The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-24 00:00:00

TENSION BILL.

On the motion of Mr. J. LOCHS the order for going into
committee on this bill was discharged, and the bill was
withdrawn.

MORTGAGE TRANSFER (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill was read a second time.

Several bills were postponed.
The house then adjourned at 20 minutes past five o'clock.

LA TV INTELLIGIEIVCE—(2his Day).

EXCHEQUER COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Channell.)
LAST V. DOWLING.
The further hearing of this cause was resumed this
morning.
The principal witness examined for the plaintiff was
Mr. James Squire, who detailed the legal proceedings
taken with respect to former transactions connected with
the suit. He then went on to relate what took place be-
fore the Judge at Chambers, and then to describe the
trouble he had in seeing Mrs. Dowling, the Execution
creditor, and in serving her with a subpoena. lie said I
went to Barnes Lodge, King's Langley, and there I
found her. I had great difficulty in obtaining an inter-
view. There were throe large dogs at the gate. (Laughter.)
A lady and gentleman and a servant came to the door. I
said I wanted to see Mrs. Dowling. The servant said she
was in London. I said I had come a long way, and must
see her. In about 10 minutes I was shown up to the room,
and there I saw a lady. She asked me what I had come
about, and I told her about the trial with Mr. Last. I told
her when the first trial was expected to come on. She said
she should be unable to attend, being too ill. I said, " I
wonder youhave proceeded, as it must produce excitement."
She said, "Oh, I leave everything to Mr. Smith: I don't
interfere at all—l leave all to Mr. Smith." I servel
her with a subpoena. She was propped up with
pillows when I did so, but when I told
her what I was going to do, she jumped up and, in a very
excited manner, said she would go to her doctor and get a
certificate, stating that she was not in a fit state to attend.
I laid down a sovereign, but she said she would not touch
it, and I took it up again. (Laughter.) I have not seen
Mrs. Dowling since.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hawkins--I will swear I did not
keep the sovereign.
Mr. B awkins— Will you take your oath you did not keep
the sovereign for your own private purpose ?
Witness—No, I did not.
Mr. Hawkins—Will you swear you ever parted with the
sovereign but for your own private purpose ?
Mr. Chambers, Q.C.—Do you think the gentleman stole
the sovereign ?
Mr. Hawkins—'Pon my soul, I don't know. (Laughter.)
I want to know what he did with it. (Laughter.)
Baron Chatmell—Did you account for the sovereign to
the parties whose property it was ?
Witness—l did.
Mr. Hawkins—Did you ever issue a writ against Smith ?
—No.
Is the writ I now put into your hands against Smith a
genuine document ?--Yes.
Your name is on it as plaintiff, and you made an affidavit
and received the money on the writ. Do you mean to say
you did all that without knowing you were the plaintiff ?
I acted throughout as the managing clerk for Mr. Horsley,
at whose suit it was issued.
You were, then, a sham plaintiff P—l acted for Mr.
Horsley.
Mrs. Dowling was called upon her subpoena but did not
appear.
Mr. Hawkins said that if it was said that the plaintiff's case
had failed owing to the evidence of Mrs. Dowling he would
remedy that.
The case for the plaintiff having closed
Mr. Hawkins rose to open the case on the part of the
defendant. He said he could describe the present action
as nothing else but a foul conspiracy on the part of
the man Last and others for the purpose of robbing
Mr. Smith, or whoever was entitled to it, of about £l,lOO
worth of property. He used the plain, good English word
robbery, because there might be no mistake as to what
he thought of the matter. Last had not paid ono
single farthing towards the expense of purchasing the
property. He had been bankrupt once, insolvent
twice, and the printer of one of the most scurrilous
newspapers that ' had ever appeared in the world,
—a mere journeyman in the employ of the late Mr. Francis
—yet he was the man who now came forward and claimed
all this property without having the slightest right or title
to the smallest portion of it. In his evidence he had stated
that Smith had paid for everything, and although he had
pressed him very much, he could not mention one
single item for which he (Last) had paid a
farthing. The learned counsel then proceeded to
comment on the evidence of the plaintiff, who, he contended,
was merely the servant of Smith, and quite irresponsible
for the payment of any of the expenses connected with the
purchase of type or other material for the Savoy printing
office. Everything was supplied on Mr. Smith's credit,
and paid for by him.
Mr. Montague Chambers here remarked to his lordship
that notwithstanding the order that all witnesses should
remain out of court, Mr. Smith was now present.
Baron Channel! said the order for the exclusion of wit-
nesses wasapplied for and he granted it, and if Mr. Smith
was present he ought at once to retire.
Mr. Smith then retired.
Mr. Hawkins said he did not for a moment complain of
the order of the Court, but when the plaintiff Last was in
court, and had been so from the commencement of the pro-
ceedings, it did seem to him a great injustice to Mr. Smith
for the other side to call for his exclusion, while they alloived
their own client quietly to retain his seat. The learned
gentlemen then proceeded with his address, and said if the
position:of the parties in this case had been different, and Mr.
Last had been the capitalist, on application being made
to him for payment of certain bills he would have altogether
repudiated such a claim, as Smith was the person credited,
and was alone responsible for the payment. Having read
a number of bills that had been accepted, and paid by Mr.
Smith, at Savoy Printing Company, without the name of
Last at all appearing, he concluded by saying, that when the
jury had heard the evidence, he should lay before them, he
felt confident they would return a verdict for the defendant.
The Judge recalled Squires, and, putting a paper and a
bill of exchange into his hand, asked him if that was his
affidavit before the Judge on a former occasion, stating that
he was the owner of the bill of exchange upon which pro-
ceedings had been taken?
Witness said it was.
The Judge said he had stated exactly the reverse in his
evidence that day.
Witness—My name I stated was there as Mr. Horsley's

clerk.
The Judge said he should direct the two papers to be laid
before the Law Society.
Mr. E. T. Smith was then called and examined by Mr.
Sergeant Ballantine. He said—l am still lessee of Her Ma-
jesty's Theatre, and till very lately was lessee of the Al-
hambra Palace. I first became acquainted with the plain-
tiff while he was in the employ of Mr. Francis. I pur-
chased the Sunday Times newspaper, and after that Mr.
Last used to come to me with the proofs of the playbills from
Mr. Francis for correction. On one occasion he asked whether
it would not be better for me to have a printing -office of my
own, and do my own printing. He said it would save me a
good deal, X told Ulm would think about it ; bt t I gtcr.