The Sun.
London, England, 1844-12-06 00:00:00

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY)

(Sittings at Nisi Prius before Lord DENMAN and a
Middlesex Common Jury.)
GREEN V. WATTS.

This was an actio❑ brought by Mr. Charles Green, an
accountant, to recover an amount alleged to he due to
him from Messrs. Watts, the ale merchants, in Lincoln's
Inn-fields, fur work and labour done by himself and his
clerks, in keeping the books and accounts of the firm of
Messrs. Watts. In the defence it was attempted to :et
up an agreement to do the work for a specified sum, and
the number of hours charged by the plaintiff was dis-
puted. A discharged cltrk of the plaintiff's was called
fur the purpose of proving the :defendant's case. The
attempt to set up the agreement failed, but Lord Den-
man intimated that he thought the charge rather high,
and the jury found for the plaintiff, Damages-45/.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL.)
BIAY V. FISHER AND ANOTHER.

This was an action on a bill of exchange for 83/. 10s.,
the interest 131. 7s. making together 961. 17s. It ap-
peared that the bill was drawn by Harrison and Co., and
accepted by one of the defendants, of the name of Harmer,
in the name of the firm of Fisher and Harmer, drill and
fustian makers, of London and Manchester, in which
firm he was a partner. The defendant Harmer allowed
judgment to go by default, the other defendant, Fisher,
pleaded that he did not accept the bill, but it, was ac-
cepted by Harmer without his acquiescence, he also
pleaded that he had received no consideration. The
only witness on the part of the plaintiff was Thomas
Tower, who was clerk to Messrs. Harrison and Co. at
the time they drew the bill. He proved the drawing of
the bill and the handwriting, and he deposed that
Messrs. Fisher and Harmer were partners at that time,
that Mr. Fisher carried on the business at Manchester
and Mr. Harmer in London. He knew both the defen-
dants, and Mr. Fisher was not present at the drawing
of the bill.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE directed the jury to find a
verdict for the plaintiff; and said that it was evident that
the defendants :were in partnership at the time, and
therefore it was sufficient that the defendant Harmer ac-
c4les..l the bill, and it was not necessary that both should
sign it.
The jary accordingly found for the plaintiff.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(THIS DAY.)
(Before the ASSISTANT-JUDGE.)
John Steetns, a very respectable-looking man, sur-
rendered on hiS bail to take his trial upon an indict-
ment charging him with an assault upon John Bunting,
on the 2d of Nov. last.
Mr. Ballantine appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Payne for the defence.
It appeared by the evidence that the prosecutor lost,
some bets upon the result of the last Crzarawitch race,
and upon calling on him for payment, the assault com-
plained of was committed.
The jury, after a short consultation, returned a ver-
dict of Guilty, and the Court sentenced the defendant to
pay a fine of 31. to the Queen.
George Hinton was indicted for an assault upon John
Hinton on the 3d of November.

Mr. Haworth appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Ballantine for the defendant.

It appeared that the prosecutor is a member of the
Hon. Society of the Inner Temple, and also was con
nected with the cutlery trade. (The statement of ►his
fact cansed co►tsiderable laughter.) The defendant car-
ried on busines,s as a carpenter and builder in Leicester-
square, and was also the proprietor of the Leicester
Chambers, in Leicester-squar . _ .

The Learned COUNSEL stated the facts of the case
which were briay as follows :—The prosecutor went to
the Leicester Chambers on the day named in the indict-
ment, and inquired of the housekeeper if a person named
Smith lived there, to which she replied in the negative.
He immediately told her she was a liar, and used several
other most abuSive epithets, upon which the defendant
came up to him, and ordered him to quit the premises,
and when he refused a scuffle ensued, the result of which
was that the prosecutor wan put out Into the street.
A number of witnesses having been called on both
sides in support of these facts,
The jury, without a moment's hesitation, returned a
verdict of Acquittal.

UNION-HALL.—(THIS DAY.)
Alexander Wilton, a notorious burglar, was charged
with breaking into the house of Moss Davis, a jeweller,
in Alfred-place, Waterloo-road, and stealing a watch.
Police sergeant 16 L. stated that, between three and
four o'clock that morning, while passing the complain-
ant'shosuseee his attention was called on hearing a noise
at street-door within. lle listened and heard the
bolts
the tr
drawn back, and the door was cautiously opened,
when the prisoner attempted to rush out into the road.
The sergeant, however, prevented this, and the prisoner
retreated into the parlour, where, in the dark, they had
a severe struggle, during which the prisoner let a watch
fall on the floor. By this time another policeman
came to the sergeant's assistance, and the. prisoner,
upon whom was found a complete set of house-
iruplements, was then secured. It was sub-
ascertained the prisoner obtained access to the
sb
er
(el au ke
ni nt gl y
house by getting over the wall of Zion Chapel, and
from thence into the yard of complainant's house, from
which he got into the interior, and went directly to the
front kitchen, where the complainant's sister was asleep.
and, without awakening her, actually took the watch
from the bedstead, where it was hanging over her head.
He was in the act of letting himself out, as above de-
scribed, when the discovery took place.
The prisoner, w'ho has been repeatedly in custody,
.
said that the last he got out of " trouble," he tried
to earn an honest living, but that, failing in his efforts,
he was compelled to have recourse to his old practices.
He was committed.