The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-13 00:00:00

V. NISBETT.

Mr. PHINN made several objections to evidence being
received of money received by the witness on account,
after the action was brought, contending that money re-
ceived on the 23d of April could not be taken into con-
sideration.

On cross-examination, the witness stated that he was
the officer of the Rishop, but paid over to the defendant
the rents he received. He was not aware that Mr. 1)u
Pasquier had a lien upon the living. He paid the motley
to him as defendant's attorney, under the sequestration.
Mr. Du Pasquier gave him no notice that he had a lien
upon the living.

- Mr. PmINN said he understood from Mr. Du Pasquier
that be had a lien upon the living, but as that appeared
not to be the fact, he would leave the ease in the hands
of the Court.

The jury immediately returned a verdict for the plain
if—Damages, 3221. 165.:7d.

SECONDARIES' COURT, Dec. 12.
(Before Mr. Secondary JAMES.)
SHAW V. FRIDAY.
This was an action brought by Mr. Shaw, solicitor, of
Fish-street 11ill, against the defendant, Thomas Friday,
steward on board a Gravesend steamer, for 161. 13s. 4d.,
the amount of a bill of costs.
Mr. Parry appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Thomas'
for the defendant.
It appeared that two actions had been brought for the
defendant against parties fur money lent, and for rent
due, in support of which two clerks of the plaintiff's
►ere called, and gave evidence as to the nature of the
business, but prevaricated very much in cross-examina-
tion.

Mr. THOMAS, for the defence, urged the want of evi•
dence as to a retainer, and gross overcharge in the
account in various items, and commented upon the un-
satisfactory manner one of the clerks gave his evidence,
having deposed, in the first instance, that he had at-
tended himself on certain occasions, and afterwards
denying having done so.
The Learned SECONDARY, in summing up, pointed out
various items in the bill as exorbitant, and in several
cases considered 3s. 4d. quite sufficient where 6s. 3d. was
charged.
The jury, after being locked up for some time, re-
turned a verdict for the defendant.

LORD MAYOR'S COURT, Dec. 12.
(Before the RECORDER and a Common Jury.)
CIBSON GOWDIE—GODWIN GARNISHEE.

This was an attachment issued at the instance of the
plaintiff to attach and recover the sum of 85/. 133. ltd.
due from the defendant to the plaintiff.
Mr. Ryland and Mr. Laurie appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Randall for the garnishee.
The defendant formerly resided in this cou.:try during
which time he contracted the debt in question, and
shortly after left for Sydney, where he now resides, Mr.
Godwin, a merchant in the City, the garnishee in the
present
.case acting as his agent, ;he plaintiff
ascertaining that he held a sum of rceoey in
hand belonging to the defendant, made an affidavit of the
defendant, and took the effective measures peculiar to
the ancient practice of this Court, being the only city in
England, with the exception of the city of York, that is
invested with the power of attaching money in the
hands of a third party, at a time when a defendant is not
residing within t e jurisdiction of this or any of the
superior Courts :':,Westminster.
Mr. LAURIE hag opened the pleadings,
Mr. RYLAND said it was unnecessary further to trouble
the jury, as he understood the parties agreed to consent
to a verdict.

Mr. RANDALL said he appeared for Mr. Godwin, the
garnishee, and he was instructed to consent to a ♦erdict
for 851. 13s. I id.
A verdict for the plaintiff for that amount was then
taken.

LITTLE AND OTHERS V. CLINTON.
Mr. LAURIE applied to the Court to fix the day for
hearing arguments upon the exceptions filed to the
answer of the defendant to a bill of discovery, filAl in aid
of an action commenced by the plaintiffs, money brokers,
at New York, against the Union Bank of London, to
attach the sum of 2,0001., deposited by the defendant
with them, and which, it is alleged, formed part of a sum
of 4,5001., stated by the plaintiffs to have been obtained
by the defendant, Clinton, from them by means of a
forged order, and with the proceeds of which he ab-
sconded from America to this country.
After some conversation,
The RECORDER appointed the 9th of January to hear
the arguments of counsel, and intimated, if it should be-
come necessary, he would also sit on the following day.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NURTIIE RN CIRCUIT.— York, Dec. 10.
(Before Mr. Baron PLATT.)

Thomas Kirk, 27, and John Blades, 19, two stou,
young men, having much the appearance of rail way "na-
vigators," were indicted for that they, on the 27th of
September last, at Ilawsker-cum-Stainacre, in the North
Riding, feloniotkly and violently did assault one 'Wil-
liam Ward, and steal from his person one shilling and
twopence.
Mr. Blanchard, with whom were Mr. Shaw and the
Hon. Mr. Phipps, conducted the prosecution. The pri-
soners were both sodefended.

The prosecutor, an old man, in a humble station of
life, stated that he lives at Stainacre, which is situate at
about two miles from Whitby. On Saturday, the 27th
of September last, he went to the town of Whitby to
make some purchases, and was on his way home, on foot,
at about eight o'clock in the evening, when, at some
distance from the town, he saw two men in the road.
He could not recognise the prisoners ; but ho stated
that on approaching the men there was something in
their manner which excited his apprehension, and he
could perceive that one of them had on a dark dress, and
the other a light one, and that was afterwards shown to
be the dress of the prisoners on the night in question.
They immediately closed upon him. One of them, he
could not say which, seized him by the neck ; he received
a blow on the neck or head, which felled him ; immedi-
ately after another blow on the side of his head. He had
a purse in his breeches pocket, eon
in
Phis waistcoat. The
cinoppseirl:ebr,esidaensd s tniweia
halfpencep e
nocre ti:

In this case Mr. Gray appeared for the plaintiff; and
Mr. Phinn for the defendant, the action being brought
to recover the sum of 3221. 16s. 7d., under the following
circumstances:—

From the statement of plaintiff's counsel, it appeared
that in July, 1844, the plaintiff, Mr. Henry Vincent
Smith, recovered judgment against the Rev. Charles
Wetherall (whose name has been recently before the
public in the celebrated action for crim. con., brought
against him by his son-in-law, Mr. John ➢iynde Cooke),
the rector of Byfleet, Northamptonshire, fur a debt of
1,5001. The beneficial interest of the living came into
the possession of a Mr. Henry Nisbett, the brother of
the defendant, who was indebted to the plaintiff in the
sum of 3001., which the defendant covenanted to pay
with interest. Thi3 debt accrued under these circum-
stances:—Some time since the Bishop of Peterborough,
in whose diocese the living is situate, issued his warrant
sequestrating the living of Byfleet, and ordering that
the debts of the Rev. Mr. Wetherall should be paid out
of the profits of the living. The plaintiff being the first
sequestration creditor at the commencement of last year,
sent in his claim, the defendant entering into a covenant
to pay him 3001., with interest. As this was not done
the present action was brought, the defendant admitting,
by allowing judgment to go by default, that there were
some profits of the living in hand.
Mr. H. P. GATES, solicitor, of Peterborough, said that
he held a warrant from the Bishop of Peterborough to
sequestrate the living of Byfleet. Under that sequestra-
tion he was appointed to receive the rents, and had re-
ceived a sum of money amounting to 1,561/. Before the
23d of April in the present year he received the sum of
541/. 18s. 110. Of that sum he paid away on the 14th
of April to Mr. Du Pasquier, the defendant's attorney,
300/. That was the only sum that had been at the dis-
posal of the defendant, the remaining portion being de-
voted to repairs, the curate's stipend, and other things.
In November, 1844, the balance was 3801.