The Sun.
London, England, 1860-01-27 00:00:00

CORPUS.

Mrs. Cobbett, who is ever indefatigable in her
legal efforts to obtain the release of her husband,
Mr. Wm. Cobbett, from the Queen's Prison, wherein
he is confined for a debt the genuineness of which
he denies, renewed her application to-day for a writ
of habeas corpus, to be directed to Captain Hudson,
marshal of the Queen's Prison, and calling upon him
to show cause why he should not bring up the body
of her husband, that he might be discharged from
custody and restored to liberty. She moved on affi-
davit, which was read by Master Turner, and which
set out the facts, often hitherto reported, under
which Mr. Cobbett was cast into prison, and where
he has since 1856 been detained. Mrs. Cobbett
then addressed the Court, and expressed a hope that
their lordships would grant the habeas corpus, in
order that Mr. Cobbett might be brought before
the Court. The parties detaining :her husband in
custody had an act of Parliament to go by, and
should proceed by it, yet they did not.
The Chief Justice—This matter, Mrs. Cobbett,
has been before all the judges, who have already de-
cided on it, and that being so, we see no alternative
but to be governed by the law as it stands.
Mrs. Cobbett—But, my lords, Mr. Cobbett is
illegally detained in prison:
The Chief Justice—lf Mr. Cobbett is to be released
from prison there must be an act of Parliament.
Mrs. Cobbett—Will your lordships look into the
case ?

The Chief Justice—Very well, Mrs. Cobbett, we
---

will.

Mrs. Cobbett—l have also an application to make
to your lordships for another writ of habeas corpus,
calling upon Capt. Hudson, keeper of the Queen's
Prison, to bring up the body of my
.husband, and
show cause why he has confined him in that part of
the prison in which convicted felons are incarce-
rated, and why he should not remove him there-
from to the part of the prison appropriated for the
confinement of debtors. Mrs. Cobbett then put in
an affidavit made by her husband, stating that he
was wrongly cast among felons, and quoting acts of
Parliament providing for the custody of debtors,
and directing that they should be separated from
criminals, and not exposed to associate with them.
The Chief Justice—We will look into the case ;
Mrs. Cobbett, and inform you of our decision on
Monday.
Mrs. Cobbett thanked their lordships, and with-
drew from the court.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Kerr.)

MACHINE PRINTERS-IMPORTANT DECISION-BAR•

RATT V. DANES.

Plaintiff is a machine printer and defendant is a
master printer, carrying on an extensive business
in Crane-court.

Mr. Buchanan, for the plaintiff, said the present
action was brought to recover £5, being £1 wages
actually earned, and £4 for two weeks' notice. On
the 24th of December last plaintiff had earned tor
the week £2 18s. 6d., being 18s. 6d, over the " stab"
wages for overtime. Some paper had been, accord-
ing to defendant, spoilt, and he (defendant) de-
ducted £1 from the wages earned. He then wished
to reduce plaintiff's wages to 365. per week, but
plaintiff refused to submit, and hence the present
action.

Plaintiff was called, and said he was a machine
printer. On Monday, the 19th December, he worked
all day and all night, and on Tuesday he vt erked
all day and all night, up to four o'clock on Wednesday
morning, then he left and went home. When he
went to work defendant sent for him, and said,
"You have done me £7 worth of damage." Defen-
dant then produced a quantity of paper, which in
plaintiff's opinion was not spoilt. He said he should
expect plaintiff to pay for this paper. On Satur-
day, the 24th December, plaintiff had to take £2
18s. 6d., and defendant paid him £1 short. He
wished plaintiff to pay for the spoilt paper, and he
said he could not give more than 365. per week for
the future. Plaintiff did not agree to any such
arrangement. On Monday, the 26th December,
there was a holiday at the defendant's office, and
on Tuesday plaintiff went in and asked for his £l.
Defendant alluded to the conversation on Saturday,
and plaintiff refused to agree, and left, after de-
manding money
.for his notice.
In cross-examination plaintiff said he left work
on the Wedn,esday, because he was physically in-
capable of continuing. It was another man who
had charge pi' the machine in which the damage
was alleged' to have occurred.
Defendant said that he never dismissed plaintiff,
nor did he wish him to leave. Plaintiff was a fore-
man and had the charge of the machine. Through
his neglect in leaving on Wednesday morning the
boys in charge of the machine spoilt four reams of
paper. As to the 365. per week, defendant dis-
tinctly told plaintiff that he would pay him 40s.
for two week, and then he would be reduced from
a foreman to a journeyman.
Hie Honour said that defendant could not set eff
damages against wages, and he must pay the £l.
Plaintiff, however; could not recover for the wages
in lieu of notice. He had not been dismissed, and
therefore he would not be entitled.
Verdict for £l, and costs.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Jan. 26.

THAMES.—ROBBERY BY A DISCIIARGED SOL-
DIER FROM INDlA.—William Reid, aged 21, was
brought before Mr. Yardley, charged with stealing
13 sovereigns, a half-sovereign, ss. in silver, a rupee
and a quarter rupee, from the person of William
Beattie.

The parties are both dischargehde
India, and natives of Scotland.
T Light ht Cavalry,
in the same regiment, the European soldiers
b oth
served from
and arrived in London on Tuesday morning
They agreed to lodge in the same
General Steam
London for Scotland in one of theon
Wednesday.
Navigation Company's oarnndi nt
go
leave llast.
Beattie deposited his gold with an
from Calcutta to England
la
he noticed there was
when it was returned to him
amongst osffiamceer wshhipo,caamnde
it, and ono
a George the Fourth sovereignip which brought him
only. Before leaving th.
wveariesitgunns
daenrdhias
to
half, this
nc oaubnat
gr
fastenedahnedpu tfh
:3 two comrades
clothes with a p
They hired more so than thehis
string.gissaoi ltnateoT hishTs
ll": King-street, Tower-hill.
drank pretty freely-ieeeinathe course of Tuesday, the
lodg-
ingspro-
secutor
at a coffee-house
very ill and almost help-
his comrade's clothes, and
tShoeonparoftseerentthoerir,baere_raimoffel there on Tuesday afternoon
put him to bed. His money was then safe in
less. Reid pulled .
the bag. Beattie was falling asleep when he felt
Reid pulling at the string
attached,ingto which
aand l
the
absagedhis
con-
taining the money was
comrade what he was doing, to which Reid re-
plied," Nothing, go to sleep." The prosecutor soon
and did not wake again until seven or
eightl asleep,
hours afterwards, when he missed his comrade
and found his bag and money gone. He made known
his loss to a boy in the service of the coffee-house-
keeper, and the police were soon acquainted with
the robbery. On 'Wednesday afternoon the prose-
cutor and a police constable, named George Read,
199 H, went on board a steamship bound to Leith,
and found the prisoner on board. He had provided
for his passage to Scotland. The prosecutor asked
the prisoner for his money, on which he assumed a
bold air, and said, " I have got no money, I have
been robbed myself." The police constable said,
" Come, no nonsense ; you have got your comrade's
money." The prisoner insisted he had not got a
farthing. The constable immediately searched him
and found upon himnsovereigns, and among them
one of the reign of George the Fourth, which Beattie
had previously described to the policeman, a rupee,
a quarter rupee, and some English silver coin.
The prosecutor, in answer to questions by the ma-
gistrate, said--All the money the prisoner had
when he came on shore was two sovereigns, a half-
sovereign, and two rupees, which were exchanged
for English money—, The prisoner went out with a
woman on Tuesday afternoon, and before he Rft
the coffee-house counted out his money, and left i'
with him. He returned it to the prisoner the same
evening. He was going to Glasgow. The prisoner
belonged to Edinburgh. The prisoner had very bad
eyes, and said Le was like an infant.
Thomas Crafford, a coffee-house-keeper, of No.
20, King-street, Tower-hill, said the two discht rged
soldiers came to his house on Tuesday last, and
hired a bed. Between eight and nine o'clock the
same evening the prisoner left the house, and said
he should not stop any longer.
The prisoner, in defence, said the money found
upon him was his own, and that he carried it in a
bag tied round his neck.
Mr. Yardley committed the prisoner for trial and
directed that one sovereign should be given to

Beattie to enable him to maintain himself until the
sessions commenced.

GREENWICH.—A DRUNKEN CABMAN.—NAR-
ROW ESCAPE OF A LADY AND GENTLEMAN, AND
SON, FROM DROWNING.—John Ford, a cab-driver,
of Wilson-street, New-cross, Deptford, badge No.
11,909, appeared to a summons charging him with
having been drunk, and driven his horse and cab
into a pond on Blackheath, whereby Mr. W.
Pembroke, a gentleman residing at 1, Florence-
place, New-cross, and his wife and son narrowly
escaped drowning.
It appeared that on the afternoon of Thursday,
19th instant, the defendant was engaged to
drive complainant and his wife and son to black-
heath, and was desired to attend at half-past ten
the same evening to convey them back. At the
time stated he attended, and the party having en-
tered the cab, the defendant drove off. Shortly
afterwards a severe jolting of the vehicle was felt,
and in a few seconds subsequently, on looking out
of the cab window, the complainant found that the
defendant had driven into a pond, the water enter-
ing at the door, and reaching up to the ankles of
those inside. An alarm was immediately raised,
and persons with lanterns came from the Hare and
Billet Tavern opposite, and having waded up to
their middles, succeeded in carrying the occupants
of the cab out, the horse fortunately standing still,
the water a few feet farther on being of the depth
of 13 feet.

The defendant denied being drunk, and said that
he had fallen asleep from over-work. He also
attzmpted to show that the vehicle was a private
carriage, and therefore not liable to the provisions
of the Hackney Carriage Act.
Charles James proved that defendant was drunk,
and had called witness to accompany him with the
cab on the night in question. Witness did so, and
wished defendant to •let him drive, when he refused
and immediately afterwards drove into the pond.
Mr. Seeker said defendant had been guilty of s
grave offence, and which was likely to have been
attended with serious consequences. His miscon-
duct had been very gross, and it had been a question
with him (Mr. Seeker) whether he ought not to pass
a sentence of imprisonment, without the option of
paying a fine. Although he shoulil not take that
course, the offence was one which could not be
lightly passed over, and, in default of paying a
fine of £3 and costs, he would be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for two months.
The defendant, not having the money, was eon"
veyed from the court in custody.