The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-26 00:00:00

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Justice CC LERIDGE, and a Common Jury.)

POWER V. BARHAM.
This was an action for a breach of warranty of four pic-
tures, which had been purchased by the plaintiff, a gentle"
man residing at Brixton, from the defendant, a picture"
dealer ; the pictures had been warranted as true Canalettis,
but had turned out to be copies. The plaintiff, on the un-
dertaking that the pictures were original, had agreed t°
give the defendant two other pictures, valued at 50/., and a
Bill of Exchange for 1101., at five months' date.
Mr. PLATT stated the case for the plaintiff, and called
the following witnesses.
George Merry,, a carver and gilder, was directed 13V the
plaintiff in the beginning of the year 1832, to let hiin Los(
if he saw any good original pictures. Witness subse"
quently applied to the defendant, who showed him four
pictures, which he said were Canalettis, and witness said if
there was any doubt about it he would have nothing to d°
with them. Defendant replied there was no question of it•
Witness was to get 15/. for the frames from the plaintimi
The pictures were sent to his house, and plaintiff requested
witness to siren, them to Mr. Woodburne, a picture-dealer'
who said they were not Canalettis. Mr. Power requested
him to communicate this opinion to the defendant, wb°
said he thought nothing of Woodburne's judgment. They
were then framed and sent home to the plaintiff. Abcw"
five months ago, at plaintiff's request, witness took down
the pictures, and they were sent to Brookes and Hedgers'
the auctioneers, of Bond-street, to be sold. On his crow
examination, by the Attorney-General, he said the picterAe*
remained for more than a year and' a half after Mr. W°,,e,',"
burne's judgment, hanging up in the plaintiff's house.
plaintiff told witness be was sorry the present action WAS
brought, and that it would not have occurred if he bad aet
been obliged to raise money upon them. The bill for 1001'
was dishonoured, and plaintiff said he had given the de'
fendant a little money, and two other bills. Witness 07-"
to receive half the profits of the sale of the pictures fret°
Mr. Barham. He has beeninformed that the pictures are
not worth more than 10/. each.
Richard Marsden—l am an artist residing in Old Bend-
street. I have studied the art since I was a child, and ha'
particularly studied Canaletti's style. I should think ,
four pictures now produced were not painted by
Canaletti,
but really pictures originally painted by old masters are s,
transformed by the number of hands they pass througe'
that it is difficult to recognize them. I should value theta
at 51. each, but have frequently known pictures sold far
much more than they are worth. Pictures sold this Ye,3,t
for 1,000 guineas may only fetch 50 next year, as judo
merit in matters of art varys very much. He founds 1:1 5
opinion upon the present pictures being copies, from the co'
cumatance that Canaletti was said to use the Carol
Obscura, which he believed was the fact. He was also red
skilled in architecture and the science of perspective, an.
the pictures are different in both these respects—the arch'
tecture is incorrect, and the perspective is. faulty, and Cana
;
letti would never have suffered such works to pass I.olc
-
his hands.
Mr. Justice CoLERIDGE—I believe Canaletti painted f
some time in England ? Witness—l am not aware,
Lord.
Mr. PLATT—Yes, my Lord, he was two years in Eng.°.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE—There are several of his P's,
tures in Greenwich and Chelsea Hospitals. He was a vcr'
prolific painter ? Witness—He was, my Lord. In
George Yates has been 35 years dealing in pictures.
his opinion the four pictures produced are not Canalettls
He would value them at eight pounds each, including the
frames.—(A laugh.)
George Brookes, auctioneer, of Bond-street—The fol
pictures were sent to his rooms to be sold. They were sa
to be Canalettis. He knew they were not, but he ga".,'
them a fair chance, the auctioneer not being responsible.'"
(Laughter.) There were 22 of Mr. Powers' pictures 01
sold, and 41 beloncrinr, to other persons. The room L'it
full of buyers, and, of the 41, 34 were sold—of 11
Powers' 22, only. two were sold.—(A laugh.) A reserve,°.,
30/. each had been put upon each of the four pictures
Mr. Power, but there was not more than 8/. or 101. bid t„,°'
any of them. When they were put up witness saitl„,,
" Shall we say a couple of hundred guineas for there.',,,
(Great laughter.) He also stated that he understood lit
employer had a warranty for the pictures. He did au
think them worth more than about 10/. each.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL addressed the Jury fbr the
;,
defendant, and contended that there was not sufficient the
deuce that the pictures were not Canalettis ; for with rt
exception of Mr. Marsden, no person of skill in the 1'1;5
had been examined who had ever handled a pencil in „:t,
life. It was undeniable that many of the most ernin',
masters were greatly defective in perspective and architteeo
ture, and even the great master Raphael himself was of 0
defective in these particulars. But there was, in fact' et
proof that a warranty had been given—the bill of sale ti:,
out " four pictures, Views in Venice, Canaletti,
That merely implied the opinion of the seller, or the elf
gagement he might have originally received with them•
the plaintiff was of opinion that he had really I.o:civet:A.,
warranty, why should he not have returned them at or,:ij,
instead of retaining them during the years 1832, 1 ft
1834, and up to May, 1835. Under all the circuinstall`r
he trusted the Jury would find a verdict for his client.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE having summed up at consideoe
ble length, and having impressed upon the Jury that
,„
question for them really to try was, whether or not a
ranty had been given,
The Jury retired, and, in about half an hOur, returnej
with a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 81/.

CRIMINAL COURT.--(THIS DAY')

OL COURT. hir
Charles Blake Skerrett,D aged 19, described in the ca
Jar as a " gentleman," was indicted for stealing a w3tcuu-
,'o
pair of bracelets, a pair of combs set with pink topaz, oob
cent bottles, and a variety of other articles, value I
ar
the property of Charles Pratt, and several articles of lice
ing apparel, the property of Leeds Payne, in the Batli
tel, Piccadilly, the dwelling-house of the said Leeds .0-`9
• Mr. CLARKSON defended the prisoner.
Mr. Charles Pratt stated that he resided near Sonde;
ton. In the month of October he was staying at the Jrfor
Hotel, and on the 19th of that month, having dresseuiiery
dinner, he left a tin case containing the articles ofjewe',oo
mentioned in the indictment, which he discovered on
following morning had been carried off. diy
The pawnbrokers and jeweller to whom the prisonera it
I posec. of payt of the stolen property produced it, an

was identified by Mr. Pratt as his. tioo
The circumstances attendant upon the culprit's deter
the
by the waiters of the hotel, and his apprehension by
the
Bow-street officers, must be fresh in the recollection of

public. _
,00
1
The prisoner; who during the trial stood with both —d
in his breeches-pockets, and behaved with great 7107i,0
lance, when called upon for his defence declined saYing:

thingM . .
r. Justice PARK summed up, and the Jury retell,cle
verdict of Guilty. vgi•ric'
The cases against the prisoner for stealing Mr. '
clothes was not gone into. flio
Augustus Montague, aged 21, was indicted for burr jo
in the dwelling-house of Henry Pace, a watcbmaenri.
Whitechapel. The evidence was conclusive, and the r
senor was found Guilty.

NEW COURT. indic°
Esther Dean, alias Foster, aged forty-four, was -
for feloniously marrying William Foster, her former
band, William Dean, being still alive. ro'
The
_Rev. W. Miller, curate of St. Mary, Lambeth, Pro
duced the certificate of the prisoner's marriage in that
rish with Thomas Dean, in February 1811. toted
William Foster, the prosecutor, who is a tinman, s•
that he married the prisoner at Whitechapel
Churcuot
1828. She then lived by needlework, and told hill 010
she was a widow, and that her name was Lake. lie
eighteen years old only when he married the prifoner.,
jay.
The prisoner, in her defence, said that her busbana tli
ing absented himself so many years, and understandilleod
he was paying his addresses to another female, a-,e /Irried
to the repeated solicitations of the prosecutor to be 0'
to him. odd
The Jury returned a verdict of guilty, but recomsaf
the prisoner to mercy.

The writ for the election of a representatiYe
the place of the late Lord Charleville, was delivered
ii a cod'
•
Hanaper-Office, on Saturday, and the election W'
mence to-day.