 4er Cup,
the'ri -arge outlay advanced to alto 6toto1; 'hal
It uisasdb owraosu go hd
14, ae, and his price at midnight wee
• IA, lat
and _ the outside; Montague retired i points,
some
tesnixore than
1at,,,,,.^,a8 'very unsteady; Nancy, Woolwich,
late Doctor -uocitor were firm at previous quotations.
to i°a„Pe and Clarissa were inquired utter at 25 and 40
14,4 The and
danTtehre
Prime Miaister maintained his position at the
hew" affairs for the Derby, at 6 to 1; Teddington was,
bpever, alongside of him at Lhe same figure; Hernandez,
am' Ina outlay of seven or eight hundred pounds,
ad-
Taeed to 8 to 1; Theseus also advanced to 20 to 1.
te;? betting in the Chi and at the West-end, this
the :14, on the Chester Cup and Derby, is pretty much
G • aule a a at Newmarket yesterday, but, on the 1,000
inae
o . Eta and Newmarket Stakes, is as follows:--1,000
, tittle_
ton .'4--6 to 5 agst Iris; 5 to 4 apt Aphrodite; 5 to 1
s, Anspach • 10 to 1 apt Phlegm. Newmarket Stakes
6 tot,? 4
on, Sir
J. Hawley's let; even on The Confessor;
•,,ythe4B
trealere
sdinunaigt
of l
the
receivedidasso
numerousßo requests for my opinion on
asnodvs. Stakes, A.F., walked over for
,fttle aY, by Artisan, for which the following horses
withdrentered :—A rtisan (the winner), Gin, vra (•take
keithawn), nesse Homburg (paid forfeit), 800, and
were ound; it is as follows:—The last-named couple
wee wrongly nominated, the conditions stating that it
4,,,78!!ike for colts "not engaged in the 2,000 Gu
. 'me3 a both of these having entered and rue forineas
that