The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-10 00:00:00

3 per Cent. ..... 67 85

D. end month

67 95

Bank Shares . ...... 3060
Credit Mobiher ... E 610
___

Do. Account 615 —I

RAILWAYS.
Orleans
Northern
New Ditto —
Lyon and Mediteran 740
New Ditto —

Geneva

LOMBARDY.

A letter from Milan, in the Opinione of Turin,
says :—" A few days ago the Bishop of Bergamo
received an official intimation from Vienna, to the
effect that if he continued to disturb public tran-
quilty by the clerical pretensions and severity for
which he has been of late remarked, measures
would be taken which he would find unpalatable.
At the same time, orders have been given to all the
authorities of the provinces not to lend any ma-
terial aid to the pressure exercised by the bishops."

COMMISSION OF LUNACY.

(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner Barlow.)

The commission of lunacy, ordered by the Lords Jus-
tices, to inquire into the state of mind of Sir H. Maur, the
head of the large brewing firm, was resumed this m g
at the Thatched House Tavern, St. James's-street.
Mr. Montagu Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and
Mr. Bodkin, appeared for the petitioners, Lord and Lady
Malden and Mrs. Arobin ; Mr. Montague Smijth, Q.C.,
and Mr. Quain for Sir William and Lady Bowyer Smijth,
in support of the petition ; and the Attorney-General,
Mr. James Wilde, Q.C., Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., and
Mr. Hawkins, for Lady Meux.
The examination of witnesses on the part of Mrs. B.
Smith, one of the sisters of Sir H. Mena, having been
concluded,
The Attorney-General commenced his address on the
part of Lady Meux and her infant SOD. The learned gen-
tleman commented very strongly upon various points of
the evidence, and contended that there was nothing in
the conduct of Sir H. Meux, in the early part of the year ,
1857, to warrant the assertion that he was then a con-
firmed lunatic. The manner in which Sir Henry conducted
himself in the month ofMarch of that year, during the pro-
ceedings previous to the election for Hertfordshire, showed
clearly that he was then in posssession of all his mental fa-
culties. The electioneering address drawn up and issued by
him (Sir H. Meux) was, he (the AttorneyeGeneral)
thought, of itself quite sufficient to satisfy every gentle-
man composing tho jury that he was then, at all events,
in the month of March, quite capable of managing his own
affairs. Nothing could be more rational than this docu-
ment, as it went at length into the various topics which at
that time occupied the attention of the political world.
He laid down his particular views on the China question,
. and also his determination to support Lord Palmerston in
his endeavours to uphold the honour of lingland, in a
manner which was quite opposite to that of a per-
son unable to manage his own business. In addition
to the electioneering address, which was iu the
handwriting of Sir Henry, there was a number of letters
which clearly proved that he was at that time perfectly
sane. Nothing could show this in a clearer light than the
answer he wrote to the letter he received from one of his
constituents, a clergyman at Royston. That answer, which
would be read, with a number of others, showed not only
that ho was then in his right senses, but that he was at
that time as sane as any member who at present held a
seat in the House of Commons. A man of imbecile mind
could never have entered into the question of his vote on
the much-debated subject of the abolition of church-
rates with such exactness as was done in that letter, and
felt perfectly satisfied that the jury would attach all the
importance to that document which it is deserving of. The
jury had been asked by his learned friend (Alr. Montagu
Chambers), on the part of the petitioners, to fix the Ist of
May, 1837, as the day on which Sir Henry Meux became
incompetent to manage his own affairs; but he had an-
other letter, written by him on the 26th of May, twenty-
five days later than that, which was, in his opinion, the

most conclusive evidence that could be offered. Thelearned
gentlemv n then read the letter, which was one written to
his election agent, giving certain directions as to the ex-
penses of the election. He felt po3itive that he should
be able, by the most overwhelming evidence, to prove
that Sir Henry Meux was, at the time Le was speaking,
a man of the most perfect intellect, and fully competent to
manage his own affairs. He felt nearly overpowered by
the duty which devolved upon him, representing as he did
L.,dy Maus and her infant son, but he entertained the
strongest conviction that the result of this inquiry would
be such as would enable the infant son of the unfortunate
gentleman ultimately to enjoy the title and fortune of his
unfortunate father.
(The case was proceeding when we went to press.)

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Sittings in Banco, before Lord Campbell, Mr. Justice
Coleridge, Mr. Justice Erle, and Mr. Justice
Crompton.)

WAITE ♦. THE NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY CO3IPANY-

ACCIDENT-A NICE POINT.

This was an action brought by the next friend of a
child about four years of age, to recover damages from
the defendants for injuries received through the alleges
negligence of the servan's. At the trial which tool
place before Mr. Baron Martin at the last Newcasth
assizes, the jury found a verdict substantially for the
plaintiff for 201. Two questions were left to the
jury, which they answered to the effect that there war
negligence on the part of the company's servants, and
also on the part of the child's grandmother, who was
killed, on which a new and very important questio❑
arose—viz., who:her the child was so identified with tht
grandmother that her negligence disentitled the chil,
from recovering in the action. The accident took plact
at one of the company's branch stations, where in order
to enter the carriages it was. necessary to cross th,
line ; and it appeared the child, being in charge
cf its grandmother, was placed in the waiting room
opening on to the platform—the practice wa
for the station-master to conduct the passenger:
across the line a few minutes before the train arrived,
and in the meantime he was occupied in supplying pas-
sengers with tickets and other duties, that led him about
100 or 150 yards from the line. lie was about that dis-
tance from the crossing when he heard a cry, and on
goi❑g to the spot he found that a goods train had come
up and killed the grandmother and injured the child at
they were in the act of crossing the line. There
was no negligence charged to the driver of the
train, who bad not to stop at the station,
but there was negligence charged in having tht
tender before the engine, which had the effect, it was
said, of preventing the driver seeing that the line was
clear. That, however, was shown not to be the case, and
there was no doubt the accident happened from the old
lady's running across the line with the child. A rule
was obtained this term on leave reserved to enter a
verdict for the defendants.
After hearing the arguments,

The Court directed the rule to be made absolute, or
for a non-suit, according t• the option of the parties.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings in Banco, before Chief Baron Pollock, Barons
Martin, Bramwell, and Watson.)

LANGSTON FAN V. WEATHERALL- STRANGE PROCEEDINGS

Mr. Barstow applied for a rule to show cause why the
name cf Lord Glenelg, one of the two plaintiffs, should
not be struck out ; the proceedings stopped and the at-
torney be compelled to pay the costs incurred. Lord
Glenelg's name had been used against his consent of
knowledge, and it appeared from the affidavits filed in
the case that in 1843 a gentleman named John William
Cooke married the Rev. Mr. Weatherall's daughter,
when a part nuptial settlement was made on a.debt of
15,0001. stated to be owing from the father to the de-
fendant. Two trustees were named in the settle-
ment. One, the plaintiff Mr. Langston, and the
ether L.rd Glenelg, whose name was used without his
lordsitio's knowledge or cement. Be knew nothing of the
parties, except that on one occasion, many years since, he
met Mr. Weatherall at a friend's house, and afterwards
accepted an invitation from him to dine at his house.
Lord Glenelg was ignorant of the liberty that had been
taken with his name, until he bad receieed a letter from
Mr. Cooke's trustee, stating it was intended to have the
settlement set aside. Lord Glenelg immediately wrote
in reply that ho would have nothing to do with the
matter, and expressed his surprise at his name having
been used in the settlement. The Rev. Mr. Weatherall
afterwards wrote to Lord Glenelg, apologising for having
used his lordship's name without previous application to
him for that purpose, and asking him to act. Lord
Glenelg wrote in reply that he could not act, and
he should renounce the trust ; and in 1844
a deed of disclaimer was prepared which re-
cited the above facts and renouncing the trust.
His lordship afterwards found that a warrant of attorney
for the amount had been give❑ concurrently with the
execution of the settlement, and that judgtnent had beet.
entered up in his name as one of the trustees. On an
application to this court, Mr. Baron Parke made an
order striking Lord Glenelg's name out of the proceed-
ings, and his lordship imagined he should never more
hear anything about the matter. After the disclaimer
had been executed, an action was brought against the
father in the name of the other trustee to rec.:ver the
amount named as the settlement, when judgment passed
f,r the plaintiff, without argument. It was afterward,
taken to the Exchequer Chamber where the judgment
was set aside, on the ground that, notwithstanding the
disclaimer the action should have been brought in the
names of the two trustees named in the settlement. Mat
(\lr. Barstow) seb,ni ted was that, in 1844, the parties, he
instead of proceeding by action at law, should have
gone to a Court cf Equity, when in all probab lity the
court would have ordered the money to have been paid.
Subsequent proceeding. were taken, and in 1858 Lord
Glenelg found that the attorney in the case had issued
proceeding's in his lordship's name without any applica-
tion to his lordship for his permission to do so. His
lordship wished to have nothing to do with the parties,
and had a great objection to his name being mixed up
with the parties. Yesterday a similar application was
made at chambers to Mr. Baron Martin, when his d-
ship made an order in accordance with the present appli•