The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-22 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHI:IIN CIRCUIT.—Lire• pool, Aug. 20.
CIVIL SIDE.—( Refire Mr. Justice CaEsswELt. )
SETTLEMENT OF THE BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE

CASE.

It having been arranged that the important cause of " Har-
bnttle r. Rylands," for breach of promise of marriage, should
be taken at the sitting of the Court yesterday morning, curiosity
was observable upon the countenances of the unusually large
number of both sexes who had been fortunate enough to obtain
admission before nine o'clock. The gallertes on the right and
left were thrown open for th accommodation of the ladies, a
goodly, party of whom, very fashionably dressed, were present
before Mr. Justice Cresawell had taken his seat. The unusal
circumstance of the Attorney-General being retained specially
for the one party, and of the Solicitor-General being also
retained specially for the other, lent an additional interest to
the case. Rumour, ever busy upon such occasions, had
given out that the plaintiff and defendant moved in
the highest rank of life at Manchester—that the court
ship, though of short duration, was nevertheless warm, in-
teresting, and romantic—that the damages were laid some-
where between ten and twenty thousand pounds. Thus was
expectation raised to the highest pitch, when suddenly it was
do-omed to suffer a grievous disappointment ; for many seconds
after nine o'clock had not elapsed before it was buzzed along
the avenues and through the Court, and even among the fair
occupants of the' galleries, that the case had been privately
settled. Mr. Martin made a slight allusion to the fact. He
said:—'' Your Lordship, I suppose, is aware that the great
cause is settled." His Lordship 'nodded in the affirmative ;
and thus all doubt about the settlement, if any existed before,
was at once removed. From inquiries made, we learned that
the settlement is to this effect : the lady is to receive the
sum of 4,000/., and her costs are to be subject to taxation in
the usual manner. Her father was in Court, and remained
there until after Mr. Martin had mentioned the settlement to
his Lordship.

GRIFFIN V. ASHLEY.

An Action on a promissory note for 5001. and interest. The
plaintiff was Mary Griffin, of Middleton, Northamptonshire ;
and the def..nelant was David Ashley, miller, of the same
county—Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

HASSELL AND ANOTHER V. WATSON AND ANOTHER.

An action to recover 1,3941. 16s. 4d. as damages, by reason
of the defendants not having loaded the ship Wilson with a
cargo of guano at Ichaboe, or some adjacent island. The
plaintiffs were Messrs. Hassell and Good, of Hull, the owners
of the ship, and the defendants were Messrs. Watson, one of
whom is at the University, and the other is oat of business.—
Verdict for the plaintiffs for the full amount.
Mr. Baron Rolfe was occupied all day in the Crown Court
with the trial of cases which are unfit for publication.

CENTRAL CRINIINAL COURT.
OLD COUR!.

(Before Mr. Justice Wieuratate.),
George giyith, 22, postman, was indicted for stealing a
letter containing a broach and a pencil case, the pro-
perty of her Nlajesty's Postmaster-General.
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Bodkin conducted the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Charnock appeared for the prisoner.
From the evidence adduced, it appeared that a travel-
ling jeweller, named Blumenthal, had been employed to
get a brooch and a stone of a certain p tttern for a cus-
tomer, and he sent to Birmingham to obtain them. The
person who received the order could not obtain the
articles at Birmingham, but, eventually, they were ob-
tained at Northampton, and were posted in a letter ad-
dressed to London. This letter never came to hand, and
shortly afterwards, upon the lodgings of the prisoner,
who had beer. taken into custody upon another charge,
being searched, the stolen articles were discovered.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty.
There was another charge against him of a similar de-
scription, but it was not proceeded with.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN sentenced the prisoner to be
transported for fifteen years.
John Tay 33, was indicted for stealing a quantity
of old silver, a silver image, and a china vase, the pro-
perty of our Sovereign Lady the Queen.
Mr. Bodkin and another Learned Gentleman appeared
for the Cro an, and Mr. Clarkson defended the prisoner.
The circumstances under which this charge was made
against ;he prisoner were very fully detailed at the time
the prisoner was under examination at the Police-court.
The prisoner was employed as a cabinet-maker, with
several other workmen, in Buckingham Palace in June
la.t, and the property in question was supposed to have
been abstracted on the 13th of that month. On the
evening of that day the prisoner was seen to leave the
Palace with a bag which was supposed to contain his
tools, and, therefore, no suspicion was excited. The
prisoner, it appeared, took a cab at a short distance from
the Palace, and proceeded to the shop of Mr. Seymour, a
silversmith in Long-acre, where he offered the silver in
question for sale. Mr. Seymour having some suspicion
askt-s1 his name, and he replied that it was John John-
son, and he g4v4 an address, and upon this he gave him a
pardon of the amount, and directed a p iliceman to
watch him, and on his finding that he had gone to a dif-
ferent arldreg'S to the one he had given at Mr. Seymour's,
he took him into custody. In addition to these facts, it
was proved that the prisoner left in the cab, which he had
bired to convey him to Long-acre, a vase, and upon his
not retarninf,,s in the course of three hours, the driver
tools this vase to the 4ackney-coach-office, at Somerset
House, where it was identified as having formed part of
the property stolen at the Palace.
It was likeyriae proved that while the prisoner was in
custody at the police-station in Bow-street, he wrote
a le:ter to his wife, requesting her to state that a
foreign gentleman, who had been lodging with them.
bad left the old silver in their charge two years before,
and had told them that if he did not return in three
months, they might apply it to their own use, and also
that he had told them to give the name of Johnson as a
refecence to the party for whom they sold it. The
whsle of the property was produced and identified by
Mr. Sattaders, the inspector of palaces, as the property
of her Majesty.
Mr. CLARKSON briefly addressed the jury for the pri-
soner. _ _

The Learned JUDGE having summed up, the jury re-
turned a verdict of Guilty, but strongly recommended
the prisoner to mercy on account of his previous good
character.—Judgteent was respited.
Thopas Parker, 51, carpenter, was indicted for felo-
niously uttering a forged order for the payment of 1301.,
with intent to defraud Henry Bosanquet and others, and
George James Aungier, 32, clerk, was indicted for ceun-
selling and abetting Parker in the commission of the
offence imputed to him.
The prisoner Aungier was likewise arraigned upon a
charge of forging the order in question, but to this in-
dictinent ho pleaded guilty.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. ')oane conducted the prosecution.
Mr. J. Payne appeared for the prisoner Parker.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel for the
prosecution, and the evidence that was adduced, it ap-
peared that, on the 26th of July, the prisoner Parker
went to the St. James's-square branch of the London
and Westminster Batik, and presented a cheque pur-
perting to he drawn by Mr. Nicholl', the printer to the
House of C,,mmons, who kept an account with the bank,
for the sum of 1301. The checrie was at once discovered
to he a forgery, arid on Parker being questioned, he said
he hal receive I it from a person named Murray, but he
subsequently ment'one 1 the name of the prisoner
Aunge-r, awl on searching his house, some documents
were discovered which left no doubt of his guilt ; but as
that prisoner Weeded gailte, it was net necessary to go
into the details of that evidence ; and the only question
was, whether the prisoner Parker, at the time he pre-
sented the cheque at the bank, had a guilty knowledge of
its being forge I. In order to show this, evidence was
adduced,- that the two prisoners and their wives were on
very friendly terms, rind that they frequently visited
each other, arid appeared very intimate. There were no
other material facts adduced in evidence against the
prisoner Parker ; and it appeared that when Aungier
was under examination at the police-office, he declared
tint he al one %sae guilty, and that he merely sent Parker,
as a messenger, to obtain the money for the cheque.
Me. PAYNE addressed the jury and contended that
the facts proved against the prisoner Parker were by
no means aufficient to warrant them in coming to the
conclusien that at the time the prisoner otered the
cheque in question he had a clear and perfect know.
ledge, for that was what woo imputed to him by the
present indictment, that the document was a forgery.
Several witnesses were called, who gave the prisoner
Parker a very excellent character for honesty and good
conduct.

The jury, without troubling the Learned Judge to
sum up, at once returned a verdict of Guilty.
There were two other indictments for forgery against
the prisoner Aungier, to both of which he pleaded
guilty. Judgment was respited.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
L:11 !BE

MANsLAUGHrEß.—Yesterday, Owen Buckley, a black-
mnith, against whom a Coroner's jury returned a verdict of
. manslaughter ten days ago, but who has since managed to keep
out of the way. WWI charged before Mr. Norton with having
• caused the death of John Curtis, a tinman and brazier.
.. From the evidence it appeared, that on last Saturday night
three weeks the prisoner and deceased, while in a state of
• intonyeation, quarrelled at the Lord Nlonteagle beer-shop, in
Brandon-street, Waiworth, and ultimately fought two hours in
the street.in front of the house. In each round the deceased
fell heavily with the prisoner upon him, and was so injured that
he was obliged to be taken home. He lingered in great suffer-
ing from internal injuries for nearly a fortnight, when he died.
Mr. Day, the surgeon who had made the post modem exa.
mination Of the body of the deceased, described the injuries
which the deceased had received, which he had no doubt had
been occasioned by the knee of a person falling upon him.
The prisoner, in his defence, said he would be prepared with
witnesses to prove that since the night in question the de-
Ceased had been drunk and fighting at a public-house with
another person.
Mt. NORTON remanded him, to give him an opportunity of
. . bringing forward his witnesses.
Mr. Day remarked that no such testimony as that spoken of
• by the prisoner had been adduced before the Coroner.
. - OMNIBUS RUFFIANISM.—.John Lijin, the conductor of
- one of the London Conveyance Company's omnibuses, appeared
to a warrant charging, him with violently assaulting Mr. Wm.
Mappleton, a gentleman holding a situation in Somerset Ileuse.
Mr. Mappleton stated that on Friday night last he got into
an omnibus, of which the defendant was conductor, at the
Vauxhall-bridge, and upon its stopping at the Horns, at Ken-
nington, he got out. In getting (Alt he accidentally struck the
defendant with the head of a shrimp in throwing it away, and
the defendant. in an artery tone, asked him what he had done it
for? Mr Nlappletrin a'sured him that he had not thrown the
shrimp at him on puipo-e, and that its striking him was merely
accidental. Tee defendant called him a liar, and instantly
struck him a violent blow on the eye-brow of his right eye, the
effrcts of which had stunned him for some moments. He also
bled so freely from the wound which had been inflicted, that
his neekerc:,ief, shirt, waistcoat, at:d even coat were saturated
with blond. On recovering hirnaelf he was obliged to be driven
to a surgeon to have the wound dressed, and then preeeeded
home 'in a cab, and since then was obliged to have his eye fre-
quently dressed by a medical man.
In reply to the questions of the Magistrate, the witness de-
clared solemnly he had not thrown the shrimp intentionally at
the defendant, and said its striking him was purely accidental.
He also declared he was perfectly sober at the time.
A witness named Swann was called, who corroborated the
complainant.
The defendant said that in the first place the complainant was
. Wi• 'quit-0W.441 fliii4n the next place he spat a quantity of shrimp
.. --- et:ert•ai-t-it- out h, ant threw them into his face, abused,
e:-- .esiir a, 11-Vet tp. s ike him, when he (defendant) gave him
/, •- ealetanaplatie of. He called a discharged conductor to
cg-. -,-, „ninirebo.inte his,,itit meat, who, unfortunately for him, his I
•-e. •:. ',.i •, !, -- -7-1::,€) 4,
0 .•..‘---"' _,•,•:7
- sl .---:i'
'7---1 -'l.
, k 7N- -.`

11 5