The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-22 00:00:00

SEEDS.

The demand for both red and white cloverseed rules
steady, but-, far from active, at full prices, In other seeds

LAW- INTELLIG-ENCE—(2his Pay).

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Peers present :—The Lord Chancellor, the Lord Bishop
of Carlisle, Lord Cranworth, Lord Wensleydale, Lord
Chelmsford, and others.

JUDGMENT.-WRIT OF ERROR.-BEAMISH V. BEAMISH.

This was a writ of error from a decision of the Exche-
quer Chamber in Ireland, and the question raised was
whether a clergyman of the Church of England could law-
fully marry himself by reading in private the marriage
service of the Church of England.
Their laleships were of opinion that the marriage was
not lawful, and that the children of the marriage were no
legitimate.

Their lordships gave judgmeLt for the plaintiff in error,
and reversed the decision of the Court below.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

Before the Judge Ordinary and Justices `ll, ightman and

Williams.

LIUDDONT v. TRE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND PATRICK.

This morning Miss Slleaduil .pplloa eo tr,.e court to
allow her further time to make her application for a re-
hearing of the above case. In making her application the
young lady earnestly entreated the Court to grant what she
required, because she felt, if time was allowed her, she
should be able to prove that she stated in her affidavit
merely that fraud, falsehood, and perjury had been com-
mitted by the other side, in order to obtain a favourable
judgment.

The Judge Ordinary asked Miss Sheddon if she was now
making her application for a re-hearing.
Miss Sheddon said she was simply askinethat increased
time for making out her application might be accorded
her.

The Judge Ordinary told her she did not require an order
from the Court to do that. The Court could not interfere
at the present time, She could do as she pleased, whether
she made the application or not, and take the responsibility
of such a step. The Court had nothing to do with it.

Miss Sheddon said she should like to inform the Court
why she did not then make the application.
The Judge• Ordinary said there was no necessity for her
doing so. If the application was made on a future day the
Court might say that it was made late, ar,d then the rea-
sons could be stAthd, which might or might not be consi-
dered sufficient.

Miss Sheddon said she would not urge the point further.
At the termination, of the former trial the whole of the
papers that had been produced in tout t were returned to Mr.
William Patrick, who since that time had died. Now, as
a great number of those documents had come upon her by
surprise she begged the Court would make an order to
enable her, or her counsel, to inspect such portions of them,
under proper supervision, as might be thought necessary.
A statement had been made by the Court that her father
had surreptitiously abstracted certain documents from the
Court of Session, but that statement she could only think
had been made by parties who had the greatest interest in
the proceedings. She altogether denied that any of the
papers had been obtained wrongfully by her father;
the papers had been obtained by herself, and
if anything of a surreptitious nature had been done, which
she utterly denied, she :was the person responsible. Her
father had never set foot in Scotland after the year 1852,
and it was not until the hearing that herself or father
heard that there was any such charge against them, and
they had been taken completely by surprise, as also by the
production of documents which had been withheld from'her
inspection. It was absolutely necessary in order that her
counsel should be in a position properly to make
out affidavits to be used in making the motion
for a rehearing, and which documents were believed to be
in the hands of Mr. Carmen and Mr. M'Kewan, two of the
trustees of the late Mr. William Patrick. She also desired
that these gentlemen be called upon to appear at the hoar-
lug, and to produce the documents, more especially a letter
dated June 14, 1839, and th 9 letters of Dec., 1798 and 1799,
and also the bond for £4,000, said to have been executed by
her grandfather, which she asserted was a forgery. Her
father had been most relentlessly persecuted for
fourteen years, and for the last four years
and a half he had been confined in prison,
but on Saturday last he was restored to liberty, and no one
but a daughter whose parent was placed as hers had been
could feel the joy she felt at such a moment. He had not
had the opportunity of e.osely and minutely looking over
the papers, and now that :he was at liberty she trusted that,
under proper supervision, they might be allowed to exa-
mine and take copies of such as they thought most mate-
rial. It was true that, towards the close of the
former trial, she had been allowed about twenty mi-
nutes' inspection of the documents that had occasioned her
so much surprise. Her father being in prison, she was
accompanied by Mr. Nethercliff, an expert in handwriting,
and while that gentleman was occupied making his notes
Mr. Carmen's conduct was such that to preserve self-
respest she was compelled to leave the room. Mr. Miller,
who was also present, was excessively insolent; and having
had to endure it once she would take care she did not suffer
the same indignity again. Scott had truthfully drawn the
picture of daughter defending her aged father; and
Glossin, they all knew, did not scruple to turn round and
insult that girl. She could not say how extremely
difficult she felt her present Position, but
as there could be little trouble and expense in granting her
request, she implored the court to grant it. It was a
duty it held to itself as well as justice to her father. If the
court had been misled into making statements that were
inconsistent with the fact, it was but right such should be
most rigidly examined into—justice demanded that the
charges should be searchingly investigated, and she felt
certain, if it should appear that the court had
been wilfully misled, it well knew how to vindi-
cate its own dignity. She pleaded thus :earnestly on
this point because her counsel, Mr. Collier, had
not read or even seen some of the documents, and it would be
impossible for him to master the difficulties with which the
case was surrounded without the fullest information. She
did not wish for anything that was unreasonable, and .uicly
it could not be considered so by her ciolting that the 'par-
ties at present having the custody of the papers of the late
Mr. William Patrick should be cited to that court to pro-
duce them.

Dr. Deane said he appeared for the respondents.
The Judge Ordinary thought he had no locus stanch.
There was, in fact, nothing before the Court. Miss Shed-
don had, as•he understood the case, made three applica-
tions to the Court first, that the time for making
the application for, the rehearing of the suit might
be postponed. Secondly, that certain documents should be
inspected and copied by order of the Court ; and, thirdly,
,flut certain persons be cited to appear ,svith those docu-
ments. With respect to the first there was no occasion
to apply to the Court to grant further time for making the
application for reopening the case. When the application
was made then would be the proper time fcr the Court to
say whether the reasons offered justified the application, as
the Court could not deal with it. With reference to the
production of the documents referred to, they related to a
suit that had been before the Court. That suit had ter-
minated, there had been a judgment, and the documents
were retained in the hands of the parties who had produced
them in court, and he could not at the present moment
order their production for the purpose Miss Sheddon re-
quired. With respect to citing certain persons to appear,
there was as yet no proceeding or suit in that court to
attend which he could cite them. As he had said before,
there had been a suit and there had been a judgment; and
if an application to re-bear that case was to be made, the
Court would then hear patiently all the reasons that could
be advanced for such a proceeding.
The other Judges concurred with the Judge Ordinary.
Miss Sheddon thanked the Court for its attention, and
withdrew with her father and friends.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before the Assistant Judge.)
IMPORTANT TO MEMBERS OF THE VOLUNTEER RIFLE

CORPS.-REILLY V.FRINNERY.

This was an action to recover £5 35., the value of a rifle
supplied to defendant, who is a member of the 4th Surrey
Rifles. _ _

Jewitt, of Leadenhall•street, appeared for the de-
fendant, and pleaded payment.

John Baker said he was manager to the plaintiff, who is
an ironmonger carrying on business in Oxford-street. In
October, 1859, a rifle was supplied to defendant. The
price was £5 36., which had not been paid. There was a
contract with the regiment, but witness had not brought it.
By Mr. Jewitt—Knows a person named Sergeant
Doughty.

Mr. Dewitt (handing the witness a document)—Now read
that. What is it ? _ _

Witness-- is a receipt signed by the sergeant
acknowledging payment of the money for this rifle.
Mr. Jewitt—And signed for Reilly ?
"Witness—Yes, but he had no authority from our firm to
sign for us-or to receive money on our account. He is not
in our employ, neither is he our agent. I believe he was
confidential agent to the 4th Surrey Rifles. Z 11,4 Ye laQver

supplied him with rifles, but I have delivered rifles to hinat
and delivered to him the one now sued for. I never agreed
to pay him a commission. He has had presents, but was
never led to suppose that he was to have commission, though
he now claims it. I was introduced to the corps by a cer-
tain gentleman.

Mr. Jewitt—Our case is that we have paid the money.
Doughby brought the rifle to defendant, and produced a
bill from Reilly. My client looked upon him as the agent
of Reilly, and paid the debt.

His Honour—The difficulty is to show that Doughty was
the agent authorised of the plaintiff. It does not follow
that because Doughty was authorised to get orders that he
was also empowered to receive money. You see defen-
dant had an account from the plaintiff, and, consequently,
must have known to whom he was indebted for this rifle.
Mr, Dewitt—The sergeant is here, and your Honour
will hear his evidence.

Sergeant Doughty said he was formerly in the 4th
Surrey Rifles, but now was not. The receipt put in was
signed by witness. Had introduced a number of members
to plaintiff', and had altogether received from plaintiff's
manager about 30 rifles. Baker promised to give witness a
commission of 5 per cent., and witness claimed something
now. Witness had received money and paid it over to
Baker, w ho allowed witness to do so.
Baker—Never without you produced the bill.

Witness—lndeed you have.

Baker—l never received money from you without a pro•
per bill.
Witness—l have paid you money when I have received
it in my ownname.

Mr. 3-swift—Name one person who has paid you, under
such circumstances.

Witness—Mr, Martineau, a member of the corps.
Baker—A precisely similar case to the present.
Witness—l know you say so, but 1 have paid you and
often have tried to bring it to your mind.
Mr. Jewitt—Name another.
Witness—Mr. Nash.
Baker—Will you swear you gave Nash a receipt in your
own name ?

Witness—No. Sometimes
Reilly signed the bills. I
cannot mention any other but Martineau.
Baker—Did I ever give you authority to sign for the
firm ?

Witness—Never, You owe me commission. ...a I hold
the money to pay myself.
Kea uonour You ilea not any right to do so. If you
have any claim upon the plaintiff for commission you
should sue him, but you have no right to hold the money.
Baker (t) the witness)—For what did you leave the corps ?
Witness—Never mind.

His Honour—That will do. It is perfectly clear that
the defendant is liable. He has paid the wrong person,
and an unauthorised agent.

Mr. Jewitt —My client having paid the money a long
damage, considered that he was bound, upon public grounds,
t) defend the case, and ascertain the facts.
His Honour—There is no imputation upon your client,
who has acted perfectly fair throughout. He can reco-
ver from the Sergeant. The verdict now will be for the
plaintiff.

P OLIVE INTELLIGEN CE.—( This Day.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

A POLISH REFUGEE CHARGED WITH THREATENING
TO CUT HIS WIFE'S THROAT.—Joseph Sesnoski, a Polish
refugee, by trade a bootmaker, was charged before Mr. Selfe
with threatening to cut his wife's throat.
The wife, having stated that the prisoner had several
times threatened to cut her throat and his own afterwards,
that he had beaten her children several times, and that he
had beaten her black and blue and struck her in the eye,
handed in the following certificate :
This is to cet tify that Joseph Jesnoski, a Polish refugee,
residing at 24, Dudley-street, is unfit to take care of him-
self, and is dangerous t others. T gave a certificate to this
effect seven weeks ago, when he was in St. Giles's Work-
house. He remained there some weeks, but was sent out,
his wife tells me, because he was not sufficiently insane.
Tilos. YOUNG, Government Medical Officer to
the Polish Emigration Society.

8, Sackville-strcot.
Mr. Selfe—lf the man is a lunatic, this is not the proper
place to bring him to. (To the prisoner)—Your wife says
you threaten to cut her throat ?
. _

Pi isoner—When ? • I know nothing about it.
Mr. Selfe—l think the wife wishes to get rid of the
burthen of him.

The wife—He has a pension from Government, and that
will go to keep him.

A constable having stated that he had seen the prisoner
going about for weeks as early as 5 o'clock in the morning,
dancing and kicking about, and that the other lodgers in the
house were frightened of him owing to his violence,
Mr. Selfe said he knew Mr. Bennett as a very humane
man, and did not think he would send a man out of the
house if he was insane'

a ho wife said he had done no work for three months,
and he was very spiteful and dangerous.

Mr. Selfe—lt is a very strong measure to deprive a man
of his liberty because he is a little queer. I will take Lis
own bail in £lO, but if he behaves unruly again he will go
to prison for three months.