The Sun.
London, England, 1842-11-03 00:00:00

WRIGHT V. MAUER AND OTHERS.

This was an action of tresspass for false imprison-
ment brought against the defendants, who were the
three Commissioners of Bankruptcy at Leeds, by the
plaintiff, who was an attorney's clerk. The case was
tried at the York Assizes before Lord Chief Justice
Denman, who gave it as his opinion that an action
could not lie against the defendants for the manner in
which they had discharged what they considered to
be their duty in the case. His Lordship, however,
said he should leave it to the Jury to say what the
amount of damages ought to be in case it should be
afterwards decided that the arrest of the plaintiff had
been illegal. The Jury found that the plaintiff was
entitled to no damages, even in that case, much to the
surprise of almost every one.
Mr. KNOWLES now moved for a new trial, on the
ground that the apprehension of the plaintiff had been
illegal, and that he was consequently entitled to da-
mages for false imprisonment.
_ _ _

The Counx, holi-ever, was of opinion that the arrest
of the plaintiff was legal, inasmuch as he did not appear
as a witness when called upon in obedience to the first
summons of the Commissioners.
The rule, was, therefore, refused.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Noe. 2.
The Court was occupied up to two o'clock in hear-
ing applications fur bail, :of which there were thirty-
two country and four town cases; none presented any
public interest.

IN RE lIENRY CHARD, ALIAS HENRY LEE ALLEYNE.
The insolvent in this case was a person who, some
short time since, occupied a considerable portion of
the public attention, in conjunction with a criminal
information in the Queen's Bench, arising out of cer-
tain slanderous expressions towards him and his al-
leged sister, who became the wife of Mr. Dempster
llemmin.r, the eminent bimker, of Caldecot
Warwickshire, under rather peculiar circumstances.
It appeared that in 1836 he became bankrupt, and
not giving a satisfactory account of his property, and
refusing to answer certain interrogatories, was in
consequence refused his certificate, and committed by
the presiding Commissioner to Lancaster Castle,
where he remained until June, 1837, when he pe-
titioned the Court, and was discharged, owing at the
time debts to the amount of 10,0001. Up to this time
he was known as henry Chard, but then assumed the
name of henry Lee Alleyne ; set up a splendid
establishment, with a large retinue of servants, horses,
carriages, &c., in Warwickshire, and it was then and
there the singular courtship commenced between Mr.
Dempster Hemming and the insolvent's sister. It
was ascertained some time back by the creditors, from
whose immediate power he was released in 1837, that
at the present time the Leicester and Warwickshire
Banking Company were indebted to him iu the sum
of 10,000/., and that he had instituted legal proceed-
ings against them for its recovery; also, that a
gentleman, named Needham, was indebted to him for
3,0001. On a former day, Mr. Cook moved for a rule,
calling on those debtors of Alleyne not to pay down
the money to him, and also requiring him to show
cause why be should not, according to the provisions
of the 89th section of the Act, pay over to the assig-
nees the sum of 10,0001.
Mr. WOODROFFE, on behalf of the insolvent, ap-
peared now to show cause, and handed in a number
of voluminous affidavits and other documents.
Mr. COOKE, for the assignees, requested a postpone-
ment of the case until he should have time to read
over these documents.
The COURT acceded to the request, previous notice
of the day for hearing being given.
It was stated in Court, by those most likely to be
well informed, that Mr. David Pollock, the brother of
the Attorney-General, was to be the successor of
Commissioner Bowen.

_
CEN TRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
Henry Passenger, aged 22, and Alfred Lewis, aged
21, were indicted for assaultin the Rev. W. Bugden,
upon the Queen's highway, and stealing from his per-
son a purse containing some silver money.
Mr. Clarkson prosecuted. Mr. Adolphus defended
Passenger, but the other prisoner had no counsel.
The prosecutor deposed that he was a Roman
Catholic clergyman, and on the evening of the 22d
September he was passing through Hyde-park about
half-past nine o'clock at night, and just as he had ar-
rived at the first bridge over the Serpentine, he heard
a loud shrill whistle, and almost at the same instant
three men rushed on him, and one of them struck at
him with something, which he believed to be a life
" preserver." The men then closed round him, and
made a most odious charge against him, at the same
time pointing at a soldier who was walking at some
distance, said, "There goes the other." The men
oafndtirleannt
then demanded money of him. Ile refused to give
them any, upon which the two prisoners seized him
tightly by the throat, and the third man forced open
his pocket and ndtookprisoners
wire
e purse,tw o
Lie todusielorsd
PZipkt
who assaulted him.

The prosecutor was cross-examined, but nothing
was elicited to shake his testimony.
James Jarvis deposed that on the night in question
he was near the spot mentioned by the prosecutor,
and he heard a whistle, and immediately afterwards
the prisoner Passenger ran towards the spot where
the sound of the whistle appeared to proceed. In a
short time he heard a cry for assistance in the same
direction, and he went to the spot and found the two
prisoners holding Mr. Bugden by the collar, and they
repeated the charge they had before made against him.
Some other confirmatory evidence having been ad-
c:uced,
Mr. ADOLPHUS aldressed the Jury, and on behalf
of
of his client sai that he had merely gone to
and
the
ass.ist the person who gave the alarm, had
to
that believing the story told by the man who
escaped, he thought himself justified in detaining the
prosecutor.
Lewis male the Rama defence.
The ‘11137 Were 11PWal•ds of three tours in delibera-

tion, and on their return into Court they found both
prisoners Guilty.
The prisoner Lewis being proved to have before
been convicted of felony, the Court sentenced him
to be transported for life, and Passenger for fifteen years.
The Lord Mayor and the Judges sat yesterday
morning at eleven m this Court, for the purpose of fix-
ing
the days for holding the Sessions for the ensuing
Mayoralty. The Judges present were Mr. Baron
Parke, Mr. Baron Alderson, Mr. Justice Pattison,
Mr. Baron Gurney, Mr. Justice Williams, Mr. Jus-
tice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Coltman, Mr. Justice
Maule, Mr. Justice Erskine, Mr. Justice Cresswell,
and Mr. Baron Rolfe. Their Lordships appointed
the following days for holding the Sessions for the
ensuing Mayoralty :—Monday, 28th November, 1842;
Monday, 12th December, 1842; Monday, 2d January,
1843 ; Monday, 30th anuary ; Monday, 27th Feb-
ruary ; Monday, 3d April ; Monday, Bth May; Mon-
day, 12th June; Monday, 3d July; Monday, 21st
August; Monday, 18th September; Monday, 23d
October.—The Court then adjourned.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr. Commissioner B ULLOCK.)
CONSPIRACY.—Frederick Shaektifield, Charles Syd-
ney Smith, and Goswell, were indicted with con-
spiring together, and with other persons, to d, fraud
several tradesmen in the City of London. Tfe case
is similar to the one that was tried at the end of the
last Session in the Old Court, and appears likely to
occupy the Court to a late hour, as there are r o less
than five counsel engaged, and fourteen counts in the
indictment.

CROYDON PETTY SESSIONS.
At the last meeting of the Croydon Bench of
Magistrates, a questionof very considerable import-
ance regarding the liability of unoccupied premises to
be assessed to the poor-rate was brought before the
presiding Justices, Messrs. Lucas and A. K. Barclay.
Mr. H. Richards, of Croydon, attended, and applied
for an order for the payment of the sum of thirty-
nine pounds, the amount of a poor-rate assessed upon
an oil-mill and other premises in the occupation of
Mr. John Watney, in the hainlet of Wallington.
Mr. Templar appeared to oppose the application.
Mr. Richards said he attended on behalf of the
officers of the hamlet of Wallington to apply for an
order for the payment of the amount of a poor-rate
I assessed upon some property in that hamlet which
was in the occupation of Mr. Watney, and which, in
his opinion, there could be no doubt was liable to be
so assessed. lie should show that the rate had been
legally made, and this being done, the Bench would
only have to sign an order for the payment of the
amount.

Mr. Templar said, that to save trouble, he would
admit the rate, but he should call evidence to show
that Mr. Watney was not liable to be assessed.
Mr. Richards contended, that as the rate had been
legally made, and there had been no appeal, the
Bench could not on this occasion go into evidence
•
respecting its validity.
The MAGISTRATES, however, decided that they
would hear what evidence Mr. Templar had to adduce.
A man, named William Denny, was then called,
and he proved that he was in the service of Mr. Wat-
ney, and that the premises in question, consisting of
an oil-mill and other buildings, were closed in April,
three months before the rate was made, and that the
machinery had not since been at work. In cross-exa-
mination by Mr. Richards, it , appeared that Mr.
Watney held the premises upon lease, and that one of
the persons in his employ occupied a cottage adjoining
the mill, and that there were desks and chairs in the
counting-house.

Mr.kichards in reply, contended that upon these facts
there was such a beneficial occupation of the premises
in question as rendered them liable to be assessed to
the: poor-rate. He need not, he said, remind the
Bench that it had been decided that a beneficial occu•
pation did not at all require that there should be a
profit derived from the business, but, on the contrary,
if a man carried on a business wherehy he might be
living on a thousand a year, the premises he occupied
were equally liable to be assessed to the poor-rate as
though he were gaining the same amount. In this
case, he submitted that although Mr. Watney was
not, personally, in occupation of the premises, yet that
lie was so in law, inasmuch as he had on servant re-
siding upon them, the counting-house was furnished
with desks, seats, and all the necessary appurtenances,
and he might at any time enter upon the premises,
and commence business. Mr. Richards then cit.:d
several cases that had been decided, in support of his
argument, and concluded by stating his opinion, that
the Magistrates were bound, under the circumstances,
to grant the order for payment of the rate.
the MAGISTRATES having consulted for some time,
expressed their opinion that in this case there was a
holding, and not any occupation, by Mr. Watney, and
they therefore considered him not liable to be assessed,
and refused to sign an order for payment of the rate.
Mr. Richards said he must, of course, bow to the
decision of the Bench, but he felt so stroug an opinion
upon the point that he should eerta'nly apply to the
Court of Queen's Bench for a mandamus, and take the
opinion of the Judges upon it.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

John Sly, who had for some considerable time heal
a waiter at the North and South American Coffee-
house, was brought before Mr. Alderman Wilson,
charged with having plundered his employer, Mr.
Markwell, the present owner of that establishment.
The evidence exposed a desperate system of robbery.
Mr. Chadwick Jones, the barrister, stated for the
prosecution, that Mr. Varkwell, who was also pro-
prietor of Long's Hotel in Bond-street, had become
master of the North and South American Coffee-
house, formerly kept by Mr. Davis, and continued the
prisoner, and a lad named Chesterton, who had been
in the service of the former landlord in the house,
the one as waiter, the other as billiard-marker. In
consequence of a robbery which had been committed,
the prisoner, of whom some suspicion was entertained,
was discharged, and, as appeared from disclosures
suhsequently made, he induced Chesterton to aid him
in plundering the house. By the activity and vigi-
lance of the City police, the whole plan was discovered.
Mr. William .Markwell, son of the proprietor of the
North and South American Coffee-house, stated that
his father entered into possession of the premises on
the 24th of February, and the prisoner and the boy
named Chesterton were transferred to the new owner,
caond slecoffee-houseee-hpot in t
use
was
house.
.iasente n
r an.ittilly last,
theeatsle-bboaxr, of the
was depositedAthere, was plundered of fifty pounds,
odd shillings. In the October following, the bar was
broken open again, and stripped of all the plate that
could be found in it.

Mr. Jones asked whether wine and spirits had not
been missed? Witness stated that the wine and spi-
rits were continually disappearing, and nobody could
tell how it went. The prisoner was discharged a
fortnight after the first robbery, but Chesterton re-
mained in the service of the house until within the last
fortnight. Witness consulted with the Superintendent
of the City Police upon the subject, and it was then
satisfactorily ascertained that Sly and Chesterton had
been in the habit of committing robberies in the
house, and that the former prevailed upon the, latter.
to continue the system of plunder after Sly s

mi-isal.
John Chesterton was then called. lie stated that
he at that time resided under the care, but not as a
prisoner, of a City police officer. lie rad been turned
over to Mr. 3farkwell's employment along with the
prisoner. and they slept in the same room. Witness
used to help
frequently saw bottles of wine and spirits in different
parts of the establishment in the possession of the
prisoner.
Mr. Jones—Did he show you how to get into the
wards he bring up
bar and get the key of the cellar ? Witness—lie did,
brought it
lainlind
thowo thteorntake n
dw
Ii n
de
raanndk stphieri
winers, amalnld
spirits
Nvit
him too.
used to drink
Mr. Jones—How long did this sort of va3,14. go on?
soon after he was Witness--For a long time. Ile used to
wine first in tumblers, but after .
up in bsiootntleessiDAidnoythouerseyeosunlygan
dis-
chargedvi'i3thir from his situation?
I told me,
told me how to get into the bar get him some wine,
tnahenrxdet
etc Ilboeyt,tolacensdohf he asked me to "Witness—l saw him
of the Bank beltw''leidenassihxe
of the cellar.
1 afterwards broughtpidnr oi c
the
broughtu r e
n tlho
re
n hi
nka i
mnegyd.
andarseavnednan
a person at the
10s., and said
Mr. J one was to meet him at the side
him seven bladders of sherry
\ brandy, and he told me he sold the wine to
h vest-end of the town, and he gave me
e owed me 1/.
the bar of s—About the time of the last robbery in
him .0 thel_,.t house had you any communication with
N i ness—l saw him at the corner of Finch-
lane, and he asked me to let him into the house at
night, but I told him
Iwould not. In our conversa-
tions he said all he was afraid of was a policeman
whom he named, and another person whom he also
named, and he said if they should split it would be
all up.
in
and another and
w.tma N
r o.
kll 23,
,e.ll Charing-cross
W. 11. Wollen, a City policeman, said he searched
tthh ee
presence
ofi°
'
in a drawer in the prisoner's sister's room he found
seven glasses he produced.
John Blundell, also a City policeman, stated that he
accompanied the prisoner from the Col npter to the
Mansion-house, and the prisoner, without being Tries-
tinned, said he did not care if --- and Weald
split, as they could not hurt him,— and it was gulls
time the party was broken up.
Mr. Markwell, upon .0,2
examining the tumblers, sal"
he believed them to be his father's property, but tber 0
were no marks upon them.
A waiter in the establishment also said he belilittvel
that the tumblers were his master's s
propertY• 15'
number of glasses had been lost at the house 'A"
.
Mr. G. Smith, of Conduit.street, AVgettt-streets