The Sun.
London, England, 1856-12-19 00:00:00

PROPOSED REMOVAL OF THE COURTS

OF LAW.

Yesterday a deputation from the council of the Incor-
porated Law Society waited upon Sir B. Ball, Chief Com-
missioner of Public Works, at his offices, Whitehall-place,
relative to the removal of the courts of law from West-
minster and the erection of a building in the neighbour-
hood of the inns of court, in which all the courts, both of
law and equity, and all the law offices might be concen-
trated under one roof.

Mr. WITH, the president of the society, in explaining
the object of the deputation, drew attention to the fact that
the courts in Westminster Hall would soon be useless to
the legal profession, and pointed out the inconvenience
which arose to the public from the offices and courts of
judicature being scattered about the metropolis. Notwith-
standing the great increase in the number of judges since
1820, no increase of accommodation had taken place, and
as a remedy for this state of things, it was proposed that
a site should be purchased by Government fur the erection
of a building in which all the law courts and ollices might
be brought together. The site suggested as most eligible
was that bounded on the north and south by Carey-street
and the Strand, and on the east and west by numerous
small courts and alleys, and presenting a frontage of 300
feet and a depth of 430 feet. Snch a building would cause
a great improvement in the neighbourhood by displacing
the low haunts of crime which at, present occupy the area
in question, and as there was no valuable property there
the ground could be obtained cheaply. Simultaneously
with such an improvement, two new streets might be
opened parallel to each other from the strand to Holborn,
and relieve the traffic through Chancery-lane. A sum of
800,0001. would defray all the expenses of the purchase and
erection of the necessary buildings.
Sir BENJAMIN HALL concurred in the opinion that the
courts at Westminster are highly inconvenient and in-
sufficient, and suggested that the judges, as the proper
representatives of the profession, were the persons from
whom the proposition to the Government should emanate,
but that in default of their interference, a motion for a
committee should come from the Attorney-General, as the
principal law officer of the Crown, to inquire and report
whether any and what funds of the suitors in the Court of
Chancery might be applied towards
.the object in view.
Having advised the gentlemen conferring with him to put
themselves into communication with the Attorney General,
Tho deputation, after thanking the right hon. gentleman
for his courtesy, withdrew.

REPRESENTATION OF SOUTHAMPTON.

A crowded meeting of Liberal electors was held last even-
ing at the Victoria Rooms, Mr. W. Dusautoy in the chair,
to hear from Mr. Richard Andrews an explanation of his
political views, and to adopt means for securing his elec-
tion.

Mr. ANDREWS stated the circumstances under which he
had become a candidate. At the first rumour of a vacancy
Capt. Mangles wrote to him saying he was ready to come
forward, and ho (Mr. Andrews) assured that gentleman
that a majority of the Liberal electors would support him.
err A. Cockburn, on accepting the chief justiceship, wrote
to Mr. Andrews, expressing a hope that their cordial friend.
ship would be continued, but it was not the fact that Sir
Alexander, in that letter, recomraended Mr. James. When
Mr. Piggott came, Mr. Andrews referred him to the
leading men of the Liberal party, and when Mr. James
followed, Mr. Andrews told him that he much approved
of the sentiments Mr. James had expressed at Hull, and
that if Mr. James came up to his standard, he (Mr. An-
drews) was prepared to support him. After the two meetings
at the Riding school, and the disgraceful scenes which en-
sued, Mr. James having abandoned the contest, Mr. An-
drews was invited to become a candidate, several gentlemen
pledging themselves to obtain a requisition with 1,000 sig-
natures. His reply was, "If you get me 1,000 signatures I
will stand and will go to the poll." That promise had
been fulfilled, and upon the strength of that he would rest
his cause ; but he had made an endeavour to unite the
differences in the Liberal party by a conference between
his own supporters and those of Mr. Weguelin. The re-
sult was that the friends of Mr. Weguelin had expressed
their intention of fighting it out. All he (Mr. Andrews)
oonld say was, that he was also determined to fight it out.
After some other observations from Mr. Andrews, reso-
lutions pledging the meeting to support him were mini.
mounly Adopted.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Before the Lord Chief Baron, and a Special Jury,
STEVENSON V. SIR ROBERT PEEL, DART.,

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a commis-
sion agent in the service of Mr. Charles Westerton, the
well-known bookseller of Knightsbridge, and church-
warden of St. Paul's, in that district, to recover dam-
' ages of Sir Peel, for injuries received by being
knocked down and run over by the defendant's carriage
and horses. The plaintiff, in his declaration, alleged
that the defendant was possessed of a carriage and horses,
and that by his coachman he so negligently managed
them as to cause serious injury to the plaintiff. The de-
fendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Overend, Q.C., and Mr. Needham were for the
plaintiff ; Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Coleridge for the
defendant.
The plaintiff deposed that he resided at Queen's-place,
Islington. On the 7th July, at about 8 o'clock in the
evening, he was at Knightsbridge, nearly opposite to
Wilton-place, and on the park side of the road. He had
been talking to a friend named Humble on the pavement,
and was crossing over the road towards Wilton-place,
having previously ascertained that no vehicle was ap-
proaching, and that it appeared perfectly safe to
cross over. As he was passing without having
any previous intimation of any kind, he felt a blow on
his shoulder, and he was knocked down on his face and
stomach. Directly afterwards he felt the hoof of a
horse on the base of his spine and a wheel strike against
the calf of his leg. He was extricated and taken to St.
George's-hospital, and afterwards to Mr. Westerton's.
He was then taken home, and was confined to his bed
Lye weeks, and suffered " inconceivably." He was a
commission agent, and as such it was necessary for him
to walk from 15 to 20 miles a day, and he did it with
pleasure before the accident occurred. For 15 weeks
he was unable to do anything, and since then his total
earnings had only been 2/. Before the accident he got 30s.
a week from one source and As. from other sources.
His doctor's bill amounted to 15 guineas.
Cross-examined by Mr. Bovill—He was engaged be-
fore the accident for Mr. Westerton, not in his business,
but to get up an association for obtaining a reform of
parochial matters, and the return of two representatives
for Westminster at the coming election. He was to
have more than 30s. a week if he could make the thing

answer.
Mr. Bovill—What, the members?
Witness—Yes. (Laughter.)
Witness continued—The other 10s. a week he got
from a little business he did in stationery amongst his
friends, and which he was able to transact either early
in the morning or late at night.
Mr. Bovill—ln calling at gentlemen's houses with
sealing war, pens, and such like.
Witness—No.

Witness continued—He saw a cab approaching, and
he thought a tilted cart in the distance, but no carriage.
When he was knocked down he did not know whether
the driver stopped, as he was lying on his face on the
ground. He believed the carriage was at a stand still
when he got up. It appeared to have backed off him.
If there were ladies in the carriage, they did not put
their heads out of the window, nor did Sir R. Peel, that
he heard, give any directions that he should be seen to.
He was what was ordinarily called " hard of hearing"
before the acoident, and his hearing and memory were
now worse.

Mr. Humble, assistant to Mr. Westerton, said that
when plaintiff left him he saw nothing to prevent his
crossing the road ; the carriage came rapidly along
and knocked him down. The wheel of the carriage
was on the plaintiff's leg when he called to the driver to
back off. He did so, and immediately drove off. The
carriage was travelling at the rate of twelve miles per
hour at the time of the accident.

Cross-examined—He heard shouting about a minute
before the accident occurred, but he could not say if it
came from the carriage. There was no attempt on the
part of the driver to pull up before the plaintiff was
kaocked down. Sir R. Peel did not look out of the
carriage window when the accident occurred.
Stephen Roy, police-constable 118 B, deposed that he
saw the acoident. It occurred about eight o'clock in
the evening. He saw a carriage coming along before
the accident occurred at about nine or ten miles an hoer.
He saw the plaintiff step from the pavement, and when
about seven or eight feet from it he was knocked down
by the near-side horse. The shoulder of the horse struck
him. Witness ran round the carriage to his assistance.
Some one called out to the coachman to move forward
or back, and then the fore-wheel went over his leg. He
did not notice any one look out of the carriage. As
soon as the plaintiff was extricated the carriage went on.
He ran after the carriage a few steps and asked the
footman whose carriage it was, and he replied Sir R.
Peel's.

Cross-examined—Several people called out to the
plaintiff when he was crossing ; and he said after that
he could not hear very well.

George Stallwood, an assistant to Mr. Westerton,
deposed that he was near at the time of the accident.
The carriage came along at a " fire•engine pace°"—(laugh•
ter)—only the horses were trotting instead of galloping.
. ..

He believed Sir Robert was late for the Queen's ball,
which took place that night.
The Lord Chief Baron—l should rather think too late
for dinner somewhere. The gates would not have been
open at 8 o'clock at the palace.

Witness—Well, it might have been for dinner or for
the Admiralty, I am sure I don't know which; the car-
riage went on immediately after the accident. The
coachman would have gone on sooner if he had been
allowed to do so.

Cross-examined by Mr. Bovill—He belonged to Mr.
Westerton's newspaper department, and not his " driv.
ins" department. He was not a member of Mr. Wes.
terton's political association, but he wished he was. He
had peculiar notions of his own.
At this stage of the proceedings Mr. Bovill conferred
with his client, and said that he was happy to announce
that Sir R. Peel, feeling that though his coachman was
not at fault, and that,he had several independent witnesses
prepared to prove that the accident arose from the
plaintiff's fault, yet, that feeling that the man had been
injured by his carriage, he was now willing to do what
he had always expressed himself ready to do, namely—
to give him compensation. Sir Robert by that did not
admit his liability, and if the plaintiff would withdraw
the record he would make him the handsome compensa•
tion of 1201.

Mr. Overend, on the part Of the plaintiff, amidst so
much conflicting evidence, said he readily accepted the
handsome offer of Sir R. Peel.
The record was then withdrawn and the case termi-
nated.

Before the action was brought into court Sir R. Peel,
whilst denying his liability, offered to make the plaintiff
an allowance of 201. a•year for life, but he refused to ac-
cept it.