The Sun.
London, England, 1826-04-06 00:00:00

PROMETER BENEFIT SOCIETY.

A GENERAL MEETING of the Shareholders of
this Company was, held yesterday at their establishment,' in
Chatham-place, Blackfriars; for the purpose of taking into con-
sideration the propriety of repelling certain charges contained
in a placard, reflecting on the chairman and directors, and call-
ing a meeting of the shareholders, in order to effect the disso-
lution- of the company. The Ho& Captain'G. H. L. DUN-
DAS was called to the chair.

illr. G. J. S. tErEvitt '(one of; the directors) referred to a
former meeting of the,shareholders, at which a vote of thanks
was carried to the Directors of the doinpany, for the manage-
ment of its concerns. He also took occasion to remind the
meeting of the Opposition which an individual gave to that vote,
and he called their attention to the,placard which the same gen-
tleman had thought paper to send forth to thepublie inviting
the shareholders to a meeting ht order to censure the conduct of
the .conductors of the Company, and to consider the best mode
of having it dissolved.. He wished that gentleman would now
come forward,- and state his -rettiOn for the step which he bad
taken.

Mr. STEELE, in avowing himself to be the author of the
handbill in question, said% that every statement which it con-
tained was true. • He had thought it right that the public
should be aware of the nature_of .a.company which had pro-
mised so much and performed So little. He was in possession
of many facts which he could have Stated in the handbill, but
he forebore to bear too hardly on...individuals, or to press his
opposition too far. He did not spft to the public what he
would state how--that when' he itiOteillo Sir Jarres Mackin-
tosh, the Chairman of the Company-,:- to know what proportion
of the 6,000 shares had been disposed oche replied that he be-
lieved half the numb& were purehaseil, although he must
have been well aware at the tithe that' lie. Considerably over-
rated the namber. thiohe Conduerof a man of integrity
and honour ?'he who had been a Judge in India—to act so un-
justly in this transaction ? What • Would not such a man be
capable of stating ? •
Several voices called upon Mr. STrELE,to bring forward his
objections in form. - •
Sir JA si ES MACKIrvi-osri would not have troubled the meet-
ing, but that the strong remarks which had just been applied
to him called for a few worth. With respect to the suppression
of certain facts for which the gentleman who had last spoken
seemed to take credit, he 'begged leave to state as regarded him-
self, he disdained his forbearance and repelled with contempt
and scorn any offer of kindness which iould proceed from such
a quarter.—(llear, bear!)---He should not be worthy of the
esteem of those whom he was proud to call his friends, if he
needed the leniency of that individual. The placard which he
had posted through the town, would one day rise up in judg-
ment against him, and he trouhtlive to repent that he had ever
penned and published such a statement. Its object was to in-
fluence popular opinion, and to disturb the course of justice.
With respect to his statement that he (Sir .1. Mackintosh) had
wilfully mis-stated the number of Shares disposed 01, he had only
to say, that Mr. Steele, whom ho had never seen before that time,
applied to him to be informed :is to the afrairi of the company,•
and to know the amount of- shares which had been sold to the
public. These questions were put to him when he was engaged
on other business, and he was consequently taken by surprise.
He thought•that Mr. Steele alluded to the number of allures
taken, which he (Sir J. Mackintosh) understood to be 2,9110,
though it afterwards appeared-that only 1,750 were paid for, and
he answered his question accordingly. 'Mr. Steele would reap
but little benefit from the manner in, which he had spoken of
Mr. Deacon and Mr. Shaw.
Mr. STEELE denied that he had reflected on those gentle-
men.

Sir J. NACKINTOSR—Be it as it may, he. would rather fall
pi company with such men, than to rise with their calumnia-
tor. (inc word more; it was said that the resolutions passed
at the former meeting had been successfully refined, and the
question was, whether Mr. Steele had advanced any thing in
his hand-bill which should change the opinion'of the share-
holders as to the condtict of the directors. Did Mr. Steele
suppose that his kind; fair, and gentlemanlike, handbill would
have the effect of altering the vote by which' the conduct and
proceedings of the company received the thanks of a nume-
rous meeting? Mr. Steele objected to .that rote, because it
was carried by numbers; but he left it to the sagacity of that
gentleman, to discover in what other manner than by a major'.
ty the sentiments of a public meeting could be ascertained ex-
cept that he might maintain, " I had all the sense, although
you have all the numbers."—(Laughter.),-In Concluding, he
could not but state his strong impression that Mr. Steele, in
bringing, forward charges against the Company, was influenced
by strong personal feelings of dislike to Mr. Farrell, who first
promoted the concern.
Mr. STEELE-1 avow it. -
Sir J. 111.toctarront—So, thin, Mr. Steele would have this
meeting pronounce an opinion against the directors, merely be-
cause lie owns that he has a personal enmity to Mr: Farren : a
very pretty admission truly !
ICE"La states!, that tie believed the cause of the dis-
like which Mr. Steele lead so candidly avowed,' arose out of
certaitf money transtetions between the parties. Mr. Steele
.had applied for proper accommodation to Mr. Farm, which
had been declined on the part of that gentleman, and that was
the cause of a termination of their friendship. - -
STEICLE denied that he had sought any _accommodation
from Mr. Farrell although he admitted that bills had passed
betweeti them. -

Sit J. ill a os ajA,.charge against the Direc-
tors appears to be, that they had reserved 3,000 shares, at 1/.
premium, to compensate the projectors and managers for their
time, cost, and labour ; but Air. Steele had his eyes open, when
he agreed to this, yet he came here to-day to repeat his com-
plaint.
Mr. STEE.r.E.—What I complain of is this, that Mr. Farren
should have 30s. on each share, when only 1,700 instead of
3,000 have been actually disposed of. Ile should be content
with a less sum.

Sir J. 111Acxxrcrosu.-The remuneration to the promoter of
the company was expressly made independent of the number of
shares which might be eventually disposed of.
Mr. STEELE said, that he was aware his objections would
have been borne down, and he despaired of convincing the
M eeting. •
Mr. KEatuLE bore testimony to the zeal and labours of the
directors. He had himself, as one of them, attended 86 days
successively.
Mr. HAKIMY then addressed the meeting. He regretted
that the plan originally laid down had not succeeded, and he
traced the failure of the concern to the state of distress which had
so lately prevailed. lie was happy to state that Ilia confidence
in the gentlemen who had conducted the drain' of the .company
continued unabated, and he was sorry that the respectable indh
vidual who had put forth the hand-bill, reflecting on the chair.
man and directors, and tending to excite the passions of the
public at a time when their prejudices were easily aroused, had
so far committed himself as to act with so much intemperance.
Mr. KE mu LE here stated that Mr. Steele had applied to the
company for the loan of 1,0001. on the security of his shares,
but that the directors had refused to comply with his request.
lie afterwards obtained the loan of' 5001 in another quarter,
and yet he would seek todestroy the security by meansof which
he had been accommodated.--(clear ) •
Mr. HENRY Larr EV RE thought it a great Injustice on the
part of any individual to advahee charges which could not be
proved.
Certain resolutions were then moved and carried, and thanks
having beeh voted to the Chairman, the meeting separated.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

YORK, TUESDAY, APRIL. 4.
( Before Mr. Justice BAYLEY and a Special Jury.)
FORSTER V. PI ARSOH AND OTHERS.
This was an action to recover a compensation in damages for
an injury sustained by the plalntiff, in consequence of the ne-
gligence and misconduct of the defendant's servants. Mr.
STARKIE opened the pleadings.
Mr. ScAit LETT stated the case to the Jury.—The plaintiff'
was a flax-dresser, and owner of a flax-mill, residing at
Knaresborough, and the defendant (Pearion) was the keeper
and owner of an hotel, at Leeds. In consequence of some of
the conches having been removed from the defendant's house,
he had, with the other defendants, set up an opposition coach,
called the Retaliator, to run down the other coaches. ou the
road. There were two modes of effecting such an. object—one
was by a reduction of the fares, which was advantageous to the
public; the other, by driving at an increased rate of speed,
which was dangerous to the public. On the 13th April last,
the plaintiff having taken his place as an outside passenger,
left Leeds by the defendant's coach, on his return to Knares.
borough, with several other passengers ; from Leeds to Hare.
wood the coach had been driven at such on extravagant rate
down hill, without locking the wheel, as to excite the
.hp.
prehension of the plaintiff,who remonstrated with the coach-
man, v
but to this caution he paid no attention. At Hare.
wood they changed horses, and proceeded at the same degree
of ,speed own a steep bill, called Ilarewood Rank. The
plaintiff' i n a
(opinesateldevtletle coachman to pull up, he con-
tinued to drive at the same furii)oieueseraotfe,
garioidunadb,otuttirnainqguairntteor
of a mile furtihn ie
r r, e
the Knaresborough road, the coach was upset with great vio-
lence. The phuntifrs thigh was fractured, and he received
several severe contusions. A. boy, an outside passenger, was
killed, and two ladies, who were inside, were severely bruised.
'!'he plaintiff was taken up and removed to a neighbouring,
dance to In, 175.,
publie.houme, where he was confined by the effects of the
ds of 111. ; the costs of his. acci-
dentrem-
for eleven weeks. One surgeon's bill amounted to up»
wards of 401.fitnather to upwar
besides other expenses, its the whale produc-.

ing to him a total of 100/. out of pocket. This was an abso-
lute loss to the plaintiff, besides his time and the severe
sufferings he had endured, and the conviction that be would
remain a cripple for life, one leg being now two inches shorter
than the other, from the fracture he had thus sustained. To
say that the,plaintiff was entitled to be repaid the money out of
pocket, was in_ effect offering a premium to coach proprietors,
to put the lives of their passengers in danger. The plaintiff
was entitled to'receive a liberal compensation for the sufferings
he had undergone, and would be satisfied with such a remune-
ration as any of the Jury would be ready to accept under simi-
lar circumstances.
Timothy Hunter, aged 10, was an outside passenger in
-April last, by the Retaliator coach, from:Leeds to Knaresbo-
rough, and sat between the plaintiff and coachman on the box.
Between Leeds and Harewood, the coach 'was driven very
quick, and the plaintiff asked the coachman to lock the wheel
in' going down the hill, or some accident would- happen. He
replied, there was not such a load that lie need be frightened.—
The Plaintiff again begged. the coachthan to pull up, in going
down the hill out of Harewood ; but he took .no notice of his
request; the leaders were at- that time cantering, and shortly
after the coach was thrown over. .The.coach was going at that
time from ten to twelve miles an hour. When witness re-
covered from his fall, he found himself two or three yards
from the coach, and the plaintiff on the ground very much hurt.
!Cross-exaMined by Mr; Bnducmant.—No accident occurred
until we had changedorses,„ Harewood-bank is not so steep
as the other hilt we had ethie-down. Witness did not see a cart
in the way, but theremight have been One ; all the four horses
were cantering when; they: came to the turn. The coachman
had not pulled up when he came to the level ground at the.
bottom ot' the hill ;' the coach was 'overturned passing through
the gate::
Henry Houseman, a farmer, residing near Knaresborough,
was a passenger by the defendant's coach on the 13th of April,
and,sat behind the coachman and plaintiff. They drove rather
quick -.from. Leeds. to Harewood, where they changed horses:
in going down .Harewond-bank, they went at a smartish
canter. Witness did not hear plaintiff speak to the coachman ;
the.coach was not going so quick when it upset • the leaders
were through the toll-gate .at the time, the wheelers were not. 1
The accident was occasioned ,by the speed and swing of the
coach In ,turning. Witness saw no stones in the road, but wit.
ness saw a cart.

Cross-examined by Alr. A trantoN—Witness had said there
was no blame to be attached to the coachman except the speed
be drove at.

Mr. ,Thtauorram, Tor; the defendant, here consented to a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 3001.
The business of the Assizes concluded this day.

ADUCTION OF MISS TURNER.

(From the ..4fancheiter fifereury, April 4.)
FINAL EXAMINATION OF MR. w. WAKEFIELD.
SECOND DAY:—MONDAY. APRIL 3. •
The examination re-commenced this day, at two:o'clock, at
the Rani Inn, Disley, in consequence of the Magistrates con-
ceiving the testimony of Miss Dalby, of Liverpoolsironi whose
school Miss Turner was carried off, to be necessary to make
Out the case against the prisoner. The only witness ex--
aminecl was Miss Dalby, who stated, that she and her three
sisters kept a hoarding-school at Liverpool; and that Miss
Turner was in their care, on the 6th of March last ; on which
day, about eight o'clock in the morning, a letter was pre-
sented to her by a person who came with a carriage, and
stated himself to be a servant to Mr. Turner; • that he had
come from Shrigley ; that Mrs. Turner had been takeni:t and
wished to see her daughter. lie then presented a letter, saying,
thatit would detail the particulars. The letter stated, that
Mrs. Turner wss seized with- a sudden attack of paralysis, and
wished to see her daughter immediately, In consequence of
this letter, Miss Turner set out in tke carnage, with the per-
son who brought the letter' in about twenty minutes after it
arrived, and witness did not hear any thing of her again till the
12th of March, .when she received a-letter from Miss Mar-
garet Turner, the: cousin of Miss Turner, stating, that 1)r.
'Ainsworth had communicated to the family some very dis-
tressing intelligence respecting Miss Turner, and requesting
to hear from her, immediately In consequence of this letter,
'the witness %vent over to Shrigley, where she learnt that she
bad been inifiased upon, and that Miss Turner had been car-
ried off by fraudulent means. Before that time witness never
knew any such person as Edward. Gibbon Wakefield, or Wil-
fiaM Wakefield, and never saw the prisoner before to her know-
ledge. Neither of those gentlemen had ever been at in house ;
and she did not think that either of them could have had an
opportunity of seeing Miss Turner whilst she 'was under the
care of witness and het sisters.
This concluded the evidence.

Mr. Han* n, of London, declined asking Miss Dally any
questions, and begged to know what coarse the Magistrates in-
tended to take.

.Alr. Gni 31 SDI TC 11, who conducts the case for the prosecu-
tion submitted that the evidence he had laid before Thomas
Legb, Esq. of Lyme, and V. W. Newton, Esq., the presiding
Magistrates, fully made out the capital offence, and le there-
forefelt it his duty to call upon them to commit the prisoner
for trial on that charge.
rer. was
Variousnot heir-apparent,
Mr. Ilansmit contended, that the offence amounted only
to`a
misdemeanour,
as
of her ti
Miss
Turt6the
mightbt onlyarise heir-presumptive
for preventing her inheriting her father's property.
That gentleman might have 'a son, and thus prevent her from
succeeding to the inheritance. The case' evittently amounted
to no more than a misdemeanour, under the statute of Philip
and Mary, which imposed a certain punishment on all persons
carrying away a young lady under lfi years Of age.. lie there-
fore submitted that the prisoner was ertHed to bail.

Mr. GRIMpDITCH ,aid the point was, whether. a person in
the eitttaiion of Miss Turner was or was not heir-sppatent with-
in the meaning of the statute of Henry VII., and lie submitted
that die Magistrates ought not to take upon themselves the re-
sponsibility of deciding it, especially in a case like, the present.
—But if they should be of opinion that the offence made out
against the prisoner amounted only to a misdemeanour, still he
.contended that they ought not to. admit him to hail, aad lie
quoted the statute respecting bail, (3 Edward 1., c. lb), and
lirun's Justice, to chew that for certain manifest and heinous
otrences, though not amounting to felony, Illigistrates ought
not to take hail.

111 r. HARMER briefly replied.
The room was then cleared ibr a short time, in consultation,
after which they announced that they should commit the pri-
soner for,the nusdemeanor, but they must decline to tulmit hirn
to bail.

Itlr. HARMER said, that he should apply for a writ of habeas
corpus, in order to have the prisoner brought up and bailed by
one of the Judges.
A warrant of commitment was then made out to Lancaster
Castle, and the prisoner will be sent off this morning.
We believe he married the daughter of a baronet only two
or three days before his apprehension.

The two following cases from the Law Reports may, at this
time, be read with interest :—.

FULWOOD AND BOWEN'S CASE, MICUAELMAS TERM,
13 Cart. 1., Cao. Can. 493.—They having been found guilty
on the statutes 3 H. VII., cap. 2, judgment was pronounced by
Justice Jones, who said, that although it had been objected that
the statute was obsolete, it was a good statute. Many have not
been executed, because they had their clergy before the statute
39th Eliz. c. 9, but some have been since hanged. It had also
been objected that the woman had been married with her con-
sent ; but all the Judges thought that immaterial, the taking.
being against her will and although it was not a marriage de
jure, because she was in such fear (as she affirmed upon her
oath) that she knew not what she answered or did, yet it was a
marriage de fite!o, and felony within the statute—whereupon
judgment was given that they should be hanged !
JOUN BROWN'S CASE, TRINITY TERM, 26 CAR. 11.
1 VENTRIS'S REPORTS, 231.—He was indicted upon the sta-
tute 3 11. VII., cap. 2, for forcibly taking away and marrying
one Lucy Ramsy, having a fortune of 6,000/. She was in-
veigled into Hyde-park by ope Mrs. P., a confederate of
Brown, who had a coach for the purpose, to take the air, when
the coachman drove from the rest of the company, and Brown
came to the coach in a mask ; and addressing himself to Mrs.
P., soon persuaded her to get out of the coach, and also a
maid servant attending Lucy Remy, and then got hithself
into the coach, and detained her until the coachman carried
them to his lodgings in the Strand. The next morning he
prevailed on her (having first threatened to carry her beyond
sea, if she refused) to marry him. He was the same day ap-
prehended in the house.—The COURT held that Lucy Rionsy
was admissible as a witness; and the evidence being clear as
to all the points of the statute—viz., Ist, that the taking was
by force ; 2dly, that the woman had substance ; and 3dly, that
marriage ensued, though it did not appear to have been con-
summated, the ury found him guilty. Whereupon judgment
was given, and he was hanged

C OAL AIARKET, APRILS.
Burdon, 32. 6d—Dean's Primrose, 30s 6d—llebburn Main,
35* fld—lloly well, 31* 6d—Killingworth, 35s 6d—Liddell's
Main,
29s—Tanlield Moor, 31s—Townley; 335--.Wmington,
35s 9d—Walls End Burraton, 35s 6d—Walls End Ilotspur,
34s 6d—Walls End Pawson and Co. 34s—Walls End Pesreth,
33s 6d— lWalls End Riddell's, 37,i_if
',Pang End Russell's,
Ms 90—Walls End Walker, 34s 6d—Wails End Metal, 308—
Walker small, 18s—Colin, 313—Fordel Alain 3611 6d—Hart-
ley, 31s—Stone Coal, 46s—Walls End Old Etherley, 3ls &i
Eden Main. 33s 3d—Lambton Primrose, 33s 3d—Alontague,
273 6d--riesion Main, 234 9d—Walls End Hatton; 38s 3d
Walls End Lyon's, 35a 64-,- Walls End Lambton, 3as 31--
Ships at market, 49—Ships sold, 381—Unsold, 10i.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.