The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-13 00:00:00

WILSON V. BATSON.

Mr. HumrnaErs stated that the plaintiff is proprietor
of some houses near Wilmingtou-square, one of which was
tenanted by a person named Dolphin, who had underlet a
part of it to the defendant, a surgeon, at 401. a year, of
which sum 101. was due for one quarter's rent. In August
or September Dolphin quitted the premises without notice,
upon which the defendant called upon the plaintiff and
urged him not to distrain upon his furniture, and if the
plaintiff pleased he would remain his tenant, and would quit
at a month's warning. The plaintiff acceded to this sug-
gestion, and having let the house to a person named Nay-
ler in the month of September he gave the defendant the
month's notice, as Nayler wished to have the whole of the
house. A few days before the quarter's rent became due
the plaintiff sent to the house and found the defendant re-
moving his goods. He said to the person sent to demand
the rent, that he was only going to attend the funeral of a
friend in the country ; that he should be back in a few days
and would then pay the plaintiff the rent. It was then
found that several dilapidations had been committed on the
premises, which a builder estimated would amount to be-
tween 51. and 61., and for these and for the rent the present
action was brought.
The SHERIFF summed up, and the Jury found a verdict
for the plaintiff for the quarter's rent only, 10/.

COURT OF 13.qUESTS.

KINGSGATE-STREET,

Mr. Burt summoned a chimney-sweep, named Bassett,
for five shillings.

Bassett was represented by his wife; who acknowledged
the debt, which was contracted with plaintiff for cards of
address, but that it was not convenient to discharge it at
the present time, trade being dull hi conoquence of the
absence of his friend* amongst the nobility and gentry from
town : she however trusted that the number of fashionable
arrivals which might be immediately expected; and to whom
Mr. Basset would shortly pay his tapas, would enable
him to discharge the amount of his demand.
The CoNtmlssioNEK asked what were defendant's pre-
sent circumstances, and how he lived? to which Burt re-
plied that he was quite an aristocratic sweep, who kept a
handsome house, all of which was occupied by himself and
his satellites, and that if he required visiting cards he was
certainly able to pay for them.
The COMMISSIONER entertained the same opinion, and
accordingly made an order in favour of complainant.
A man named Sinfield, under five feet in height, appeared
to answer the complaint of Mrs. Mercer, who stands at
least six feet in her stockings ; both parties affording a
capital illustration of Ossa and the wart.
The claim of the plaintiff was for 155., which had been
incurred for beer, &c.

Sinfield acknowledged the debt, and the Co) DiPsIoNER

demanded how he would discharge it? Sinfield—l'll pay
so much a week, your Worship.
COMMISSIONER.— How much is that? Sinfield—As
little as your Worship will allow me ; I'm wery poor, your
Honour.

Mrs. Mercer—That's not the fact, sir ; his wife keeps a
most respectable laundry.
Sinfield—l'm sure it arn't respectable ; you bees the first
that ever accused it of that, Mrs. Mercer.
The COMMISSIONER, however, despite defendant's libel
upon himself, directed him to discharge the debt in four
monthly payments.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.

Mr. Smart, the vestry clerk of Bishopsgate parish, ap-
plied to the LORD MAYOR yesterday, for his signature to
the suspended order of a removal of a sick pauper, whom
Alderman Copeland visited in his bed-room. He stated
that since the Reform Bill had taken place, the parishes
were become more particular in requiring that all the forms
required by the Act of Parliament for the removal of pau-
pers should be complied with, before they would admit
those who had claims upon them for parochial protection.
One of those forms was, that a magistrate should go to any
pauper who might by illness or infirmity be confined, and
take his deposition as to his settlement, and then report to
another magistrate the result of the visit, and that both
magistrates having signed the affidavit of the pauper, should
proceed to adjudicate.
The LORD MAYOR saw no reason for departing from the
usual practice of depending upon the overseers for the ex-
amination of paupers, particularly as such departure would
be attended with considerable inconvenience to the Ma-
gistrates.
Mr. Smart said that by the 49th Geo. 111. the order of
removal could not be made without the examination by a
Magistrate. The consequence of non-compliance with the
Act was that the parish to which the pauper belonged
would not be compelled to pay the expenses incurred by
him in the parish in which he might be confined, so that it
was now a great object to pay accurate attention to the
construction of the Act of Parliament.

The LORD MAYOR—The Act does not say that the Ma-
gistrate must actually go into the pauper's bedroom to take
the examination. It is quite enough if the overseer take
down the evidence and hand it over to the Magistrate. As
there were a great many cases of the kind, the alteration in
the practice would be exceedingly inconvenient.
Mr. Smart regretted the necessity of strictly obeying the
terms of the Act, as advantage would be certainly taken of
every instance of neglect. By a former Act it was neces-
sary that a pauper's examination should be taken before
two Magistrates, but the 49th of Geo. 111. altered that
form, and his Lordship's signature was necessary to prove
that the report had been made to him by Alderman Cope-
land, who had done his part, by going to the sick-bed. Lord
Ellenborough ruled that the form was necessary.
The LORD MAYoa said that Lord Tenderden held
that it was unnecessary, and observed that the examina-
tion by the overseer was quite sufficient.
Mr. Hobler was of opinion that the common order
which Mr. Smart wished to have signed might be ob-
jected to by those who required that the examination
should be taken before a Magistrate in the presence of
the pauper ; an especial order, stating the facts would
he thought be necessary.
Mr. Smart was willing to take upon himself the re-
sponsibility, if the Lord Mayor would sign the common
form.

The LORD MAYOR at length consented to place his sig-
nature to the order, but repeated his conviction that the
presence of a Magistrate at the sick bed of a pauper was
not necessary.