The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-27 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
CUSTOMS' FRAUDS—THE QUEEN V. BLAKE.
Lord DENMAN said, that in the ea=e of the Queen v. Blake,
the Court was of opinion that the rule nisi for a new trial ought
to be granted. It would not, hnweier, go into the new trial
paper, and some day, next term, would be fixed for the ar•
gument.

THE QUEEN V. FORBEiI
The defendant, in this case, appeared upon the floor of the
Court this morning, to receive judgment.
Mr, Justice PATTISON, in passing sentence on the defendant
said, that this was an indictment, charging the defendant with
having assaulted John •Abel Smith, on which indictment he bad
suffered judgment to go by default, and he was therefore, now
brought up to receive the judgment of the Court. (The Learned
Judge then proceeded to recapitulate at great length, the chi—
cumstanees which had led to the assault, and which have beer%
already frequently fully reported.) As soon as it had been re- •
ported to the defendant that the prosecutor had made use of '
the offensive term swindler, the defendant had written a letter,
very properly framed for that purpose, requesting a retracta -
lien of the expression, or an investigation, which
letter had been forwarded to the prosecutor by Mr.
Ravenshaw. The prosecutor, however, had refused to re-
tract the Offensive expression, or to give any explanation, and
had stated that the only investigation to which he would con-
sent was a legal one, and Mr.Freshfield, the prosecutor's attor-
ney, had written to Mr. Ravenshaw, stating that the prosecu-
tor had used the expression in a moment of irritation, but that
he would not retract it ; that he was willing to afford every fa-
cility for legal inquiry, and that. if an action were brought against
him, he would put in a plea of justification. That coarse, how-
ever, had not been adopted, and the defendant had taken the
first opportunity of publicly horsewhipping Mr. Smith. The
Court entirely acquitted the defendant in sending Mr. Williams
to the prosecutor of any design or intention to stir up the anglls
feelings of the prosecutor, but it could not but be regretted that,
the offer of the prosecutor to snake the matter in dispute the sub-
ject of legal investigation had not been adopted. The defend-
ant said that the offer was a mere mockery, but the Court was
not of that (spinier', for although the use of the word swindler
might not be actionable, which was very doubtful, yet the pro-
secutor might have been required to reduce the expressions to
writing, and the Court was of opinion that the letter of Mr.
Freshfield was in itself actionable. If that course had been
adopted, all the facts would have been laid before
a jury, who would have had the advantage of hear-
ing the viva voce evidence of the witnesses as
given on their examination and their cross-examina-
tion. Such a course of proceeding would be much more
consistent with the interests of justice than the one which bad
been adopted, for no character had ever been vindicated by
acts of violence. The language of the prosecutor, it must be
admitted, had been most offensive, and such as he ought never
to have used, and if it could have been shown that all explana—
tion had been refused, the Court weuld have considered that,
eircumstance in passing sentence ; hut it seemed that the use of
that language !cad been justified by the prosecutor, and volu-
minous affidavits had been put in on both sides, to the contents
of which he would now allude. (The Learned Judge then

went at great length into the history of the pecuniary transac•
tions of the defendant with the house of Smith, Payne, and
Smith, and of the circumstances attending the formation of the
vartnership of Wells and the whole of which has al-
reay appeared when the ease was argued.) With regard to the
misappropriation of the trust fund of Mrs. Wells and her
daughters, the Court was of opinion that the prisoner,, in the
first instance, had been led into this misappropriation of that
fund from his blind confidence in others, and that he was
guilty of negligence, and not dishonesty. He, however,
kad subsequently- shown a degree of acquiescence in
the acts of others, which might very fahrly have
been considered as operating on the prosecutor's mind to
produce an - unfavourable impression. In the y ear 1810
the defendant had discovered that his partner Wells had been
guilty of several unjustifiable acts, more particularly that he
had been pledging the eredit of the firm for his own private
debts, in consequence of which the defendant had canoed the
partnerihip to be dissolved, and had attempted to carry on the
business, impoverished as it had been by the abstraction of those
funds. The business was insolvent, acd the attempt
was hopeless. The Court, however, 0.;c1 not think
that the defendant believed such to bays been
the state of the business at that time ; on, the con-
trary, they 'were of opinion that the defendant thought
the business might be restored, although they could Slot ap •
prove of the steps which had been adopted to support that busi-
ness. The Learned Judge then went into a history of tha bill
transactions between the defendant, Virtue, and others. NM'',
although there might not have been any deliberate intention P
defraud Smith, Payne, and Smith, yet no one could be mar-.
prised that a person who had suffered so severely as the proseen.
tor had, in consequence of these transactions, should have bees*
betrayed into tke use of strong terms in expressing his feel--
ings. Looking carefully st the affidavits, although the prosecutor
was not justified in using the word swindler, or in imputing.
deliberate fraud to the defendant, yet looking to all the circtun-
sten ces of the case, it must be admitted that great allowances
ought to be made for the use of expressions blameable in them-
selves, but which had been uttered in haste and not deli-
berately. But nothing could excuse the defendant in having
had recourse to personal violence, nor could the Court peso
over such an offence lightly. It was necessary, by making S,
example, to protect the public against such breaches or
the peace, and to prevent persons who might consider
themselves aggrieved from having recourse to personal vio-
lence. A certificate of the state of the defendant's health
had been put in, which would have the effect of diminishing
somewhat the length of time for which he would be impri-
soned. The sentence of the Court was, that for this his of-
fence he should be imprisoned in the Queen's Prison for three
calendar months.
Mr. MtNiel was then removed in custody of the officer °I
the court.
MANDAMUS—THE WILL FORGERIES.

THE QUEEN D. THE LORD MAYOR OF LONDON.
In this case a rule nisi had been obtained, calling upon the
Lord Mayor of. London to show cause why a mandamus shrill('
not issue calling upon him to deliver to Joshua Fletcher or to his
attorney copies of the depositions taken against him, and upon
which he had been committed to the Giltspur-street Comptes.,
for re-examination, on a charge of forging the will of Ann Slack.
The ATtORNEY-GENERAL now showed cause against the
rale, and contended that it was evident, from the wording of
the Act, that the. copies of the deposition: were to be furnished
only after the person demanding them shouisi have been com-
mitted for trial ; besides, it appeared from the affidavit of Mr.
Goodman, the Lord Mayor's clerk, that the depositions wer°
not actually in existence, inasmuch as they had not been Yo
'signed by the magistrate.
Mr. V. RicnAnns followed on the same side.
Mr. KELLY (with whom was Mr. Ballantine) in suret
of the rule, contended that the wording of the Act made Vs
distinction between committals for trial and committals on re*
maul, and that every person committed on a magistrate's vi sr:
rant, had a right .to copies of the depositions on which he v4'''
detained in custody.
Lord DENMAN said, that it appeared to him that in this
case the rule ought to be discharged. It was evident fio l!
the preamble of the Act (the Prisoners' Counsel Act) that
th
intention of the Legislature was to furnish the prisoner vit
copies of the depositions in order to enable his counsel to dr
fend him at the trial.• He had at first been inclined to enter
tilst
some doubt from the wording of the section, which enacted tb
any prisoner committed to any lawful custody for any to •
. might demand copies of the depositions on which he had blss
committed; but in the present instance it did not appear ivoi
the committal was for any offence—it was for the purposes t be,
further investigation, and therefore did not come within ~,
meaning of the words of the Act. The rule must therefore Pv
discharged.
The other Judges concurred.
Lord DENMAN—In coming to this decision we do net ft,rTs
ceed at all upon the want of signatures to the deposition&
the duty of the Magistrates to sign the depositions at the tint
they are taken, and every other proceeding as it goes on.
Rule discharged.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY•)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Baron RoLrE sna

Common Jury.)

EVELZIGH PURSIORD.
This was an action to recover from the defendant a. certtebil:
quantity of goads and chattel!, which were assigned tempi,
plaintiff by his nephew by a bill of sale. The plaintiff, go
a member of the Society of Friends, became security low
amount of 1001. for his nephew, who was formerly a CO' hoed
mission agent, and who, becoming embarrassed, wasll for
by his employers, to whom the plaintiff paid 991. 5.- Aro.
moneys which his nephew had received on account of the
at the
Subsequently the goods were &strained by the Sheriff fore
suit of the defendant, against which the plaintiff appealed o$
a. Learned Judge, who decided that the Sheriff was an
legally. The plaintiff now appealed against this decision! hos
in support of the bill of sale, which he contended entitled tbe
to, the ownership of the property. His object in bringiug;Jery
present action was, not to recover damages, but that a
might determine to whom the property really belonged- vsor
On the part of the defendant, his Counsel (111 r.
~,ire
complained of the extreme hardship of cases of this 107,0!
A man might refuse to pay a debt—his creditor isCT-10
to issue an, execution on his property. A writ is issue go,
then a relation steps forward and, producing a piece of page
declares the property to be his. Why, so soon ua re W 0
into difficulties he might say to a relation, let me illy: tbd:
money and I will give you a bill of sale on my proPer'''conet
defrauding his creditors, who may have trusted him teaAs
derable extent, on the supposition that he (the debtoadopted
possessed of considerable property. This was a plae.,,,eige
by an embarrassed man. It was an established maxim 40
lawyers, from the reign of Queen Elizabeth to the tieeooll
George the Third, that unless possession immediatelYcoo!
ponies a deed it is a batch of fraud. The Learned the
cited authorities in support of this doctrine, and con ivied
t.epwee:;
bill of sale was a private transaction, not likely to be
unless the plaintiff's nephew should get into difficult ht, sUP
was not stamped until the present action was bre°
therefore illusory and fraudulent. inae
The Learned JUDGE summed up. It was easy for the e%
set aside his property for the benefit of one creditor tet p 014.,
elusion of others. The transaction was not fraudulent arable
of law—in a moral view it might not be strictly hell_ hp te_f
it was very difficult for juries to determine questioge. tittle °I,
one before the Court; the absei.ce of a stamp at t f 61• tri
executing the deed was not fraudulent ; a penalty °ties, esP::
inflicted when executed deeds were stamped, and ardeeds,
cially relation., desirous of saving expense, keep •ht sir
Prey
stamped, by them until a dispute may arise requiring
duction in a Court of law.
Verdict for the plaintiff.

POLICE INTEL LIGENC°.

A 1./
BOW-STREET.--(THIS -11''', - foie.
A young man, named Webb, a servant, at tne .oation:
Club Honse, Pall Mall, was brought up for final elan/eej rtY ::
charged with stealing a quantity of articles the adother
'the Right. Hon. E. Ellice, the Earl of Clarendon , ,„,
' Mr. Cbppock appeared for the prosecution. er "'-'
. A short time ago, a woman with whom the Pris°e:bie 1
habited, committed suicide, and left one child cligr_Sy fonn_,
The palish: The parish of St. Martin's seized the fc_Tle ssis.olf
in the prisoner's room, in order to appropriate them od, „amoreoc
tenance of the child. Amongst these had been Ml.° esses yr. g
of articles belonging to the Reform Club, and Not° haft°
,c 1 to the
sceaelltiedthleo-pdraisyotnoerilbernitnigfy them. The little girl deP°3-1, iron,
ROOM _club House, anhdoamlseotahrepalerst,icpleesariZ
The prisoner said nothing in his defence, an
committed for trial. nquu..._estisiode.o,
foof

sav 7/;Illillit WYarLd,EaßnTriEous.
Savage; 83, Harrow•-road. eharg—of rlt.
haying -passed three counterfeit shillings 0 the SW
A be
id tbs.
...
POli
. ce-constable Thpmas Hallingan, 83 n, sa ' eiseae`,.
asnertained from. Mi. Sais.,,e the de.scription. of tr Pobera,
and haying found out the same'
evening that three • lie nigh"
at
titterers pf base coin I d uht admittance for liogte,
sm(Ihlol-E,I‘Sv as 9 it-17:4.).vitil
•at the Refuge for the Destiiatutes°iif Market-street, rtard:savofi;
he went there, Apcompanied b the complainant, I‘ . .
who .identified the:linty who had passed the shirlebbeg...t.tba
. yeas therefore taken into custody, and on being sea A, oilltang.
station-house, a cOunterfeit half-crown and two bsu.
__ osoet
*ere was also found a phial containing
. were fo.priCuppn-him. On a more minute search bettili apps
rently for colouring the coin• some liquid, 0