The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-15 00:00:00

LAW AND LOLICE.

ACTIONS Yon LIBEL—In the Court of Common Pleas,
Mr. Keen, a clerk in the War Office, brought an action
against Mr. Ilartnoll, the proprietor .of the Kentish
Mercury, for an alleged libel. The plaintiff with others
was associated in a co-operative store, and the
defendant stated that Mr. Keen and others were
receiving £5O per year for managing the con-
cern, and that the affair had been advertised as a
" limited company," when in fact it had never been regis-
tered under the Limited Liability Act. The case is still
proceeding.—ln the Court of Exchequer Mr. ➢Maule, a
chemical manufacturer, was sued for libel by Mr. Spill,
a waterproof manufacturer. The defendant lent the
plaintiff several sums of money, and subsequently, on the
latter going into partnership with a Mr. Briggs, lent
further amounts. The concern was ultimately a
failure, and the defendant said, in a letter to one
of the creditors, " The conduct of Mr. Spill
has been most disgraceful and dishonest, and the
result has been to diminish materially the avail-
able assets of the estate." This was the libel
complained of, and Baron Martin, who presided, ruled
that there was no case for the jury, as the missive in
question was a privileged communication.

ACTION FOR INJURIES SUSTAINED.—In the same court
Mr. Paddock, the proprietor of a panorama, brought an
action against the North-Eastern Railway Company for
damages. It seemed from hig evidence that when at
Ripon he visited the station to see after the con-
veyance of his exhibition to Otley. The first person he
saw was a porter, who directed him to cross the
line and inquire on the other side of the plat-
form. Whilst carrying out this suggestion the plaintiff
fell into a hole and received such injuries as to necessitate
his calling in a medical man, who attended him for eight
weeks. The jury found that there had been no negligence
on the part of the company, and returned a verdict in their
favour.

ACTION AGAINST A SHERIFF.—In the Bail Court the
case of Wood v. Watt has been tried. It was an action
to recover damages from a sheriff for a negligent escape.
It appeared that in 1865 the plaintiff had recovered a
judgment debt for £264 15s. against a person named
W. H. Bainbrigge, and in September 1865 a ca. 44 was
issued into Yorkshire to arrest Bainbridge. The sheriff's
officer accordingly arrested him at Doncaster during
the races, but, instead of taking and lodging him in prison,
he took him to his house at Doncaster, and while there
Bainbrigge made his escape. On the 4th October follow-
ing Baiiibrigge was made bankrupt on his own petition,
his debts appearing to be £17,000, and his assets £3O,
which latter amount was advanced by his friends. On
the part of the sheriff, the escape could not be denied, but
it was contended that the pecuniary loss of his body by
the escape was next to nothing, as he was in a position of
such indebtedness. The jury gave a shilling damages.
ROBBERY OF A THOUSAND POUNDS' 'WORTH OF
JEWELLERY.—At Marylebone Police-court, John Harris,
aged 35, of 17, Mead's-row, Westminster-bridge-road,
clerk, and William Meads, butler in the service of Mr.
Freshfield, solicitor to the Bank of England, residing at
No. 6, Sussex-square, Hyde Park, were charged with
stealing jewellery, &c., to the value of £l,OOO. It appeared
that at four o'clock on the afternoon.of Saturday, the 6th,
it was found that Mrs. Freslifi eld's bedroom had been broken
into, and that several jewel cases had been broken into
and emptied of their contents, the drawers having been
forced.open as if by a jemmy." A man had called in
in the afternoon, and remained some time with the
prisoner Meads. This man was interrogated as to who
his companion was, and gave an answer that was subse-
quently discovered to be untrue. This was found out,
and then lie said that Harris had called. Harris was
taken into custody, and on his room being searched
several articles that may be evidence against the accused
were found. The prisoners were remanded for a week.

THE Munmn OF A COMMERCIAL TRAVELLE
R IN ._,HROP-
sIuItE.-7--At the examination on Saturday, at Wellington,
the prosecution offered no evidence against Hart, who was
consequently- discharged. The case against Harris is
entirely circumstantial, but a large number of strongly
suspicions c;rt.itunstances have been adduced. The case
occupird the whole day. Harris was remanded. He was
proved to have been the lwit seen with deceased, and sub.
scquently was Been in possession of two gold watches and
chains, alleged to be a portion of the stock carried by
Zusman. The case for the prosecution is not yet closed,
and the further proceedings were adjounied till Thursday.

Mr. Sothern had an audience of the Prince of
Wales on Monday, when (says the Era) his Royal High•
ness presented him with a handsome qiamond ring,
reauestinw him to wear it as a sourchire