The Sun.
London, England, 1850-01-23 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER COURT, Jan. 22.

,Sittings at Nisi Prius, before the LORD CHIEF
autos and a Middlesex Common Jury.)
CLARE V. SKELTON AND WIFE.

Mr. Edwin James and Mr. Tindal Atkinson were
counsel for the plaintiff. Mr. Crowder and Mr.
Sewell for the defendants.

This action was brought to recover damages for
a false imprisonment. It appeared that the plaintiff
was a cook in the service of the defendants, who kept
a lodging-house in Suffolk-place, Pall-mall. She
left that place- on the 12th of November last, and was
afterwards given into the custody of a police-con-
stable by the female defendant, on a charge of having
stolen two blankets and a tablecloth. Upon a search
being made at the plaintiff's lodgings, at the instance
of the female defendant, the missing articles were not
found. Nevertheless, the charge of robbery was
persisted in, and upon it the plaintiff was kept in
custody from Wednesday, the 14th of November,
until Friday, the 16th, as the magistrate did not sit
on the intervening day, the 15th, in consequence of
its having been appointed as a public thanksgiving.
the plaintiff was discharged on the 16th, and thii
action was commenced shortly afterwards. The de-
fendants pleaded a justification, but it was not sub-
stantiated, and the contention on their part was
limited to the fact of there being reasonable and
probable cause of charging the plaintiffwith the rob
bery, and, at the same time, of there being no evi•
dente of malice.
Verdict for the plaintiff —Damages 20/.
WILSON D. ♦SIILET, _

A rule was granted in this case, on the motion of
Mr. Atherton, on behalf of the defendant, for a new
trial. It was tried in the adjoining Court a few days
ago before Mr Baron Rolfe.
JUDGMENT-BIRD ♦ND OTHERS vi DROWN ♦ND

OTHERS.

The LORD CHIRP BARON delivered judgment for the
plaintiffs in this action to-day, which was argued
before the Court during last term on a special case.

ADMIRALTY COURT, Jan. 22.
(Before Dr. LUSnINUTON.)
THE TEIDBNT.
This is a salvage case, which the owners an
crews of three smacks, called Lalls Rookh, Five
Brothers, and George the Fourth, all of Harwich,
bring on against the United States vessel Trident.
Dr. ADDAMS appeared for the crews of the three
smacks, and stated that the Lalla Rookh, on the 21st
September last, got under weigh from Harwich
harbour, and anchored under the Languard Fort, in
readiness to put to sea to assist any vessel that might
be seen in distress, the wind at
.the time blowing a
strong gale from E.S. E., which continued to increase
during the night, and about three, A.M., on the next
morning", while on the look-out, the crew saw a light
on the larboard bow to the S.E., and considering it
to proceed from a vessel near the 'Cork Sands, they
made towards it, when they found it to proceed
from .a very large vessel, which proved to be the
United States ship the Trident, of 335 tons, trading
from Amsterdam to New York, with a general
cargo and emigrants. She had all her masts gone.
Part of the crew of the Lalla Rookh got into their
boat and endeavoured to get on board the Trident,
but could not, from the mast and rigging hanging
over her sides and flapping about. She was then in
only four fathoms water, about a quarter of a mile
from the Cork Sands, her head at the time was
S S.W., the tide fast ebbing, and had she gone on
shore she must have remained there in great peril
until high water. At this time her main, mizen,
and foremasts were gone, and her top-yards and
sails, and with difficulty the crew of the Lalla Itookh
was at last able to get on board, when the master of
the Trident asked it the lights then seen were not the
South Foreland, and being informed they were not,
the master gave up the ship to the crew of the Lalla
Rookh. By this time the other two smacks, the Five
Brothers mad the George the Fourth, came up and
assisted. Having cleared away the deck of the Tri-
dent from the wreck that covered it, they towed her
off the sands into Harwich harbour ; the ship, cargo,
crew, and passengers, were saved from destruction by
this timely assistance, and for which he had no doubt
the Court would award salvage to the parties.
Dr. ROBINSON followed on the same side.
Dr. liaaaaen said he appeared for the owners of
the Trident, and contended that the vessel did not
require any extra hands, that no pump was at work,
that the master and crew of the Trident got her off
the sands without any assistance, that they cut away
thet therigging her, and that she was in no danger
a
Rookh came to her assistance,
time tthoe ease
Lciht
and there was no danger of life, the wind being also
fair to carry her into harbour. The master of the
Trident admitted they bad been in danger, but they
had relieved themselves from it without any assist-
ance, and what services had been rendered by the
smacks were amply remunerated by the tender of
50/., which he had no doubt the Court would consider
sufficient.
Dr. ROBEATSON was heard for the 'same party. •
The L arned JUDGE said this was a claim of sal-
vage made against the United States ship Trident,
bound to New York with a general cargo, and 36
emigrants on board. Having got on the Cork Sands,
off Harwich, which the master took to be the Good-
win Sands, three smacks bad rendered her assistance,
for which SOL had been tendered. A question for
the Caul to decide was, whether the two last vessels
were entitled to salvage, or whether they made a
claim without due foundation ? There was no doubt
but that the vessel was in great danger, for the master
had hoisted a light for assistance, which unquestion-
ably he wanted, and the Rookh coming up, she
towed,the Trident, with the assistance of the other
two smacks; in safety into Harwich harbour, and this
must have been done with the consent of the master
of the Trident. The Learned Judge said he felt the
services were meritorious, and that they were- all
entitled to salvage. The vessel and cargo were
estimated of the value of 4,8001., and instead of 50/,
which had been tendered, he should award the sum
of 2001.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Jan. 22.
()More Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, Assistant-Judge, and

a Bench of Magistrates.)
The adjourned sessions for the month of January
commenced this mor4ing at Hicks'-hall, Clerken-
we 1 l-green.
The calendar contains a list of about 70 prisoners,
of whom nearly the whole are indicted for the com-
mission of felony.
The Learned JUDGE briefly addressed the grand

jury..
W. Anderson, a boy of 14 years of age, was indicted
for the following robbery :
It appeared from ,the evidence that about the middle
of the day of the 10th inst. the prisoner went into the
shop of a baker of the name of Cooper, in William-
street, Stepney, and asked the wife of that person,
who-happened to be standing behind the counter, for
a halfpepnyworth of bread, and at the same time he
placed a penny piece on the counter. As Mrs.
Cooper was fn the act.of giving the boy the change
he threW a handful of pepper <into her eyes, and in-
stantly jumped up on to the counter, and began to
help himself out of the till, which had been Pnly the
moment before opened by Mrs. Cooper. The boy,
however, having possessed himself of Bd., heard a noise,
which induced him to desist and make his escape.
Ile was, however, pursued and quickly overtaken by
the prosecutor in an adjoining street. No sooner had
he been secured than the boy turned round, and held
out the 31. to his pursuer, remarking, " Oh, its only
3 1., so it's not worth running for, so I gives in ; but
you would not have nabbed me it it had been more."
the prosecutor, of course, gave him into the custody
ore policeman, and. he was now put upon his trial.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Mr. PAYNB remarked, that the prisoner appeared
to have adopted the, n.ew mode. of enabling a man to
commit a robbery:" It-was only the other day that a

jeweller in Fleet street had bean robbed of a watch
under preciealy similar circumstances.
One of the police now intimated to the Court that
the boy at the bar had only been released two days
previously from the gaol at Ilford, where he had un-
dergone an imprisonment for the commission or a
highway robbery.
The Learned JUDGE—For what robbery, do you
say ? The policemen—For highway robbery, my
Lord. The prisoner, with three others, stopped a
chaise on the turnpike road ; and one of the party, but
not the prisoner, fired a pistol at the driver. They
succeeded in effecting the robbery they intended, and,
then made off, but the prisoner was afterwards taken.
The Learned JUDGE observed that the case of this
boy presented a fearful instance of depraved juvenile
precocity. The best course of treatment that could
be applied to such a case would have been to have
sent him to Parkhurst ; hut it unfortunately hap-
pened that he had not now the power to pass such a
sentence as would have the effect of obtaining his
admission into that establishment. All that be could
do, therefore, was to sentence him to six inooths'
imprisonment and hard labour in the House of Cor-
rection.

Newbound, aged 24, was indicted for having
stolen two silk handkerchiefs, of the value of 104., the
property of Richard H. Teller.
Mr. Collyer appeared for the prisoner.
The prosecutor stated that oa the evening of the
17th inst. the prisoner had come into his shop, where
he had asked to be shown some silk handkerchiefs.
Of course, regarding him as a probable purchaser, the
request was complied with, but, in consequence of
there being a peculiarity of manner in the way in
which the prisoner handled the handkerchiefs, after a
short time had elapsed he accused him of having
secreted two out of the lot. Upon this charge being
made against him the prisoner took the two misting
handkerchiefs from under his coat, where he had, as
he imagined, concealed them without his having been
seen to do so, and threw them down upon the counter.
Ttose handkerchiefs, added the prosecutor, formed a
portion of the parcel which had been exhibited to the
prisoner for him to make a choice from.
Mr. COLLIER addressed the jury on behalf of the
prisoner.
The Learned JUDGE left it to the jury to say,
whether, upon the evidence they had heard, they en-
tertained any doubt in the case. If they did, of
course they would give the benefit of such doubt to
the prisoner.
The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
Two persons of the names of Squires and Weeks,
who had been convicted at the December sessions of
an assault, were now brought up for judgment.
It will be remembered that a colonial agent of the
name of Hardwick, residing in South-street, Fins-
bury-square, had purchased two pianofortes from the
defendant Squires, for one of which he paid at once
upon its delivery, but that on his complaining that
the instrument which had bees sent in some days
afterwards was of an inferior, quality, Squires, ac
companied by the other defendant, with his van, and
several other persons, had gone to the prosecutor's
house, where, after they had assaulted him because he
endeavoured to prevent their removing the instrument
which was the better of the two, and that which had
been sent in the first and had been paid for, they by
force carried both of the instruments away.
Mr. EighT, who appeared for the prosecutor, now
said that the parties had entered into an arrangement,
in pursuance of which the defendant was to repay
the prosecutor the sum which he had given for the
first pianoforte, namely 23/, and also to pay a further
sum of 101. for costs. At the same time it was a
. matter of anxiety with the prosecutor, that the Court
should be informed that the defendant Squires had
withdrawn and retracted every offensive expression
which he had on a former occasion given utterance to.
The Learned JUDGE was extremely glad that so
wise a course had been taken. He could not but
compliment the prosecutor upon the spirit he had
manifested throughout the whole transaction.
The defendant Squires then paid the 33/. ; and
The loarned JUDGE thereupon passed a nominal
sentence upon the defendants, both of whom were
then discharged.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

A respectable-looking woman presented herself be-
fore the magistrate to complain that same authoress
had been making use of her name in applying for
some relief from the charity-box, an account or
which had appeared in some of the papers, and which
was calculated to alarm her friends in the country, if
uncontradicted. This person was represented by the
newspapers to have said she had nearly finished a va-
lumnious poem, and to have given her name as Anna
Maria Jones, the authoress of some well-known
works of fiction. The fact was that she (the appli.

cant) was the Anna Maria Jones referred to, and she
handed up a list of her works.
Sir P. LAURIE, in looking over the list, said—
Why, did you write the whole of these ?
She replied that she did. They made thirty-stight
volumes.

---------
Sir P. LAURIE said—But you are not the authoresi
of the " Scottish Chiefs," for that is the work of
♦nna Maria Porter.
The applicant replied, that one work was called the
" Scottish Chiefs," and the other the " Scottish
Chieftains." She was not answerable for this seem
ing piracy, for it was the bookseller's device, to
which perhaps she weakly yielded. The taste of the
public had so completely altered since she began
novel-writing, at nineteen years of age, that she could
get nothing for such labour now.
Sir P. LAURIE said she was not the only literary
character who was complaining of the entire change
in the public taste, and had been thereby reduced to
straitened circumstances.

She said, that was unhappily her case. She could
no longer support herself in comfort by her pen, and,
to increase her distress, her husband, to whom she
had looked for support, had become of impaired in-
tellect._ _ . _ ,

Sir P. LAl3ElE:asked what her husband's name was
She replied, that it was Lowndes, and he was it
business for a long- time as a- dramatic bookseller,
but he failed in trade, and that misfortune preyed
upon his mind. Although she was in straitened cir.
cumstances, she was not reduced to beg charity at a
police-office, and she was afraid the account would
alarm her friends in Monmouthshire, where shs had
resided a great many years.
Sir P. LAURIE had no dohbt the newspapers would
set her right with the public.
Mrs. Lowndes thanked Sir P. L curie for his at-
tention, and then retired: