The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-07 00:00:00

BRITISH MINES.

Share' Mines. - paid. 1 Closing I Business
Price. Done.
Alfred Consols (Philack) 2.11.10 6 7
29 British Iron
, Condurrow (Camborne) 2O
10 Devon G. Cons. (Tavist.) 1 460 470
East Bassett (Illogan). 30 220 230
Great South Tolgus ' 17s 13 15
G.WhealAlfd.(Phillack) 11.18.8 21 35
—G. Wheal Vor(Helston) 91 1 I '
Lady Bertha
North Frances (Iliogan) 85 71 8
North Wheal Crofty 7.9.4 7 9
-- N.Wh'l Basset (Illogan) nil. 91 105
Par Consols (St. Blaxy) 11 14 15
—, Porkellis Unit. (Wend.) 9 -
-- Sortridge Cons. Min. Co. 6s ; 1/
SouthCaradon(St.Cleer) ' 21 2325 2371
-- South C. Brea( Illogan). 2 21 3
S Wheal Fran. (Mogan) 18.18.9'200 210
5- Tamar Silver and Lead
Mining Co 4l 1; 21
10 Tin Croft 9 4 45
UnitedMines(Gwenr ap) 40 --
Vale of Towey (Calm.) 12s 6d 1 f
West Basset (Illog an) ll 21 22
W. Caradon (Lisk rd) 2O 774 824
Wheal Basset (Il'oXan) 55 190 200
Wheal Buller (Ileelrun) 8 130 140
Wheal Edward (Cats.) 54 • 2 2
I 4
Wheal Kitty (U. Lelant)I 1.7.2 .104 114
Wh'l ilaryAnn(Menhe I 8 46 98
-- Wh'l Trelawney (Lisk. 44 30 32

BELFAST SECRET SOCIETI.Eq. _

(Pt BRITISH ANT) IRISH MAGNETIC TELEGRAPH.)

BELFASTi. PIIURSD~! Y:

The Befit Mercury' 'says the jury were dis-
charged, as there was no probabiliy of their
agreeing, allowing the -prisoners to stand out till
next assizes on renewing their bail.
Crown business of assizes finished.

LA W INTELLIGENCE.--(THIS DAY.)

SECONDARIRS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Potter and a Jury.)
FISKE V. DANIELS-DAMA.GES £720.

This was an action to recover £4,000, the value of four
bills of exchange, including interest.
Mr. Brandt, instructed by Mr. Holt, appeared for the
plaintiff, who is a widow lady ; and Mr. Capreol, of Gray's-
- appeared for the defendant.
It appeared from a long examination, that in the :year
1850 Mrs. Fiske discovered amongst the effects of her de-
ceased husband four bills of exchange for £2,984, accepted
by Major Cartwright in May, 1847. Defendant was kit-re-
duced to her in August, IES), and entrusted with the bills.
He was instructed to obtain the value, or something.
Nothing satisfactory was heard ti 111855, and the defendant
admitted that he had received £3OO (it was believed he ad-
_
milted £600) on account. As no money could be obtained
from him the present action was brought. Defendant was
not authorised to apply the bill to his own purposes. Upon
being expostulated with he said he had handed them
to his brother, to whom he was indebted.
Defendant's brother was called, and said he had received
the bills from defendant. in 1853. His brother paid him
about £1,200 at the time, but he did not take the bills as
security for that debt. They had outran and were value-
less, but better than nothing. Defendant had had some
money since the £1,200 which was due upon his bank-
ruptcy, and requiring a further advance he pressed witness
to accept the bills. In 1855 witness, through
the instrumentality of defendant, and a Mr. Bunardy re-
ceived £6OO from Rickards, scl!citor to the -Cartwright
family. Witness paid Bunardy no commission.. That was
paid by Rickards. Witness paid defendant £456 10s. on
account of the £6OO, and applied £143105. to the liquidation
of his claim on defendant.

Mr. Rickards said defendant brought him the bills in
1852, and said he had discounted them. Witness did not
negotiate with him. Witness paid Mr. Nathaniel Daniels,
the witness, £660 for the bills, and that person paid £6O as
commission to Bunardy. At least that sum was paid in
Mr. Daniels's presence.

Mr. Capreol contended for defendant that as that person
had been put to considerable trouble and expense, it was
useless to say he was not to have remuneration. The bills
were not worth 4000, and ittwas in the evidence that only
£6OO had been obtained for them. It remained for the jury
to say what sum they considered the plaintiff was en-
titled to.

The learned Secondary summed up, and pointed out that
Bunardy had been paid commission, which did not appear
to have been earned by defendant.
The jury found for plaintiff—damages £720.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-(TRIS DAY.,

21.1ARLBOROUGH• TREET.

I PLATE ROBBERY AT WILLIS'S ROOINIS.—John Saun-
ders, a respectable-looking man, a waiter, was charged with
stealing twenty plated forks, of the value of £lO, the pro-
perty of Messrs. Frederick and Charles Willis, Willis's
Rooms, King- street, St. James's.

From the evidence of Stephen Mowbray Payne, manager
of the rooms, it appeared that a dinar having taken place
at the rooms, at which the Duke of Cambridge was in the
chair, the prisoner was employed as an extra waiter, and
that in the course of the evening his (Payne's) attention
was called by the cellarman to the fact that a quantity of
table forks wrapped in brown paper were lying in the cellar
covered with loose straw. He then spoke to a constable,
and told him to watch near the spot, and when the person
came to take them to take him into custody.
Peskett, 143 C, said that having been spoken to by the
last witness he placed himself in a position to see who
came into the cellar, and about a quarter-past 12 he saw
the prisoner come along, and just before he got to where
the forks were lying noticed him stop, and listen, and then
stoop and pick up the forks and put them in his coat pocket.
He (Peskett) then stepped forward and asked what he had
got, when he replied " that it was all right ;" but on telling
him that would not do, he took the forks from his pocket
and laid them on a tub.

The prisoner said the forks, not being taken out of the
house he did not see hpw it could be called a robbery. There
was plate lying about in all parts of the 'house, and if he
had wanted to take any he could have taken more valuable
property. He had never had a blemish on his character,
and had been employed at the Maitsion House, the London
Tavern, and other plates. He had merely taken up the
forks to take them to the first witness, having found them
in the cellar.
Committed for trial.