The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-13 00:00:00

THE PROFITS ON RAILWAYS.

For years past the commercial public have con-
sidered that although a multitude of legal encum-
brances to the transaction of business still remain,
the tendency of Parliamentary action steadily sets
towards their removal, and that, whatever caution
may be requisite in sweeping away old follies,
every new measure now passed involves some step
in the direction of sound principles. This is a
popular delusion. Cases showing that modern
economists and free-traders can acquiesce in errors
no less gross than those which prompted the finan-
ciers of half a century ago could be cited every
week, and oue of the latest and most prominent
has just been described in the annual railway report
of Captain Douglas Galton to the Board of Trade.
The paternal control exercised over this branch of
enterprise fi om its commencement, and which has
led to results notorious throughout the world, is
being extended with greater vigour every year, and
has received its highest development in 1858. The
total of their capital, the extent of their borrowing
powers, the limits of the liability of the share-
holders, the direction of the lines and the tariff of
charges of the various companies having been all
dictated by the wisdom of the Legislature, it has
lately been thought fit for their especial protection
to prescribe the terms upon which the shareholders
shall deal with their own profits, so far as those
profits may be turned to account as a security
to enable them to borrow money on the best
terms. Ic recent railway bills a chaise is ac-
cordingly introduced prohibiting the company
from creatinf, any preference shares entitled
to a fixed l'dividend. They may issue such
shares nominally bearing a certain interest, but this
interest is to be dependent on the net profits for
the year, or in some instances even the half-year.
They must not go into the market and say, " Our
annual receipts have upon the average been of such
and such au amount, and have in the main shown
a steady increase. They are obviously sufficient to
render the payment of a 5 per cent. dividend on
£lOO,OOO a matter of cc it linty, although accidental
fluctuations have occurred, so that shortcomings in
the year would have to be made up in the next.
We will pledge ourselves to this 5 per cent. Will
e some
be-
tween
the
any one lend us, the required amount ? The very
existence
ffiof thee ant
idaitv
loNi
railway,trla traffic,
mcta,hke a
may
the completion
dthe
ep ednidffe uponnc
e difference
of
importatnrat link
money being obtained, but Parliament forbids the
transaction unless the public will lend the money
in a speculative manner—that is to say, with the
possibility of finding in occasional half-years that
their investment will yield them no income what-
ever. Of course, the .result is, that the loan is re-
fused, except at such a rate of interest as will com-
pensate for this uncertainty, and, as the charges
for risk are always calculated at their extreme point
the protected company find themselves compelled
to submit to those extra and onerous conditions,
always enforced in a restricted field. The public
cannot fail to discern that if a company is bound to
pay, dividends to a certain class of persons out of
the profits only of a certain number of months,
it will usually be to its advantage to throw
For.roar ;ne,dt
aconcerns, the cost of ally serious accident upon the immediate
i
period, instead of spreading it, as in all properly
preference shares outstanding, and the annual profits
e i thereo"e aarr'e'ti£loalo,a4eorarp per tune.cent
of the company with an ordinary share
£500,0()0, £lO,OOO, and some damagei
to the amount. of £20,000, from as 3 othercollision or the
scsaupsittaailne ofd
giving
tjiwaye e(1),1;
(embankments,
of
the
directorso ratioi
meet
of the revenue of the next two years, since there
will :hen be no profit to show, and the preference
shareholders will consequently be deprived of divi-
17eet cause, it
it entirely
lacwill
divi-
dends; whereas, if the total had been spread over
10 years, these persons would still get regularly
paid, and the full loss would be borne by the cem•
pally, whose divinable profits for the term would be
reduced from £5,000 per annum to £3,000. The
law, in fact, to use the words of Captain Galion,
places it to some extent in the power of the direc-
tors so to adjust the time of payment of outgoings
chargeable to revenue (e 9., for renewal of extensive

works or plant, losses by accidents, &c.) as occa-
sionally to subject the holders of the preferential
shares so restricted to abatement from their
dividend to the subsequent advantage of the
ordinary shareholders." If it could be sup-
posed that capitalists are to be duped like
children into parting from their money without
taking these things into account, some glim-
mer might be gained of the intentions of the clause,
and this actually seems to have been the idea.
Sixty millions of preference capital was already in
existence subject to no such restrictions (the wis-
dom of Parliament having been at fault on the
matter up to 1858), and the possibility of making
new and. inferior issues which the public would
supposG to be as. good as the old is the only con-
ceivable temptation that could have led to the
change. As a remedy Captain Galton suggests
that companies should, at all events, be compelled
to insert the new condition in whatever certificates
they may issue, and, although it seems hard that
traps should be set by legislation, and that further
legislation should then be required to give warning
of them, this is obviously a safeguard that will
become essential. Meanwhile the practical results
of the tender care thus exercised have already been
illustrated in the fact that the Hertford, Luton,
and Dunstable Railway Company, after having
procured in their Act of last session the insertion
of the clause in question, applied this session to
have the restriction repealed, " on the ground that
it has tended to prevent their disposing of the
preferential stock so restricted." But the House
of Commons are stubborn upon the principle, and
have refused them relief, telling them that if,
owing to the obnoxious clause, they cannot get
money at 5 per cent. they are at liberty to give
6, but that the clause must remain intact. Unifor-
mity, however, is evidently not the object, since,
apart from the fact that 60 millions of capital
exists without the new restriction, some of the
acts now passed limit the preferential dividend to
the profits of a whole year, and others to the profits
of a half-year only. Captain Galion, regarding
capital in its true light as a commodity, suggests,
moreover, that " it is not apparent why such a re-
striction should be applied to a company's contracts
for money rather than to their contracts for works
or services, or to their contracts for money raised
by means of preference stock rather than to their
contracts for money raised by means of debentures
or debenture stock. The principle, too, if it be cor-
rect, should be extended to all enterprises, and espe-
cially to all connected with passenger traffic. It
would be convenient to the great mail steam com-
panies if they could get funds on preference shares
and occasionally by paying no interest on them
make up for the loss of a ship worth £120,000.
Parliament, to be logical, must afford the same
thought and protection to all. Otherwise, instead
of sending out to instruct the authorities at Cal-
cutta in finance, we had better retain every means
at our command for enlightenment at home.— Times'
City .Irtiele.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.-CROYDON, AUG. 12.

(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn and a common Jury).
REDHEAD V. RICH.

This was an action to recover the amount of a
promissory note for £5O, given by the defendant to
the plaintiff.
The defendant had put several pleas upon the
record, but the material one relied upon was, that
the note in question was given for an illegal and
immoral consideration.
Sergeant Parry. and Mr. Paterson were counsel
for the plaintiff; Mr. Hawki is, Q.C., and Mr. Doyle
appeared for the defendant.
Sergeant Parry, in opening the case to the jury,
said that, under ordinary circumstances, all that
was necessary to do in an action upon a bill of ex-
change or a promissory note was to prove that it
was made by the defendant; hut in consequence of
the extraordinary plea that was put upon the re-
cord by the defendant, it would be necessary for
him to give a short detail of the circumstances under
which this note was given. He then proceeded to
give a narrative of the facts detailed in the evidence,
and said he could not deny that there had been an
intimate connection between the plaintiff and the
defendant; but he believed that when the jury had
heard all the facts, they would be of opinion that
the plaintiff was entitled to recover in the present
action.
Elizabeth Redhead, the plaintiff, a woman about
30 years of age, was then examined. She deposed
that in the year 1854 she was employed as a dress-
maker, in John-street, Oxford-street, and she was
then in the habit of going to a public-house close by
to have her dinner. Upon one occasion the defend-
ant followed her, and, while engaged in reading
the newspaper, he touched her on the shoulder with
his stick, and they. entered into conversation toge-
ther, and she told him where she lived, with her
mother, in Vauxhall-road. They became very inti-
mate after this, and the defendant agreed to allow
her £1 a week, and he invited her to nis house in
Lodge-road, St. John's-wood, and introduced her to
some members of his family, and told her he would
give her the £1 a-week as long as she lived. In
September, 1855, the defendant gave her a promis-
sory note for £2O, payable on demand, but said she
was not to make any use of it while she received the
D. a-week, and witness kept that note until 1856,
when she gave it back to the defendant upon his
giving her the note for £5O that was the subject of
the present action. The defendant discontinued
paying her the £1 a-week in April last.
C ross-examin ed by Alr.Hawkins--Witness h ad been
a dressmaker all her life. She was earning about 9s.
a week at the time she became acquainted with the
defendant.
Mr. Hawkins (pointing to the white-headed, de-
erepid old man, stated to be 78 years old, who was
sitting near the counsel's table)—ls that the old
fellow ? (A laugh.)
The witness said it was.
,Cross-examination continued--The first thing
that occurred in the publie-house was the defend-
ant touching her on the shoulder with his stick
while she was readimg the newspaper. (A laugh.)
She told him she thought he was very rude, but
she did not speak very cross to him. On the first
interview she told him where her mother lived, and
made an appointment for him to come and see her.
The fact was she was very much attracted by his
looks. (Laughter.) She did not introduce the old
gentleman to her mother when he called the first
time.

Mr. Hawkins—Why did you not introduce him
to your mother ?
Witness—l don't suppose you tell your mother
everything you do when you are out. (Laughter)
Mr. Hawkins—l certainly should not tell her if
I took a fancy to an old woman like that (pointing
to the defendant). (Renewed laughter.)
Cross-examination resumed—The first improper
intimacy that took place between her and the de-
fendant occurred about three weeks after their first
interview. She did not tell her mother anything
about that. (A laugh.) * The defendant afterwardsing
took a lodging for her, and he introduceddid not her as
his wife, and paid all her expenses. Witness
know the age of the defendant. He used
was 50. (Laughter.) She did n- t knowud to say he
that he was
considerably over 70. He had certainly begun to
look very old latterly. Would swear
thathmish. Hee had
not had so much as £7OO or £BOO from
used to pay the £1 a week regularlye down to the
h
present year, and sometimes gave her a few
shillings besides during the week. When she gave
up the £2O bill the defendantsaid to her, " If you
give me that bill I will give a larger one, ‘Duckey.'"
(Laughter.) •
Re- examined—Defendant always called her
" Duckey." (Renewed laughter.) He used fre-
quently to come and take his meals with her, and
he generally broug ht about half a.pint of wine and
his pipe in his, pocket. (A laugh.)
Mrs. Jane Smith,
the sister of the plaintiff,
give h •
the defendant et the
£5O she saw
proved that
bill. She also said she was aware that he was to
allow her £1 a-week.
By Mr. Hawkins—She declined to state what
to be given for. • She might
the :11 a-week
wasn mind something upon the mat-
upon in her.ewi
et
attend there to anything
fir. say
ci.i
ter,''.bat she d
upon that su . bject. aug .
1 (A 1 h )
atthe
Mr. Hawkins,
plaintiffr.submitted that the defendant's plea had
been made out, and that there was nothing to go to
the jury.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said that the plea involved
a question of fact, which he should leave to the
jury. He should, however, certainly rule, as a
matter of law, that if they believed the considera-
tion for the note in question was that the plaintiff
should live as a prostitute with the old fool, the
defendant, she could not recover in the present
action.
Mr. Hawkins then
made a m. st humorous speech
to the jury on behalf of the defendant. He said
that his learned friend was quite right in stating,
in his Opening address, that the inquiry was one of
a very peculiar and delicate character, and lie
jury
thought thewould have no difficulty in coming
to a conclusion as to what were the real factS of
the ease. This old fool, who was nearly in his
dotage, had been picked up by " Duekey,' and she
had made a very good thing indeed out of him. It
was perfectly absurd to suppose that there had ever
been anything like affection existing between the
parties, but the plaintiff evidently thought she had
got hold of a foolish old man, who would lavish
money upon her, and "Duckev" seemed to have
been pretty wide awake all thi-ough the proceed-
ings. She had got more than a hundred a-year out
of the old man ever since she had been acquainted
With him, andbe said he thought she ought to have

..,„-.
been satisfied without endeavouring to get this
additional fifty pounds. He then urged that it
was impossible to doubt for a moment for what
purpose the promissory note in question was given,
and that the defendant was clearly entitled to a
verdict.

Mr. Justice Blackburn having briefly summed
up and explained the law to the jury, they at once
returned a verdict for the defendant, at the same
time stating they had no doubt that the note was
given for an immoral consideration.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.--WELLS, Aug. 11.
CROWN COURT.
THE CASE OF LIEUT.-COLONEL FORBES.—This
morning Lieut.-Colonel John Alexander Forbes
was called on to surrender and take his trial on a
charge of sending an obscene letter to Miss Lucy
Adelaide Fenton, of Bath. The accused did not
appear, and his recognisances, and those of his
surety (Mr. Frederick Morris, of Bath) of £4OO
each, were ordered to be estreated.

On the application of Mr. T. W. Saunders, who
appeared for the prosecution, a warrant was
granted for the apprehension of Lieut.-Colonel
Forbes, and his lordship expressed a hope that, in
cases where persons in a higher station of life were
charged with offences and sent for trial, the magis-
trates should take such an amount of bail as would
prevent the ends of justice from being defeated.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE-Aug. 12.

B OW-S TREET.—EXTRAORDINARY POST-
OFFICE CHARGE.—Miss Catherine Flint, a lady
residing in Lyndhurst-terrace, Peckham, appeared
on a summons before Mr. Jardine, to answer the
following extraordinary charge, preferred by the
Post-office authorities, Mr. Sleigh being in atten-
dance as counsel for the defendant.
Mr. Peacock, the solicitor to the Post-office, after
referring to the Aet of Parliament under which
the present proceedings were taken, and which
declared it to be a " felony" to take, by force, or
otherwise, any letter from the possession of any
letter-receiver or other person in the service of the
Post-office, expressed his regret that it had been
his duty to make a charge of this serious nature
against a lady of the defendant's respectability. It
would be shown, however, that on the afternoon
of the 4th inst. the defendant caused a letter to be
posted at the Peckham office, which was kept by Mrs.
Eliza Bull, who also carried on the business of a
stationer. Shortly after this occurrence, the defen-
dant called at the office and saw a young lady, Miss
Amelia Tucker, who assisted Mrs. Bull in the busi-
ness. The defendant, who was known personally
both to Miss Tucker and Mrs. Bull, stated that she
had just sent her servant with a letter, which had
been unfortunately misdirected, and mentioning the
address upon the envelope, begged that it might be
returned to her. Miss Tucker replied that it would
be contrary to the rules of the Post-office to return
any letter. The defendant then begged very hard
that she might see it, and, if possible, correct the
address. Miss Tucker then looked among the
letters, and found one of the address described, upon
which Miss Flint took it out of her hand. Miss
Tucker, however, immediately recovered possession
of it, a portion of the envelope being torn off in the
struggle. By this time Mrs. Bull arrived in the
shop, and the letter was handed to her, and she
was applauding the conduct of her assistant for
having refused to give it up, when the defendant
snatched it out of Mrs. Bull's hand and left the
shop, stating that she would take the responsibility
upon herself. The circumstances were very pro-
perly reported to the Post-office, and this prosecu-
tion was the consequence ; it being of the utmost
importance to the public that all letters, after being
posted, should pass uninterruptedly to their des-
tination.

Mr. Sleigh said he was far off from complain-
ing of the course which had been pursued by the
Post-office, but before this case proceeded far-
ther he would venture to ask his worshipif it
would not amount to something like absurdity to
brand this lady with a charge of felony, even admit-
ting all the circumstances detailed by Mr. Peacock.
Miss Flint had, no doubt, acted very indiscreetly,
and conscious of this, she had apologised to Mrs.
Bull for what had occurred. The fact was she had
written two letters to some relatives, and by an
unlucky accident, she had placed one of them
in the envelope belonging to the other—a mistake
which she did not discover until after the first
had been sent to the post. No doubt the letter
related to matters in no way concerning the cor-
respondent addressed, and in her anxiety to correct
this unfortunate error, she very improperly took
back her own letter, on seeing it in Mrs. Bull's
hands. She saw no harm in this, and as for the
" felonious intent," which was an inseparable in-
gredient in the offence of larceny, it was insult-
ing to common sense to say that it existed in the
mind of his client for a single moment.
Mr. Jardine said if it was not a case of stealing,
what else was it. The depositions must be taken.
Mrs. Bull, the postmistress at Peckham, and her
assistant, Miss Tucker, then stated the circum-
stances as described by Mr. Peacock, the latter
witness adding that Miss Flint was in a very
excited state, and appeared to attach great import-
ance to the mistake which had occurred. She told
her that the postmistress could be fined and dis-
missed for returning a letter. Witness saw no
harm in showing the defendant the letter, on her
expressing a wish to see it only—little thinking
that Miss Flint would snatch it out of her hand. It
was addressed to Mr. Flint, East-street, Brighton.
Mr. Peacock said he would represent the case to
the Postmaster-General, having now performed his
duty; and it was eventually decided to adjourn the
summons for a week to await the result.

The defendant then lefi—the court with her
friends.

HAMMERSMITH.—CAPTURE OF A FASHION-
ABLE SHOPLIFTER. - SINGULAR DEFENCE.—A
fashionably well-dressed young woman, who gave
the name of Sarah Wilson, and refused her address,
was charged before Mr. Dayman with stealing
four pieces of ribbon, value £2 ss. from the shop of
Mr. James Colbourne, a linendraper, of High-
street, Kensington.
Mr. Martin appeared for the prisoner.
William Baker, assistant to Mr. Colbourne, de-
posed that about one o'clock that afternoon the
prisoner entered the shop and requested to look at
some satin ribbons. Witness was desired to serve
her, and he placed a drawer of ribbons before her.
When he opened the lid he saw her cover a portion of
her mantle over the end of the drawer. She selected
a piece, and then told him to cut off a yard. He
showed her another piece of ribbon, but the drawer
appeared not to contain the width of ribbon she re-
quied. He went to the end of the shop, and ob-
tained the reserve box of ribbons, which he also
placed before her. She selected two pieces, and re-
quested him to cut a yard off each. During the
time he saw her draw her hand along the drawer
under her mantle, and suspecting she had stolen
some of the ribbon, he went and communicated
what had occurred to his employer. Mr. Colbourne
came forward and accused her of robbery, but she
stoutly denied it, and expressed great indignation
at such a charge being made. Mr. Colbourne then
asked her to walk to the back of the shop, which
she declined, and then turned to go out. She was
brought back and given into custody.
Emma Harrison, the female searcher at the Ken-
singtont o
search
police e
hher
thestation,
prisoner said
l
placed
ed whatin
n her
re h
ahnadd taken,the fo n r andpieces when she proceeded
al et r
otsfhhreei
bwabaoomun le. d
timegs hv
ee
I appeared exceedingly
handsome gold watch well d
er
he sasi en 1, a anndd worel
sao ve r
hady
in her purse £6 in gold and Bs. 6d in silver.
Mr. Martin asked his
worship• to deal at once
with the case, as she admitted taking the ribbon.
She was a respectable married woman, and she as-
sured him this was her first offence. He understood
she was pregnant, and he believed she was seized
with some uncontrollable desire .for the ribbons.
They all knew that persons in high stations of life,
when in that condition, were often guilty of singu-
lar acts, and this was one of them.
Inspectoi Rigarlsford said the prisoner had re-
fused to give any address, and he should like to
have time to make some inquiries about her.
Mr. Colbourne said he had no doubt she was in-
collusion with two men who were outside at the
time. When she came out they pressed up against
her, apparently for the purpose of relieving her of
what she might have. When they went away she
called after them " Jim, Jim."
The prisoner, who had a number of rings upon
her fingers, declared she never spoke to any person.
Mr. Dayman said he should remand her, to find
out if anything was known of her.

IMPORTANT TO SHIPPERS,—The suspension of a
Liverpool shipping agent (announced last week) has pro ved
a source of great inconvenience and loss to the shippers in
Manchester and Glasgow, *hose business he transacted, as
their goods are in some instances detained by the carriers
for carriage accounts, and in others the bills of lading with-
held by shipowners for freights due by 'the insolvent for
prior shipments. Whether carriers and shipowners have
the power thus to detain goods or securities is likely to be
decided legally. In the meantime, the whole subject is one
of interest to the Manchester trade.

[ADVERrisiiiiNT.]--Holloway's Pills, a Remedy for
Bilious and Liver Complaints.—Those who suffer front
bile and liver complaints shoi!ld try the effects of this
valuable ikaredy, a few dozes of which will make the suf-
ferer feel elastic and vigorous, remove all impurities, give a
healthy action to the liver, and strengthen the stomach. If
bilious attacks be allowed to continue without using such a
preventive, more serious casualties may arise, and the
sufferer consigned to a bed of sickness. Holloway's Pills
areanexof acidity from thetra°rdinarYre medyacting iramEdiately in the
removalstomach, indigestion, debility,
and nausea, preparing the food thoroughly for assimilation, j
rendering each tributary organ perfect in its function, and
stimulating the kidneys.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

BETTING AT MANCHESTER—FRIDAY.
EBOR HANDICAP.
7 to 1 agst Shafto (taken)
8 to 1 agst Starke (taken)
10 to 1 agst Coroner (taken)
10 to 1 agst Volatile (taken)
10 to 1 agst Archduchess (taken)
14 to 1 agst Punch (taken)

HORSES STRUCK OUT OF THEIR ENGAGE3IENTS.
On the sth inst., at 1 p.m., Odo out of his engagements at
Reading, the Convivial and Gimcrack Stakes at York, the
Nursery at Oxford. and Stamford Biennial at Wolverhamp-
ton.
On the sth inst., at 1 p.m.. Kinnersley out of the Whitley
Handicap, Reading.
On the sth inst., after 6 p.m., Leamington out of the Lewes
Handicap.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Paul out of the Wolverhampton
Stakes.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Certainty and 'Atalanta out of
the Yorkshire Oaks.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Mary Stewart and colt by Her-
mit out of Lady Ann out of the Convivial Stakes.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Lord Lumley out of the Eglinton
Stakes at York and Cleveland Stakes at Stockton.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Atalanta, Certainty, Strathern,
and Killingworth out of the Zetland Biennial at Stockton.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Trabuco and Little Agnes,
all their engagements at York and Stockton.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., all Mr. Ten Broeck's horses out
of the Warwick Handicaps to date.
On the Bth inst., at 9 a.m., Belle out of all handicaps.
On the Bth inst., at 3.30 p.m., Des Chiles, Cincinnati, and
Lincoln out of their engagements at York.
On the Bth inst., at 3.30 p.m., Des Chiles out of his engage'
ments at Warwick.
On the 9th inst., Jordan out of his engagements at War-
wick. out of
On the 9th inst., at 9 a.m., Viatka out of the Stratton Aud-
ley Stakes at Oxford.
On the 9th inst., after 8 p,m., Gift out of the Bulmershe
Plate at Reading.
On the 9th inst., after Bp.m.. Minster out of his Oxford en-
gagements.