The Sun.
London, England, 1850-10-11 00:00:00

THE HAT.

Among the minor matters to which the attention
of rkformers needs directing are, dress and costume.
Science and art have invaded the palace, the cottage,
the workshop, the prison; concerning themselves
with the flesh we eat, the air we breathe, the water
we drink, the houses we dwell in, the streets along
which we walk; it is high time they should deign to
look at the clothes we wear. Possibly more than
one article of our costume, ugly and expensive as it
is, from hat to boot, will meet with condemnation
in the great gathering of the coming year. Look,
for example, at the European hat. Grim, stiff,
unsightly, uncomfortable; it has not a redeeming
feature. Yet from year to year we go on wearing it,
and even capricious fashion refuses to meddle with
this mode. IVe owe the hat to France, whose pro-
verbial good taste in dress is .certainly here, as, in-
deed, in male dress generally, at fault. The native
English hat, whether worn soberly as in the Com-
monwealth time, or with the dancing plume of the
Restoration, was characteristic and useful. We never
turn over the prints of those times without envying
our fathers the ease of their soft and shady coverings.
Ours are neither. While they brand the temples with
red and painful line=, they expbse the face to both wind
and rain. Oar neighbours across the Channel, we
see, propose to send over to the Great Exhibition a
variety of new ideas in the way of male head-dress—
perhaps this may lead to a revolution in English hats.
The turban is at least picturesque—the Greek cap is
gorgeous—the old German slouch hat is comfortable
—the helmet affords protection—every covering that
we remember has some good quality in its form ex-
cept the section of funnels now worn in Europe,
under the influence of Paris. The English batters
had better be wise in time, and set their wits at work
to invent some thi▪
ng that will meet the existing dis-
satisfaction with the produce of their art. We see
that anti-hat soci▪
eties are springing up in England.
The monarchy of the stiff hat is visibly drawing
towards its close.—Atheneunt.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
SHERIFFS' Gallia', Oct. 10.
BREACH OF WARRANTY—DURLING V. DENNY.
The plaintiff in this action is a lady residing at Sidcup,
Kent, and defendant is a barrister. The action was
brought to recover the sum of 151. for damages for breach
of warranty of a pony sold by defendant to plaintiff.
Defendant pleaded non-asiumpsit, and that the pony
was Round.

Mr. Sergeant CHADWICK JONES stated the case for
thePlainnff is a lady residing at Sidcup.
nd
want of a pony, and through a
aplaintiff July last
The
was
in
friend answered an advertisement inserted in the 7'imes
newspaper by the defendant, who had a pony to dis,Jose
of. The ploy was then at Groombridge's stables, in
Holborn, and. from. taere a reference wa; given to de-
rend ant, at his
chambers, and then d.f:oidant asked 201.
for it, an I said that it was a capital ene to go, and was
as quiet as a child to ride or drive, and would not suffer
anything t ) pa
's it on the road. Tail was partly true,
for when the pony could be got to move at all, which was
some negoistion it was arranged it would not stop. After
that plaintiff should
some
Defeadantle9d:fnculty
warranted it sound and
well disposed, and. on plaintiff thinking the pony rather
old, defendant said that, although it looked so, it was
not. Toe pony was taken from the stables, but seemed
pa u workrlia: e oi
ft
to have such an attachment to the locality that he could
hardly be got to go at all; but between coaxing and
whipping it was at length got to Sidcup. The next day
it was arranged to come up to London, and after coaxing
the animal to start, it moved one foot forward and two
back, and was a perfect fibber. On getting half way to
London he managed to run into a ditch, and after divers
mishaps they got to London. Plaintiff then called in a
veterinary surgeon, . who , said that the pony was
.
not only unsound, being ~a : roarer," but was far from
being a young arimal. He grimly shook his head, and said
that it was aged, but he could not tell whether it was 16
or 26; but thought nearer the latter.—(Laughter.)
This being the case, defendant was waited on, and he
then said that it must be sold, and he would pay the dif-
ference. It was accordingly sold at Aidridge's, in St.
Martin's.lane and
fetched only 71; and it was to reco-
ser the difference and the expenses of keep, &c., that
the present action was brought.
Mr. MAXWELL, for the defendant, denied that there
had been any warranty, but,
After a long consideration, the jury found for the
plaintiff fur 121. 18s.

__—
MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
George Freeborn, of the Stanhope Arms Tavern,
Oval-road, Camden Town, obtained his licence, the
numbers being—for, 11 ; against, 8; Mr. Ballantine ap-
peared for the application.
Edwin Winder, of the Mogul, Drnry-lane, was sup-
ported in his application by Mr. Bodkin, who stated
that the necessities of the neighbourhood called for
such amusements. The petition had been signed by the
churchwardens and overseers of the parish, and 54 of
the principal inhabltants. Application refused.
THE ARGYLL ROOMS.
Mr. Charles Emile Laurent applied for a licenc-3 for
the above place, situated No. 8, Great Windmill-street,
Haymarket.
The applicant was examined at great length, and Stated
that he signed, on the 2d of September, an agreement by
which ho became the lessee for three years, he agreeing
to pay the sum of 100/. He had taken the premises
of Mr. Bignell, but bef that time he was
paid a s'ipulat,d sum for his services. It had
nothing to do with any public-house, and he would
base to pay the same sum, whether he was granted the
licence or not. Theme is no eommun'eation from the
rooms to any other house whatever. He had received
tters from L A. Paeet, Colonel Paget, Major Pitt,
Lord Tenaplemore, Lord A. Fi.eclatence, and several
other noblemen of distinction, approving of his appli-
cation for the fiance.
Mr. WYLDE opposed the application, and said that
there were great doubts ai to the genuiness of the agree-
ment signed on the 2d of September last.
Mr. BODKIN supported the applicati"9 and said that
he could not understand how the churchwardens, who
hael:cenae,there to petition against the lice' ce, had the
effrontery to do so, when they could not get a signature
to the petition, and they were persons who made wit-
less assertions without bang able to prove them. The
room was a maguificent structure, and adu3irably

adapted to the purpose to which it was applied. After
"1^,11,7r• n ti t. 11?

• .•
ULiC: Z.L.d 4.61 i
Upon the question whether the licence should be
granted only one hand was held up against it. Loud
applause followed this decision.