The Sun.
London, England, 1845-01-15 00:00:00

TR

The Court were of opinion, that the jury attributed to
the defendants malice which did not exist. If the
plaintiff would consent to take damages in 2004. the rule
should be discharged, not otherwise.
Mr. Sergeant TALPOURD, for the plaintiff, at once con-
sented, and the verdict was entered accordingly.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Jan. 14.
(Sittings in Banco.)
WIPE c. 41111111111 X.

In this case, Mr. MARTIN moved for a rule to show
cause why an order of Mr. Baron Alderson, granted at
chambers, on the 6th of December last, should not be
set aside on such terms as their Lordships might direct.
The action was commenced on the 14th of May, 1844.
It was brought upon two cheques, one dated
on the 25th of May, 1840, and the other
on the 14th of July, in the same year ;
and amongst other pleas, there were pleas to each count
that these cheques had been given for money won at
hazard in a gambling-house in St. James's•street. The
case stood for trial as a special jury case on the 7th of
December last. All attempts to obtain the necessary
evidence having failed, on the 6th of December,
the day before the trial was to take place,
the plaintiff 'a attorney consented to an order
of Mr. Baron Alderson, for the payment of the debt
and costs. ()n the 7th of December a person called on
the attorney from the defendant, and stated, that himself
and various other persons whom he named, were pre-
pared to prove that the money had been won at play in
St. James's-street, four years before, and not only
so, but that it was foul play, and false dice
were used. He (the Learned Counsel) was pre•
pared now with the affidavits confirming this state-
ment, and stating further that the action was brought
in collusion with Davis, the man who kept the house.
An officer who was employed to procure information on
the subject, and every possible means was resorted to
without effect. The money had since been paid into
Court, in pursuance of an order of Mr. Baron Rolfe.
The case went off in order that the affidavits referred
to by the Learned Counsel might be filed.

THE REVENUE FRAUDS.-TIIE ATTORNEY• GENERAL V.

SMITHS.

In this case, which was an information filed by
the Attorney General, for certain alleged offences
against the excise-laws by the defendants, who until
recently carried on the business of spirit distillers, at
the east end. The Solicitor-General applied to the
Court to fix a day for the trial of the action at bar.
—Thursday, Feb. 6, was appointed for that purpose.

THE ATTORNEY-OF.NERAL V. SMITHS.

Shortly after the above application, Mr. KELLY
said, in a case of the Attorney-General against
George Smith and James Scott Smith, he had to
move to show cause why particulars should not
be delivered to the defendants of certain arrears
of duties alleged in the last count of the information to
have become due to the Crown, with the times at which
such duties became due, and also why particulars of cer-
tain spirits alleged in the third and other counts of the
information to have been removed from this distillery to
the rectify ing house, and the time or times at which sash
removal was supposed to have taken place. This
was certainly one of the most extraordinary, and, as it
stood, unaccountable prosecutions that had ever been
instituted. The information consisted of six counts ;
and in the first five of these counts there were charges
that the defendants had used and carried on business on
certain premises used as a distillery, within a quarter
of a mile of certain other premises, used as
a rectifying-house, and that, contrary to the statute,
there was a communication between the distillery and
the rectifying-house, by means of which spirits, wort,
wash, and other articles had been conveyed otherwise
than by waggons, and on the public highway. The
communication was stated in one place to be
by a pipe under-ground, and, in another,
by means of a trough ; and the penalties
sought to be recovered on each of these five
counts amounted to 75,0001.—that is, 5001. a week, for
the space of nearly three years. In the last count, for
the penalties, the defendant was charged in the most
general form. The whole amount sought to be recovered
by the two informations filed, including the cumulative
penalties, was 309,0001. The Learned Counsel then
proceeded to state at length the history of the establish-
ments with which the defendants are connected. The
business of a distiller had been carried on upon the pre-
mises for more than 100 years, and in that period
many millions had been paid to the revenue, in
the form of duty upon spirits. He believed that
the house had paid, for the most part, not less tha❑
1,0001. per day. In 1817, for obvious reasons, an Act
was passed to prohibit the carrying on of the two trades
of a distiller and rectifier on the same premises ; but
a saving clause was introduced excepting the case of
Messrs. Smith on account of the great expense which
they had been at in the rectifying establishment. Upon
the passing of the Act, however, the openings, yards, and
gates, connecting the distillery with the rectifying-
house, were blocked up to the perfect satisfaction
of the excise offieera, and there had since been no com-
munication between them. By another Act, passed in
1125, there was a prohibition of any communication be-
tween any such two establishments, by which spirits
might or could be conveyed from one to the other, except
by means of carts or waggons, along the public highway.
It happened, unfortunately, however, that a supply of
water was required for the use of these extensive pre-
mises. For nearly a century past they had been supplied
by the East London Water Company. As the supply
required was large, the water was first brought into a
tank, the dimensions of which are such that
a battalion of soldiers might swim in it.. It
held, he believed, upwards of 80,000 gallons
of water. From this large reservoir the water was car-
ried by a great number of pipes, into some twenty or
five-and-twenty chambers or departments of the dis-
-1 tillery ; it was conveyed sometimes by pipes within the
different chambers, at other times by pipes without the
buildings, going down and rising up outside the walls,
at other times along the ground, and the❑ again
under the ground. By these various pipes the whole
of the distillery and the rectifying-house was supplied.
The business was carried on with the pipes existing
in this condition from a period of seventy years back
until the year 1844. In that year certain officers of
the Excise bethought themselves that where water
could be conveyed spirit could be conveyed, and sus-
pected that these water-pipes were an infringe-
ment of the Act of Parliament. They might, with
at least equal propriety, have selected the gas
pipes. The pipes had been allowed to exist without ob-
jection for thirty years, but they now endeavoured to make
an experiment, proving that inasmuch as water could be
conveyed by these pipes spirits could be conveyed, and
that here therefore was a violation of the Act of Parlia-
ment. Under these circumstances the Messrs. Smith
were charged with using these pipes contrary
to the statute for three years, minus six weeks, three
' years being the period limited by the Act of Parliament.
He would now state to the Court the precise information
in which these gentlemen were placed.
The LORD CHIEF BARON was not satisfied that the
Court had any authority in the case.
A long argument ensued as to the right of the Court
to compel the Crown to produce particulars in a case of
this nature. The Learned Counsel contended that the
Crown had no right in such a case which the subject did
not equally possess, and referred to authorities in sup-
port of his argument.
After the Learned Judges had consulted,
The LORD CHIEF' BARON said the Court would not
stop the case in the outset on the ground of authority.
They would assume it for the purpose of granting a
rule nisi.

It was ultimately arranged that application should be
made to the counsel for the Crown, on the part of the
derendants, for the particulars sought to be obtained, and
that if they were not satisfied, they should apply to
this Court.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
BOW-STREET.

Four decent-looking young men, of from 18 to 25
years of age, were charged by John Lloyd, the landlord
of the Coachmakers' Arms, Hanover-street, Long-acre,
with creating a disturbance in his house, and wilfully in-
juring his property.
Complainant stated that at a late hour last night the
prisoners, together with four or five others, entered his
house, and ordered some ale and gin, with which they
were served. They then began to siag boisterously, and
made such a disturbance that he attempted to turn them
out. He called a policeman, but even with his assistance
he could not get them out. He sent for another Fol ce-
rium, but before any could arrive the four prisoners had
escaped. They broke a tumbler, and in forcing the
window they broke an iron bar with which it was fas-
tened : ss. would cover the damage.
One of the prisoners said that complainant put out the
gas, and would not let them finish the ale and gin, which
they had paid for.
Mr. JARDINE said that the prisoners must pay the ss.
to Mr. Lloyd, and he should fine them ss. each for being
drunk.—The money was immediately paid.