The Sun.
London, England, 1856-08-05 00:00:00

•EVENINtI2 AUGUST 5, 1856.

Most of our readers are doubtless in some degree ac-
quainted with the processes by which printers and pub-
lishers of literary works are enabled, by wesns of stereo-
type plates cast from the types of such works, to obtain
an equivalent for those types. and at the same time ren-
der them available for other books. One of these pro-
cesses, we may state, is t) take a stucco mould or tnatrix
from the types, and from this to obtain a metal cast or
stereotype plate, while, by what is called the " paper
process," a matrix is formed by beating softened paper or
pulp into the types with a hard brush. Ail who have
had any practical knowledge of stereotypinerwill F.a irca(.l37,
we beeeve, to ad.Liiii,t,tibiatextepotehn4f, ta6n-d-,sarle'r''ciceetZn'einniva(ilvt:
considerable.te
toe types. An altogether new and very simple method of
stereotyping has just beer, discovered an patented jointly
by Mr. Hogg, publisher, of Edinburgh, and Mr. Napier ;
and we have had an opportwity of seeing it in opera-
tion. Mr. Hugg's process consists of a mixture of various
ingredients, finely pulverised, and mixed up to the con-
sistency of putty. In this state the substance is spread
with a knife on a piece of wrapping paper, and then
passed under an accurately adjusted straight edge, by
which means a surfece as smooth and equal as a sheet of
paper is obtained. The material for the matrix being thus
ferined, it is laid on the types, the composition, in a soft
state, being next the face. An impression is then taken
by the eminion printing press ; but the pressure re-
quired is so slight thet Mr. Hogg uses an ordinary copy-
iiig.press fur the purpose. The matrix affixed to the
lace of the types is then laid on a gently heated but plate
ler abut twenty tninu es, after which it is ready for
being cast fr ma. The advantages over any of the pro-
ceeeee now in use are very caeiderable. From the ire-
preisinn being taken as in the ordinary in Pie of print-
ing, a perfeetty kvel surface on the face of the stereo-
type plate is attained. There is not the slightest
shrinking or twisting of the matrix as in casting from
stucco. No mereeLemage is done to the types than by
pulling a proof at the hand press ; what printers will
undetetend a-. low spacers anti leads are preferred ; there
is Ho filliyg up et tbe types with the material of e, hick
the matrix is loads, ai.il the types are returned as clean
as they leave the hands of the cempesitor, no brushing
or 61:ini`g'2" of the Little of
while the
what is un-
Waiohilinags
,o. upt,
deret
saving to the printer in the wear of types is very great.
This will at once be apparent to those acquainted with
stereotyping, either from the stucco or paper process.
Jo stucco ail low portions of the forms of types must be
tilled up, and the face of the type brushed out, while
what remains of the stucco must either be cleaned out by
the stereotyper, or, what is generally the practice, picked
out by the compositor as be best Can. By the "paper"
proceee great damage is done to the types by the pulp
being hea‘en into them, and from the metal requiring to
be used at a comparatively low heat the plates are
j softer. The process we have been describing permits of
the metal being used at any temperature,

theatre, or concert room, or at any public or private
party, or in any place whatsoever in the United King-
dom ; and that Antonio Poletti might be restrained
from interfering, without the consent of Mr. Gay, in
the direction and management of Picco until the further
order of the Court; the injunction being applied for
under these circumstances :—ln the month of December
last the plaintiff, Mr. Gay, happened to witness the per-
fermances of Picco at the Pagliano Theatre, Florence,
and believing him to be a man of uncommon musical
skill, made some inquiries about him. Finding that he
had contracted with Antonio Poletti and Gaetano Baga-
relli, professors of physico juggling, to play on the pipe
at their performances for a period of three years, and
that the adventure was not so successful as might have
been anticipated, and that they were in a distressed can-
dition, he proposed to purchase Bagarell's interest in the
adventure, with the view of bringing Picco and Poletti,
who had the personal care of Picco, to England, where
his performances on the whistle might realise greater
profits. Bagarelli's interest was accordingly purchased
for 1301., and Mr. Gay became a partner with Poletti
in the contract for three years, and also in another
contract between Picco and Poletti for a further pe-
riod of six years, to commence at the expiration
of the other contract. Mr. Gay advanced to Po-
letti a sum of 5,000 francs, and also advanced the
expenses necessary for the removal of Picco and Poletti
and family to this country. Mr. Gay rented and fur-
nished the house, 38, Hart-street, Bloomsbury-square,
for their residence. Picco played under the direction Of
Mr. Gay (who expended large sums in advertisements),
at Hanover-square-rooms, and at the Adelphi and St.
James's Theatres, with great success ; but on the 11th
of Jane, Picco and Poletti and family departed from the
house, and refused to permit Mr. Gay any longer to in-
terfere in the management of the adventure. Picco
alleges that he is not bound by the contract, and now
performs in public independently of Mr. Gay's control.
The learned counsel submitted, however, that although
Picco was not actually a party to thb instruments under
which Mr. Gay became the director of the adventure, he
had assented and ratified them and had, until the lth
of June, performed under the direction of Mr. Gay, with
whose direction he expressed his entire satisfaction.
The Vice-Chancellor remarked that there was no evi-
dence that Picco bad entered into a written contract
with the plaintiff. Poletti had taken sp)n himself to
make the plaintiff Picco's master without Picco being a
party to the transaction. Could that be done ? If
Picco were a horse or an ox it might. Picco swore in
his affidavit, in opposition to this motion, that whilst he
was in Italy his brother Angelo took care of him, but
that Angelo was sent away from him at the time f the
assignment of Bagarelli's interest to the plaintiff, and
that he, Picco, was now perfectly helpless in this coun-
try. Poletti, the juggler, had juggled away Angelo, and
there wag not a single individual to take careof him.
Mr. Denney said his case was that Mr. Gay was made
the treasurer of the undertaking by virtue of the con-
tract into which he entered with Poletti. As treasurer
he had expended a considerable amount of money to-
wards making the adventure successful, and had made
remittances to Picco's parents in Italy, in conformity
with the terms of the contract between Poletti and
Picco. Picco had performed under Gay's directions,
and ought to be considered to be the servant' of Gay.
' The learned counsel referred to various cases, including
the well known case of Lumley v. Gye, and submitted
that an injunction ought to issue, as a mere action at
law for damages against Poletti could not compensate
Mr. Gay for his expense and trouble.
Mr. Gland (instructed by Mr. Lewis) appeared for
Piece), and read an affidavit by the Rev. Faa di Bruno, of.
Lincoln's-inn-fields, to the effect that Picco had fre-
quently complained to him that sufficient food and
clothing had not been furnished to him. He submitted
that no injunction ought to issue, inasmuch as Picco
had never entered into any contract of any 4scription
with Mr. Gay. It was alleged that Bagarelli.had as-
signed his interest to Mr. Gay, but Bagarelfi,could do
nothing of the kind, because contracts involving per-
sonal confidence were not assignable without the assent
of all parties to such contracts. He referred to the case
of Stevenson v. Bentley (1 Kay and Johnson's Reports)
and other analogous cases. Picco's brother,', Angelo,
was a party to the contract between Picco, Poletti, and_
Bagarelli, and Angelo ought to have been made a party.-
to the agreement between Mr. Gay and Poletti and
Bagarelli. ?Imo swore that he had not received pro-
per attendance from Mr. Gay. The .case of Lumley. v.
Gye did not ippiy to the present case, inasmuch as
there was a contract between Mr. Lumley and Madlle.
Wagner, and further she bound herself not to. sing but
under his direction during the existence of the contract.
If an injunction were issued in this case, Picco would be
absolutely without remedy against Mr. Gay, because
there was no contract between them.
Mr- Denny, in reply, contended that Pied') would
have a right to file a bill in this court against Poletti
and Gay to compel them specifically to perforce the con-
tract between himself and Poletti ; and that, if so, Gay
a!so had a right to file a bill against Picco and Poletti
for non-performance of the contract.
The Vice-Chancellor said this was a very novel and
mistaken application. He would shortly dispose of the
motion for injunction against Poletti (who, it is alleged,
has gone to Paris) by observing that he bad not been
served with a notice of motion. With regard to the
motion for an injunction against Picco, he had to ob-
serve that Poletti, who had contracted with Picco and
ricco's parents and brothers to take care of him during
the existence of the contract, had taken upon himself to
c)ntract with Mr. Gay that he would oblige the blind
man Picco to follow Mr. Gay to any part of the world
that Mr. Gay might choose—in fact, to act as if, he were
a horse in a mill. And such was the contract that Mr.
Grey asked the Court to compel Picco to perform. But
the truth was, that Pic6o Could not be compelled to do
anything of the kind, for be was no party to it. Even
if he were, the Court would hesitate much before it.
would compel him
.to perform such a contract. The
learned counsel for the plaintiff had argued that Picco
would have a right to file a bill against Gay art# Poletti
for the specific performance of the contract between him-
self and Poletti; and therefore Gay had a right to an
injunction against Picco ; but the terms of the contract
were of such a nature that the Court could not at the
suit of Picco compel its specific performance, for,
amongst ether things, it laid down in minute detail the
meat that was to be furnished by Poletti to Pic4o.
The motion was refused with costs as regarded Picco,
but no costs with regard to Poletti, as he did not ap-
pear.
MINIM
PREROGATIVE COURT.
(Before Sir John Dodson.)
.. HANLEY V. STACEY.
The facts of this testamentary case appeared in our
columns on the 29th of laut month. The learned judge
gave his decision this morning. It was a cause of prov-
ing the last will of Thomas Eldridge, late of Bond-street,
Vauxhall, the suit being promoted by Mrs. Hanley, the
sister of the deceased, and only next of kin, against the
executor named in the instrument. The ground of op-
position to the validity of the will was the alleged inca-
pacity of Mr. Eldridge at the time it was executed—the
15th of December, 1853—and various instances of in-
sane conduct had been placed in support of such ppposi-
ton. On behalf of Mr. Stacey, however, proof had been
adduced to show that the testator was always treated as
a person of sound mind by his relatives in maters
business, and also, although his conduct was (gram
ally eccentric, it was only from his intemperatelhab
and that be was never incapable from insanity. Af
going carefully tbroigh the whole case, the court war
opinion that the will must be pronounced for as the
of a capable testator.

ASSIZS INTELLIGENCE.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.—GLOUCESTER, AUG. 4.
The commission for the county of Gloucester
opened on Saturd y last with the usual formalities.
Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Wightman yesten
attended divine service at the Cathedral. The burin
of the assizes ber4an this 'morning in both courts sc
..ften ten o'clock, Mr. Baron Alderson presiding .in
civil court and Mr. Justice Wightman in the crimi
court.

The cause list contains an entry of 15 causes (includi
one for the city), four of which are marked for spec
juries.
The calendar for the county contains a list of 32 p
soners, two of whom are charged with wilful murdi
The calendar for Bristol contains a list of foiir Prisone.
and that for the city of Gloucester one prisoner, T
offences charged in the several calendars are for t
most part of a very light character, nearly half of the
being simple larceny. 1
CIVIL COVRT.—(Before Mr. Baron Alderson and a
Common Jury.)
Nearly the whole of the day wa,i occupied by the tri
of an action for the pi ice of some hops.
CRIMINAL COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice Wightroa,e.
William James, aged 46, a farmer, was charged wi
forging a receipt for 51. lle., with intent to defraui
and also wi7h ue.tering the same, with the like intent,
Cheltenham, on the 18. h of June.
Mr. W. It Cooke appeared,for the prosecution I; M
Sergeant Thomas defended the prisoner. I
It appeared that the prisoner, who was a farmer, hi
become surety for a person who had obtained a lol?tri
about 101. from the Cheltenham and Gloucestershirei DI
Society. Some payments, with interest, had been mad
but in the month of February last a balance of 51. ls. 3
was remaining due. The matter was then put into ti
hands of a Cheltenham solicitor, named Town, a id,
plaint being made in the County Court for ,he rec vei
1)
of the amount, the prisoner was summoned to app ar r
the 20th of Feb. In the meantime—viz., on the lOth
Feb.—he called on Town, and paid him the baits +e d
inanded, together with the costs, making in all 511 11
At the same time Town gave the prisoner a receipt fr
the 51. lls, on account of the debt and costs, but d
matided a I:additional sum of 15s. in respect of hisl" a
tendance. —Sky the rules of practice of the County ur
it appears to.at it the debt and costs endorsed o 1 •I
ra stmonses are paid " five clear days" before the eal
iog, the attorney is not entitled to his fee ofi 16
" fur attendance," but in the present ease the prison,
had delayed payment a few hours beyond the 14th,! am
so had become, in strictness of law, liable to pay ti
attorney 15s. for attendance, though it was never tr4ali
place. Town therefore insisted on his right, and eves
tually eued the prisoner in the County Court, and too

vered judgment for the 15s. On. that occasion the pri-
soner produced the receipt which he had received from
Tow.', "on account of debt and costs," but it appeared
in the mean tune to have been altered by the erasure of
the word " on," and the change of the word " account"
into " nount." The prisoner swore that he bad not al-
tered the receipt, but that it had been locked up in his
drawer all the time, and was in the same state as it was
when be received it. The document was impounded, and
the present charge was made by Town against the pri-
soner of forging the receipt. It appeared that when the
parties were in the County Court, on the 13th of June
last, on the occasion when the receipt was produced, the
prisoner did not dispute the account given by the prose.
cuter of the conversation which took place when the
receipt was given.
Mr. Sergeant Thomas addressed the jury for the pri-
soner, and contended there was no pretence for saying
that he had altered the receipt, and still less that there
was any fraudulent intention. On the other hand, the
learned sergeant complained that the prisoner had been
vexed with the present charge,' after having paid the loan
society everything that wasdue from the party for whom
he had become surety, and, in addition,tbe 15s. to which
the attorney, by rule of practice, was entitled.
Mr. Justice %Vightman, in summing up the evidence,
observed that, according to the statement of the attorney,
though nothing was done, he was entitled to 155., by
what he called "the effluxion of time," His lordship
then went carefully through the evidence, and observed
that if the prisoner had any intention to defraud, the
attempt must of necessity be nugatory, as the receipt as
altered could have no effect on the judge. His lordship
left it to the jury to say whether they thought there bad
been any fraudulent intent.
The jury found the prisoner not guilty, and he was
discharged.
Ann Farley, aged 14, servant, pleaded "Guilty" to a
charge of feloniously and maliciously setting fire to a
barn arid rick of straw, whereby property to the amount
of 5001. and upwards was destroyed, the property of
Ann Cotterell, at Alstone, on the 14th of April last.
Mr. Justice Wightman, in passing sentence, said the
establishment of reformatory schools had relieved Judges
of the difficulty which they had formerly felt in passing
sentence on yeuxg prisoners like the present. The in-
terests of society, as well as of the prisoner herself, re-
quired that she should be sent to such an institution for
a considerable period. His lordship then sentenced her
to imprisonment with hard labour for one fortnight, and
then to be sent to the Reformatory at Allesley, near
Coventry, for four years.
The rest of the day was occupied with the trial of Mr.
Theodore E /one, formerly manager of the Tewkesbury
Bank, for stealing the sum of 1,5001. belonging to the
Gloucestershire Banking Company.
The learned Judge recommended the jury to acquit
the prisoner, which they did accordingly.

HOME CIRCUIT.—CHELMSFORD, AUG. 4.
(Before Mr. Justice Erle and a Special J•lry.)
LISTER AND ANOTHER V. LEATHER AND ANOTHER.
This cause was further proceeded with to-day.
The Attorney General summed up the case on behalf
•f the de!endanto, and Sir F. Thesiger then replied upon
the whole case.
Mr Justice Erle summed up the evidence with great
care and niinuteneNs, and at half past 8 o'clock the jury
retired to consider their verdict.
After being absent about an hour they returned into
court and gave a verdict for the plaintiffs.

during the investigation, seemed to be astonished at the
decision of the magistrate.

SOUTHWARK. CON. AND ASSAULT.—
&matt Blarkhans, a married woman, the wife of a cab-
driver, was brought before Mr. Seeker, charged with
committing an assault on Elizabeth Martin under the
following singular circumstances :
The complainant, a good-looking young widow, said
she resided with her three children at ber father's, John-
street-mews, Harper-street. Her father was the pro-
prietor of two horses and cab, which was driven by the
prisoner's husband. Witness had the receiving of the
money from him and the settling about the cab. On
Sunday morning, shortly before eight o'clock, while she
was at the breakfast table cutting the bread and butter,
the doer was burst open, and in rushed the prisoner, ex-
claiming, " Where's my husband ! I'll have him or
your life." Witness was so frightened at her that she
attempted to get out of the room, but she seized her by
the head, and taking up a table-knife, threatened to
murder her. In the struggle the table was upset, and
all the tea-cups broken. Witness screamed out " Mur-
der," when her father came from the stable, as well as
the prisoner's husband, and the latter turned her out of
the room, and kept her there until a policeman was pro-
cured to take her into custody.
The prisoner said she had been cruelly treated by her
husband, who had left her nearly twelve months to live
with Mrs. Martin. On Sunday morning, while she was
going for some milk, she beard that her husband was in
complainant's house. She went there, and, on opening
the door, saw him in Mrs. Martin's bed. She pulled
the clothes off, and tried to pull him out of her bed,
when complainant seized hold of her, and they had a
sculls together, but she never took up a knife to threaten
her.

The complainant denied that defendant'i husband was
in her bed. He certainly was in the room, and pre-
vented his wife from injuring her.

The defendant here exclaimed that her husband then
jumped out of bed almost in a state of nudity, and as for
the tea-cups being broken, that was caused in the scuffle.
John Barrett, the father of the complainant, said he
was in his stable on Sunday morning-when-he heard his
daughter scream out " Murder." He at once proceeded
to her assistance, and went and fetched a constable.
The defendant said she would murder them both.

This witness was cross-examined by Mr. Seeker as to
the prisoner's husband cohabiting with his daughter,
and being in her bed on the morning in question, and
he. prevaricated to such an extent as to leave no doubt
that such was the fact. His worship remarked that their
conduct was disgraceful, but still the defendant had no
right to rush into the house and commit the assault.
The defendant said that her husband bad neglected to
support her, and hearing that he was in Mrs. Martin's
bed on Sunday morning, she could dot help going after
him and attempting to pull him out of bed, when they
had a scuff) together.
Mr. Secker told her that if her husband neglected to
provide for her she must go to the parish authorities,
and not enter other persons' houses, however depraved
they might be. She must be fined 10s. for the assault,
and he should advise her for the future to keep away
from the complainant.

L AMBET4.—CHARGFE OF ROBBERY AT TIE CRYSTAL
PALAOE.—EmiIe Delvaux, a Belgian, viho is most re-
sPectabiy connected, appeared befOre Mr. Elliott, on
re-examinatien, charged with stealing a blue bracelet, a
scent-bottle, and a cigar-case, from the stall of Mr. Wm.
Cutler, at the. Crystal Palace.
Mr. Bodkin attended for the prisoner. _

The evidence against the prisoner was to the effect

that on Thursdai,aiternoon. Ind, the prisoner, with a

gentleman named-MTherson and his daughter, bought
P eve ral articles of Mrs. Cutler, to the amount of 16s
In the evening they again called, when they were served

by Mr. Cutler, of whom they made further purchases.
While they were at the stall Mr. Cutler saw the prisoner
put a blue bracelet in his pocket. He almost immedi-
ately went avOay with his friends. Upon their leaving
he asked his wife' if she had missed anything. She looked
over the counter, and said that a blue bracelet was gone.
He went atter the party. The prisoner was unable to
speak English, and he (Mr. Cutler) could' speak French
very indifferently. When he got up to them, he observed
t,) thesprisoner that he had taken a blue bracelet. Whe-
ther or not the prisoner understood him he could not say.

He then pointed at the prisoner's pocket, upon which
the prisoner took several things out of his pocket, but
. .

not the bracelet. Prosecutor took hold of the prisoner's
.pocket, when, in opening it, he saw the bracelet lying
at the bottom of the pocket. He took possession of it.
While looking in his pocket he observed a scent-bottle,
which he thought was one of four he had bought the
previous day. He called to Darling, a constable, to
watch the prisoner, and ran back to his stall, in order
to ascertain from his wife if she had missed anythingelse.
She looked over her stall, and observed that she had
missed a ruby scent bottle. He returned to Darling,
who showed him the direction the prisonerand his friends
had taken. As Soon as Darling laid hold of the prisoner
he flung something behind him over a counter. Prose-
cutor told a person at the counter to piok it up, when
it proved to be a cigar cave. The scent bottle was found
on the prisoner by a police-constable after he was given
into custody.
The prosecutor, in answer to Mr. Elliott, stated that
there were other things taken by the prisoner out of his
pocket which had been bought. He would put a bracelet
in paper.
Mr. Cutler, being cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin, said
_ _