The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-23 00:00:00

LIDDARD V. LIDDARD-JUDGMENT.

His Honour said—This suit arose on the construction of
a settlement bearing date 6th October, 1848, made by the
father of the plaintiff in favour of the plaintiff, Thomas
Liddard. By that settlement Wm. Liddard, on his son's de-
cease, gave property in question to trustees to be appropriated
by them for the benefit of his widow and children. And
then it proceeded in these words—" I hereby declare it to
be my wish that Thomas Liddard Robertson shall, on
attaining the age of 21 years, sell the hereditaments hereby
conveyed, and it is my wish that John Liddard (my son) and
Laurel Liddard (my daughter) may be allowed by my son
Thomas Liddard Robertson to participate in the division of
the price in the same as my son Thomas Liddard Robert-
son." He was clearly of opinion that John and Laurel
Liddard were entitled, under that provision, to an equal
share of their father's property with the plaintiff, Thomas
Liddard Robertson.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—( This Day.)

MARLBORO-UGH-STREET.

HIGHWAY ROBBERY BY A WELL-KNOWN THIEF.—
Catherine Dawson, a notorious thief, and well known as an
associate of thieves, was charged, before Mr. Beadon, with
stealing a silver hunting watch, of the value of £4, the pro-
perty of William Smith, an elderly man, a coach painter,
under the following daring circumstances :
The prosecutor said be was going up Upper St. Martin's-
lane on Saturday night, a little after twelve o'clock, when
the prisoner and a companion came in front of him, upon
which he stepped aside and tried his utmost to get away
from them. The prisoner then made a snatch at his watch,
which was in his waistcoat pocket, and he had no doubt
handed it to the other woman, who immediately started off
in a different direction. The prosecutor" managed to seize
the prisoner, who commenced a severe struggle, in which
his thumb was nearly wrenched from the socket. He could
swear positively to the prisoner being the one who took the
watch.

A constable said the watch had not been found.

Sergeant Cole, 9 C, said he knew the prisoner as a noto-
rious thief. He had seen her at Bow-street and at this
court for robberies, and she was considered a " clever
woman in her profession."
Sergeant Silverton said she was well known to him as an
associate of thieves.

Mr. Beadon said she would be remanded for a week for
further inquiries to be made.

COST OF TILE WEEDOA INQUIRY.

A Parliamentary return, printed at the instance
of Colonel Dunne, shows that the cost of the Wee-
don Commission amounted t0..£9,835 Os. 6d., which

is thus accounted for :—Remuneration to Colone'

French (Commissioner), including personal and
travelling expenses, £538 9s. 2d. ; do. of Mr. Selfe
(Commissioner), 60 days, at £5 ss. per diem, £315 ;
• . .

do. Mr. Dew, the secretary, for his services, £324
9s. ; personal and travelling expenses of Mr. Tur-
ner, Mr. Selfe, and Mr. Dew, £157 9s. Bd. ; allow-
ances to witnesses for attendance, £l7 17s. 4d. ; paid
for notes of evidence, £390 4s. 4d. ; claim of Messrs.
Quilter, Ball, Jay, and Co.' accountants, in investi-
gating the store accounts atWeedon,,EB,o39, 4s. 10d.
The Treasury auditor has reported to the Commis-
sioners of the Treasury on the above charges. Refer-
ring more especially to the enormous sum claimed
by Messrs. Quilter and Co., the auditor says, " I
feel it my duty to disallow it, as having been in-
curred without authority and without reasonable
proof of necessity, and as involving, both from the
course pursued in the investigation and the high
rate of charges made by the accountants employed,
an useless and extravagant expenditure. He also
states that the report of Quilter and Co. does not
present those accurate results which might have
been expected from professional accountants, after
the expenditure of so much time and labour and that
the report "is really of no practical value." The
auditor, it appears, wrote to Quilter and Co. for de-
tailed information with regard to their account, but
he states that all he had been able to ascertain from
them was, that the number of clerks employed from
first to last was 21, of which number, with slight
occasional interruptions, 17 were continuously em-
ployed. In answer to his inquiry respecting the
pay allowed to their clerks, they replied, " the re-
muneration paid to our clerks is a matter strictly
between them and us, aid upon which it is not the
practice either to give or require explanation." The
auditor has, however consulted other accountants,
and obtained the ordinary scale of charges, from
which he is enabled to report " that considerably
less than half the amount claimed by Messrs.
Quilter and Co. would afford ample remuneration
for their service, supposing that the time claimed had
been usefully employed. Upon the claim of Mr.
Selfe, who is in receipt of a salary as a police magis-
trate, the auditor thus remarks :—" The next item is
the account of Mr. Selfe, chairman of the commission,
amounting to £328. Of this account tie sum of
£l3 is for hotel and travelling expenses; the re-
mainder is charged as personal remuneration, at the
rate of five guineas a day for 40 days employed
in the examination of witnesses—viz., 21 days in
London and Weedon, 12 at Woolwich, and seven at
the Tower, £2lO ; and at the same rate for 20 days
employed at home " in perusing and abstracting
blue book in July, 1858, in perusing evidence,
drafting, revising, and considering report with my
fellow commissioners, secretary, and accountants,
£105." The auditor, while reminding the Com-
missioners of the Treasury that Mr. Selfe has a
salary as a police magistrate, omits to state that
Mr. Dew, who received three guineas per day
(exclusive of £B4 Os. 6d. for personal and
travelling expenses), is a clerk in the House
of Commons, in receipt of a fixed stipend. Messrs.
Quilter and Co. have refused to abate any portion
of their account, but have consented to a competent
reference on certain conditions, one of which is that
they should be allowed to withdraw the account
already furnished in order to submit another at
what they term " usual charges," which they state
will give a larger claim on the Treasury. The
Treasury decline to consent to may conditions which
could have the effect of incurring a charge which
they designate as " enormous" and " extravagant."
The matter must therefore be arranged by the hon.
member for Lambeth in committee of supply. The
report and correspondence from which the above
facts are gleaned forms an instructive, if not a satis-
factory, State paper.

THE GOVERNMENT GUNBOATS.--In a notice of
these boats which appeared in The Sun of Saturday under
the head of '. Naval and Arilitary Intelligence," and which
referred in terms of condemnation to the majority of these
vessels, it was stated, " In the midst of all this decay there
are two boats which have been examined and repaired
which are declared by the authorities to have been con-
structed in a creditable manner to their builder, both as
regards labour and materials,:but it is said that the doing so
nearly entailed their builder's ruin. They are named re-
spectively the Earnest and the Escort." We learn from
our Bristol correspondent that these boats were turned out
from the yard of Mr. William Patterson, of that city, the
builder of the Great Western, Royal Charter, and other
vessels of world-wide fame ; anl that although Mr. Patter-
son was a considerable loser by his contract for building
the gunboats in question he was not ruined by the transac-
tion. Mr. P., it will be recollected, was one of the gentle-
men called Lin to survey the Great Eastern after she left
the Thames 'and the dispute arose between the company
and Mr. Scott Russell. The Earnest gunboat was launched
on the 29th of March, 1856, and the Escort on the Otb. of
April of the game year.