The Sun.
London, England, 1867-02-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 21, 1867.

SHARE

day.

LOll 100 j

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

HOUSE OF LORDS-WRIT OF ERROR.

THE BISHOP OF EXETER AND JOHN BORWELL V. MAR:

This was an ecclesiastical case of some importance to
the clergy, involving as it does the right of bishops to re-
fuse to institute clergymen presented to them for institu-
tion to benefices. It was an appeal from the Exchequer
Chamber affirming a decision of the Court of Common
Pleas in favour of the defendant in error.
The action was brought by the defendant in error, the
plaintiff in the Court below, to recover re-presentation of
the rectory and vicarage of St. James and Cuby, otherwise
Tregony, in the county of Cornwall, of which the defen-
fendaut in error was patron, against the Bishop of Exeter
as the bishop of the diocese in which the parish was situ-
ated, and against the Rev. John Relay Coots Boswell, M.A.,
of Queen's Collep, Oxford, formerly curate of Chittlehain-
holt, who had been collated by the bishop to the said rec-
tory and vicarage upon a lapse alleged to have occurred to
the bishop.

The case is a long and complicated one, and will nol
conclude to-da

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Nisi Prius Sittings, at Guildhall, before Lord Chief Jus-
tice Cockburn and a Special Jury.)
DAWSON I'. THE NEW RIVER COMPANY.
This was an action by the plaintiff, an excavator in a
small way of businesq, to recover compensation in damages
for injuries sustained by a horse through the alleged
negligence of the defendants. The latter pleaded not
guilty, and that they were not liable under the act of
Parliament relating to the repairing, &c., of roads.
Mr. IL James appeared fur the plaintiff, and his state-
ment was to the effect that a man in the employ of his
client was driving a horse and cart along the Kings-
land-road in September last, when a portion of the road
gave way, and the horse's leg went through a hole about
three feet deep. It appeared that the company had been
excavating in the road for the purpose of laying down
pipes. The accident was alleged to have occurred in con-
sequence of the hole not having been filled up properly, a
soft instead of a bard material having been used. The
defendants contended that, having done what was neces-
sary in the first instance by filling up the hole, the parish
were the parties liable for any defect in the road after-
wards, as the care of it passed into their hands.
His Lordship observed that the Court of Queen's Bench
had decided that a company were not liable for any acci-
dent which occurred in the case of the softening of mate-
rials of a roadway, if they had done what was necessary in
the first instance, and the softening was produced by na-
tural causes.

Mr. Ccleridge, Q.C., who appeared for the defendants,
said that his clients would not dispute the claim of the
plaintiff, which was only for £lO, if they thought they
were legally liable ; but they felt bound to resist the de-
mand, as they considered that the Metropolitan Board of
Works were the parties responsible for such accidents.
Some witnesses were then called, and a verdict was
taken by consent for the plaintiff for £lO.

much bad feeling. Ile fined the prisoner 40.5., / and in
default one month's imprisonment.

WESTMINSTER.

CRUSADE AGAINST CROSSING-SWEEPERS.—John and
Robert Fay, two children, aged 8 and 9 years, were charged
with begging.
Police-constable Giles said that ho saw the defendants
begging in Belgrave-place last evening. They had
brooms in their hands, and were near a crossing.
Mr. Selfe—Were they sweeping a crossing?
Constable—l did not see them sweep any crossing. It
was a fine, dry evening., and the crossing did not*waut any
sweeping.

Younger boy—The crossings was dirty when we went
there, and we had to sweep them. They was dean when
the policeman came, but then we'd done it. We kept to
our crossing.

Policeman—They followed people five and six yards and
begged of them. I saw a lady give thorn a halfpenny.
Defendants—Wo thought we might sweep a crossing.
Mr. Selfo—_dad you thought right. You may sweep a
crossing, but you must not beg of any one ; but if any one
pleases to give you anytling, well and good, you may take
it, and will be doing no harm. \\rhea the weather is fine
and dry there is yo necessity for your services, and then
the act of being about with a broom iu your hand would
look very much like begging.

A sergeant informed the magistrate that the boy's
mother was there the other day watching them.
She explained that seeing one of then had a disinclina-
tion to go to "his work," she followed to see that he did.
Mr. Selfe repeated to the little boys that they might
sweep the crossing, but must not importune passengers.
They were then discharged.