The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-25 00:00:00

it was not to be supposed when a judge inclined to
believe one side that he imputed wilful and-corrupt
perjury to the other. After some conversation be-
tween his HOnonr and Mr. Bond, during which the
latter said Mr. Barrett felt hurt at the expression
made use of by his Honour, that " the truthwas all
on plaintiff's side," Mr. Senior said he unfortunately
happened to be the advocate on the occasion, and
he believed what his Honour had then said was
that "the preponderance of evidence was clearly on
the side of the plain ti ff." His Hon our said distinctly
that it was never his intention to impute wilful and
corrupt perjury to Mr. Barrett. At the same time
he considered that Mr, Buirratt w4s very much in-
debted to Mr. Bond for the very proper course he
had advised him to take, because he (the judge) was
sure when he read the explanation it would be
found that there was just ground for the summons
which he had received to show cause why he should
not be co emitted for contempt of court. His Honour
then quoted from one of the letters sent by Mr. Bar-
ratt,in which he had threatened to get up a " peti-
tion against his Honour,whidh he could get signed
by 40 members of both Houses of Parliament.' The
longer he remained a judge the more cautious was
he of imputing motives to any man. He knew he
was quite liable to err ; but on deciding on the va-
rious cases that came before him he must conceive
the truth to be somewhere. He did not deny Mr.
Barratt's or any other person's competency to write
to him; but it was another matter when threaten-
ings were used. His Honour then referred to a de-
cision given in the case, " Lechmere v. Charlton"
(in Bingham's Reports, 339). By this it appeared
that a letter sent to a judge imputing to him im-
proper motives was held to be contempt of court, or
one sent to a judge with the object of diverting the
course of justice was also contempt of court. On the
ground of his having apologised his Honour then
only fined Mr. Barrett X 5, to be given to the Wake-
field Dispensary.

ARCIIDEACON DENISON AND HIS
SERVANTS.

At the Western Petty Sessions, on Monday last
(before the Earl of Cavan and Mr. T. T. Knyfton
and Mr. H. F. Emery), Ann Gamlen was charged
by James Hudson and Emma Baker with libel,
calling upon her to appear at the next assizes to
answer for the same. Mr. H. Davies appeared for
the complainants, and Mr. Bailey for the defendant.
It appeared that
.the two complainants were ser-
vants to the Venerable Archdeacon Denison, and
that the defendant had also lived for a short time
in the same service, but from her bad conduct had
been dismissed ; immediately upon which she wrote
the libel complained of, and which imputed that an
improper intimacy had existed between the com-
plainants. The Venerable Archdeacon was exa-
mined in support of the complainants' case, but
before giving his evidence he stated that his object
was not to punish the defendant, but to protect the
character of two persons whom he looked upon,
from their long and faithful services, as his family,
and even now if Gamlen Would withdraw publicly
in court the accusation, he would close the whole
matter. A conference then took place between Mr.
Bailey and his client, in which it was evident Mr.
Bailey, wished Gamlex to retract the imputation,
but which she determinedly refused to do. The
archdeacon's examination was then proceeded with.
He stated that Hudson- had. been in his service
upwards of thirteen years, and Emma Baker had
been a domestic in his service above three years,
and had given him entire satisfaction in every
respect; Gamlen also had been a servant of his
from October last to March, but he had
discharged her for foul language, disobedience to
orders, and general bad conduct of the worst de-
scription ; he had discharged her before receiving
the letter containing the libel complained of ; had
no knowledge of that charge until after he had told
her to leave the house in an hour's time ; she then
said, as she was going out of the room, "I have
seen James Hudson and Emma Baker commit for-
nication." He left home the latter end of January,
and Mrs. Denison a week after; both returned
early in March ; he had received two letters from
Gamlen during his absence, but neither alluded to
the charge before the Court ; had told Gamlen
several times she would be discharged for foul
language ; after leaving the room, on the occasion
referred to, lie heard a noise in the kitchen, where
Gamlen was abusing Emma Baker; he subse-
quently received the letter now produced ; would
swear it was Ann Gamlen's writing, being in the
same handwriting as other letters he had received
from her. In reply to Mr. Bailey, Archdeacon
Denison said that Ann Gamlen brought the letter
to his house herself, and he felt no scruple in saying
that it was her writing. Mr. Bailey, on behalf of
Gamlen, contended that the letter in question was
a privileged communication, which relieved it
entirely from the character of a libel, and dwelt
particularly upon the words, " I am quite ready to
meet Hudson and Baker face to face," to show that
the archdeacon's most proper course would have
been to have investigated the matter in his own
house, rather' than to have recourse to the pre-
sent 'proceedings. Mr. Bailey then quoted several
cases, with a view of showing that the letter was
a privileged communication, and asked what ad-
vantage could be gained by bringing the girl
Gamlen before the magistrates, in order to ob-
tain an indictment ? Mr. Davies, in reply, said it
was the most legitunate mode of proceeding, for
the judges held it was cowardly to go to an assize
to obtain upon an ex parte statement an indictment
against a party to be heard at tho following assize ;
every judge would condemn such a course. Mr.
Bailey, with much earnestness, again submitted to
the bench that it was a privileged communication,
consequently not a libel at all, therefore the magis-
trates should dismiss the application. The magis-
trates, after consulting together fora few minutes,
concurred in this opinion, and the application was
refused. Archdeacon Denison, • addressing Mr,
Davies, said, " Then you indict her at the assizes
and left the court.—Bristol Times..

IMP ORTANT TO MEMBERS OF
BENEFIT SOCIETIES.

On Saturday William Glegg, the secretary to the
South London Branch of the British Engineers'
Benefit Society, held at the Goldsmiths' Arms
public-house, Southwark-bridge-road, was sum-
moned before Mr. Combe, at Southwark Police-
court, by Mr. William Drage, the general treasurer,
for unlawfully withholding and detaining the books
of the society after receiving due notice to give
them up.
It appeared that the British Engineers' Benefit
Society has been established for some time, for the
purpose of rendering assistance to such members as
might be in need. Branches were established, and
among them was one at the Goldsmiths' Arms, in
the Southwark-bridge-road, of which the defendant
was the secretary. From the evidence of Mr. Drage,
the general treasurer, it appeared that, owing to
the reduction of the members, and to save the ex-
penditure, a-general meeting took place at the Lon-
don Coffee-house on the 20th of September, when
resolutions were passed to amalgamate several of
the branches, among which was that held at the
Goldsmiths' Arms. Notice was then served on the
defendant to hand over the books of his branch to
the general. society,- so that inquiries might be
entered into respecting its stability, &c., and on his
refusing the present proceedings were taken. De-
fendant denied the power of the general society to
compel them to amalgamate, and in consequence of
that a case was laid before Mr. Tidd Pratt for his
opinion. _

Mr. Solomon produced Mr. Tidd Pratt's opinion
on the subject. The learned gentleman said that
on looking over . the rules of the society and the
case submitted to him, he was of opinion that, ac-
cording to the 14th clause of the Friendly Societies
Act, any society having branches enrolled under
that act could at any proper -and legal general
meeting order an amalgamation. He (Mr. Solo.
mon) contended that such general meeting was
legally held, and the amalgation carried.
Mr. Lewis denied that anything of the kind took
place to their knowledge, and they never received
any notice of it. The fact was, that the Southwark
branch was doing well, and the others being badly
off, wanted to take their money.
Mr. Combe asked whether he denied the authority
of the parent society to amalgamate.
Mr. Lewis replied that he did not, but he con-
tended that there was nothipg to show that such a
meeting took place, and that such resolutions were
carried.

Mr. Combo asked whether Mr. Solomon had the
minute book in which these resolutions were passed
at the general meeting on the 20th of September.
Mr. Solomon replied that he had not. He had,
however, a copy of them, which he produced.
Comb,, told him that would not do. It was,
however, Such an important case to the working
classes, that he should" adjourn it for the produc-
tion of the general secretary's minute book.

{HOLLOWAY'S. PILLS AND OINTILENT.—MeIaTIChOIy,
low spirits, and sluggishness of mind and body, are pro-
verbially attributable to England's climate, aided in some
to measurestthserdUtbey:tmoi u,;,serohof depressionzaibait7, Holloway's ointment be well
rubbed over the liver and stomach twice a day their action
will be roused, the food will be better digested, and the pills,
simultaneously taken, will purify the blood and regulate
every function, instantly dispel gloom and weariness
from the mind. These purifying and restorative remedies
penetrate every; fibre of the frame, restoring vigour,
regularity,: and health, alike to all, whether anxiety,
climate, or pleasure, has undermined nip strength and
emtiNti94l