The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-07 00:00:00

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

(Sittings in Banco.)
The Court was occupied the INhole morning in hear-
ing motions for new trials in cases tried before Mr.
Justice Patteson, who took his seat to-day in this Court
with the other judges, for the purpose of those motions
being brought on.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DA

THE NEW JUDGE.
Mr. Erle, Q.C., was called within the bar as sergeant-
at-law, having been previously invested with the
coif by Lord Chief Justice Denman, in the usual foroll
at the Judges'-chambers. The Learned Gentleman is
created a sergeant preparatory to his being called to the
bench. He will take his seat with the judges of this
Court (Common Pleas) to-morrow, in the room of Mr.
Justice Erskine, who has retired, in consequence of the
bursting of a blood-vessel some months ago.
THOMAS v. DUNN.—THE CHINESE COLLECTION.
This was an action upon an agreement, in which the
jury found for the defendant, the proprietor of the
Chinese Collection, Knightsbridge.
The plaintiff yesterday, in person, moved the Court
for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict WO
against evidence. Their Lordships adjourned the hear-
ing to this day, when Mr. Thomas proceeded with the
application.
The verdict was for the defendant upon the first P.lett
which was, that the agreement was a forgery. The Jur'
were, as plaintiff contended, piyerned in this finding bY
the evidence of several engravers, who swore that certain
signatures must have been forgeries, °a account of their
exact similitude, the witnesses believing, from their long
experience, that no person, repeating his signature bons
tide, and without any designed imitation, would produce
autographs so perfectly alike. He was now prepared wit°,
counter affidavits from other engravers, accompanie"
with numerous autograph signatures and addresses
from letters and envelopes received by the plaintiff prior,
to the action, some of them being from parties oppose°
to him in this cause. These autographs were verified V
the post-marks.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE observed that the signs;
tures were not the only grounds uponwhich the jury rested
their verdict. But the evidence was too long for bun to
go over now upon his notes, the trial having occupied
two days.
Mr. Thomas said that he was prepared with evidence:
documentary and otherwise, to rebut all the other material
vaidence for the defence. He then went into a length'
ened detail of the transactions between him and the
defendant from their first introduction to the ruptuve
between them. The chief points were, that the plaintitt
was engaged by Mr. Dunn as his agent to contract for
the construction of the building for the Chinese Collee;
don, and to obtain certain leases, including the lease 0‘
the ground (on which the building now stands), and that
of an adjacent cottage. On condition of his executiug,
these agencies to the satisfaction of the defendant
he was to receive the sum of six guineas a week'
as long as the rents of the exhibition would
produce that sum. Towards the close of November,
1842, he received notice from Mr. Dunn that his engage'
ment should terminate on the 31st of the ensuing
December. In the course of a correspondence wbie
then commenced between the plaintiff and Mr.M.Turner,
the defendant's attorney, the latter stated that Mr. Dun'
had no recollection of signing the agreement, and that
it must be a forgery. Subsequently Mr. Dunn made 5°
affidavit to the effect that the signature was a forgerf,!
but afterwards he stated that he had no reel
lection of making the affidavit, and that b!
was under the influence of opium when he was sworn 11f
it. The plaintiff went into a detail of correspondene;
and transactions to show that the agreement had bee
entered into. He also, at great length, explained cc
tain discrepancies between the case which he set up
Chancery and that which was tried here, and which sr
parent discrepancies had, he said, erroneously influenced
the jury.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE observed that the jug
were influenced by the fact that in September, 1842, t°'
plaintiff was negotiating with Captain Sibon, the Prf
Waterlooprietor of the Model, for an engagement at s"'
guineas a week to superintend that exhibition. This net;
gotiation appeared to the jury to be incompatible Wt
the existence of such an agreement as the plaintiff OP
sisted upon.
Mr. Thoinas said that he was prepared with pr °,
which had not gone to the jury, to show that this WO:
negotiation for the renewal of an engagement, which he
had before held for nine months, concurrently with thet
in Mr. Dunn's establishment, and with the full kob'
ledge of both parties. He had been five years it0;114)
service of Captain Sibon, without a constant or regular
personal attendance at the exhibition being either ne,,
cessary or required by his employer. It was known to
Mr. Dunn and Capt. Sibon, that he could and did effec-
tively manage the two establishments.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE reminded Mr. TlyotellS'
that after having received notice of discharge from fir'
Dunn, he wrote a letter, which was interpmled by IS
jury into an admission that the defendant had the Pow`'
to terminate the engagement upon a month'; notice.
Mr. Thomas said, that at the time he was not resolve'
to press the agreement to a suit at law ; but when the
imputation of forgery was cast upon him, be was con'
winced that a settlement by arbitration would not be.
enough to vindicate his character. Therefore he brought
this action, and was resolved, with their Lordships' Pee'
mission, to persevere in it.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN said that the Court could 014
decide according to what had appeared on the trial, and
what might now be presented upon affidavit. They could
not act upon Mr. Thomas's statements, as to what he
might expect to prove upon A hew trial.
(The trial had not concluded when our report left.)

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)

ESDAILE U. LUND.
This action was tried at the London sitting after hilt
term, when a verdict was entered for the plaintiff o'",
one issue, and for the defendant on the other.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved for a rule nisi, cS
ing on the defendant to show cause why the verdi i
should not be entered for the plaintiff on the sec°
issue, or for a new trial, in consequence of misdirectil
and the verdict being contrary to evidence. A scar
facias was issued against the defendant Lund as a 00,5
holder iu the Yorkshire Agricultural and Commerei4
Banking Company, upon a judgment obtained egni°,',
the public officer of that Company, under the provisiemj
of the 7th Geo. IV., and in favour of the London an
Westminster Banking Company. The first plea leo
which issue was joined was a plea that the judgment WI,.
fraudulently and collusively given, to enable the Who
shire Bank to recover a call of 3/. per share from t"
plaintiff. Upon this plea the verdict was given for the
plaintiff. The second plea was that a writ of scire fao
was issued against a person named Tomlinson, anoth,d
shareholder of this Banking Company, that the plainli;
obtained judgment and took him in execution, and OA,
with the consent and under the direction and authoritit;
of the plaintiff, Tomlinson was discharged out of, t
sheriff's custody, wherebyit was averred the debt due 0:.„°
the defendant was satisfied. The defendant called a peTd
named Ackland, a sheriff's officer, who proved the arr,
and the discharge. Several writs were inclosed in a
to Ackland from Messrs. Roy, Blunt, and Co. the se„'"
citors to the London and Westminster Banking en
pany, and he was directed to apply to Mr. Seymour,
solicitor in York, who would inform him as to the Per;
sons of the various defendants. Mr. Tomlinson. wltt
individual debt was 8,3/. 65., was released on paying tP,,,,'"
amount ; and the writ being endorsed 20,000/., the "'",
fendant pleaded this discharge in his second plea t°
satisfaction of the writ for 20,0601. against all the atisre,,;
holders. The Learned Counsel contended that t"
parties in York did not act under any proper authoriq
from Messrs. Roy, Blunt, and Co., the solicitors to
Lcnd.n and Westminster Banking Company, and YIP'
proceeding to argue that there was no legal stay of 11,;
ct,edings against the shareholders generally, when "s,
was interrupted by the Court, directing him to take
rule for a new trial.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Mr. Justice WlGulliP

and a Common Jury.)

PRICE AND ANOTHER V. BAXTER AND OTHERS.
This was an action brought to recover a sum of s');
for work done by a person named Brain, as a copPe/
plate printer.
Mr. Watson and Mr. Wills appeared for the plainti'ffs'
awl Mr. Martin and Mr. Smith for the defendants. ,r 1
it appeared that Brain was employed by a pets
named Birch to print some copper-plates for "Faust: he
turned out that Birch had not capital to go on with
work, and ultimately became insolvent. The Alesol;:
Baxter, the Bible publishers, of Paternoster-01r
took up the publication, and employed another pL-
i
lisher to bring out the work, as it was not in
line of publication. The Messrs. Baxter made advsoc,,,,
on the plates worked off for Birch, and 371. 16s. for T.,
series of plates printed, after which it was alleged Pi,
Messrs. Baxter undertook the continuance of the vv°rbe
Subsequently to this Brain became a bankrupt, and t
present plaintis succeeded to his rights.
It was contended on the part of tne defendants thoi
Brain did the work for Birch, and not for them ; tll3O
that the official assignee debited Birch for the accoull
sent into him after Brain's bankruptcy.
The case was likely to occupy the Court till its ruing'

INSOLVENT COURT-(THIS DAY')

IN RE EDWARD WEST. 111
In this case, which has been already reported ill be
Suu, the insolvent, who was an extensive broker into,
City, had been before the Court about a month o,
when his petition was adjourned in order that the leg
solvent should render an account of certain ell'qde
which he possessed in Portsmouth. Having conlPej
with the order of the Court, he was this day discharts
from custody.

UNION-BALL.—(THIS DAY.) „t'
7 lamas Beavan, a youth the son of a very resPe—
th
able man, was charged before Mr. Cottingbam Wi
stealing a watch, the property of William Eve.
,00
It appeared the prisoner went into the cOMplain—,d
shop and had his shoes repaired. He took an opPor;1-
pity of walking into the room adjoining the shoP ittio
took a watch off the mantel-piece. Having give this
watch to a little girl to pawn, she was stopped, and
led to the apprehension of the prisoner.
The prisoner's father gave a melancholy acce';,d,
of the incorrigible habits of his son, who, he 5%0
was convicted at a late sessions for felony ; butto
account of his youth he was only sentences sd
21 days' imprisonment. The punishment, however, P d
not the slightest effect in shaking his evil propensities' et
although he had a good home and every comfort, la
he was in the habit of staying out and committing g
kinds
Mr. of exoesses.
. COTTINGIIAN said that he should now commit the
.
prisoner, and that on his trial the record of his formerce 0
viction could be produced, which would probably. catigio
the Judge to sentence him to transportation, but Inge