The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-21 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

;Before the Lord Chief Baron, and Barons Martin, Bram
well, and Channell.)
SWYNFEN V. LORD CHELMSFORD.

The Attorney-General, on the part of the noble defendant
said this trial stood for hearing at the last assizes at Staf•
ford, but the venue had been changed to London or Middle.
sex, to be heard at sittings after this term.

Mr. Baron Channell said the venue was changed, but
application was ordered to be made to the Lord Chief Baron
as to the time at which the case should be heard.

The Attorney-General said he was only anxious that
the ease should not be called on during the next fortnight,
as he would be unable to be in attendance during that time,
and it might be thought the defendant was not ready to go
on. He begged to state he was quite prepared.
The Lord Chief Baron said he saw nothing to take the
case out of its order. It would come on as a special jury
case at the sittings after Trinity term.

SHERIFFS' COURT.

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.-RUCKROSE V. VAUGHAN

This was an action to recover a sum of money, and it
had been adjourned to obtain a document in pencil, to be
produced as evidence.

The defendant, for whom Mr. Buchanan appeared,
affirmed that he had paid for certain parcels of meat, but
produced no voucher for such payment.
Plaintiff, on the other hand, handed in his book, from
which it appeared that the amount was still due.
Mr. Buchanan said it was impossible for the defendant
to produce any receipt, as such things were never given in
the Newgate market.

His Honour was of opinion that it was for the defendant
to prove payment, and he, not having done so, must pay
plaintiff.

- Verdict for plaintiff.
MASTER AND SERVANT -SHARP V. TIBBS'
This was an application for a new trial, and Mr.
Buchanan, who appeared for defendant, stated that, on the

cause being heard, plaintiff positively swore that defendant
had frequently promised payment.
_ .

Defendant now produced a receipt, and said he had paid
the sum claimed. He said he never employed plaintff to do
the work now claimed for ; that he (defendant) employed
a person named Williams, and that he paid Williams, think-
ing him a master.

Mr. Buchanan said Williams was in the service of plain-
tiff, and had no right to receive the money
His Honour was of opinion that defendant had not ex-
ercised proper judgment in paying Williams, and refused
the application.

FRENCH V. McDOUGALL—MASTER AND WORKMAN—

SINGULAR CASE.

Plaintiff is a journeyman wheelwright, and he sought to
recover a sum of money as wages due.
Mr. Buchanan appeared for the plaintiff, and stated the
case as follows :—Plaintiff was on a certain day employed
to do certain work in defendant's shop. When he had
nearly finished he was desired to go to the docks, and upon his
return he found that the shop work had been completed by
another person. This happened on two or three occasions,
and plaintiff having contracted to do the work at a price, he
now sought that amount in full. The rule in the trade
was that if a man agreed to do a piece of work, and was re-
moved from it by the master, he was entitled to the full
amount, notwithstanding another man bad been employed.
It was contended, in answer, that the rule in question was
not admitted in defendant's shop.

His Honour was of opinion that the defendant was en-
lied to a verdict.

Verdict for defendant.

RAMSGATE COUNTY COURT.

THE LAW OP LOST PROPERTY.

A case was heard on Tuesday at the Ramsgate County
Court (Almond v. Masters) of considerable importance to
the community at large. Mr. Buchanan, of Basinghall-
street, London, appeared for the defendant, a publican, of
Ramsgate. It appeared that a poor man found a diamond
pin, worth about £3O, in the street. He took the pin to
defendant, who agreed to keep it until an owner came for-
ward. After keeping it some time, plaintiff came forward
and claimed it, but as he could not give a very accurate
account of it defendant refused to give it up. Upon this a
summons was taken out, and heard on Tuesday. Plaintiff
was still unable to give a description of the pin to satisfy
defendant, and the judge ordered Mr. Masters to show it to
plaintiff.

Mr. Buchanan objected to this proceeding, but his
Honour persisted, and upon the pin being handed over,
plaintiff said, " I'll swear that is the very pin."
His Honour, upon that, ordered it to be given up.
Upon applying in the first instance to defendant, Mr.
Almond had offered £5 for the pin, and Mr. Buchanan
hoped that the finder would be rewarded.
Mr. Almond would consider upon that.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-(TIIIS DAY.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

DEFRAUDING PAWNBROKERS-SHAM GOLD WATCHES.

—Mr. Bravington, pawnbroker, of Tottenham-court-road
and Princes street, Coventry-street, attended the court to
answer the complaint of a Frenchman for detaining a gold
watch.

The Frenchman having stated, through M. Albert, the
interpreter at the court, that he offered the watch in pledge,
and that Mr. Bravington refused to return it,

Mr. Bravington said the applicant presented the watch
to him in pledge, and asked the loan of £4 on it. Having
good reason to suspect him, he asked if it was gold, and the
applicant said it was, and that he had bought it of a gentle-
man. He took his address and sent for Sergeant Stephens,
11 C, to make inquiries as to its correctness, and who, on
his return, stated that he did not live at the Cavendish
Hotel, Sherrard-street, as he stated, but in some cottages
at the back of it. He therefore refused to restore it to the
applicant so that he might have the opportunity of exposing
the fraud which was attempted to be committed, having
already been taken in under similar circumstances,
and knowing that a great many watches of a simi
lar kind were being offered in pledge in various] parts
of the country. On examining the watch offered by the
applicant with the one he had previously received in pledge,
he found that they were of exactly the same make and qua-
lity—of horizontal construction, and so strongly gilt as to
defy the test of aquafortis, and it was only by filing that
the fraud could be detected. They were well got up, the
works good, and jewelled. The value of them, though sold
and offered to pavinbrokers as gold, and valued by the
sellers at £4 10s., was really not more than 30s. He thought

it probable that the applicant was only the tool of others.
Mr. Beadon said Mr. Bravington had done a great ser-
vice in coming forward.

Sergeant Rogers said it was part of a system of.swindling
now being carried on by foreigners. The watches were
made at Paris, and sent here to be got, rid of—the cost of
their manufacture being about 12 francs.
The watch was given up to the Frenchman.
Mr. Beadon said no time should be lost in exposing the
fraud among the trade.

Mr. Bravington said he had been informed that the par-
ties had been very successful, but could not get a sufficient
supply of them from the maker.

From the superior manner in which the watches are
finished, and their being jewelled, though the jewels are of
a very inferior description, they are well calculated to de-
ceive even experienced persons.