The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-28 00:00:00

CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

JONES V. POWELL.

This case, which has-been so repeatedly before the Court,
was specially appointed to be heard to-day upon a re-hearing.
The question in the cause arose out of the disagreements
between seven partners, with reference to a large speculation
in wool.
Upon the case being called upon, Mr. WAKEFIELD objected
to its being heard for want of parties.
Mr. KNIGHT was heard against the objectim, which their
Lordships thought fatal, and ordered the appeal to stand over.
This being the only appeal on the paper, and the Court
having no other case to proceed with, their Lordships rose be-
fore 12 o'clock.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR shortly •afterwards took his seat
in the Court as Vice-Chancellor, and proceeded to hear
motions.

ROLLS COURT.-(T HIS DAY.)

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE MAYOR AND CORPORATION OF

LIVERPOOL.

Mr. PEMBERTON applied this morning in this case for the
dissolution of the injunction granted by his Honour ex-parte,
restraining the Corporation of Liverpool from mortgaging any
of their corporate property for the purpose of paying the in-
creased salaries of the Clergymen of that town. The facts of
the case, from the statements of the Learned Counsel; ap-
peared to be these :—Some years back it was considered by
the Corporation of Liverpool, that the remuneration to the
Clergy of that town by the Corporation was not sufficient, and
it was proposed that -an increase should be made, to be paid
out of the church-rates. This was agreed to, and up to
the year 1834, when the Church Rates' Abolition Bill was
introduced into Parliament, the increased salaries were paid
out of that rate. Upon that Bill, however, being intro-
duced, as it would have the effect of destroying, the fund
out of which the increased payments to the clergy were made,
it became necessary to adopt some course by which the in-
creased remuneration to the clergy was to be met. Meetings
took place, at which it was proposed to pay the amount out of
the poor rates, and a resolution to that effect was proposed ;
to that resolution an amendment was mored, that it should be
paid out of the corporate funds, and that amendment was car-
ried by a majority. The Act for the abolition of Church rates
having been abandoned by his Majesty's Ministers, things re-
mained as they were in Liverpool, until the Dissenters of that
town, as had been the case in others, refused to pay Church
rates. In consequence of this refusal, it was found impossible
to pay the clergy, unless through the medium of the Corpora-
tion, who, for the purpose of meeting the charges, had taken
tile step of which the Attorney-General complained, alleging
it to be a contravention of one of the statutes of the Corpora-
tion Reform Bill. The Learned Counsel, on behalf of the
corporation of Liverpool, was addressing his Honour when our
reporter left.

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

RICKMAN V.
,ROBINSON.

This was an action brought by Thomas Rickman, the well-
known architect and surveyor, to recover a balance of
173/. lls. 7d., due by John Robinson, a builder, for surveying
and measuring the defendant's work. Mr. Robinson had been
employed by Sir Edward Blackett to build a seat at Malton
Hall, Northumberland, and the work having been paid for by
measurement, instead of contract, it was necessary that it
should be surveyed. The charge made by the plaintiff was
that usually made, of '2l per cent. upon 15,0001., the value of
the work executed. A sum of 100/., and some smaller ones,
had been paid plaintiff b, the defendant on account, and the
present action was brought to recover the balance.
Sir Wm. FOLLETT appeared for the plaintiff, and Sir FRED.
POLLOCK for the defendant.
Sir Edward Blackett was examined, and deposed that be
had employed the plaintiff to prepare plans, and the defendant
to execute the work of his mansion. He had received such a
character of the defendant from the Bishop of Carlisle, that
he made no contract with him, but paid him whatever sums he
required. He paid him altogether 19,2501., not on the certi-
ficates of work executed which were furnished by the plaintiff,
but by referring to the defendant's own accounts. He had
paid the plaintiff 1,0801. for his services as architect, but it
was no part of his duty to measure the work.
At this stage of the case it was suggested that the matter
should be referred to arbitration, and a verdict vas taken for
the plaintiff, subject to a reference.

THE KING V. NEWMAN AND ANOTHER.

This was ;;17indietment for an assault committed upon
Daniel Shearman, the landlord of several houses in Shackle-
well-street, Bethnal Green, by James Bull and James New-
man. The defendant Bull collected the rents of houses on
the oppoaite side of the street, and on the Ist of June last, he
charged the prosecutor with creating a nuisance, and threatened
to indict him. Prosecutor made a reply which irritated him,
and he crossed over and struck him violently ; the other de-
fendant, Newton; encouraging- him by crying out, " Go it,
Bull." One of the prosecutors teeth was knocked out, and
he was ill for several days. The evidence of Shearman was
corroborated by two other witnesses.
Mr. PRENDERGAST appeared for the prosecution.
There was no defence. The Jury found both the defendants
guilty.
Lord DENMAN said it was a very great grievance that such
eases should be brought before the Court of King's Bench,
occupying time that ought to be devoted to- other purposes.
If the prosecutor had'suffered any serious injury, and required
compensation, he might have brought his action ; but bringing
the defendants there for the sake of punishment was a mere
waste of time, when it could have been settled before a magis-
trate in a few hours. The sentence he should pass upon the
defendants was, that Buil should pay a fine to the King of
205., and Newman a fine of 10s.

EXCHEQUER COURT-(THIS DAY

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. NOLAN.

The SOLICITOR-oENERAL, me TANCRED, and Mr. KAYE,
appeared for the Crown. The former stated to the jury that
the present information was filed against a large starch mann-
faeturer at Liverpool, for a fraud on the revenue under these
circumstances. The Legislature had taken off the duty on
starch in the year 1834, so far as regarded England. An ex-
port drawback was allowed on all sent to Ireland, which was
to cease on the 10th October, and of course the manufacturers
of the article, who had stocks on hand, were very anxious to
have as much exported as they possibly could. On the 4th of
October, in consequence of a notice from the defendant, an
officer attended at his premises, in order to pack some casks
of starch for exportation. On that day, five casks, each con-
taining about 11 cwt., were packed and sealed up by the
officer. They were sent down to the Clarence Dock, and
sent off to Ireland in a steamer. An officer again attended on
the Bth and 9th Oct., when 17 more casks were packed, and
sealed. They were not sent down for clearing till within half
an hour before the office being shut on the 10th. They also
were sent on board a steamer, and also taken off to Ireland.
When the first five casks arrived in Dublin, some suspicion was
excited in the mind of an officer, and he took what was very
properly termed a " tormentor," and probed the cask, when it
brought forth not starch, but very good salt. There was a
little starch round the bung-hole, but not any further than an
inch from it. The whole five casks were examined, and as
they contained nothing but salt, they were seized. On the ar-
rival of the other seventeen casks, they were examined, and ,
thirteen of them were found to contain salt, and four starch.
The whole were seized. If he (the Solicitor General) were
asked how this fraud had been done, he would fair 4 answer
that he did not know, for the
,casks were precisely
in the same same state as when they were sealed by the
officers, and they were equally ignorant of the manner in
which the thing had been committed. But he would show that
the defendant was well acquainted with the fact, and was in
truth the mover in the business, for, he would show that almost
immediately after the Act repealing the duty received the
Royal assent, a very large quantity of salt, he was informed
seven tons, arrived at the defendant's warehouse, and was bieng
taken in by the crane on the public street, when the defen-
dant came up and said that would never do, and ordered the
cart to go into the gateway, when it. was unloaded out of the
public eye. That was a strong fact, for there was no salt
used in the manufacture of starch. There was the name
of a Mr. Woods connected with the transaction. He believed
be was a partner with the defendant or his foreman, but he
had no doubt he would bring the offence home in the most
clear manner to the defendant.
The case as stated by the Learned Gentleman was proved
by a number of witnesses.
No person appeared for the defence.
The Learned JUDGE summed up, and the Jury retired to
consider of their verdict : after being out for ten minutes they
returned with a verdict for the Crown for a penalty of 2001.
• upon the five casks, and found the single value of the seventeen
casks to be 2001., making the penalties altogether 8001.
There was an information against G. F. Woods for the same
transaction, but as the former Jury found that Nolan was prin-
cipal and Woods only the servant in them, the Crown officers
withdrew the record as against him. •