The Sun.
London, England, 1857-11-16 00:00:00

ARRIVALS AT SHREWSBITRY.

Vandal, Pantomime, Pet', Bretze, Little Cob, Flo-
rence (late Agra), Queen Lily, Orlando, Brother to
Laird Duff, Queen of the Etst, L4verna, Victoria, St.
Giles, Englemere, Lady Nelson, Princess Royal (Mr.
Cunningham's), f byJericbo, Dividend, special License,
Torn Moody, Willie Wright, Trot, Dot, Pyrrhus the
Second, July, Wild Honey, Indian Queen, South-
Western, Marauder, Spinet, Good Friday, Emulator,
Romeo, Red Rose, Lady Aintree, Shirah, Knight of
Avon, St. Dunstan, Hamlet, M.BB llarkaway,
Blind Harper, Thistledown, Tiff, Princess of Orange,
Erin-go-Bragh, Chester, Hobgoblin, (Ma'am, Miss
Waters, Unexpected, and Secunda,

LAW INTELLIGEDTO.O.--(This Day.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
CREMORNE GARDENS-SIMPSON V. CARTER.

Mr. James, Q.C., said, in this case a rule had been
issued calling upon the plaintiff to show cause why
certain interrogatories should not be propounded to the
plaintiff by the defendant, and why be should answer
the same within 10 days. This was an aciion for slan-
der, brought by Mr. Simpson, proprietor of Cremorne
Gardens, against the defendant, fur charging him, as
proprietor of these gardens, in allowing conduct to g
on there of a character to corrupt the morals of the
public.

Lord Campbell said the Court did not grant the rule
calling on the plaintiff to answer the interrogations, but
to show cause why they should not be propounded.
Mr. James said the rule was for both.
Lord Campbell—The court never said the plain`,lff
should be compelled to answer them.
Mr. James said that when tile rule was moved it was
stated that Mr. Simpson declined to answer them en
the ground that he might criminate himself. No suet
refusal was ever made by Mr. Simps m, but only to the
extraordinary nature of the interrogations, asking
him to answer facts not withisi his knowledg,,
such as " Are you not aware that after parties
had left the gardens ladies were guilty of in-
decent conduct on their way home to London." It was
utterly impossible for Mr. Simpson to answer such ques
tions. He had no desire to screen hiesself'or evade an-
swering the question, and he would do so in the best
way be could.
Lord Campbell said that when the rule was moved,
he had no doubt Mr. Simpson would be willing to
answer all the interrogations he could.
Mr. James said it was peeencly absurd to.expect Mr.
Simpson to be able to answer for the conduct of particis
oft his premises.
Mr. Justice Wightruan said the rule was granted to
exhibit interrogatories.
Mr. Keane said he moved for the rule, and it was
drawn up in the terms of the section, hut by some mis•
take the words were introduced calling on the plaintiff
to answer the interrogatories. _ _

The rule was made al)olute for propounding the in-
,errogators.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE. (This Day.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

CAUTION TO INDISCRIMINATE ALMS GIVER.—Jane
Rodgers, a dirty, dissipated, middle-aged woman, wao
placed at the bar before Mr. Beadon, charged with
being drunk and begging.
It appeared from the evidence of police constable
175 C, that on the previous night he was on tluty in
plain clothes, in the Haymarket, when he saw th,
prisoner, who was much intoxicated, go up to seve-
ral ladies and gentleman, and solicit alms. In som-
inst!..nces she succeeded, in others she did not, and at
last she came up to him, and after telling him a pitiful
tale, requested him to give her a penny, with whin
to buy bread, as she was literally starving. He told
her to be off, when she went up to a gentleman,
who pitying her oistress gave her sixpence. She ❑o
sooner received the money, than she entered a pub-
lic house. She spent the money in gin, thou re-
tnned to the streetF. He then took her into cue-
toddy.
She vvaii sent to prison for a month with hard
labour.