The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-20 00:00:00

The
k We of Chesnut is larger than has ever been
ctowo, the low price, compared to other nuts, being in
'Nat of consuulpt

EN,CII.-Tills DAY.)
at....,415L J. ius, oe ore Lord CAMPBELL ttud a
_ .

Special Jury.)
Tali
DANIEL V CHALLIS AND ANOTHER.
ii was an action to recover compensation for an at-
,pillegal distress.
he Solicitor-General, Mr. Coaling, and Mr. Sewell,
let°,.oeuesel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Sergeant Shee,
fo,r,',a3s Chambers, Q.C., and Mr. Brsmwell, appeared
',Jae defendants.
11,71',. Daniel, the plaintiff, is a solicitor, residing at
111,,duaro, Wiltshire; and, in this action, represented
assigneesnd of
no Mr. a
Jabankrupt, mes Bohn,
an bdookthesellerdefen-
and
sr, a
is, ees
wenn) the Sheriffs of London at the time the
hattersh in action arose. In 1845 Mr. Bohn instructed
ts solicitor, Mr. Hoare, to raise money for him, and
11t gentleman, having communicated with the plaintiff,
1,1 ° was then the attorney of a Captain Long, residing
2t,
3,1'10 vicinity of Bath, who had money to lend, on the
of January, 1846, a deed was execulei between Mr.
1);41Qs Bohn, of the first part, Mr. John Bohn, his
ether and assistant, of the second part, Mr.
ft!,e,s,., of the third past, and Mr. Daniel, the
""tt, of the fourth part, assigning all Mr. James
'
6
,„4 stock in 'trade to cure 3,000/, advanced
aptain Long to. Mr. Jameses Bohn. The deed also
ssit_;
jit tied a trust with respect to moneys due from Mr.
Iles Bohn to Mr. Hoare. It also re ited an indenture
up
°0 31st of October, 1845. between Mr. John Bohn
kii,,Nlr. Hoare, whereby the former assigned lii are
Ills interest in the estate of his late father in con-
ksteration
of 50/. The deed a's ) recited another indsn-
4of the Ist of November, 1845,. between James
to an and
Hoare,
by which to secure the payment of all
tileYa then due, or to become due to Hoare, James
411 assigned to Iloare all the property not previously
hri geed to the Bishop of Llandaff, Mr. Soares-
ofelr) and Mr. Anseli, by a deed of the 24th
of,s3') tausortly after the execution of the deed
ts'qe 23dy, 1846, Mr. Bohn ri moved his buti-
ip from King William•street, Strand, to St. James's-
so,tet, Where Hoare occupied a first floor. The busi-
eo4 was then carried on in the names of Daniel and
Ist:. There was another dead executed in 1846, 13:-
/,-11 James Bohn, John Bohn, Mr. Hoare, and Mr.
:413_101, similar to the pre, ices one of January in that.
It appeared that on the 20th February, 1-84 e,
ts,•e linsre issue 1 a writ of fi. fa. on a judgment re-
trio ri,l against sir. James Bohn, at the suit of Cap-
ty a few days presious,y. An execution was
shell, Put into Mr. Bohn 's premises by tSquman, the
e1i,,18 officer, at the instauce of Ho ire, ho, it was
i.„6°, had taken this step at a time when Mr. Bohn
lc 1,4 the country. and without the sanction of Cap-
•"-4cmg. The result was, that Mr. Bohn's stock-in-
Was sold by the sheriff at a serious loss. Under
toe.3oeon circumstances the plaintiff brousht the present
to recover compensation for the loss he had
taint d.
Tae ease, which was proceeding when our report
-:vas likely to last the whole of the day.

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.
(THIS DAY.)
(Bo , CRIMINAL APPEALS.
tore tne LORD CHIEF BARON. Mr. Justice MauLE,
JUstice CRESSWELL, Mr. Justice WILLIAMS, and
r. Justice TALFOURD.
QUEEN U BIRD AND WIFE.
tt t,e primnrrs were tried before Mr. Justice Talfourd
tie° Exeter Assizes, fi._r the murder of an appretrice
tor and acquitted. They were eubsequently indicted
tga7u assault, and convicted. An appeal was made
weillest the conviction on the ground that the assault as
,ihas the murder was contained in the first indictment.
kre LORD CHIEF BARON now stated that there was a
'r
srpenne of opinion among the Learned Judges when the
tip)'ll,nlents were heard, and their Lordships theugltt it
or.; that the case should stand over for the consideration
ke",;arger number of the members of the Court.—Judg-
" Postpened accordingly.
IthlTh'-1 QUEEN U. JOSEPH BARNES.—JEDWIrNT.
e LORD CHIEF BARON said the prisoner in this case
gnii,triEd before the Recorder of Canterbury, and found
tb, Yof felony. The Court was of opinion that, though
fal, ," kart was clearly guilty of obtaining money under
foo Pretacts, he was not liable to be indicted for
and therefore the prosecution could not be sus-
`u.---Conviction qua•bed.
QUEEN U. ARTHUR FERRALL.—JUDGMENT.
e LORD CHIEF BARON Sod this was an indictment
dsow
o.kleBt soldier for disobe)ing the order of teo justices
thild Lug him to be the putative father of an illegitimate
' and directing him to pay a sum of money for its
fou ttee,tee.
Upon this indictment the prisoner was
Nan," guilty, Now, the Court was of opinion that the
goocilelion of the defendant for such disobedience was a
n,convictioo, and must therefore stand. At the same
6' F 0 could not refrain expressing his individual dig
oOm the doctrine that there was nothing to prevent
seehs.'` MI of Sessions, on a party being convicted for
fot in°ll-Payment of money, ordering him impris3nment
%Ors six, or eight months, or even a larger term of
tll4, 4etnent, when it was expressly decided by the:etatute
ste).-,tette term of punishment tor such disobedience
u'n be three months. The conviction must, however,
Ofir
14044 rn ed. and an order be expressly made for three
8,4t,:ku3, imprisonment. With regard to the other point,
134 " soldier being exempt from imprisonment, except
defutteninal charges, the Court was of opinion that the
thisuLtl.ant was nut entitled to such exemption, a case of
Th'ind being expressly set out in the statute.
Atru conviction was accordingly affirmed, and a certi-
kr 6 granted for the imprisonment of the defendant for
te months.

ECONDAHIES!--(THIS DA Y.)
(Before Mr. Secondary POTTER.)
NICHOLLS V. MILTON.
„
4eet„,,-as an inquiry to assess dimages on an issue di-
of °Y the High Court of Chancery, to try the validity
kiirSeed of covenant. It appeared defendant had been
hots:ed to the late W.lNicholl, a solicitor, and covenanted
titivt,loterfere witb, or bleu r engaged for
foir °' the clients of his mapter, under a penalty of 1001.
4444 breacb, and the like amount for each day's con-
tatts,4llee•
divan eaches were alleged, and an injunction
Main this issue directed. Defendant de-
4"ed bat the demurrer was overruled, hence the pre-
eeoceedinm
toor Plaintiff's solicitor said they did not seek for
da
Aa
e thagek n 100/. on each breach, as awl for liquidated
•
terdtct for 5001. was then taken.

IIIMINAL COURT—(THIS DAY.)
OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTNAN
Charles THE STRAND ROBBERY.
ries Clinton aged 17, a porter; Daniel John Shaw,
uootmaker;James Badcock, 19, shoemelter; John
11'41,zer, 25, a hawker; Mary AnnlCheruneau, George
spaller, and platy Ann Buncher, were indicted for
o d*
vtilu g liters watches, diamond rings, and other articles,
Ailij; 1,5001 a the property of Thomas Clapham and
lei 'lto Williams, in their dwelling-house in the Strand,
afterwards breaking out of the same house. There
gre feveral other counts in the indictment, varlieg the
asru.te,_ of the charge, and imputing to some of the priso-
kit" too minor offence of receiving portions of the pro-
knowing it to have been stolen.
for mr• Bodkin, with whoa' was Mr. Clarkson. a. peered
the
prosecution. Mr. Ballantine for the Bunchers,t
' Parry for Shaw and Badcock, Mr. Parnell for
:runeau Mr. Huddlestone for Gardner, while Mr.
of Loalf was in attendance to watch the case on bebalt
the boy Clinton.
i
%id t• Caanasoer stated the ease to the jury, which he
for tkwas one of considerable importance to the public,
ver toe robbery charged upon the prit-oners was of a
ktrif txtraordinary character; and, if he was rightly in-
It fit would turn out to have been erpetrated
er°llle of the prisoners at the bar. None of the
eet,
ream Property bad been recovered, and whatever
sb t the jury might arrive at, they could not avoid
ics4sPathiajog with the unfortunate pro.:ecutors, whose
tigis,hai been very considerable indeed. They were ex-
-14 ,I,.tte jewellers and silversmiths, carrying on business
tile" Strand, and the robbery was committed there in
r.,,,e4r1Y part of October, as it would seem, by previous
krijugetneut with some one or other engaged on the pre-
toties• Indeed, one of the prisoners, namely, the boy Clic-
hki who was taken into custody the day after the robbery,
1.,„ Pleaded guilty, and made a confession which would
iT related to the jury, and which, if true, se-
st°„llB_,lY implicated the other parties who now
st;(kt charged uf the robbery. Other circum-
(l6-nilices of an equally conclusive character would be
al-:`°Bed in the course of the evidence, such as state-
ofbilla made by the prisoners themselves, and the finding
toVneY and papers on their persons which would seem
gjave some connexion with the robbery. For instunce,
"ec'ek was heard on a particular occasion to talk about
tt iheoncerted plan of robbery, which " Charley," meaning
etah Clinton, had undertaken to engage in,
len" while the
q all Cheruneau, who cohabited with Gardner, when
c°'7anteering a statement, was suddenly stopped by
tlstalner. The officer, however, finding he could not get
4.6 statement, asked her if she had anything about
en person. She replied in the negative, but
being searched at the station, a Large
amount of money was found upon her, and bho was,
,thLerefore, charged with having received some of the pro-
ria of the robbery. On the second woman was
a list of valuable jewellery, and this fact, coupled
with other circumstances of a suspicious character, led
to
her arrest and that of her husband. It was not ne-
ti "aarY
p for him to go over all the evidence in detail, and
re would, therefore, not trouble the jury further, but
°eeed at once to call the evidence upon which they
here to decide, whether the prisoners at the bar, or any
of them, had been concerned in this very serious robbery.
pleaded
the prisoners pleaded not guilty but Clinton, who
view:led guilty.
tkkr. Thomas Clapham, one of the prosecutors, was
5 first witness called. He deposed as follows—l am
,4 Partnership with a gentleman named Williams, as a
Ttfeller and silversmith, and we carry on business in the
rand• We have two shops that communicate with
each other; a porter named Ktlly, resides on the pre--
11746e5. In one of these shops we have an iron safe let
vknt9 the wall. We have an assistant of the name of
iscard, and it was his duty at night to lock up a large
portion of the valuable property in the safe, and take the
ey with him. On Monday evening, the 2 1 t of October,
I. 14ft the shop shortly after eight o'clock, and at the
.1,10 I left, Clinton was putting the shatters up. I left
11scard there with Kelly, the porter. A little before
ten_ o'clock on the following morning I returned to the
'hop and found that the iron safe had been opened
d!. a.-false key, that was still remaining in the lock.
frcna that Safe a' number of rings,
'lve and other erticleS amounting in 'value to
4414'1 ft t9t • •
?. I es() missed proporty of the same de-
irtiten froma•glitss-eded fanning one of the windows,
44 *SU' 4001, 5004 making about