The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-26 00:00:00

PA ilTA:aiiiiilhSSbLVED.

W. Panting and D. Blackford, auctioneers, Mahnesbury,
Wilts—G. Aylieff and W. Whitelaw. tailors, Princes-street,
Hanover-square—W. Tyrrell and F. Warner, pasteboard box
manufacturers, Leicester—J. G. Hiern and W. W. Ward. soli-
citors, Stafford—C. Thick and C. Stronghill, attorneys, Lom-
bard-street—J. Hayes and W. Hayes, grocers, Salisbury, Wilts
—H. Woodhouse and R. Lockman, patent linen thread-manu-
facturers, Manchester—NV. C. Southey and E. Light, cabinet-
makers, New Gloucester-place, Hoxton—S. Ruff and H.
Taylor, tobacconists, New Windsor, Berkshire—R. Lahti and
P. S. Mackie, drapers, Leeds, Yorkshire—J. Smith and 0.
E. Teakle, Southampton-street, Strand—M. Muir and T.
Muir, patent flooring and saw-mills, Glasgow—M. Muir, T.
Muir, and J. Gibson, silk-spinners, Glasgow—W. Green,
J. England, H. Snowden, and J. Hobson, worsted manufac-
turers, Bowling, Yorksbire—R. Johnson and T. Doyle, belt.
manufacturers, Manchester.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION.

JOHN M'CALLUSI, auctioneer, Glasgow, July I and 22,
at two, at the Black Bull Inn, Glasgow.
JOHN STEUART, farmer, Kincardine, Perthshire, June
29, and July 22, at two, at the Unicorn Inn, Kincardine.
JOHN FRASER, builder, Colinton, Edinburgh, July 1
and 22. at twelve, at the Old Signet Hall, Edinburgh.
ANDREW NISBET, cabinet-maker, Edinburgh, July 1
and 22, at three, at the Old Signet Hall, Edinburgh.

LAW INTELLIGENCE
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, June 25.
Sittings at Nisi Prius before Baron ROLFE and a Special
Jury.)

WOOD v. LEADBITTDR.
This was an action for an assault, in forcibly expelling the
plaintiff from the grand stand at the last Doncaster races.
The defendant, amongst other things, pleaded that he was
the servant of the Earl of Eglinton; that the close on which
the plaintiff had entered was the close of Lord Eglinton; that
by command of his Lordship, the defendant ordered the plain-
tiff to leave the close; and that upon the plaintiff's refusal,
the defendant laid hands upon him and expelled him, using
no more force than was necessary. To this plea, the laintiff
replied that he was in the close in question at the time the
assault was committed by the license of Lord Eglinton, upon
which issue was joined.
Mr. Jervis, with Mr. Humfrey and Mr. Petersdorff, repre-
sented the plaintiff; and Mr. Kelly conducted the defendant's
case, assisted by Mr. Wortley, Mr. Martin, and Mr. Peacock.
The case on-behalf of the plaintiff was, that he had pur-
chased, at the regular office a ticket for the grand stand at
Doncaster, for which he paid a guinea, and which was to
have secured him admission to the grand stand during the
races. That, on the first day of the races, upon presentation
of his ticket, he was admitted to the grand stand, but shortly
after the defendant accosted him, told him he had positive
orders to eject him, and, upon the plaintiff's declining to go
out, the defendant seized him rudely by the collar, and the
plaintiff still resisting, the defendant struck him a severe
blow upon the knuckles ; and by the force of the defendant, and
others assisting him, the plaintiff was hustled off the stand.
The plaintiff's case was supported by the evidence of a
person named Hicks, who accompanied plaintiff when he
purchased and paid for his ticket, and also accompanied him
to the grand stand, to which both were admitted. The as-
sault was proved by a person named Dixon. the son of a
cheesemonger in Tottenham-court-road, who frequented
races about London, and in this way became acquainted with
the plaintiff.
Mr. KELLY, on behalf of the defendant, expressed his sur •
prise at the audacity which the plaintiff exhibited in coming
before a court of justice. The stewards of races, for the pro-
tection of the public, determined to exclude from the betting
ring all defaulters. The plaintiff was not only a defaulter,
but he was a swindler and a cheat. He had been excluded
from the Liverpool races, and also from the Goodwood races ;
and Lord Eglinton, upon the suggestion of Lord George Ben-
tinck, had excluded him from the Doncaster races. For the
purpose of entrapping persons, the plaintiff made bets upon
commission. He solicited a person named Hawker to make
bets on his behalf. Hawker assented, and the plaintiff sent
him several letters containing the particulars of bets made
by him on Hawker's account, in reference to the race for the
Derby stakes, in 1841. The plainiiff informed Hawker that
he had made bets for him with Colonel Anson, Mr. Greville,
Mr. Payne, Captain Rous, and other persons, which, in
fact, he had never made. The horses against which the bets
were made, unfortunately for the plaintiff, and contrary to
his expectations, won. He was then obliged to confess to
Mr. Hawker that he had deceived him, and that he could
not pay him the amount which Mr. Hawker was entitled to
receive, if the bets had been genuine. Had the results of the
race been different, Mr. Hawker would have had to pay the
plaintiff between 2,0001. and 3,000/., which the plaintiff
would have put in his pocket. When Hawker discovered
the fraud practised on him he appealed to the Jockey Club,
and laid the whole case before them. They cited Wood to
appear before them, but he declined to come. After this it
was thought Wood was an improper person to associate with
honest men, and he was accordingly excluded from Liver-
pool, Goodwood, and Doncaster. By the encouragement of
racing, 'a breed of horses had been secured for this country,
which was the admiration of the world; and the question
really was, whether the noblemen and gentlemen who
patronised this noble and truly English sport were or were
not to have the power of excluding from their meetings'
swindlers and persons whose character was such as made it
impossible for gentlemen, or honest men to associate with
them? In the present case, Leadbitter, the defendant, was
of course a nominal party. Lord Eglinton, acting under the
sanction of the Jockey Club, was the real defendant.

In support of the aefendant's case, after calling two or
three witnesses to prove that the plaintiff was civilly re-
quested to leave the stand by Leadbitter, and declined, he
was removed.

Lord George Bentinck was examined. He proved that he
was the senior steward of the Liverpool races in 1843. Lord '
Stanley and Mr. Mostyn were his colleagues. A notice
was published that defaulters were not to be admitted to the
betting ring. The plaintiff came into the betting ring, and I
a general complaint having reached witness's ears that he
had found his way there, plaintiff was called upon to appear
before the stewards. The charge made against plaintiff by
Hawker was repeated to him. He was asked if he could
deny it. Plaintiff said he had settled with Hawker, and
that Hawker, in fact, owed him money. The stewards were
of opinion that no settlement or compromise with Hawker
made any difference in the character of the transaction, and '
unanimously resolved that the plaintiff must quit the stand.
He begged to be allowed to go off quietly; but witness said,
"No, they would make an example of him," and he was
taken off by a police-constable, and his ticket taken from
him. Witness afterwards saw the plaintiff at Goodwood
races, where he was spoken to by Mr. Roper, the Duke of
Richmond's steward, and left the course. Also saw the de-
fendant at Doncaster. Represented to Lord Eglinton, who
was sole steward, that the plaintiff ought not to be allowed
to remain in the betting ring. Lord Eglinton, in witness's
presence, ordered defendant to remove plaintiff. Witness
did not make a bet of 1,8001. to 1001. against Metternich and
Eringo for the Derby of 1841, nor did he bet 4,500/. to 100/.
against the Duke of Wellington. Made no bets with plain-
tiff, as agent of Hawker, on the Derby for 1841.
Cross-examined—Knew the plaintiff's father, who kept a
hell. Ile betted with plaintiff's father, who is a defaulter,
and owed witness 100/. on the Derby. Hawker complained
of plaintiff's conduct to the Jockey Club, but afterwards took
back his papers, saying he was satisfied. The money paid
by the plaintiff was not returned when he was sent off from
the course at Liverpool, as it is part of the regulation that
the ticket-money shall be forfeited. The object is to pro-
tect the public from being robbed. It is not unusual to em-
ploy persons to bet. Witness has employed a person named
Glen, a baker, in Regent-street, to bet for him. Glen has bet
for witness against a horse called Grey Milton. The horse
did not run after the bet was made. The horse was the pro-
perty of witness. Witness did not allow him to run, not
because he had betted against him, but because there was no
chance of his winning. Glen did not bet for witness on Run-
ning Rein, at the last Derby. A man may be temporarily
a defaulter, and afterwards pay up his debts, and cease to be
a defaulter. A temporary defaulter, whose default is not '
connected with any fraud, is often re-admitted to the betting
ring. The ring was like a market—like the Stock Market,
where every man who played fairly, whatever his condition
might be, was admitted. Gaining-house keepers and such
persons were not excluded. Witness did not think it dero-
gatory to bet with an honest man, however humble his con-
dition might be.
Re-examined—lf a man was temporarily unable to pay,
but afterwards paid honestly, and there was no fraud in
the transaction, he was free from any imputation ; but if
there was falsehood or fraud in the transaction, he could
never expiate his offence by any payment. No man ceased
to be a defaulter until he paid 20s. in the pound, and ac-
cording to the regulations at Doncaster such a person was
liable to be removed. The Raciug Calendar and Bell's Life
in London were read by nearly all sporting men. Grey
Milton died a maiden horse, that is, he never won a race.
Before witness withdrew him he had given public notice that
unless he greatly improved he should not run him for the
Derby. Previous to the Liverpool races in 1843 there was
an advertisement inserted in the Racing Calendar, and also
in the .21hrntng Chronicle, Morning Herald, Morning Post,
Times, Sun, and several other papers, containing the regula-
tion, one of which was that no defaulter should be admitted
to the grand stands or if admitted should be expelled and
forfeit his ticket money. There were similar regulatious
published in reference to the Goodwood and Doncaster races
last year.
Mr. Jr:as-is—They have not been published in the Morning
Advertiser, and that is the only newspaper we read.--(A
laugh.)
Mr. KELLY—Has your client instructed you to se); that is
the only newspaper he reads ?
Mr. Howard, an attorney, was called, to depose to some
conversation which he had with plaintiff, in reference to this
transaction; but objected to disclose it, on the ground that it
was a privileged communication, and was therefore not called
upon to give evidence
Lord Stanley corroborated what had fallen from Lord
George Bentinck as to the occurrence at the Liverpool races.
The plaintiff said he could not deny that lie had falsely stated
to Hawker that he had made bets on his account. Witness
said that what had happened afterwards with Hawker was of
little importance, and the stewards unanimously agreed to
exclude plaintiff from the betting ground.
Mr. Mostyn, who was also a steward at the Liverpool
races, gave evidence to the same effect.
The Duke of Richmond said he was the owner of the land
on which the Goodwood races were held. Hearing the cha-
racter of the plaintiff from Lord George Bentinck, witness
authorised his solicitor to give him proper notice, and oblige
bins to quit the course.
Mr. Roper, the Duke of Richmond's solicitor, stated that
at the last Goodwood races he gave the plaintiff notice to quit
the ground, and the plaintiff said, as the ground was private
property, he could not resist.
George Hawker resides at Stroud, Gloucestershire. Knows
plaintiff; who solicited witness to allow him to make bets on
his behalf in reference to the Derby in 1841. Afterwards
informed witness that he had made such bets. In the event
• of Coronation winning witness would have to receive
. 11,825/., and to have paid several other sums, which would
. have left a balance of 2,640/. coming to witness upon the bets