The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-10 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

TRIAL OF WALTER WATTS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Cross-examined—The prisoner had been in the office
since 1832, and was a servant of the company, who paid
him his salary. The papers he wanted sealed up were
not all the office contained, but those in his own and the
secretary's offices. The prisoner held two shares in the
company, and no doubt had received dividends. There
was a treasury committee, without whose authority no
cheques could be drawn. The cheques are signed by
three of the directors, and countersigned by the treasurer
or secretary. The cheque is then handed to a clerk in
the cashiers office, and before it is handed to the party
in whose favour it is drawn it is copied into a transcript
book. The prisoner surrendered to the police.
Re-examined—The cheque-book produced is the one
that was in use in February. The prisoner had no ac-
cess to it. It was kept in the inner department of the
cashier's office and never was brought higher than the
board-room. It was the duty of the prisoner further to
take care of the cheque when it was ready for delivery,
and to countersign it. There appear to have been
several leaves torn out of this cheque-book. I never saw
the prisoner in the lower office, where this book is kept,
but it was his duty to go in on his arrival in the morn-
ing and enter his name in the time-book. The pass-book
was entrusted to the prisoner's custody.
Cross-examined—The prisoner could not get to this
cheque-book in the lower office, when he signed his
name in the time-book. It was the duty of the prisoner's
father to keep the duplicate cheque-book.
Mr. George W. Ellis, a clerk in the office of Messrs.
Freshfield, the solicitors for the prosecution, stated that
he served the prisoner and his solicitor with notice to:pro-
duce the missing cheques and his pass-book with the
London and Westminster Bank.
Mr. James Ashton, the ledger clerk of the London and
Westminster Bank, produced the ledger in which the ac-
count of the prisoner for the present year was kept. On
the 26th of Feb. the prisoner appeared to be credited 1,4001.
as cash. In January and February the prisoner paid in
various sums, and the balance now remaining in his
favour was 201. 7s. 41.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. COCKBURN then took the objection that the in-
dictment could not be sustained, inasmuch as the pri-
soner was a partner in the Globe Insurance Company,
who, in fact, were the prosecutors in this case, though
the Act to which the Learned Attorney-General had
already referred, provided that the company should sue
or be sued, prosecute or be prosecuted in the name of
its treasurer, and gave no power whatever to sue or pro-
secute each other, except in so far as to recover the calls
on money to be raised under the general provisions of
the Act. In common law, therefore, the com-
pany could sustain no proseontion against the
prisoner, and there was ample authorities
in the books to support this objection. The Learned
Gentleman cited the cases of "The King and Ranley"
in Russell and Ryan, page 478; " The King and
Willis," Moody's Crown cases, page 110; and " The
Queen and White,".Cox's criminal law cases, page 245.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—IS it the dictum you rely
upon, a man can't steal his own property?
Mr. COCKBURN—Certainly, my Lord.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—WeII, then, the charge is
not for st aling from the company, but from individuals.
Mr. COCKBURN—No my Lord, he is charged with
stealing the property Of the treasurer, as the represen-
tative of the company.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—I am not speaking of the
cheque for 1,4001.
Mr. COCKBURN—Your Lordship then is speaking of
stealing the piece of paper. In the case of the " King
and Willis," it was held, my Lord, that a wife could not
be found guilty of st=aling the property of a society and
company in which her husband was a partner, and I
submit, upon principle, that this indictment cannot be
sustained. A man can't steal his own property.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—In some cases he can; for
instance, there is a note to a case in Saunders, where a
master robbed his servant under these circumstances.
Re gave him some money to go and pay a bill, and
while the servant was on the road he waylaid him and
took the money from him. Now, do you mean to say
that a man in such a case could not be prosecuted fur
st-aling his own money?
Mr. COCKBURN—Yes, my Lord, he can, if be commits
the robbery with a felonious intent, but here the piece of
paper was as much the property of the prisoner as any
of the directors.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—The rule of law as laid down
by Lord Hale is this,—a joint tenant having possession
of a thing cannot be indicted for stealing it from his
partner, and that was the rule the Court relied on in de-
ciding the case of the wife already referred to. There
the husband was the joint tenant in possession.
Mr. COCKBURN—WeII, my Lord, I apprehend the
prisoner was the tenant iu possession, but the principle
laid down by Lord Hale was broader than that main-
tained by the Court. Lord hale distinctly states that a
man entitled even t ) possession cannot be prosecuted.
Mr. Justice CREsswELL—But here it is shown that
he was not entitled to possession.
Mr. COCKBURN—Nor was it shown to be in the pos-
session of the directors, who are the prosecutors; and I
submit the piece of paper was as much the prisoner's
property and in his possession as the directors. This
was evidently a case of joint partnership, where some of
the parties were managing a business for the others, and
no indictment for felony could be sustained against them.
Mr. BODKIN was heard on the same side.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL said there was no doubt as
to the rule of law upon this subject, but here there was
a special property and the indictment could be sustained.
Mr. BODKIN took exception to this. No special pro-
perty had been shown whatever; the directors were paid
for their services and so were the clerks, while there
was no evidence whatever to show that the directors
were specially responsible to the other partners or share-
holders for the security of the property then in their pos-
session.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL overruled the objection, on
the ground that there was special possession and special
property in the directors.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON concurred in this ruling.
Mr. COCKBURN applied; to the Court to reserve the
point.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL—I have said nothing about
that yet.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—That is matter for after con-
sideration.
Mr. COCKBURN addressed the jury for the prisoner
at great length.
Mr. Justice CRESSWELL then summed up the evidence.
The jury after an hour's absence returned into court
with a verdict of Guilty of stealing a piece of paper.
Mr:Coexist:me moved an arrest of judgment until
the point raised in the course of the trial relative to the
prisoner being a partner in the company could be de
sided by the Exchequer Chamber.
The COURT granted the application.
SP

ORTIN G INTELLIGENCE.
CHESTER RACES.—Trr URSDAT (CONCLUDED).
soya,
The Selling Stakes of 5
each, and 30 added. Once
round and a dis.
ya , Tat
6(
91810 SBl biubb.s.. ... )..
Mr. Lawson's Caurire, 4
(E. ) 1
Mr. Foster's Osbaldwick3,
yryersi
..Noble) 2
but
were
llb ............ (Blail) 3
Mr. Merry's Countess,
The following also ran,
yrs,
,r4e7111:.
i.t.o(PiWbl a e.he d.
I. t. e.: hToLuys ee )) 'p 0
Mr. Hargreaves 's Oversight,
Mr. Dawson 's Bill Brown, 4
Mr. Pedley's Cintab, 4 yrs, 7st 101 b ................... 0
Mr. Koegan's Ranelagh, 3 yrs, Est 41b
Betting-5 to 4 agst Caurire, and 5 toS elahnla:t
Billy Brown, Countess, and Osbaldwick.
a length. Run in 2 min. 7 secs. won easy by
The Scurry Handicap of 5 sovs. each, 3 ft, and 20 added.
Three-quarters of a mile. (11 Subs.)
Mr. Stopforth's Bich°, 3 yrs, Est llb ..(Arnold) 1
Mr. Wright's eh f by Coronation, 3 yrs, sst 2lb 2
Mr. J. Armstrong's Chieftain, 3 yrs, sst 101 b (Hiatt) 3
The following also started, but were not placed:—
Lord Howth's The Fiddler, 5 yrs, Bst 101 b (A. Day) 0
Mr. Maugan's Portia, 4 yrs, Bst 91b (Keegan) 0
Mr. Choice's May Day, 4 yrs, Sat 61b...(G. Whitehouse) 0
Mr. Ellis's Acomb, 5 yrs, Bst 41b ......... (G. Abdale) 0
Mr. Stebbing's Westow, 4 yrs, 9st ...(Wintringham) 0
Mr. Wetherell's California, 3 yrs, sst 71b ...... (Wells) 0
2to 1 agat Elcho, 7 to 2 agst Chieftain. Won in a
Canter bY two lengths. Time, 1 min. 21 secs.
------

THE LONDON GAZETTE.

(THIS EVENING.)

LORD CHAMBERLAIN'S-OFFICE, MAY 9, 1850.
Notice is hereby given, that her Majesty's birthday
will be celebrated on Wednesday next, the 15th just'
Commission by the LOrd-Lieutenant of Cumberland.
Royal Cumberland Regiment of Militia.—Thomas
Mitchell, Gent., to Ice Surgeon, Jan, 7, 1842.
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Stafford.
Queen's Own Royal Regiment og Staif,rdsiiire Yec-
nianry Cavalry.—Thomas Thorneycrott, Gent., to 1.0
Captain, vica Earl Granville, promoted, May 4.
WHITEHALL, MAT 3
The Lord Chancellor has appointed William Wood-
land tha younger, of Taunton, in the county of Somerset,
Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court
of Cancery.

WHITEHALL, MAY 8.
The Lord Chancellor has appointed Richard Duke, of
Liverpool, in the county palatine of Lancaster, Gent. to
be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chan-
cery. _

..
BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED.
Evan Rees, hatter, Dudley, Worcestershire.
BANKRUPTS.

Richard Dart and Joseph Brown, coach lace manu-
facturers, Bedford-street, Covent-garden, to surrender
May 17, at eleven, and June 22, at twelve, at the

Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Guild-
hall•chambers, Basinghall-street; May and Sweetland,
Queen-square, Bloomsbury.
Edward Parratt, advertising agent, Park-village West,
Regent's-park, May 22, and June 21, at7one, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Stansfeld, official assignee; Cun-
ningham. Buckingham-street, Strand.
John!Thomas Holland, builder, Coventry, May 23 and
June 20, at twelve, at the Birmingham District Court.
Christie, official assignee, Birmingham; Dewes and Son,
Coventry; Motteram, Knight and Emmett, Birmingham.
William Hayhurst, coach proprietor, Liverpool, May
22 and June 20, at eleven, at the Liverpool District
Court. Bird, official assignee, Liverpool; Dewhurst,
Liverpool.
Margaret Milne, grocer and tea dealer, Manchester,
May 31 and June 14, at eleven, at the Manchester
District Court. Hobson, official assignee, Manchester;
Mackinson, Manchester.

Buckley Boyle, dealer and chapman, Manchester,
May 28, and June 12, at twelve, at the Manchester
District Court. Fraser, official assignee, Manchester;
Andrew, Manchester.

Richard Wilson, dealer and chapman, Kingston-upon-
Hull, May 29, and June 19, at half-past twelve, at the
Leeds District Court. Carrick, official assignee, Hull ;
Stamp, Hull.