The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 19, 1860.

'Business done

all
all
24
all
all
all

17;
12.13.9
9
5.14.6
8.12
4.7.0
1.8.6

9.18.9
1k
10.6.7
12s

18.1-.9

13s 6d'

6 6

8 1
19,1 1
191
38} 39i
-8
-p9
31 35}
52 54

2 lid

1021 2

1011 i

301 i

4i i

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--(This day.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

(Peers present—The Lord Chancellor, Lord Chelmsford;
Lord Wensleydale, Lord Kingston, and other Peers.)

ROWBOTHAM AND OTHERS V. WILSON.

This is an appeal by way of writ of error, by
which it is sought to set aside a decision of the
Court of Exchequer Chamber, affirming a judgment
of the Court of Queen's Bench, delivered on a
special case stated for their opinion in favour of the
defendant. The action was brought by Daniel Row-
E•etham, having a reversion in fee of certain lands situated
in the parish of Bedworth, in the county of Warwick, to
recover from the defendant, William Wilson, damages in
respect of injury done to his houses and lands, by reason of
the defendant having worked his mines underneath his
property without leaving sufficient supports. The
special case stated that the plaintiff was reversioner
in fee of houses erected after an award was made
by the Commissioner enclosing the lands for more than
twenty years before the grievance complained of, and also
of the surface of the land. And that the defendant after-
wards worked the coal mine underneath without having
supports. The defendant stated that he worked the mine
with skill and care, according to the usage of the cointry.
The plaintiff stated that his property was destroyed there-
by, that his houses were rendered uninhabitable, and the
lands unfit for cultivation. That no natural or artificial
pillars were left for support, in terms of the Act 9, Geo. 3.
The defendant contended that the right of the plaintiff to
support of his surface was qualified, and subject to the right
of the defendant to work his mines, and the plaintiff having
derived his title from tke award, was bound by the cove •
nants in it, and that a right to have the surface supported
would be destructive of the grant of the mine.
The Lord Chancellor affirmed the decisions of the Exche-
quer Chamber and Court of Queen's Bench, and dismissed
the appeal with costs. The other noble and learned lords
concurred.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
(Before Lord Chief Justice Erle.)

CATTAWAY AND WIFE V. SMITH.-THE PROCTORS OF
CAMBRIDGE AND THEIR POWERS.

This ease was resumed this morning by Mr. O'Malley,
on the part of the defendant.

From the opening speech of Mr. Edwin James, it ap-
apeared that Mrs. Cattaway was the wife of a fireman on
the Eastern Counties Railway, living at Cambridge, and
the defendant was a proctor in the university in that
town. in another case which was now down for trial
before his lordship a very serious question would arise as to
the power of the proctors to imprison women found in the
' streets of the town, but in the present case the defendant did
not justify his act, and therefore the only question here
would be whether he had done what was complained of. He
should prove that it was under the defendant's orders that
she was arrested and imprisoned, that she was under his
control whilst in prison, and that it was by his eider that
she was discharged. If he proved this the simple question
would be the amount of damages. On the 2Sth March last,
in the evening, Mrs. Cattaway was speaking to two females
for whom she washed, and they were standing in St.
Andrew-street, when the proctor came up, accompanied
by two persons who wet° denominated " bull dogs "
(laughter)—and it was not a bad name for them, for their
doings caused constant scenes of violence in the town, and
the whole three were taken to the spinning-house. This
spinning-house was a kind of private prison, containing cells,
and belonging to the University of Cambridge. The proc-
tors claimed the right to go up to any woman in the town
and say, " I suspect you of being an improper character,"
and order her to the spinning-house, where, without any
evidence on oath, the Vice Chancellor sentenced unhappy
women to a fortnight, a month, or even two months' con-
finewent. In the present case Mrs. Cattaway was only
detained about half an hour, but this confinement had
seriously affected her character, for a large number of per-
sons were assembled round the spinning-house when she
was discharged, and she remained up to this time with the
stigma upon her of having been imprisoned as a woman of
the town. The hardship of the case, too, was, that when she
was taken up she had done nothing that could give offence
to any human being.

At the conclusion of the evidence for the defendant,
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—damages £5O.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.

;Sittings in Error, before Justices Wightman, Williams,
Crompton, Willes, Byles, Blackburn, and Keating.)
DARELL, BART., V. STURGIS, PROVISIONAL ASSIGNEE.
This case raised a question upon the Statute of Limita-

tions as regarded specialties. A bond was dated in 1821;
payment became due in 1822. An action was commenced in
1831, which was held over for compromise until 1835, when
the obligor died. In 1352 the obligee became insolvent,
and Sturgis was appointed provisional assignee. In
1857 letters of administration were granted to the defen •
dant below, and in 1853 the present action was brought.
The question was, whether the action was not barred by the
statute of 3 and 4 "William IV., c. 32. The case now came
before this Court on error on the judgment of the Ex.
Judgment affirmed.

THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY V. GLADSTONE.

This case cane before this Court upon a bill of excep-

tions to the ruling of a judge. The action was one of eject-
ment, brought by the plaintiff to recover a copyhold tene-
ment in the manor of West Derby. The case was tried at
Liverpool. The plaintiff proved that he was lard of the
manor of West Derby, and had been so since 1824. The
defendant was admitted tenant of the manor to a copyhold
tenement in 1828, and it was alleged that he had broken the
surface and had dug clay for the purpose of making the soil
into bricks which were sold off the manor, and it was al-
leged that this operated as a forfeiture. The defendant
relied upon immemorial usage as being sufficient to prove
a custom, and the judge upon the trial directed the jury that
if the custom was proved in fact it was good in law, and to
this ruling there was a bill of exceptions, and the question
now was, whether an alleged custom for the copyhold tenants
of a manor to take the surface—to take the clay—to make
it into bricks, and to carry them off the manor, and sell
them for purposes not connected with the manor, was good
and valid in law.
Judgment affirmed.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
DOUBTFUL s B.—Catherine Jones, a smart-looking
young woman, was charged before Mr. Beadon with stealing
a gold watch of the value of £lO from the person of James
Twiddy, valet, 145, Piccadilly.
The prosecutor said he met tho prisoner on the ntorning
of Wednesday last, and while walking with her suddenly
felt a tug at his watch, and on turning round his watch
was gone and tho prisoner too. There were others near at
the time.

The prisoner said the prosecutor had taken her for some
one else. It was not her.

The prosncutor said he was confident it was the prisoner,
and be gave a description at Vine-street.
Brown, 304 A, said the prisoner agreed with the descrip-
t ion, upon which

Mr. Beadon said ho would remand her for a week.
BRUTAL ASSAULT.—John Mattos, a tall, powerful look-
ing mulatto, who described himself as an interpreter, and
who has frequently been at this court charged with assaults,
was again charged with an assault on a female, named
Murphy, who sells fruit.

The prisoner, imagining that the female had caused a
coffee-shop door to be closed against him, struck her two or
three severe blows with his clenched fist, knocking her
down, and while on the ground kicked her several times.
Mr. Beadon, having commented in severe terms on the
prisoner's brutality, committed him for three months, tell-
ing the prosecutrix, who appealed for further protection,
that she should have any she might require.

AVOIITING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTERSALL'S—(YEaTERDAY.)
NORTHUMBERLAND PLATE.
10 to 3 agst Butterfly (taken)
10 to 1 agst Ben Webster (taken)
10 to 1 agat Edmund Kean (taken)
10 to 1 agst Wild Man (taken)
12 to 1 agst Apollyon (taken and offered)
100 to 7 agst Baron Parke (taken)
100 to 6 agst Hepatica (taken and offered)
20 to 1 agat Shaft() (taken)
ST. LEGER.
sto 2 agst Thormanby (taken)
7to 2 agst The Wizard (taken)
10 to 1 agst Horror (taken and offered)
20 to 1 agst Stampedo (take 25 to 1)
GOODWOOD STAKES.
100 to 7 agst Gridiron (taken)
100 to 6 agst Rattlebone (taken)
20 to 1 agst Stapleton (taken)
25 to 1 agst Edmund Kean (taken)
25 to 1 agst Pitman (taken and offered)
25 to 1 agst Feodorowna (taken and offered)
25 to 1 agst Claire (offered)
to 1 agst Avalanche (taken)
33 to 1 agst Marine (taken)
THE DERBY.
30 to 1 agst Klarikoff (taken)
33 to 1 agst Nautilus (taken)
33 to 1 agst Robin Hood (taken)