The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-07 00:00:00

Mr. Justice PATTESON asked what the Court was ?

Mr. PEACOCK replied that he believed it was the ItOya
Court.—Application granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 6.
(Sittings in Banco.)

BUNTER, APPELLANT ; THE TOWN CLERK OF WEN-

LOCK, RESPONDENT.

Mr. KEATING applied to the Court under the 6th and
7th Victoria, c. 18, to remit to the revising barrister the
case prepared by him in reference to a decision come t
during his revision of the list of voters for the borough
of Wenlock. The application involved an important
question as to the appella,,e jurisdiction of this Court
over the decisions of the revising barristers. The appel-
lant alleged now that in the statement transmitted to the
Court by the barrister, facts had been omitted which
were essential to the cafe. He had applied to the bar-.
rister to insert those facts, but the Learned Gentleman
refused to do so. Mr. Keating now moved their Lord.
ships to remit the case, with the order of the Court for
the insertion of the omitted facts.

Mr. Justice COLTMAN said, perhaps those matters
which you aver to be facts, were not proved to the satis-
faction of the revising barrister ?
Mr. KEATING said that was not the case. But the
barrister said they were not material to the cace ;
whereas the appellant maintained that they were so.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said that the Court might,
perhpi, send back the statement for the insertion of
facts, which, after hearing the appeal, they might deem
to be material. But they could not interfere as to those
matters at present. 4.
Mr. KEATING was preparing to pro. Ted with his at -
fitment, when
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, that the object of the
application was to put the Court in the place of the
revising, barrister, whereas their Lordships were re-
quired to decide upon the statement made by the bar-
rister. If, upon the hearing of the appeal, they found
any insufficient, they would send back the statement to
have the insufficiency supplied ; but they could not an-
ticipate the hearing of the appeal.
The other Judges concurred, and the Court refused
to interfere.

THOMAS V. DUNN.

This was an action upen an agreement, in which the
jury found upon the principal count for the defetick
the point left to them by the Judge (the Lord CI ief
Justice) having been whether the signature of the de-
fendant had been forged. The plaintiff now moved the

Court for a new trial, on affidavits that he was prepared
to disprove the allegation of forgery.
Their LOU/SHIPS, having part-heard the application,
adjourned the further hearing till to-morrow, and the
Court t 0.%

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 7, 1844.

handkerchief, which he considered he had fairly ob-
tained by such an exhibition of his superiority, until
the turnkey interposed his power. M. Legrand justi-
fied the vigorous means he had adopted for restitu-
tion upon the maxim of " honour amongst thieves."

BOW-STREET.
Iluesday Mr. G. W. Jones, the Secretary of tie
Hammersmith Suspension-bridge Committee, attended
in obedience to a summons obtained at the suit of Mr.
G. Lewis, Secretary to the Master of the Horse to
her Majesty, to show cause why he had exacted a toll
from Mr. W. J. Goodwin, her /11.)jesty's Inspector of
Stables, on a pair of horses drawing one of the royal
carriages, on the 21st ult., contrary to the provisions
of the Company's Act, by which the Queen's horses
are. specially exempted.
Mr Bolton, of the firm of Bolton and Price, Lin-
coln's Inn, attended for the complainant, and was
about to open the case, when
Mr. Thomas, the defendant's counsel, questioned
the jurisdiction of the Court, and urged that the Ham •
viteramith bench was the proper one to take cognisance•
of the present case.
Mr. Burnaby, the chief clerk, observed that, as a
general rule, all matters appertaining to the Palace
and her Majesty's household were submitted to this
office, as the chief Police-court.
Mr. JARDINE said, there could be no doubt as to
the jurisdiction of the Court, and, as the summons had
been granted by Mr. Twyford, he should not hesitate
to hear the complaint:

Mr. Bolton, after directing attention to the several
provisions 'of the sth George IV. (the Company's. Act),
by which her Majesty's horses were exempted from
toll, stated the particulars of the alleged demand, and
observed that the complainant had only been induced
to request the interference of a magistrate by the
frequency of these interruptions on the part of the
Company's officers, and the impediments and imper •
tinence to which her Majesty's servants had been con-
sequently exposed.
Mr. Goodwin examined—l am inspector of stables
and veterinary surgeon to her Majesty, and had occa-
sion to pass over the suspension bridge on the 21st of
October with a small britschka and a pair of horses
belonging to her Majesty; the former had the royal
arms emblazoned upon it. I was accompanied as
usual by a servant in her Majesty's livery. On
reaching the toll-office Mr. Junes, the defendant,
stepped out and requested me to atop, at the same
time demanding where I came from and whither I
was going. I refused to tell him, but said he knew
my grounds for claiming exemption, and if he de-
manded the toll I would pay it, and he must take
the consequences. Mr. Jones was a stranger to me
personally, but the toll-keeper knew me well, as I
had been in the habit of going over the bridge for
years previously, sometimes as often a 3 three or four
times a week, without paying toll.
Cross-examined—l have been asked questions be-
fore, but have invariably refused to state where I was
going, as I felt that the inquiry was impertinent. I
have always stated that the horses and carriage be-
longed to her Majesty, and were therefore exempt.
On the occasion in question I was going from Hamp-
ton-court to the Queen's-mews at Pimlico, on her
Majesty's business ; but I admit having repeatedly
passed over the bridge in the same carriage on my
own business, and having then also declined to pay
the toll.

Mr. Thomas—Then, I think, the case ought to end
here.

Mr. JARDINE—Were you on those occasions with
her Majesty's carriage and horses ? Witness—Cer-
tainly, your Worship.
Mr. JARDINE—Then the Act clearly exempted
him, inasmuch as it specified " her Majesty's horses,"
without any restriction whatever as to the service in
which they might be engaged.
The witness was further cross-examined by Mr.
Thomas, but nothing material was elicited from him,
except an acknowledgment that Mr. Jones and the
toll-keeper were both civil to him, although he consi-
dered the inquiry relative to his mission an imperti-
nent one.

Mr. Jones explained that about five years ago, in
consequence of a complaint made by the Company
upon this point, the secretary to the Master of the
Horse authorised him to ask persons who claimed
exemption in the Queen's name, the question which
he had put, as civilly as possible, to Goodwin, but
which he refused to answer. Defendant denied that
he had applied for the toll ; it was paid by Goodwin
without any demand being made. He also denied the
assertion of the latter, that he claimed exemption.
Mr. JARDINE thought that no one could suppose
that Mr. Jones had been impertinent, in the general
acceptation of the term, but, on this occasion, seeing
that the carriage -had the royal arms on it, and that
the defendant might have known from the toll-keeper
who and what Goodwin was, he was of opinion that
the question ought not to have been put. He would
hoar the next case hefore poonouncing his decision.
A second charge, precisely similar in its nature,
was then preferred against the toll-keeper, William
Moore, for demanding the toll of Goodwin on a sub-
sequent day.
Mr. JARDINE repeated his conviction that the do-
mand, in the face of the Act, was altogether unjusti-
fiable. Ile felt it his duty, therefore, to inflict the
mitigated penalty of 51. in each case.
Mr. Thomas said the decision would be appealt d
against.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
James Ryan, between 40 and 50 years of age, one of
the waiters at Hawkins's Hotel, No. 29, Albemarle-
street, was placed at the bar, charged on suspicion of steal-
ing a letter-case containing a 101. Bank of England note,
about 40i. in gold, two gold pins, a gold pencil-ease,
and other articles, the property of Captain the Hon.
R.N. It appeared
Lincolnshire,th Dudleyatt
the
eVp or
or ss leoecnyu
Tt Anderson daldrr
isavoyend e
in
are'
town from Yarbrough,
evening
last, and put up at
Hawkins's Hotel. He was waited on by the prisoner,
who unpacked, by his directions, a portion of his bag-
question. On the
groalgloe'vviinngwheiveehniwnags, tthhee writing-casein
hinaving occasion for
some money, made a search for the case, but could not
find it. He questioned the prisoner about it, but he
denied having seen it. Not feeling quite confident that
it had been packed with his baggage, he wrote home,
and last evening received an answer that it had
been placed in a carpet bag, which was a part of his
luggage the prisoner had opened. Under these circum-
stances he made application at the police-station in
Vine-street, Piccadilly, and Sergeant Gray, No. 10 of
the e division, was immediately engaged in investigating
the matter. The constable by dint of much perseverance
succeeded in discovering that the prisoner, who was
known to be without money lately, had since Friday
been very flush of cash, and that he had discharged
several small debts he had incurred in the neighbour-
hood. On Friday night he absented himself from the
hotel without leave, and returned at two o'clock on
Saturday morning very much ibtoxicated. On Saturday
he applied for his wages, which, however, were not paid
him, but on his being closely questioned by the con-
stable, he admitted that he had on Sunday night inclosed
to his wife, living at Bath, 131. in money, adding, that he
blow sothing of the prosecutor's property.
Mr. HARDWICK asked the prisoner if he wished to say
aaything in answer to the charge ?—The prisoner said
he was quite innocent, and could prove by respectat le
witnesses that he had between thirty and forty sove-
reigns very lately in bis possession.
He was remanded until this day week.

The following letter was on Tuesday handed to the
reporter from the bench :
" A. and B. inclose a five-pound note, which they
request Mr. Maltby to apply to the relief of the first
poor persons he may think deserving of assistance, and
request the receipt of the same may be acknowledged
in the daily papers."