The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-17 00:00:00

BREAD.

The prices of wheaten bread in the metropolis are from
9d to 9Ad ; of household ditto, iid to 8,3 d per 4 lb loaf.
HIDES AND SKINS.

Market hides, 5616 to 641 b, 4d to sd; 641 b to 721 b, 5d
to sid ; 721 b to 801 b, sld to Sid 2 • 801 b to 881 b, sid to 6d ;
861 b to 9611), Gd to 6.4 d ; 961 b to 1041 b, 64d to 6 d ; 1041 b
to 1121 b, 6id to 7d ; upwards, —d to —d ; horse hides,
N Od to lOs Od ; Calf skins, light, 4s 01 to 5s Od ; ditto
run, 95 Od to Os Od; Polled Sheep, lOs Od to 12s Od ;
7s 6d to Os Od ; Half-breds, 7s Gd to Os Od ; Downs, 5s 9d to
7s Od ; Shearlings, Os Od ; Lambs, Os Od.
. _ _

HAY MARKETS.
SaIITHPIELD.—Meadow hay, 21 15s to 4/ 4s ; clover
l oa do.,
31 108 to 51 Os; and straw, 11 4s to 11 98 pd.
A fair average supply and a steady demand.
CUMBERLAND.—Meadow hay, 21 16s to 41 4s; clovEr
do., 31 108 to 5/ Os ; and straw, 11 48 to 1/. 103 per load.
Supply moderate and trade tolerably firm.
WIIITECTIAPEL.—Meadow bay, 2/ 115 s tc 4/ 48 ; clove
isoc.,t,h3h/ la;2asntd straw to srla
wss ss;w
and straw,
at our quotations.
aw, 1/ 48 to 1/ 98
soldolo
o per load.

BLOOMSBURY COUNTY COURT.
PLANCHE V. JAMES —THEATRICAL REPRESENTATION.—
"A PLEASANT NEIGHBOUR."
Mr. Heath, the Judge, at the sitting of the court gave
judgment in this case, which was reported on the '27th
nit., to which an important question was raised respect-
ing theatrical representations. The action was brought
to recover a penalty of 405., under the 3 and 4 William
IT., c. 15, known as the "Dramatic Authors' Act,"
for the defendant having permitted the representation
of a piece called "A Pleasant Neighbour," of which
the plaintiff is the author. The defence set up was, that
although the Lord Chamberlain's licence was to the de-
fendant, the original lessee, yet, having let the theatre
to Mr. Geo. Bolton on the night on which the piece was
performed, he was not liable. On the other side it was
contended by Mr. Geo. Lewis (Lewis and Lewis), the
attorney for the Dramatic Authors' Society, that, under
the authority of the 7th sec. of the 6th and 7th Viet.,
c. 18, it was clearly the intention of the Legislature, by
the words of that section, to convey to the public the
person absolutely responsible for all matters in connec-
tion with the theatre.
His Honour. (Nfr Heath) considered the matter of some
importance, and took time before be gave his judgment.
He now delivered his opinion, remarking that his mind
was made up on the hearing of the case which related to
a performance at the Queen's Theatre in Tottenham-
street, but he would not hastily decide the matter. He
referred to the acts and the licence of the Lord Cham-
berlain to Mr. James, which was clearly a personal li-
cence, and nc.t to the place. He held that Mr. James was
liable, and gave judgment for the plaintiff with costs.

THE GREAT NORTHERN _FRAUDS.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—Jew. 16.
[The following appeared in part of our impression of
yesterday :--]
(Before Mr. Baron Martin and Mr. Justice Willem.)
Leopold Redpath and Charles James Cornyns Kent
were placed at the bar this morning to answer the in-
dictments of fraud and forgery preferred against them by
the Directors of the Great Northern Railway Company.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Bodkin, and 111 r. Gif-
ford prosecuted ; Mr. Sergeant Parry and Mr. Tindal
Atkinson defended Redpath ; Mr. Hawkins and Mr.
Thompson defended Kent.
On the learned judges taking their seats on the bench
Kent was ordered to retire, and Redpath was tried
singly, upon one of the indictments charging him with
forgery. The document was described as a transfer of
a stock, and there were a variety of counts in order to
meet any legal difficulties that might arrise,
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, in addressing the jury, ex-
plained the nature of the prisoner's duty as the transferer
of Stock in the Great Northern Railway. The particular
charge was that of forging and uttering a transfer deed,
numbered 3,623. It appeared from an examination of
the books that an amount of stock was brought into the
books of the Company about the time the forgery was
alleged to have taken place, in favour of John Morris,
who was described as of Manningtree, Essex, gentleman,
and the manner in which it 'vas brought in appeared by
the books of the company in the following entries,
"OB 197 B," which represented the old books of the
company folio 197 B. The name of the attesting wit-
ness was Shaw. Not only were there no such persons
as Morris and Shaw, but there were no such entries in
the old books as indicated by the numbers in the new
books. The account was altogether fictitious—an in-
vention of Redpath's for the purpose of establishing that
fraud which he ultimately carried out.
Evidence was then adduced to bear out the statements
of the learned gentleman, which was merely a recapitu
lation of the evidence published in The Stm during the
•xamination of the prisoner at Clerkenwell Police-court.
Mr. Sergeant Parry having addressed the Court for
the prisoner,
The Jury retired, and, after a short absence, returned
into Court, and gave a verdict of "Guilty."
Leopold Redpath and Charles James Comyn Kent
were then arraigned for feloniously forging and uttering
a transfer to George Sidney, with intent to defraud.
The particulars of this case were similar to the last
and, as the facts are so fresh in the recollection of the
public, it is unnecessary now to repeat them.
After the examination of o numbs of witnesses,
Mr. Hawkins then proceeded to address the jury on
behalf of the prisoner Kent. He said that the prisoner
was precluded by the law from giving his own account
of the transaction, and he complained that he had not
been treated fairly by the manner in which the case bad
been brought forward against him. He bad been for
several years in the service of the company—his integ-
rity had never been impeached. He bad always done
his duty, and he hoped to be able to satisfy them that
there was not the slightest foundation for the charge
that was made against him. He confessed he was sur-
prised at the weakness of the case for the prosecution,
and it appeared to him that even upon the facts as they
had been proved there was nothing to show that there
was any fraudulent intention on the part of the prisoner,
and if that was not made out the prisoner was entitled
to an acquittal. So far as the case of Mr. Redpath was
concerned, he had nothing to say ; but whatever might
bays been the nature of his proceedings, he submitted
that there was nothing whatever to show that Kent was
at all mixed up with aay fradulent proceedings, or that
when he signed this transfer he had the least idea that
he was doing anything wrong. What evidence was
there that he bad aided or abetted Mr. Redpath
in
the commission of any fraud 3 He submitted that there
was none at all that would justify the jury in coming to
such a conclusion. What was there to show that Kent
knew that Redpath had no authority to make use cf
the name of the witness l'farnmond, particularly when
they recollected the manner in which that witness bad
given his evidence, and his admission that Redpath
had told him that he had stock standing in his name They would also recollect that he did not deny that he bad
beer -

nt
An told a great many times by Mr. Redpath thatba he
bad made use of his name ; and he asked them, upon
all these facts, whether th,

... was anng to make
it appear clearly that Kent ere
knew thaytthi Redpath had
no authority to make use of the name of Ham-
mond, and whether he might not have attested
the signature in a perfectly innocent manner V
The learned connect then referred to the fact of
•ne of the five transfers being proved to have been
attested by Cawkell, another clerk ; and Kent had only
done the same thing ; and if one of them was guilty of
•rgery and fraud, it was clear that they were both
equally guilty. Again, let them look at the position of
his client. Mr. Redpath bad almost unlimited confi-
dence placed in him ; lee evidently was allowed by the
director's to do almost what he pleased ; and was it to
be wondered at that a junior clerk in the office should
have done what his superior required of him, when he
no doubt told him at the time that it was all right, and
that he Was •my traneferring stock that belonged to him,
and which he had paid fort It was impossible for him
to call eithersof the prisoners to prove the facts ; hut he
submitted that there was quite enough in the evidence
that had been adduced for the prosecution to justify the
j ury in coming to the conclusion that this was the real
history of the transaction. The learned counsel then
proceeded to observe upon the absence of any evidence
to show that Kent ever obtained the slightest ad vaistage
from the transaction, er that a farthing of money was
received by him for what he did upon the occasion, coe•
eluding by expressing a confident hope that the jury
would not upon the facts before them convict the pri-
soner Kent of an offeece which might subject him to a
sentence of trenspertivion for a long period.
A great number of respectable witnesses were era
mined, who gave the prisoner a most excellent charac-
ter from the earliest period of his life.
Baron Martin then proceeded to sum up.
His Lordship said that, with regard to th 3 prisoner
Rec;patb, it appeared to him that if the jury leelieved the
evidence of the witnesses there could be no doubt that he
bad signed the name ',fa non-existing person to a transfer
of stock for the purpose of fraud, and if that was made
out he was, in law, undoubtedly guilty of forgery. In
.oference to some observations that had been made upon
the subject of some supposed proceedings of the direwor,,
and to their disposing of stock under the name of other
personß, he could conceive that this might be done for
the purpose of preventing alarm In the public mind,
or preventing a panic from the supposition that
they were parting with their interest in the railway; but
it was a totally different thing when a person dealt with
stock which in reality had no existence, and where the
transaction, as appeared in this case, was entirely fictiti-
ous ; and be therefore co, sidered that even if such a pro-
ceeding as that suggested had taken place, it had nothing
whatever to do With the question as to the guilt or inne-
fenc o the prisoner Redpatle With regard to the other
prisoner, Kent, the case Was very different, and he xas
bound to tell them that the mere act of attesting a false
signature was not eufficient to 'support the charge of
forgery, hut they must also he satisfied that at the time
he so acted he was aware of what he was doing, and had
a fraudulent intention, and if it was a mere acts f i gu-
larity, the jury would not be jn tified in finding guilty upon the present indictment. He could not hel
also observing that it did seem rather odd that Cawkel!
the other clerk, who Was proved to have done exactly the
was not prosecuted, but
same thing upon two occasions,
remained in the service of the company, while a proeecu
tion was instituted against the prisoner Kent for a pre
cisely similar act. He concluded by sayin the jury
would take all these c:rcumetances into theistconsidera-
end if any doubt existed upon their mind% the good
tion,
character the prisoner had received front a great number
of highly respectable per sons ought to have cotsiderabie
weight upon their decision.

The Jury almost immediately returned a verdict of
guilty against Redpath, and not guilty as regarded Rent.
Sergeant Ballantine said that there was another in-
dictment for felony again,t Kent, but as the circumstance,
were precisely the same he should not, after what had
fallen from the Court, and the verdict of the jury,
proceed with those charges. There was, however, one
indictment for misdemeanour, and he should like to
have time to reflect whether he ought to proceed with it
or not, and be proposed that it should stand over to the
next session, and that Rent should in the meantime go
at large upon his own recognisance.
Mr. Hawkins said he must protest against such a step
being taken, as it would involve the
riliQery upon the
prisoner of having a charge hanging over him for an•
tber month.
Sergeant Ballantino said if his learned friend would
not consent to what be proposed, be should go on with I
the case.

Mr. Denison, the chairman of the Great N,rthern
Railway, here Mcidtt a private communication to I.