The Sun.
London, England, 1850-01-24 00:00:00

MEAT MARKETS.

SOUTHALL, JAN. 23.—Our market 'fro-day, was very
inactive for each kind of stock, and last week's prices
were with difficulty supporte 1. Beer, from 3s to 4s;
Mutton, 3s 4d to 4s 2d; Veal, 3s 2J to 3s 8d; and Pork,
3s 4d to 3s ad per 81bs, to sink the offal.
LEWES, JAN. 22.—We had a sexy dull trade here to-
day, and prices were with difficulty supported. Beer,
from 314 s to 4s 2d; Mutton, 3a 4s to 4s 4d; Veal, 3s 4d
to 3s 8d; and Pork, 3s 4d to 3s 8d per 81bs.
BO➢tFORD, JAN. 23.—The general detnsnd was in a
very sluggish state, on the following terms:—Beef, from
2s 10d to 4s; Mutton, 3s 4d to 4s 2d; Veal 3s 4d to 3s
8d; and Pork, 3s 4d to 3s 8d per 81bs. Suckling
Calves, 18s to 245; Quarter-old Store Pigs 16s to
20s; and Mulch Cows, with their small Calf, 141 to
181 each.

CORN AVERAGES.
GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISII CORN
Tor the Week ended Jan. 20, IMO, made up from the Returns of the
Inspectors in the different Citiesand Towns in England and Wales
per Imperial Quarter.
WHEAT. I nasurr.l OATS. RIM. I ELAM I PIA,.
PRICE .. 4ls Od I 26s 3d 16s Od I 23s 9d I 264 id I 27s 6d

DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN.
WHEAT. BAILEY. I 1
OATS. IT BEANS. PIA..
Is Od Is Od Is Od Is Od Is 01 Is 01

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

THE QUEEN V. RICHARD GUNN MAHON.
The defendant, a respectably dressed person, who had
been au officer in the Royal Marines, surrendered to re-
ceive the judgment of the court, for trafficing in the sale
Cl an appointment in the gift of the Board of Ordnance.
He had pleaded guilty of the offence.
A number of affidavits were put in on both sides. The
first was from James Paxton, jun, of 36, Russell-street,
Bermondsey, farrier, who deposed that his father in-
serted an advertisement in the Times on the 2d of July,
1847, that he was desirous to procure for his son a Go-
vernment or railway appointment, legally saleable. Im-
mediately after he received a letter from the defendant,
dated from Grosvenor House, Knightsbridge, stating
that, through the influence of his friends, he could
meet the wishes of the advertiser. Several interviews
took place at the Ship Hotel, and the defendant at one
of them produced a letter purporting to be from Lord
Alfred Paget, the Secretary to the Ordnance, intimating
that an appointment could be obtained. Upon this Mr.
Paxton, sen., gave the defendant 271. 10s., taking a short
bill for the amount, and after inquiring at the Reform
Club, and finding the defendant what he purported to
be, another sum of money was paid to him, making in
all 1101, the defendant binding himself by a certain day
to procure an appointment in the Ordnance. He did
not, however, keep his word, neither were the bills paid.
The elder Paxton corroborated in his affidavit the pre-
ceding facts, and both Lord Alfred Paget and Lord
Clarence Paget swore positively that they had never
written to either the def-ndant or Paxton in their lives.
The defendant put in a voluminous document, setting
forth that he it as the son of a clergyman of the Church
of England, who died in 1826, leaving him almost un-
provided for. Through the influence of Lord Bran-
don and his family a situation was obtained for him in
the Royal Marines, in which he bad served with credit
for eleven years under many distinguished officers, one
of his recommendations for promotion being signed by
Lord William Paget. Through the interest of Lord
Minto he was appointed, in 1841, paymaster in South
Wales, but, in consequence of over confidence being
placed in him he became embarrassed grid was obliged to
resign in 1843; but the Admiralty gave him the hope
that he would be reinstated. Through the interest of
Sir Henry Ward, Sir Thomas Wilde, and Mr.
Brown, M.P., he believed he should have been
placed upon the half-pay list, but for the perse-
cutions cf the Paxtons, under whose threats of exposure
by advertisements in the newspapers, he gave them the
promise for which he had been prosecuted; but though
he calculated otherwise he was unable to fulfil it. Hav-
ing been arrested at Bath he was compelled to petition,
as an insolvent, the Judge uf the County Court t f So-
merset for protection; but, owing to the opposition of
the Paxtons, and the statement of the transaction with
respect to the appointment, ho was remanded for twelve
months, and passed six months in gaol. Having actually
suffered' for this °flout), having been altogether ruined,
and suffering much from dyspepsia, he trusted the Court
would be lenient to him. Medical certificates to the Ef-
fect that the defendant was suffering from this complaint
were put ie. Oae of them stated that confinement
might bring on the disease, and that ho could not answer
for consequences.
Mr. COCHDURN addressed the Court in mitigation of
punishment. It could not he denied that the defendant
was placed in a disadvantageous position, in consequence
of having no opportunity of answering the affidavits of
the proseeutces. The Court must see that the Paxtons
were not blameless in this matter, since they were per-
fectly ready to enter into an illegal compact. Having
already suffered for his misconduct, and being a ruined
and destroyed man, he trusted the Court would think a
light punishment sufficiently ample.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL regretted that he could
discern no mitigating circumstances in the case. The
defendant could not be placed in a disadvantageous posi-
tion, as he had advisedly pleaded guilty, with a perfect
knowledge of the truth of the allegations that the Pax-
tons could bring against him. The Paxtons were not,
however, without imputation, as they were ready to break
the law, but he did not represent them, but the public.
It was, he confessed new to him, that a conviction for
fraud was to extenuate an offence of this kind. The
defendant had laboured to cast an imputation upon his
Noble Friend, Lord Allred Paget, and that Noble Lord
had a right to expect that the judgment of the Court
should fully establish his utter innocence of any know-
ledge of, or communication with the defendant. The de-
fendant well knew that he was perpetrating a fraud, and
the Court would not discharge its duty if it did not
strongly mark its sense of the defendant's misconduct.
The defendant said he was an entire stranger to both
the Lord Pagets who had sworn affidavits. The letter
he produced was from Lord William Pager, who, as
would be seer, had backed his testimonials.
Mr. Justice PA.TTESON said the imposition of a fine,
send imprisonment until it was paid, would be equivalent
to passing a sentence of perpetual imprisonment on him.
The sentence ww, that he be imprisoned in the Queen's
Bench for twelve months.
The defendant was removed in custody.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
At the sittings in Banco, this day, the Court was
occupied in listening to arguments on points of pleading
of not the slightest public interest.

BAIL COURT.--(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice ERLE.)
CIIBITT V. PURDY.

Mr. PARRY applied to the Court on behalf of the de-
fendant iu this case, a prisoner in Whitecross-street
Prison, for a writ of babeaa corpus, to bring up the pri-
soner fur the purpose of being discharged, on the ground
that the warrant of commitment was insufficient in law,
and that he bad been discharged from the debt by an
order of adjudication made by the Insolvent Court. The
plaintiff was an officer in the army, and the prisoner a
horse-dealer ; the transaction arising out of the sale of
a horse. On the 12th of January, 1849, the plaintiff
obtained judgment in the Bloomsbury County Court
against the prisoner for a debt under 201., but in the
following April the prisoner obtained his discharge under
the Insolvent Act. Nevertheless, on the 11th of this
present month he was arrested on a county-court war-
rant at the suit of the plaintiff, and committed to White-
cross-street Prison. It would seem that the arrest took
place under the 102 d section of the 9th and 10th
Victoria, chapter 95, which provided that "no protection
order or certificate granted by a Court of Bankruptcy
or Insolvenoy,shall be available to discharge any defen-
dant from any commitment under the provisions of
this Act, but the Learned Counsel apprehended this
clause did not apply to any case where the certificate
order, or protection, had been obtained prior to the
arrest.

Mr. Justice ERLE suggested that the application
being virtually fur a discharge, ought to be made
to the county court that had made the order of corn.
mittal. _ __

Mr. PARRY thought, as the prisoner was wrongfully
imprisoned, this wAs the proper tribunal to render him
relief.

Mr. Justice ERLE said, that he would consider the
point.
Mr. PARRY said there were several objections to the
form of the order of commitment. In the first place, it
stated that it was issued after the prisoner had been ex-
amined by the Court, but it did not specify that the ex-
amination had been made on oath.
Mr. Justice PATTESON did not think that was neces-
sary where the order showed upon the face of it that
the Court had the power of adjudicating, and taken the
proper st-ps to accomplish the adjudicaion.
Mr. PARRY said his 'next objection to the order was,
that it stated that the defendant had obttibei
credit by means of false pretences, and had
made a gift, or tram far, of his property,
fir the purpose cf defrauding, and the Court there-
fire adjudged him to forty days' imprisonment.
Now this order was as much in the nature of a convic-
tion as a commitment, and ought to be construed strictly.
Wel', then, by the wording of this sentance it would ap-
peir t iat the defendant had committed t so offences, and
the term c..f impr;sontneet ought to have been awarded
to Will,

Mr. Justice ERLE—But the Court had only rower to
imprison f •rty days for such an offence.
Mr. Lim?. said there was one other ground of objec-
tion to the form the order. It stated that the def nd-
ant had " destro) ed, made a gif.`, or try.' .It•fern d his
property for the purpose c f detrau, iing hie, creditors."
Now, this being in the disjunctive, tb e t,ffr nee was too
indefinitely stated to justify the commi
Mr. Justice FAME—Had the conjur ction been "and,"
then the objection mould not lie.
Mr. PARRY was &raid not. The le .st ,ground objec•
thin wile, aft'', it omit red the prisoner to be imprisoned
for " forty days, or until any soar er discharge in due
course of law." Now, he contenried t bat the order ought
to have specified in what manner arty sooner discharge
could be obtained, such as by pay-ing the debt and costs,
which amounted in the whole t, 19e. It had been
held in the Insolvent Court th at rich an order was
clearly bad.
Mr. Justice Max said the points raised were of
some importance to the public, aul they were so nice
and minute in themselves that t hey required some cor-
sideration. He would not, theyefore, give his decision
till to-morrow morning.

SHERIFFS' COUB.T.--(THIS DAY.)
(134 fore Mr. Under-Sheriff Buttons:Lt.)
MILITARY TAIL9RING.—.7onzi"sON v. cOWPER.
The plaintiff in this action is a tailor and army-
accoutrement-maker, in Jermyni-str,et, St. Jatees'e, and
sought to recover the sum of 154. 7s. 6d. for goods sold.
Defendant is a surgeon in the arrny.
Defendant suffered judgment to go by default.
The plaintiff's traveller was celled to prove the order-
ing of a pair t f tringed bullion epaule.tes, a sce,nd-
hand regulation sword, &c., and that toe prices cbargtd
Isere fair and reasonable.
The UNDER SHERIFF—How yeas the order given—
in writing ? Wituess—No._ Mr. Cowper was at the
time only an assistant-surgeon, and expecting promotion
said, that the order was to be executed when he was
gazetted.
The UNDER-SHERIFF—Then the Gazette was to be
the order, did you take it from 'that ? Witness—Oh,
no. It is pretty well known how things are, without
looking to that.—(Lkughte".)
The UNDER-SHERIFF—I see you charge interest
upon the debt contracted in 1846. Did defendant
agree to pay interest? Witness—No, but it is usual ;
and when I applied for the amount defendant's only
excuse was, that he had not enough to pay, and offered
to give up the epaulettes, for which, as they were not
much worn, I said 51 ss. would be allowed.
Another witness was called to prove that the charges
were fair, and that it was the custom to add interest
on over-due accounts.
The UNDER-t-_HEREFF said, as there was no defence,
the jury would probably give a verdict for the amount
claimed.
The jury found a verdict for 151. 7s. 6d.