The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-01 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
I INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Oct. 31

IN THE MATTER OF RENTON NICHOLSON.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Wednesday James Murdoch was charged with uttor-
ing a forged bill of exchange, purporting to be ac-
cepted by a Mr. Barbour, of Manchester. He had
surrendered himself on aturday at the office of the
Police Commissioner, in the Old Jewry, confessing
that he had committed forgeries to the extent of 400/.
on the National Provincial Bank. His manner
seemed to indicate derangement, and it was ex•
pected his self-accusation would turn out to be moon-
shine ; but the letter written to the police of Man-
chester brought Inspector Buckley to town yesterday
morning, armed with a warrant for the prisoner s
apprehension.
Sir C. MARSHALL asked the inspector if he could
identify the prisoner as the individual named in the
warrant ? The inspector said he could not.
The prisoner admitted he was the person.
Sir C. MARSHALL thought the better course was to
send the prisoner to Manchester for examination, and
delivered him to the officer.
Mr. Richards, a carpenter, complained of a bread!
of faith on the part of Mrs. Parkes, in respect to hei
recent lottery for paintings. He said he was tht
purchaser of two tickets in the lottery, one of which
he presented to his daughter, who attended the draw-
ing, and heard her number drawn a prize of 100/.
Upon applying for it the same day, he was told nc
person could be admitted, but an authorised list of
prizes was being printed. He went next day and saw
a printed list, in which his number was omitted. IL
then peremptorily demanded to see tLe check-book in
which the prizes had been taken down at the moment
of drawing, as under the state lottery system the
Government always allowed this satisfaction to
ticket-holders. He was told it could not be shown
to him, but he had an indirect message from Mrs.
Parkes that three 100/. prizes had been omitted (and
inferior prizes substituted), and his number was pos-
sibly one of those. After several attendances he was
laughed at by the secretary, who told him he wat
labouring under the mistake that the number of the
picture 249 was the number of the ticket, and he was
at liberty to inspect the books. As a week had passed
over, it was useless to refer to the book then, and the
applicant wished the Alderman to take up the matter
as a public grievance. The lottery was to consist o'
14,000 tickets, and 2,100 prizes. He wanted to know
why three of the prizes had been subtracted in the
distribution ?
Sir C. MARSHALL asked if the young lady had the
ticket with her when she attended the drawing ?
Mr. Richards said she had.
Sir C. MARSHALL said the case had occurred out
of the City, and, therefore, he could have no juris-
diction, but he had no objection to state his view.—
that if Mrs. Parkes invited the ticket-holders to la
present at the drawing, and a prize was drawn against
a number, which prize through some mistake could
not be found, Mrs. Parkes was bound to make good
the loss to the purchaser of the ticket. If not, the
lottery would be altogether a delusion. It was not,
however, a case in which he could interfere.
Three wretched-looking girls were placed at the bar
on a charge of stealing a loaf of bread, from the shop of
Mr. Maddox, baker, Fleet-lane.
They pleaded guilty to the charge, but stated that
they were driven to it by hunger.
Sir CHAPMAN MARSHALL asked what part of the
country they came from ? and was answered that one
was from Essex. one from Hampshire, and the third
from Dublin. They were unknown to the constables.
The two first were released on a promise of at once
leaving town for the country ; and the third was ordered
to be passed to Ireland.
BOW-STREET.

Wednesday Inspector Barton, of the G division of
police, was charged by Lord Ranelagh with having
violently assaulting him, in the Strand, on Monday
afternoon. The case occupied much time, but may
be stated in a short compass.
Lord Ranelagh said that he was walking with Sir
Thomas Hare towards Charing•cross at about two
o'clock, shortly after the police had received instruc-
tions to clear the carriage-way for the return of her
Majesty from the Royal Exchange, when two con-
stables came up to him and ordered him and his
friend to get on the pavement, at the same time
pushing them in a rude manner. He remonstrated
with them, upon which the defendant walked up to
him from the other side of the road, and, without
making any inquiry relative to the dispute, pushed
him with great violence on to the kerbstone. He (Lord
Ranelagh) then endeavoured to strike the defendant,
who immediately seized him by the neckcloth, and
addressed him in so excited a manner as to convince
his Lordship -that he had no sort of control over either
his language or his conduct, and was therefore a very
unfit person to be a police officer.
His Lordship called Sir T. Hare, who gave some
corroborative evidence, and expressed an opinion that
the defendant used an unwarrantable degree of vio-
lence on the occasion.
Rupert Richbell, who did not see the commence-
ment of the altercation, heard the inspector demand-
ing his Lordship's card. Lord Ranelagh was then
walking from the middle of the road (which had been
cleared) towards the pavement, followed by the de-
fendant and several other policemen. His Lordship
complained of his not being able to pass along without
the interference of the police, and declared that, hav-
ing been insulted, he would force his way across in
spite of them. The defendant appeared to be having
hold of his Lordship's coat; he had a staff in the
other hand. 1

The defendant's solicitor commented briefly upon
the foregoing statements, and examined the follow-
ing witnesses, who were kept out of Court until called
upon.

No. 65, G diviAion, said he saw the complainant
and his friend walking in the road after it had been
cleared. Heard defendant call and tell them to go
out of the carriage-way ;he spoke in civil terms to
them. They made no reply, but attempted to force
their way past defendant, who stood before them and
resisted them, having previously repeated his former
request. Lord Ranelagh raised his arm, and struck
a violent blow at the inspector with his closed fist,
afterwards raising his umbrella with the other hand,
and exclaiming, " You vagabond, don't stop me," or
words to that effect. Defendant evaded the blow,
and, taking Lord Itanelagh by the arm, forced him
upon the pavement. his Lordship then demanded
the inspector's name and number, of which he made
a memorandum. In reply to defendant's application
for his Lordship's card, he said, "Card be d—d,” and
walked away.
Police-constables G 197, G 137, and G 106, and
Inspector Shackell, all denied most positively the as-
sertion of his Lordship that the defendant seized him
by the neckcloth, or used any unnecessary violence.
They stated that the blow which Lord ftanelagh
aimed at defendant was received by a by-stander,
whose mouth bled profusely in consequence. The
road had been effectually cleared, his Lordship and
Sir Thomas Hare being the only persons out of the
lhNienoemrtolasen.
tTeailowtwrhydalssiatibcslDeevis.haenargiyddA,arnllelnfoortvhayiceentagowrbyiayt,tnesses said that the
athnthededd_ciceocnlatprreaodlriicee"ty.th,oa
ft
statements
whatwwhieerhe
the facts deiemade,. it was difficult to
petanse
e;
abouftb,yevielins 6
aufittheoem
were it admitted that the

The insolvent in this case, who was well known
upon town as the proprietor of the Garrick's Head
Hotel and Tavern in Bow-street, Covent-garden, and
the " Chief Baron" of the " Judge and Jury" So-
ciety held there, was described in his schedule as a
hotel keeper and agent for discounting bills, and an
author, and printer and publisher. He had also been
the editor and proprietor of a publication called the
Town, the Crown newspaper, the Illustrated London
Life, and Nicholson's Nodes. The amount of debts
which appeared in his schedule was about 2,4001., of
which 1,2001. was without consideration. He attri-
buted his insolvency chiefly to the defalcations of a
person named Abbott, who had the management of
the hotel business, and by whom he lost nearly 4,0001
in little more than twelvemonths.

His petition was supported by Messrs. Cooke and
Woodruffe, and opposed by Mr. Nicholls on the part
of Messrs. Burnett, the distillers.

It appeared from the evidence, which was ♦ery
lengthened, and occupied the Court nearly the whole
of the day, that the insolvent had kept the Garrick's
Head about three years. When he first took that hotel
a gentleman of the name of Lane became his security,
and wished that the arrangements and pecuniary
affairs of the hotel should be managed by a person
named Abbott. In little more than a year, when
they came to settle the accounts, it was found that
there was a defalcation to the amount of 4,5001. in
Abbott's accounts, for which he could afford no satis-
factory explanation. Finding that this extensive loss
had rendered him insolvent, he called together his
creditors, to whom he made an offer of paying them
at the rate of 6001. a-year, and they all seemed to
consider the offer a very fair one. However, in less
than a week after offering the composition, he was
served with an immense number of writs, and con-
sequently compelled to keep out of the way, to the
serious detriment of his business. By great exertions
he was enabled to pay 1,2001. out of those debts, but
owing to the loss of a large sum of money by specu-
lations at Hampton, Epsom, and other races, where he
had booths, he was unable to do otherwise now than
seek the assistance of this Court.
After some further evidence,
The LEARNED COMMISSIONER said, although the
insolvent had no money at the Bank at the time he
gave the cheque, yet all the circumstances of the case
proved that there was not the slightest intention of
fraud on his part. The whole facts of the case fully
proved that the insolvent's conduct had been fair and
straightforward through all the transactions, and Le
(the Learned Commissioner) felt bound to order him
to be dis'charged forthwith.
The insolvent then left the Court.