The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-15 00:00:00

LAW AND FOLICE.

ACTION FOR FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION.-At
the Leeds Assizes the cause of Thompson and others v.
Candlish and Fox has been decided. At the conclusion of
the opening it was admitted that there was no case as
against Candlish, and a verdict was taken for him. The
plaintiffs are engineers at Newcastle, and the defendants
until lately carried on business at Middlesborough as
shipbuilders, under the name of Candlish, Fox, and Co.
In January 1866 the plaintiffs entered into a contract
with the defendants for the building of a ship, which was
to be paid for by three instalments ; but on the second
becoming due the defendants wrote, saying that the
business would be carried on in future by Bennie and Co.,
on whom he asked the plaintiffs to draw. This the plain-
tiffs refused to do without further knowledge of the firm,
and the defendants stated that Bennie and Co. were a
responsible and respectable firm. Bennie and Co. gave
the plaintiffs a bill which was dishonoured, and the firm
made an assignment for the benefit of their creditors ;
but the defendants paid the plaintiffs' bill. The present
action was for £lB7 Os. 6d. for extra work done to the
ship for Bennie and Co. in reliance of what Fox said con-
cerning that firm. The jury ultimately returned a verdict
for the plaintiffs.

ACTION FOR ASSAULT.--At the Gloucester Assizes an
action was brought by Mr. Stephens, a merchant's clerk,
against Mr. Myers, his master, a hop merchant, for
injuries sustained in consequence of an assault. There
was some dispute between the parties, and the plaintiff
was dismissed, but refused to go till he had received half a
year's notice. The defendant refused to give it him, and
demanded the key of the safe. Stephens said he would
not give them up, and this so enraged his master that he
garotted him and obtained the key. From the injuries
then sustained the plaintiff bad suffered much. The jury
awarded £3O damages.
EMBEZZLEMENT BY AN ATTORNEY.-At the Leeds
Assizes, William Unwin, a solicitor, was charged with
Unlawfully concealing and embezzling £24 6s. id. after
having been adjudged a bankrupt, with having withheld
certain papers, and other offences against the Bankruptcy
Act. The accused formerly resided in Sheffieli, and
received an excellent character. At the close of the trial
the jury, after some deliberation, found the defendant
guilty of embezzling the two sums in question ; guilty of
fraudulently withholding the notices of dividends, mnl
guilty also of fraudulently omitting them from his balance-
, sheet. They, however, recommended him to mercy on the
ground of the good character he bad received. The learned
judge deferred passing sentence.
STARVING A FAMILY.-At the Worship-street Police-
court William and Caroline Brooks were charged with
neglecting their children, and by such neglect having
caused the death of one of them. A witness saw the chil-
dren in an exceedingly filthy room, and on one occasion,
when the prisoners were out on a pleasure-trip, they were
perfectly naked, and had no food. Medical evidence
shewed that Barbara (the deceased) had suffered great
privation, which had undoubtedly accelerated her death.
The prisoners were committed for trial on the double
charge of manslaughter and neglect.

ACTION FOR LIBEL—At the Bristol Assizes an action
was brought by Mr. Henry Isaac Brown, a solicitor, of
Bristol, against Mr. Hawkins, the publisher of the
Western Morning News, for an alleged libel in that journal.
The plaintiff was about to establish a building society at
Plymouth, and a meeting was held to discuss the matter,
and at that assembly the plaintiff stated that the name of
the society would be " The People's Permanent Six per
Cent. Investment and, House and Land Purchasing
Society," and Mr. Brown was to be the managing director.
Soon after this meeting a letter was inserted in the Western
Morning News, which had been received from some gen-
tlemen, stating that their names had been placed in the
prospectus as directors without their authority. Simul-
taneously with the appearance of this communica-
tion an article appeared in the defendant's paper,
headed " Caution," which stated that it would
have been imagined that the exposure which had
followed similar attempts to use names without authority
would have deterred others from adopting such a course,
and went on to say that the society professed to issue
debenture shares, payable at the rate of 6 per
cent., and offered to receive deposits at 5 per cent., repay-
able at fourteen days' notice. It was not clear how the
depositors were to be paid at fourteen days from moneys
to be invested " only on mortgages," but no doubt that
such difficulties would be overcome by ma agers
who did not hesitate to use other people's names with-
out their consent. The article in question, which
constituted the libel complained of, said that
it was a wonder that money could be obtained from the
public on such manifestly absurd promises. The plaintiff
was called to give evidence, and in cross-examination by
Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., admitted that he had placed names of
persons on the directorate who had not assented.
For the defence, Mr. Coleridge contended in the first
place that there was no malice exhibited, and in the second,
that the article complained of was well within the limits of
public comment. The comments were abundantly justified,
and therefore upon the ground of privilege he considered
that he was entitled to say that nothing more had been
done than the editor of a public paper was bound to do.
There was no doubt as to the fact that the names had been
used without authority. The learned counsel then went
on to comment on the manner in which certain gentlemen's
names had been introduced into the prospectus as directors.
After bearing the summing up of the learned judge, the
jury retired, but, after deliberating for more than two
hours, their foreman intimated that they could not agree
as to their verdict, and they were discharged. It after-
tards transpired that ten of the jury were in favour of a
verdict for the defendants, and two for the plaintiff.

MILITARY CONFERENCE ON EXPLOSIVES. —A com-
munication from Berlin says :—" In the military conference
called for by Prince Gortschakoff relative to the explosive
balls, Prussia will be probably represented by Colonel
Count du Schweinitz, military attache at St. Petersburg.
The belief is that France and England will name similar
officials. Italy will send a special commissioner. No one
doubts that Austria and the other States invited will also
be duly represented.".
COMPLAINT AGAINST A CHIEF CONSTABLE.—The
Shrewsbury Town Council has passed the following reso-
lution :—" The Town Council of the borough of Shrews-
bury beg respectfully to call the attention of Sir Baldwin
Leighton, as chairman of quarter sessions, and also the
county magistrates, to the unusual and uncourteous way
in which several of the borough magistrates, as well as
some other respectable inhabitants of this town, have been
excluded from the court of justice during the last assizes,
by order of the chief constable of the county constabulary
(Colonel Edgell), and they hope that su::11 instructions
may be given to this official as will prevent a repetition
of the conduct complained of."

A most mendacious anecdote comes from Paris
apropos of duelling; but it is at least amusing, if impro-
bable. Two men—literary men, of course ; for they are
now your only swash-bucklers and bully-boys—quarrelled,
and one of the seconds rushed off to Devisme's, and procured
a case of duellingpistols. This pair was selected as the pair,
Devisme being supposed to have previously loaded them.
" One, two, three—at the third call Messieurs will fire ; "
and Messieurs did fire, and the effect was droll. A little
duck perched itself on the nose of one of the principals,
and a wreath of roses entwined itself round the manly
brow of the other. Devisme, or his boy, had by mistake
lent the pistols of Robert Houdin, who was then the arch-
conjurer of Paris,— Orchestra.

DEATH OF SIR CLAUDE W. C. DE CRESPIGNY.—
We have to record the death of Sir Claude W. Champion
de Crespigny, which occurred on Tuesday last at Wiven-
hoe Hall, near Colchester. The deceased baronet was the
eldest son of Captain Augustus James Champion de
Crespigny, RN., who served under Nelson and Coiling-
wood. Sir Claude William was born 25th of June, 1818,
and married the 22nd of August, 1843, Mary, the second
daughter of Sir John Tyrell, of Boreham House, Essex.
He succeeded his grandfather the 28th of December, 1829.
He was educated at Winchester School, and afterwards
proceeded to Trinity College, Cambridge, where be gra-
duated 8.A., 1839, and M.A. 1840. In 2852 he was
appointed "a jdeputy-lieutenant of Essex, was appointed
1859 captain of the 6th (Colchester) Essex Rifle Volunte2rF;
Lieutenant-Colonel of the Ist Battalion, 1860, and I.on.
colonel of the Administrative Battalion in March last.
The deceased is succeeded by his eldest son CiaZe.:-, born
in London April 20, 1847. . •