The Sun.
London, England, 1857-11-24 00:00:00

LAW his Day.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
Sittings in Banco, before Lord Campbell, Justices Cole•

ridge, Wightman, and Erie.)
THE ST. PANCRAS VESTRY.
The Solicitor-General moved for a rule nisi, calling-
upon the vestry of St. Pancras to show cause why
mandamus should not issue, calling on them to elect au
auditor, under the direction and order of the Poor-!avr
Board, pursuant to the 4 and 5 Wm. IV., chap. 76, see.
46. The rating, &c., of the parish was ve.ted in the
Vestry, and the management of the poor in the directors
of the poor; and the Poor-late Board, on the 14th May
last, called upon the directors to appoint an auditor of-
the accounts relative to the parish within two
months. On the 18th July, after the expilation of the
time of election, application was made by the Poor-
law Board to the parish authorities, and a lengthened
correspondence ensued. The result was that, on the
28th Oct., the clerk to the directors communicated to
the Poor-law Board, that they did not consider them-
selves empowered to elect an auditor, the election of
the parish officers being vested in the vestry. The
learned counsel contended that the election of officers
under the local act bad no reference to the poor-law act,
and that the auditor was a new officer appointed under
the latter act.

Mr. Justice Coleridge asked if the local act provided
for the auditing of the parish accounts ?
The Solicitor General said it did by the 83d section.
Lord Campbell—You say this is an independent
officer, and is to be appointed under an act superadded
to the local act ?
The Solicitor General—Yes.

Rule granted.
THE QUEEN V. KEMP-ALLEGED CRUELTY BY A HUSBAND.

Mr. Power moved that Mr. Keay, the defendant in
this case, should be called oa to give security.
Lord Campbell—ls Mr. Kemp here I
Mr. Kemp, who was brought up in ettstody of Mr-
Keene, governor of Horsemonger-lane gaol, then canto
forward.
Lord Campbell—Have you anything to say !
Mr. Kemp—Yes, illy lord.
Lord Campbell—Then the Curt will hear anything
you have to say on the law.

Mr. Kemp then read a written statement, from which
we gathered that he stated the minor charges contained
in his wife's statement to be totally untrue, and many of
them greatly exaggerated. He denied that he even com-
mitted the acts of violence alleged, and attributed it to
his wife's unfortunate malady, not being as times in her
right mind. She had on frequent occasions, and before
setkral persons, charged others with having attempted
to smother her, as she had alleged against him. ID
had tried every means to get rid of the foolish
notions with which her mind was imbued, but without
effect. He admitted that he had taken away her ring,
but denied that he had used violence in so doing. ne
was induced to do so because she had degraded him, but
he was ready now to return it to her. Her statement

with regard to the application to a single magistrate,
and that he refused to entertain her information, was
untrue. It was made in petty sessions before several, whop
after hearing the facts of the case, unanimously dismissed
her application. He had been lately in difficulties, and
had had to pass through the Insolvent Court, and at the
magistrates suggestion he consented to allow his wife
2s. 6d. per week, with a promise that when he was is
employment he would allow her 101. a-year ;he had
now obtaine I employment and was ready to pay her
that sum in advance. He alluded to a testimonial that
had been presented to him by the inhabitants of
Woodbridge, observing that if his conduct had
been such as that described they would not have
given it to him. He charged his wife's soli•
citors with having caused her to institute
these proceedings against him from ill-feeling towards
him, and that they knew her friends would pay their
charges, and that they were perfectly aware a medical
certificate had been given of his wife's insanity at certain
times. He prayed to be dismissed from custody.
Lord Campbell said that if the law was to be rigidly
enforced the defendant must be bound over. He, ho
ever, suggested, if it was possible, fur an arrangement
to be come to.

Mr. Power said he had received a communication
staling that the wife's statements were to be relied 00.
Lord Campbell—Thedefendant's statementcontradietg
the wife's materially, especially with reference to the
application to a magistrate, There was a great air of
sincerity about the defendant's statement.

Mr. Power—This is the first time I have heard it, awl
I have no means of inquiring into it. I understand the
law to be that, where articles of the peace are exhibited,

the party cJmplained of must give security, whether the
stacement contained in them be correct or not.

Lord Campbell—That is true ; but the Court has the
power of fixing the amount at which the party com•
plained against shall be held in recognisancee. I think
the best course will be to call upon the defendant to enter
into his own recognisances in 1001. to keep the peace
for twelve months.
The defendant entered into the required recognisanceo
and was discharged.

THE QUEEN V. THE REV. H. C. OHERRY.
In this COw., articles of pca,_lo had also been exhibited
against the defendant for threats towards his wife. On
the application of counsel, the attachment was ordered
to stand over till next term, the defendant entering into
recognisances not to take away his wife by force, as
threater:ed.
The recognisances were fixed at 1001. and two sureties
iu 501. each.
THE ROYAL BRITISH BANK.—THE QUEEN V. CAMERON.
Mr. Dig by Seymour moved for a rule calling on the
Attorney—General to show cause why the defendant'S
trial (he being the secretary to the Royal Briti,h Bank)
should not be postponed till next term,- on the ground
that he had not bad time to prepare his defence.
Rule granted.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Comruissioner Goulburn.)
IN RE BYERS, WALKER, AND BYERS.
To-day was appointed for hearing further arg
tunente
on the question of certificates applied for on behalf of
these baukrupt4, who had carried on an extensive bug.
ness in London and Liverpuol as shipowners, itc: The
failure was to a large amount, the liabilities being ul3'
wards of 250,0001., and the assets about 35,000/.
Mr. Pook opposed on behalf of Mr. Farwig, a creditors
and Mr. Lawrance for others ; Mr. Roxburgh appeared
on behalf of Messrs. Syers, and Mr. Bayley for Walker.
The case was now further adjourned by consent until
his day week.

IN RE STEEDMAN.
This bankrupt was described as of Albany-street,
Regents'-park, pianoforte manufacturer, and came up to
pass his last exunination, on accounts prepared by
Messrs. Paul and Turner, shows a surplus, Aug., 1856'
of 3111. ; debtor to creditors, unsecured, 1,5121, ; to
dit o, holding secu►ity, 1181. ; liabilities, 413/. ; profits,
226/. ; creditor, good debts, 841. ; doubtful, 1631. ;
property, 525/. ; ditto, in the hands of credi•
iors. 601. ; trade expenses, 6011. ; losses, 4044.,
of which 3631. was on the realisation of the stook,
&c. ; house expenses, 4301. The examination was ad.
jourued for a month.