The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-23 00:00:00

PALMER V. PALMER.

Mr. BETHEL; (with whom was Mr. Fooks) moved
for an injunction to restrain the defendant from vend-
ing candles in packages having labels resembling the
parcels of metallic wick candles sold by the plaintiff.
The names of the plaintiff and defendant being the
same, and there being no question that the defendant
s..,ts entitled to use his own name, the only matter to
be argued was whether the lables used by the defend-
ant were imitations of those adopted by the plaintiff,
and so calculated to mislead purchasers. The defend-
ant by his affidavit stated that by the labels which be
used his candles " were not designed, devised, or in •
tended to be represented as the plaintiff's metallic
wick candles."

Mr. Itour and Mr. WELFOBD, for the defendant,
argued that there was no ground for the injunction.
The defendant had distinctly negatived any attempt
at imposition. He was willing to adopt any label or
description which would be satisfactory to the plain-
tiff, and only desired to be free to conduct his own
business in his own name without danger of being
involved in litigation.
His LoausuiP said he remembered a case in which
he had, as counsel, applied to Lord Cottenham on be-
half of a conveyance company to restrain other parties
from using omnibuses painted with the same colours
and the same in external appearance as those used by
the company. The Lord Chancellor had in that case
granted the injunction at his house in vacation, and
the defendant, who was present in person, before
leaving the house, had addressed Lord Cottenham
wkh this question, "My Lord, what colour am I to
pint my busses ?" That was a question, however,
which his Lordship was not called upon to answer.
Mr. HOLT said that in such a case the Court would,
no doubt, consider that the adoption of the colour and
external symbols was evidence of an attempt to mis-
lead. In this case the defendant had no alternative
but that of using his own name ; he was also of ne-
cessity obliged to describe the contents of the parcels
of candles and the quality. This involved the nEceu-
sity of introducing the words "metallic wicks." The
colour of the label also was necessarily different from
the outside wrapping of the parcel. In every respect
the conduct of the defendant had been unexception-
able, and be ought not to be burdened with the ex-
pense of this suit. _ _ _

His LORDSHIP said there was nothing to prevent
a tradesman from putting his own name or symbol
upon his shop or wares. That was an early praotice
in business, still preserved with regard to inns, and
formerly adopted generally in other trades in this
city, and if one tradesman had adopted a certain sign
it would not follow that another tradesman might not
in ordinary cases still adopt and use the same sign ;
but if a parson bad by his skill and industry acquired
celebrity in any art or manufacture, that celebrity
was the reward of his exertions, and another party
would not be permitted to adopt the peculiar symbol
which be had attached to such productions of his la
bour, and thereby deprive him of his just reward.
This Court regarded it as a fraud upon the party
who had given to that mark or symbol its peculiar
value if another party so used it as to lead pur-
chasers of the article to believe that they were buy-
ing the goods of the original vendor of the com-
modity, when they were, in:fact, buying the goods
of another person. It was difficult or impossible
to lay down by any definition a priori what
would be an adoption of the mark or symbol
appropriated by another man—that could only be de-
termined when the circumstances arose, as in the
omnibus case to which he had referred. Lord Cot-
tenham in that case said, " I shall not tell you how
you may paint your omnibuses, but you must not
so paint them as to lead the public to believe when
they get into them that they are entering the omni-
buses of another company." In this case, if the cir-
cumstances were before him as a juryman, he should
feel bound to say that this was such an adoption of
the plaintiff's label as this Court would not permit.
It might possibly be an advantage to the defendant
that his name was the same as that of the plaintiff.
But this did not depend on the mere name : there was
the size and disposition of the words, the colour of
the label—all calculated to convey the impression that
the candles were the same. It was suggested that the
colour was different, and this being rather alight day,
it certainly did appear that the colour of the defend-
ant's label was of rather a lighter shade, but in this
there was so little difference that in ordinary circum-
stances it would not be distinguishable. The injunc.
tion must be granted.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec. 21.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before Lord
CAMPBELL and a Special Jury.)
DANIEL V. CHALLIS AND ANOTHER.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of Saturday.)
Several witnesses were then called in support of the
defendant's case.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL having replied, Lord
CAMPBELL summed up the evidence.
His LORDSHIP said the present was an action
against the sheriffe of Middlesex, in which it was
alleged that, under an execution against the goods of
James Bohn, they had seized the goods of the plain-
tiff, Mr. Daniel, and the plaintiff sought to recover
the value cf the goods so unlawfully taken in execu-
tion. The main question for them to consider would
be, whether the plaintiff Daniel consented to this exe •
cution. That the goods belonged to the plaintiff
down to the time of the execution, there could be no
doubt. By the deeds of January and August, 1846,
they were conveyed to him upon trust to pay Captain
Long, Sze., so that the legal interest in the property
was transferred to the plaintiff, and nothing had been
done to divert it. The counsel for the defendants
had said that there had been no conversion, because
Sloman had merely made a catalogue of the goods
and executed a bill of sale ; but he (Lord Camp-
bell) should direct them (the jury) that if they
believed that the plaintiff had not consented to the
execution, he was entitled to the verdict, for
in that case there had been a wrongful conver-
sion of the goods. The putting a man in possession
and making the bill of sale was a conversion. The
question then was, whether the plaintiff consented ;
and it was incumbent on the defendants to prove that
the goods were taken with the plaintiff's consent.
The evidence upon that point appeared to be all one
way. Hoare said he never mentioned the execution
either to the plaintiff or to Captain Long, although,
strange to say, the latter came to London in De-
cember, 1846, and passed several days at Hoare's
house. It was clear, then, that Captain Long did not
consent. The question then was, did the plaintiff
consent ? Now, the plaintiff's examination at the
Court of Bankruptcy had been put in evidence, and
in that examination he said, " I did not authorise any
hostile proceedings against Mr. Bohn ; but I re-
quested Hoare to obtain a judgment. I did not au-
thorise the execution. It is not my act." The
money had not been paid over to Long or Daniel, so
that it did not appear that there had been either a
prior authority or a subsequent ratification. His
Lordship then referred to Hoare's letter of the 7th of
December, and observed that the writ had been sued
out in the February preceding, and was sent to the
Sheriff's-office on the 12th of November, before
Mr. Daniel's name had been effaced from the
shop front, which took place on the 11th of De-
cember. It was strange that in that letter of
the 7th of December Hoare should not have stated
in express terms what was done. All he said was,
" I have taken possession of Bohn's securities." That
did not convey the information that a fi. fa. had been
issued, nor did the plaintiff's answer show that he
understood that information had been given him of
an execution having been levied. He said, "I am
sorry Bohn has turned out bad. I hope you will not
be a loser by him." Was that evidence that the
plaintiff knew that Hoare had taken possession of the
plaintiff's goods, as well as those of Bohn ? It
seemed to him (Lord Campbell) that it was not; but
the jury would judge of the effect of it. They
would see whether that was evidence of any thing like
a general authority. Of that there was very slender
evidence ; but as it was a question of fact, he would
leave it to the jury. Supposing their verdict should
be for the plaintiff, the next question would be as to
the amount of the damages. That would depend
on whether they should be of opinion that Sloman
was acting in collusion with Hoare, and whether or not
he entered under the fi. fa. on the 12th of November,
for if so, the plaintiff would be entitled to the full
value of the goods seised, as well as of those sold to
Sotheby and Leslie, including the property which had
been destroyed. They would, however, require strong
evidence before they came to that conclusion. Sloman
had stated that he was not at St. James's-street
on the 12th of November; but he might have made
a mistake about that, as there could be no doubt that
he was there. But he (Lord Campbell) must caution
the jury against coming to the conclusion from that
circumstance that the writ was executed on that day.
If he did not enter till the 10th of December, and

left on the 24th, the jury must confine their damages
to the goods comprehended in the bill of sale, and
could not give the plaintiff damages for the property
which had been removed before the 10th. The only
evidence of collusion was the fact that Sloman was at
the house on the evening of the 12th of November.
If the jury should be of opinion that there had been
collusion, the plaintiff would be entit!ed to the value
of the stock on the 12th of November ; but if there
had been no collusion, the damages must be limited
to the value of the books contained in the bill of sale.
Mr. Bohn had stated the value of the books to he
14,6001., that being the retail price to his customers.
Toe books were 26,000 in number, and had been
valued by Mr. Price, the auctioneer, at 1,5001. It
was clear that the party einp'oa ed was not a fit per-
son to make the valuation, which had been made in
a hasty, slovenly, and ignorant manner; and ho (Lord
Campbell) was sorry that Sloman had not taken
greater precautions than he appeared to have done.
His LORDSHIP here recalled Mr. Bohn, who stated
that the value of the property belonging to Daniel's
trust in the bill of sale was 7,075/. 9s , including cer-
tain property which had been seized by the ground
landlord. There were also in the bill of sale 4,121
articles denominated " various," which he valued at
3,9061., making a total of about 10,9821.
Lord CAMPBELL (in allusion to a bill of exceptions
which had been handed up by the defendants' coun-
sel) then said, lam told that I ought to direct you
that the damages ought to be merely nominal ; but I
direct you that they ought to he according to your
judgment of the value of the goods.
The jury then retired for about 20 minutes, and on
their retur❑ into court, gave a verdict for the plain-
tiff, with 5,0001. damages.
In answer to questions from his LORDSHIP, they
stated their opinion that the defendants had wrong-
fully taken possession of the plaintiff's goods ; that
the plaintiff had not consented to the execution, and
that the execution commenced on the 10th of De-
cember.

Lord CAMFBELL then said he had ne.thirg more to
do than to wish the jury a merry Christmas and a
happy new year.

POLICE IN TEL LI GEN CE
BOW-STREET.

Mrs. Flemming, Mr. Montague (her son in-law),
and others, who lately interested themselves in the
prosecution of Adolphe de Werdinski, a Pole, on a
charge of brutal and unnatural treatment of a child,
named Mary Ann Richards, with whom he had
cohabited since she was 10 years of age, now waited
upon Mr. Jardine to ask his advice under the follow-
iec, circumstances :
follow-
ing
the committal of the prisoner from Bow-street
to take his trial at the Middlesex sessions, inquiry
was made respecting the persons to whom the clerks
were to look for the fees due on drawing up the
indictment. Sergeant Thompson, the officer who had
the management of the case, stated that the prosecu •
trix, Mary Ann Richards, was of course wholly
destitute, and neither Mrs. Flemming, the lady who
had kindly given the girl a home sinee she rsn away
from Werdinski, nor Mr. Montague, who had been
already put to some expense and much trouble in the
matter, could be expected to make themselves respon-
sible for the expenses attending the prosecution. All
the witnesses were present at the Middlesex sessions,
and were kept there until the business was over, and
the grand jury was discharged without any indict-
ment against Werdinski having been placed before
them. Consequently the prisoner Werdinski was
discharged by proclamation. An excuse was mule to
Sergeant Thompson to the effect that the delay arose
from some omission or error in the indictment, but it
was sufficiently obvious that the non•payment of the
fees was the real cause of the extraordinary occur-

rence.
Mr. JARDINE had every sympathy with the com-
plaint of the parties, and much regretted the useless
result of the trouble to which they had been put in
the matter. Probably Thompson, the constable, would
be able to collect the witnesses together again at the
next sessions to prefer the charge against Werdimki,
who might again be apprehended.
Mrs. Flemming inquired if anything could be done
for the girl Richards, who was now thrown upon her
for support.

Mr. JARDINE directed that 1/. should be given
from the poor-box.

WORSHIP-STREET.

A young woman, named Elizabeth Bate:, an inmate
of Shoreditch workhouse, was placed at the bar before
Mr. Hammill, charged with the following vindictive
attack upon Mary Hawkins, another of the inmates
of the same establishment :

The complainant, the fore part of whose head was
bandaged over with adhesive plaister, and who ap-
peared to be much debilitated by the injuries she had
sustained, stated that about two o'clock on the pre-
ceding day, as she was about to leave the dining hall
in the workhouse after the paupers had finished
their dinners, the prisoner commenced assailing
her with the most abusive epithets for accepting a
quantity of fruit from a young man she had acci-
dentally met while out on the preceding day. She
assured her that it was only a single apple that had
been so presented to her, and whether from jealousy,
or what it was witness did not know, but, the instant
she had uttered the words, the prisoner caught up a
knife from the table, and exclaiming with a horrible
oath that she would stick it into her skull, immedi-
ately hurled it at her with such force that the sharp
point of the blade cut through her cap, and, burying
itself in her head, remained firmly fixed there. Seve-
ral of the bystanders who had witnessed the pri-
soner's conduct hastened to her assistance, and pulled
the knife out of her head ; but the wound it had in •
flicted was of so serious a description that a stream of
blood instantly poured down her neck and completely
saturated her clothes. The medical officer of the
workhouse happened unfortunately to be absent at
the time, but one of the nurses was sent for, and she
having stopped the hcemorrhage as well as she could,
the prisoner was taken into custody and lodged in the
station.

Hannah Hale, one of the inmates, who had drawn
the knife out of the complainant's hand, deposed to
the malicious manner in which the injury had been
inflicted ; and Benjamin Elmslie, the superintendent
of labour, stated that the prisoner had been repeatedly
committed to prison for outrageous acts of insubordi-
nation and violence, and that upon taking her into
custody upon the present occasion she broke away
from his grasp, and, rushing ag4in at ihe injured
woman, declared that she was determined to be sent
to Nowgate on her account, and that if she got over
that wound she would take very good care to do for
her effectually the next opportunity that presented
itself.

When called upon for her defence the prisoner,
who exhibited not the slightest contrition for her
outrageous violence, sullenly answered that she did
not wish to say anything, and
Mr. HAMMILL, after giving directions for the girl
Hawkins to be placed in the infirmary of the work-
house, under the care of the medical attendant, or-
dered the prisoner to be committed until that day
week, and to afford time for ascertaining the result of
the injury the complainant had sustained.

ciERKENWELL.
The capture of one of the " Hackett gang" was
effected between two and three o'clock on Saturday
morning, in Islington, by Police-constable Geoder-
ham, 433 N division, under circumstances which en-
title him to considerable praise as a brave and excel-
, lent officer. On Friday night, about the hour of
twelve, a lady, residing in Canonbury-villas, was
alarmed by seeing from her bedroom window two or
three men lurking about the gardens adjacent, and,
feeling conscious that their designs were evil, she sent
off a message to the station•house of-the district, and
several active policemen were speedily dispatched to
the spot, but they were unable to make any discovery
beyond the strong evidence, through footmarks, that
the lady had had good reason to he terrified and
aroused to a sense of danger. After scouring the im-
mediate vicinity, the officers were, in part, dispersed
—a sufficient force being left in reserve in case of
further necessity ; and, about the time first stated, the
attention of Gooderham was drawn to a rustling noise
in the grounds attached to Belinda. cottages, Canon-
bury, where lie concealed himself for about a quarter
of an hour, when he observed two men throw over a
wall a rope, to which was affixed a sort of grappling
iron to secue it, to enable them to ascend or descend, and,
without making any alarm, he boldly rushed upon
them, and caught each firmly by the collar, tripping
them up at the same time, and bringing them to
the ground. A fearful struggle followed, the
officer being almost instantly seized by his stock,
and so clicked as to be incapable of calling for
help. He however struggled on, enduring much
suffering from suffocation, blows, and kick., until he
had again succeeded in throwing them, when he lost
his grasp of one of the ruffians, who escaped, minus
the skirts of his coat. Gooderham now sprang his
rattle, and speedily obtaining assistance, had the fel-
low conveyed to the station• house, and made search
after his companion, but unluckily he had got clear
away. In the course of the day he was taken before
Mr. Tyrwhitt, at this court, where the officer exhi-
bited the skirts, and one of the most complete sets of
instruments used by thieves that ever was seen, which
latter he found on the accused ; and near the spot
where he captured him there were also two life-pre-
servers and some gags. The prisoner is a determined
athletic fellow, about twenty-five years old. As he
refused to give his name and address, the worthy
Magistrate had him put back until the arrival of some
of the detective force of other divisions, when he was
eventually recognized by Sergeant Walker, 118 M,
Lockerby, of the S division, and Collins, 59 N, as
one of the Hackett school of thieves, and cs the com-
panion of " the Doctor," " the Cuuntryman," and
Betsy Beker," the ruffians recently sentenced to
transportatien for the burglary at Mr. Holforu's, in
the Regent's- park.

Mr. TYRWIUTT, after paying a well-earned tribute
:o the gallantry of the constable, regretted that the

prisoner would be so soon let loose on the public, and
sentenced him to three months' hard labour in the
House o f Correction.

LAMBETH.
Emma Smith, a girl of fifteen years of age, 028
placed at the bar before the Hon. G. C. Norton, wig
a charge of taking away a little boy, of two years of
age, the child of her master, a tradesman in
street, Walworth, and dispesing of several articles 01
his dress.
Two women named Allen and earthy, and
man named Donohue, were also charged vvitk.ugwe
implicated with the first-named prisoner. •
The case occupied some time in its investigati°l4
but the chief facts are these :—On Friday week Ist
the girl, Emma Smith, who was in the service ef•
Mr. Clark, of Hill-street, Walworth-road, was sent
by her mistress to get some sausages, and was .eye,ll,,
half-a-crown to pay for them. She took her master e
child, a fine little boy of two years of uge, with are
and from thet time, until Thursday evening' tee
family could not learn what had become' Of
either. On Monday last Mr. Clark caalea
printed bills to be issued by the police descriptive
of the girl and child, and on the Thursday teoruiff
following a second bill, offering a reward of 511;1°6
such information as would lead to the discovery
missing persons. In the last bill the address of .02.
Clark was omitted, though it was given in the firs It;
but notwithstanding this omission, the man Detwbillk
on Thursday evening called on Mr. Clark, and to°
him to a room occupied by Mrs. Allen in Ploriallb:3
court, Whitechapel, and there he found 'his child eg ;
Emma Smith. The latter, when questioned on Ilb
subject, said that on Friday week, while going all
Walworth-road on her way to tire pork butcher's,
dragging child of her master in a small wick* n
basket chaise, she was accosted by the woman Alli,'
who asked her where she was going, and
ing her, and showing the halfcrown, she said she tolunav
•
go with her, as she had something to show her, it he
took her to her lodging in Plough-court. Her° ad
was. partly kept until found as before stated;
r.
while there Mrs. Allen had disposed of the vvickd
basket chaise and a portion of the dress of the chilcl
support them. fist
The statement of Mrs. Allen, on the contrarY,
'SO
that on Friday week the prisoner Emma Smit" ed
brought to her by another young woman, who 11",
itb
on her to us.
her if she could oblige her by letting her remain ej
her for a few ills. Smith, at the time, representi
ier
that she was the mother of the child, that itsoo
was a French gentleman named Palmer, r"id'ultad
Brixton-hill, and that in a few days she xe pecLcie
ed
large sum of money from him. Allen aeke"l;A gi
having sold a part of the child's dress, but 581** - to
had done so at Smith's request, and to
procure food for the child until she got money, 11. the
its father, and said that she (Smith) bad wave
03,
same misrepresentations at the West London IM°de
where she slept several nights, that she bad rat,
to her. o
Smith (in reply to the questions of Mr. A.ov the
admitted that both she and her waster's child the
slept in the union for several nights, but said., by
representations she made were those dictated to be'
Mrs. Allen. • 01 let
enable bet!
00
Mr. NORTON ultimately remanded the prl',/
Smith for a week, and desired that Mrs. Allen, -e.
MaCarthy, and Donahue, should also be in eittendav

SHIP NEWS•

-
NOTICE TO MARINERS.
ingA.,dtri:Ttaatcn.hn
ohuansebilelegnorleeceived receiptut
ofL loyd's ..-1,11 sir
PI 0
from 1"-- the
Governor of Western Australia, in whaitclhisPli2eicrheqfurelt 101
order to prevent accident 3, that notice Way be kive,,T3,
no light is at present exhibited on the light"—.
Rothnest Island.

LIVERPOOL,; DEC. 21.—Wind S., fresh breu7.9th
Ann sail, d from Whitehaven for Maranhain on th° Jr
inst. Union, hence, has arrived at Ostend. Lor' 4 co,
speeddli st
'Anton, hence, has arrived at Port Philip.
ea 0
has arrived at Colombo. Rose, hence, has arriv'•• t
Gala.z. Beppo and Mercury, hence, have arriv on
Malta. Mayflower sailed from Malaga for this Pr st
the 7th inst. Chiral:lra, from Gallipoli, has arriv :ed.
this port, towed in from Studwell Roads disma-g! 01
Delhi, from Calcutta, arrived at the Mauritius, 'co
sailed for this port on the sth of October. Eknils; the
Heape sailed from the Mauritius for Port Philip Orii la'
12th of October. Steamship Astrologer, from '/
'' ni.
stantinople, has arrived at Mal! a, and sailed for this, or
Amy Ann, from Montreal, and the Mary An°' -
Cephalonia, have arrived at Kingato A D.
GRA:7E9EI,7D, DEC 22.—Wind N. W,
Arrived—Besse], from Calcutta; light, fine:ea :ae;
Ocean, Apollo, and Giraffe, from Rotterdam; Jan Ft %s'
from Boulogne; City of London, from Dunkirk; ' Cr
Dordt; 1;
beth, from Pillar; Stadt Dordrecht,' from
line, ~,i 001
from Gravelises; Amable Ana ita, from DID lel
Rival, from Suo yre,
Menai, from Calais; Antiquary, from Zsnte; -re, •ota
from Barletta; Wave, Medemblik; Elizabeth, "• e,
Wismar; Triton, from Ostend; Seine, from Bonlool or;
Sailed—United, for Belize; Mermaid,for Swar}!3"l. 019
Liverpool, for Bremen; Seppings, for Manilla. lite; res.
Albion, for Boulogne;
for Amsterdam; William
Jolliffe, for Havre„ d sad
for Jersey; •
and Rainbow, for Rotterdam; City Et' Rotteraanli ,oro
Dunkirk; Tiger, for Hambur -,h; Roscommon and, -* cot
John Russell, for Harlingen; Sir Edward Banl'9"
Ostend; Fame, for Calais; Antwerpen, for Marta?
; I. 9
VESSELS SPOKEN WITH.
Earl of AU" for,
Choice, of Jersey, for Buecos Ayres, Nov. 159 'l3 lig
N., long. 23 W. 1 tl.f
William Carey, for Pernambuco,•
long. 24 W. .„1 10
Arthur s' • nip, from Liverpool for China, July 13, I'-
21 N., long. 25 W. io
Indus - Nov. 16, in
barqur, from Shields for Coquimbo,Nov. 9-'t '
Ist 7 N., long 8W . . Nov 3
Vrouw Johanna, from Newcastle for Ceylon, '" 4
list. 12 N., long 25 W. lat. 1-

0
WI
di6 j.