The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-02 00:00:00

GADSBY V. ESTALL.

This was an act,on for trim c,,n. The jury found a
verdict for the nit fendant. A motion was wade for a
new trial, and the rule was made absolute, and the cause
was tried again, and a verdict was again returned tor
the daenciant. A rule was then male absolute for a
third trial upon payment of costs. Tile plaintiff had not
paid the costs.

- Mr. Sergeant SHEE then moved to discharge the rule.
Rule granted unless the plaintiff shall pay the costs
within a week.

COURT OF EXCHA (1 Moy 1.
(Sittings at Middlesex at iii<i Prins. in k..s;er Term,
btfure Mr. Baron ALDERSuN at.d Counntiu Jarie,)
DUNFORD V. FORD AND ANOTHER.

(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
his LORDSHIP having EUWILIC d up,
The jury niund a verdict f,r the plaintiff lor 71. over
and above the amount paid into Court.

LEWIS V KNoX.

This was an action to retn,ver the amount of an at
torney's bill fur professional services rendered, and
rueney expended on account of the detendent. The de-
tendant ph ailed that he did not promise.
Mr. Ilueutrey (with Mr. Temple) conducted the case
for the plain,iff, and Mr. M. Chambers (with elr. 11. A.
Simon) apl.esred for the defendant.
It appeared that the de!endanr, who resided at Cam-
berweil, in the spring of the past year intending to
bring an action against the sheriff ut Middlesex for the
alleged improper coi.duct of one of his officers, named
Shannon, had consuited one John Lewis upon the sub-
jtct, by whom he was eventually introduced to his
brother Charles, the press nt plaintiff. Having heard
the nature ( f the cause of the deteialant's complaint
against Shannon, be gave it as his opinion that the de-
,endatit had a good cause of action, and that opinion
was subsequently confirmed by the counsel to whom the
case bad been submitted. The action was accordingly
brought, and the venue having been laid in Surrey, the
matter was to come on for trial at the last summer as-
sizes for that county, at Croydon. The commission
day at that place was the 6th of August. On the 31st
of July preceding the plaintiff wrote to the defendant
requesting that he would furnish him with a further sum
of money to take the case down to Croydon, and also
expressing his disappointment that he should have sent
him only la The further sum required was 501. at
least, which amount he bi-gged might be sent to
him by the following Saturoay. On the Ist of
August it appeared that the defendant had written in
reply to this letter that it was out of his power to sup-
ply any more funds, and therefore he desired that the
novice of trial should be countermanded. A consulta-
tion thereupon ensued between the parties, and the re-
cird was withdrawn. The question therefore arose as
to what course should be taken, when it was arranged
that the venue should be changed from Surrey to Mid
dlesex, in order that the matter might be tried at West-
tninsier alter the next Michaelmas Term, as that would
be a far cheaper mode of trying the cause than by
taking it down to Kingston at the spring assizes,. The
record was consequently withdrawn, and an application
was then trade in due couise in November, before a
judge at chambers, for leave to change the venue. That
teamed person, however, refused the application. The
defendant was accordingly informed that the case mu-t
therefore be taken down to Kingstou far trial at the
spring assizes. In the cross-examination of one of the
witnesses he state i that the expense of taking this cause
tor trial at the assizes would be from 301. to 501., whilst
the expenses would not have been more than about 25/.
had it been tried in London, and that that had been ore
reason why the plaintiff had recommended that the venue
should be chang.d to Middle-sex, rather than incur the
additieual expense of taking the cause a wi=nd time
into Surrey. There were higher fees given to counsel at
the as.six?e than in London, and it was also much were
exp=nsiee in te4pect of witnesses.

Mr. CHANDIins, en the part of the defendatit, con-
tend, d ;14ia !he pkintiff was netted, having undertaken
the tits; of die cause, to show by evideuce that he k.a t
carried out the spirit and intentien I,f that utioettakitig.
Here, however, it had been proved that, he had re t s
carried out the undertaking, nor had there been Any prof
offered that the notice which the plaintiff had given to
the defendant, that he must have the large sum he had
demanded ready by the following Saturday, was a reason-
able notice in respect of time tor a man in the circuro-
stsnc, s ef the de'endant. He should submit that, having
undertaktu the trial of the cause, the plaintiff was bound
to carry it to trial, and that not doing so, the defendant
could not be called upon, or be held liable for expenses,
unless the plaintiff were to show that the notice he had
given fir the advance of money towards the expenses,
and also that if the money required were not sent in duo
time, then that he should decline to proceed with the
cause—unless the defendant showed that that notice had
been given a reasonable time beforehand. In support of
his argument, the Diluted Counsel cited the cases of
" Holey v. Built," 3 Barn. and Ald., p. 350; and of
" Nicholls v. Wilson," 11 Mee and Wel., p. 106. Now
his case on behalf of the defendant was that the matter
might have been tried at Croydon if due notice had been
given by the plaintiff to the def!ndsnt that a certain
amount of funds would be required by a given day, and
that, at all events, it was the duty of the plaintiff to have
taken the cause down for trial.

Mr. Baron ALDERSON was of opinion that, at all
events, the preliminary expenses prior to the not taking
tie cause down for trial ought to be taken out of
account. That is what should be done by the Master on
taxalion.

Mr. CHAMBERS—And then, if the jury were to find
that there had nut been reasonable notice given in point
time, that he should move the Court upon that point.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—Certainly ; and the only
question now for the jury to deal with was whether,
looking at the circumstances of the defendant, the plain-
tiff had given him a reasonable and timely notice to
raise the rtiquired amount of money for the exile :ses.
Lis own opinion was, that it he did not give a reason-
able length of notice, then that the plaintiff must bear
all the consequences, and a verdict ought to be found
for the defendant in respect of that part of the bill
which was rendered unnecessary by the not going to triul
at Croydon.
The jury consulted for a few minutes, and then gave a
verdict fur the defendant, upon the ground that the
notice had not been sufficient to enable a man in his cr-
cumstances to get so large a sum together.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—That would then be a verdict
for the plaintiff, subject t the taxation of the Ma,t-r,
who must strike out all the items in the bill which ;were
not necessary in consequence if the want of sufficient
notice to the defendant.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
Matthias Martinez Delrio, a Spaniard, was brought
before the Lord Mayor, in the custody of Inspect .r
Brannon, of the G division of the metropolitan pollee,
ehaiged with having stolen two Bank of Engiald notes,
the Grin for 50/. the other for 30L, end between four arid
five ounces of gold dust, value 100/, the property of Mr.
Strutt, purser in the Royal Mail St?sn-packet Cum-
pany'a service.
'the prisoner refusel to give his address.
Mr. M. 11. Strutt, of Gunuersbury-place, Brentford,
said—The prisoner embarked on board the Avon. mail
steamer, of which I was purser, at Vera Cruz on the
19th of M eruf., for the purpose of coming to &glared.
Ou the 21st of Aprit we arrived at Southampton, and the
day after our arrival there I missed a Batik of England
note for 50/., another for 301., and a quantity of gold-
dust. About five days befire we arrived at South-
ampton, I lett my keys in the door of my cabin while
I went to wash my hands, and on my return I missed
the keys, one of which opened my desk. I saw the pri-
soner near the door, and I asked him whether he saw
my keys, to which he replied in the negative; but the
circumstance did not particularly excite my suspicion,
as my servant had a duplicate key, and I
attributed the disappearance of the key to a joke that
had been played upon me. In the evening of that thy
one of the passengers and the surgeon invited me to their
cabin to take a glass of wine with them and the pri-
soner, and while we were sitting together, engaged in
that way, the prisoner complained of a pain in his
stomach, and was obliged to leave us. When he was
absent about, as I think, half an hour, I went to my
cabin in order to retire to bed, and I then found my
keys lying on the desk, although I had in vain looked
for them all about the place, and searched it thoroughly
before. I therefore, on missing my property at South-
ampton, the day after our arrival there, came to London
and applied to the inspector, and stopped the notes at
the Bank.
Inspector Brannon, it appeared, apprehended the pri-
soner in Finsbury-square, and found upon his person a
new gold watch and chain and ring, which he had re-
cently purchased at the shop of a jeweller, in Coruhill.
The stolen 50/. note had been changed at the Batik.
The prisoner was remanded. He persisted in refusing
to give his address.
DERBY HUDIBUGS.—Sir PETER LAURIE stated that he
bad receis ed communications on the subject of an Anglo-
American system of swindling, against which he felt
bound to endeavour to protect the public by means of the
press. Two American papers had been transmitted t
him, and his attention had been called to advertisements,
by which it appeared that "a splendid fortune might be
gained by an outlay of 101. or 5/." In the Montreal Pilot
the promise of wealth presented itself under the head of'
" Metropolitan Portrait Club," and seemed to issue from
the Albany-road, London. The advertisement announced
that the directors, who have no names, would draw for a
gland series of portraits of all the horses entered for the
f .rtLcorning Derby race; that the drawing would be
conducted upon those honourab!e principles which had
hitherto given so much snttsfaction, and secured to the
above association such extensive patronage. The n fol-
lowed the list of priscs upon the drawing of the horse
portraits, and the information that till letters were to
contai n a remittance, drafts, ba,k-notes, &c., and to be
direct ed to the manning direc,,..r in Laidon. The oritk:r
A ami /can pater (the Sunday Grayier of New York)
coma; tel art advertisement referring to a similar este-
blishu e,,t in P.yrnoteth.
The LORD MAYOR approved cf the notice taken by Sir
Peter Laurie of u plan the great promikes in which were
likely to irvcinate credulous parties on the other side of
the Atlantic.
t3ir PETER LAURIE said the attempt to reinvigorate
thk Bet by swe-ps, which were so completely put down
in London ley the City magistrates, was nothing less
Olsen could be expected; but the system he came forward
to expose was one for which there Gould not be the
pre-tette. in the chtrice (Pk ga.ning amything. No
oh.. ersdulity waJ doing a Brea: deal for the spe.cula-
..r., ti t.,e postman who traversed the diariet in which
the ‘• Luttuaging director" resided stated that he had de-