The Sun.
London, England, 1867-12-05 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

13RF.ACII OF PROMISE.—In a case of breach of promise
of marriage, tried in the Court of Exchequer at West•
minster, the plaintiff was a young girl named Howard,
and the defendant Captain Morhain, said to be private
secretary to the Count of Paris. The mother of the
plaintiff, a Mrs. Vinnicombe, described how, under th,
captain's orders, she took apartments for him and had
daughter for a few days till he should be able to ma.try
her. She admitted in cross-examination that the plaintf
and her two other daughters were illegitimate. Plaintifri
counsel now said he had come to the conclusion that the
action could not be maintained, and would therefore with.'
draw a juror. There was another action by Mrs. Vinni•
combe against the captain for the seduction of het
daughter, and in this a stet processus was entered.
ALLEGED MURDER IN BIRMINGHAM.—At the Warwick
Assizes William Silvester was indicted for the wilful mur-
der of John Sheppard, at Birmingham, on the 29th of
July last. It appeared that on the night in question the
prisoner's father and a man named Stewart began fighting
in Harding-street, Birmingham. The deceased's father,
who also lived in the locality, became mixed up in the
affray, and was knocked down. The deceased, who
was in bed at the time, on hearing some one exclaim
" Old Sheppard's down," ran into the street. He
went to assist his father up, and whilst he was in the
act of doing so the prisoner stabbed him with a knife in
the left shoulder, inflicting a wound an inch and a half
long and two and a half inches deep. The deceased was
taken to the General Hospital, where he died on the 29th
July, from the effects of that wound. The day before he
died the prisoner was confronted with him, when deceased
said, " That's the man that stabbed me." The jury
found a verdict of manslaughter, and the learned judge
sentenced him to fifteen years' penal servitude.

BREACH OF PROMISE OP MARRIAGE.—At the Man.;
chester Assizes the case of " Rogers v. Cleff " was tried.
It was an action for breach of promise of marriage in
which the defendant, James Clegg, was higher in social
position than the plaintiff. He for some time took an
interest in her education, and seemed to have regarded
her with a mixture of lover and patron. After some
years' courtship, however, he attempted to break off
the connection, and when, through her solicitor, she
charged him with breach of promise, he sent her a letter,
which the counsel for the prosecution said was an appli.
cation for her to send in a sort of bill of costs for her
damaged affections. The learned judge said the letter
was about as mean and shabby as a man could write.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff ; damages,
£l6O.

THE DECEITFUL WINDING' or WOOL.—Counsel's opinion
(that of Mr. Cleasby, Q.C.), has been taken by the Brad.
ford Chamber of Commerce on the question whether there
is any remedy in common law for "the deceitful winding
of wool," and a typical case was put, in which the put..
chaser found a quantity of inferior stuff among the wool he
bought, and made a claim on the vendor. An Act of Parlia.
meat, which gave protection to the buyer under such circum.
stances, having been repealed, it was asked what would be
the prospects of an action in such a case, and what court
should be applied to. Mr. Cleasby gave it as his opini
that no proceedings could be taken to recover any penal.
ties for the fraudulent winding of wool ; but that, if an
unusual mode of winding was adopted to give undue
weight to the fleece, an action for deceit could be main.
tained. It should be brought in a county court for a small..
sum, but in the superior courts for a larger one.

DAMAGING SIB HENRY EDWARDS'S ESTATE. The
Master of the Bolls has had before him an application by
Sir Henry Edwards, M.P. for Beverley, for an injunction"
to restrain the defendants, Morris and others, who are
chemical manufacturers, from allowing sulphurous and
arsenical fumes to escape from their works to the injury and
destruction of plaintiffs trees on his estate, called Pye'e
Nest. His lordship said that after carefully reviewing
the evidence he had come to the conclusion, first, that the
plaintiff had not satisfactorily established his claim, and
secondly, that by his acquiescence in the nuisance the
defendants had acquired a prescriptive right to commit the.
nuisance complained of.
JOHN FREELING WILKINSON AGAIN.—In the case of
Shepherd v. Gillespie, before Vice-Chancellor Stuart, the
plaintiff sued to have his name taken off the list of
contributories, as he had sold his shares to John Freeling
Wilkinson, who I ad transferred them to the defendant
Gillespie. The defendant contended that he never bought
the shares, and that Wilkinson—who is now undergoing
imprisonment for alleged forgery—had used his name
without his consent. It was shewn, however, that defers•
dant had had the deeds handed over to him, and he had
kept them. His Honour held that the contract was in,
fact substantially performed, and made a decree in favour
of the plaintiff on the question of removing plaintiff's
name from the list of contributories.

ROBBERY FROM EBOLOYEBS. —At the Middlesex Sessions,
a builder's clerk, named John Henry St. Aubyn Weston,
was awarded five years' penal servitude for having robbed
his employer of £220. Weston was entrusted with a,
cheque for the £220, and disappeared with it. After
indulging in " high life " at various hotels throughout the
country under assumed names, a wideawake policeman
pounced upon him unexpectedly, and put an unceremonion
and t 9 his short fashionable career.