The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-11 00:00:00

since,

LAW AND FOLICE.

CURIOUS QUESTION OF LAW.—In the Court of Queen's
Bench the case of Carpenter v. Stanley was heard. The
case raised the curious question as to whether a labourer
earning 14s. a week could be convicted as an " idle and
disorderly person." The appellant had refused to maintain
his wife, in consequence of which she had been obliged to
go to the union of Tunbridge-wells. It was proved that
the respondent,who was the relieving-officer, had gone with
the appellant's wife and required him to maintain her, but
he refused to do so. It was also proved that the appellant
was earning 14s. a week. Upon this evidence the justices
convicted the appellant. It was contended in support of
the conviction that within the Act the word " idle " did
not mean " idleness " in the general acceptation of the
term ; but that the refusal to maintain was the gist of the
offence. For the appellant the contrary was urged. The
court affirmed the conviction.
ELECTION LAW.—In the same court the cause of Somer.
hill v. Coley came before their lordships. This was a
special case, stated by way of appeal from a decision of
magistrates declining to convict the defendant for miscon-
ducting an election under the Public Health Act, by in-
cluding voters not entitled to vote, and thus causing
he complainant the loss of his election. The magistrates
leclined to convict, as the act was bond fide, and not
vilfully erroneous. The defendant was chairman of the
Board of Health of a district in Staffordshire, and
he had admitted votes of marksmen, whose marks bad
been attested by witnesses, but whose names had not been
written as the Act required. He had taken legal advice
upon the point, and acted in accordance with it, that
advice apparently being based upon the omission in the
voting papers to be delivered under the Act of any direc-
tion requiring the names of marksmen to be written by the
witnesses. The court from the first were clear that the
penal provision in the Act only applied to neglect or dis-
regard of clear and undoubted directions, not mere mis-
takes upon doubtful points. It could not be supposed,
they said, that the Legislature meant to impose heavy
pecuniary penalties (the penalty here was £5O) for mere
mistakes upon doubtful points, They therefore affirmed
the decision of the magistrates.
DAMAGES FOR FALSE I'MPRISONMENT.—At the Second
Court of Common Pleas a case in which damages were
claimed for false imprisonment came on for hearing. A
llr. Collings gave the plaintiff, Mr. Beresford, in custody
for stealing a horse. It seemed that the defendant gave
him into custody at Hai, in Essex. He was remanded,
and eventually committed for trial at Chelmsford ; the
grand jury found a true bill, but no evidence was offered
and the plaintiff was discharged. There had been some
negotiations between the plaintiff and the defendant for
the sale of the horse, and it had. been placed at pasture
on a marsh near Ham, and had been taken away by the
plaintiff, whose it was. The question was, in fact, one
of damages only, and the jury found for the plaintiff ;
damages, £-25.
ACTION FOR BREACH OF PROMISE.—In the same court
an action was brought by a cook, named Benniells, to
recover damages for a breach of promise to marry against
a butcher named Morris. The defendant had also
borrowed £55 from his quondam lover. The debt was
proved by the plaintiff, and the breach of promise by
passages from letters written by the defendant which left
no doubt as to his liability. The documentary evidence was
corroborated by the fact that the defendant had put up
the banns and made arrangements for his marriage. The
jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of the
loan, and £lO damages for the breach of promise. Imme.
diate judgment, and execution in four days.

Mrs. Rickaby, the "well-dressed, handsome
lady " (as she is described in the police reports) charged
with having married four husbands, was brought up again
on Saturday, at the Southwark court. Some additional
evidence was taken, and Mr. Ribton, who appeared for the
accused, applied for a further remand to see the result of
an action she had commenced against Dr. Blackmore, the
alleged fourth husband, for alimony. On the other side it
was stated that the prosectitor had petitioned for a dissolu•
tion of his marriage with the prisoner. The magistrate
committed her for trial, accepting bail for her appearance.
THE DOVER AlvaDEß.—On Friday, at the meeting
of the magistrates in Dover, it was determined to invite
the authorities and inhabitants to join them in a sub-
scription to be presented to Mrs. Walshe, the widow of
the late station-master at the Dover Priory Station,
whose recent melancholy death has excited so much sym-
pathy, as a testimonial of the high appreciation of the
unvarying kindness, efficiency, and courtesy evinced by
him in the performance of his duties. Immediate arrange-
ments will be made for carrying this determination into
e*Stl7.l-DQVIr OrPicki