The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-28 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT, Feb. 2(.

DAVIS V. FISHER.
Lord LANGDALE gave judgment this morning in this cause,
notice of which has alrigly appeared in The Sun.
His Lordship was of opinion that the will and codicil of
the husband, Wiliam Davis, and the will of his widow, were
not too remote, and therefore that the bequests to the children
of Davis were valid.
His Lordship then proceeded to hear pet itio4s ;
none of them,
however, were of any interest.

VICE-CIL-INCE LLOI?S' COURT, Feb. 26.
(I3e6"tre the VicE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
BILANFIL V. Buync:Es.
The arguments in this part-heard case were resumed to-day,
and ordered to stand over till Monday, in consequence of the
absence of Mr. Stuart.
( Before Vice-Chancellor K sic; tur Baum)
His Hosoun disposed of several unoopAsed petitions and
short causes, presonting• no point of general interest.
(Before Vice •Chancelior IiVIGRAm.)

S C. WILLIAMS.

His iloNoun pronounced judgment in this cause. The ob-
ject for which the suit was instituted was to set aside a bond
which had been obtained front the pLintilf, a lady residing at
Oswestry, in Walas, by a person who had arted.for her in the
character both of trustee and tew aril, on the ground of ser-
vices performed. The bond was for the sum of 93i. One of
the principal punts made Jr the plaintiff was that at the time
of executing the bond she was totally ignorant of the English
language. _

ills IiONOU it. made hi; decree aceorfhng to the prayer of the
bill, and gave the coats of the suit and the costs at law.

COURT OF QUEEN'S 11ENCH, Feb. 26.
'ME QUEEN V. JOHN PARKER, BENJAMIN PARKER, AND

MAY.
This action, which has been removed into this Court by
a writ of certiorari, was laid against the defendants for obtain-
ing certain goons and merchandise under false pretences, thus
defrauding, to a considerable amount, several respectable houses
in the City of Lor.don. From the successful manner in which
the goods had been obtained, the case excited great interest in
the commercial community.
Mr. Platt and Mr. Clarkson appeared for the prosecution ;
the defence was conduCted by the Attorney-General and Mr.
Kelly.

Mr. PLATT stated to the Jury the facts of the case, as
follow :—The defendants, John and Philip Parker, had been
iu business previous to the year 1830, and the defendant, Philip
May, was also carrying on business in the City of London as a
linendraper. In 1841 Benjamin Parker was an uncertificated
bankrupt, and being such, he, in the early part of that year,
took a house in the city, and opened a business under the name
of John Parker and Co. His business was ostensibly that of
an exporter of goods to the East Indies, Sydney, and Texas ;
he was an importer also, but his business was principally in fo-
reign 4xpo-tation. Ile gave out that lie haJ a capital of
4,000/., and that lie expected 5,000/. from his mother-in-law,
and, in sh irt, that he was a person of considerable expecta-
tion... His counting-house was No. 701 f, Thames-street, and
from this place he, during the month of June, 1841, applied in
the name of John Parker and Cu., through his clerk or buyer, to
several houses for goods suitable to the markets, to which hesaid
he was in the habit of-exporting. These orders were of various
amounts, and were chiefly given to Messrs. Tarn and Law, car-
pet-manufacturers and agents, Wood-street. They were to be
paid for in part on delivery, and the remainder at a subsequent
time. As in most cases, where there it an intention to defraud
tradesmen, a large portion of the first order was so paid.
Other orders were given and supplied during the whole
of the month of June, from Messu.4. Tarn and Law; Mr.
Bradbury, Messrs. Holmes, and other parties, the amounts
being varying sum=, from 100/. to 377/. 10s. at a time, but
the great part of them being suppled by Messrs. Tarn and
Law, who were sufferers altogether to the extent of 1,600/.
by these transaction:. During this period application was
Made for payment for these goods, when the defendant
John Parker stated that his brother was very ill; on inquiry
being made for his ',riven, residence, he said it was at Hamp-
stead. Early in July, Parker and Co, applied to a Mr. Fen.
hell, fa- a sample of cotton yarn suited to the East India
market, and a quantity was supplied on their represen-
tation. Mr. Fennell called at the counting-house in Thames-
street which was tilled up with all the appearances of an ex-
tensive shipping business, invoices, bills of lading, and cards
of the sailing of vessela. He called again on the 10th of July,
and then found no one but a porter, while the counting-house
had been completely gutted. On inquiry it was found that
all the goods that had been supplied to Parker and Co.,
had been taken to Philip May, within a day or two after
their delivery at the catnoing-house, and disposed of enor-
mously below their value. The names of the two Parkers were
falsely stated, as the real John Parker was called Joseph, while
Benjamin called himself John. They hail an account at the
London and We.tininster Bank, and Benjamin Parker had
signed the book in the name of John, while it also
appeared that on the 30th of July, the account had been closed,
and they had not a shilling in tha: bank. The Learned Coun-
sel remarked strongly on the manner in s hich the property had
been received by May, anal pointed out the injurious effect
likely to result to the commercial community from such pro-
ceedings. The firm that had principally suffered had in con-
sequence been compelled to call its creditors together,
and make an arrangement with them. On the 12th of July,
all vestige of the firm of Parker and Company had
disappeared, and the firm was entirely swept away. Pro-
ceedings were taken against the two Packers before the Lord
Mayor, and made much noise in the City. At the time Ben-
jamin Parker was taken into custody, lie and John Parker, the
sham Joseph lived in private lodgings ; and it happened that it did
net occur to them to ray their rent. The landlord consequently
teieed some of the property, and among it some letters, one of
which he kept. Mr. Plait read this letter, which was written
by Benjamin to his brother, after lie was taken. It stated
that he had not reciglyed aiy letter from him in answer to his
tavo last, and expresoearlin'anxiety to see low he could sign
John Parker and CO:" He hoped also that his brother would
get a copy of the evidence, and make himself well
aCqu lilted with i', as he might have a great deal of cross ques-
tioning ; he then gave directions as to certain hills that had
been accepted and other matters, and advised him not to let
the Counsel excite him or put him out of temper, should they
cross-examine him mush ; he was to be prepared with such
answers as would tell against them. 31r. Platt then mentioned
a most extraordinary part of the ca e. Mention had been
made of Joseph Parker, and though John Parker had falsely
assumed the name of Joseph. yet there really was a Joseph
Parker existing. There were three brothers, John and Joseph
being twins, and so much alike in person, that when they were
dressed alike, co person could distinguish one from the other.
But the real Jo eph at the time lived two hundred miles from
London. The letter to-which the Learned Counsel had re-
ferred then gave the most minute directions as to the answers
John Parker should return to certain questions which Benja-
min anticipated would be asked of him. He (Mr. Platt) had
never read such a complete case of attempting to suborn a
witness. The real Joseph was also now brought
forward; an extract from a letter from Benjamin
to him was read, asking how long he hail been in town, and
stating that he (Benjamin) wanted to bring two actions for
false imprisonment, against certain parties, as they could pro-
bably make a few hundreds by it. Mr. Platt explained that
for this purpose Joseph was brought up to London, that he
might be taken up for John, so that then an action for false impri-
sonment might he brought by the veritable Joseph, on the ground
of not being the right person. The letter told him that he
might make 1001. or 200/. by it, and advised him to keep him-
self quiet and out of the way for the present. In a letter to
John Parker, he again begs him to practice his handwriting,
and write as much like him ( Benjamin) as pos-
sible, pafticularly as to signing John Parker and Co.,
He also begs him to order two su;ta of clothes at the place
where he had tn, last ; one suit to do for .Joseph, and to have
them just alike, an,.! ordered to be ready on the same day.
This sufficiently prover; the intention of the parties. The
Learned Gentleman then concluded by commenting on the
great importance. of the case, and i.ointing out to the Jury
the great talent with which the defence would be conducted.
Mr. PLATT then called as the first witness:

Jacopi Arenfeld, who was examined by Mr. CLaussow—
He stated that he was engaged in the service of Benjamin
Parker in the month of May last. He knew him by the name
of John Parker, and he was engaged by him as buyer at a salary
of 300/. a year. lie understood that Parker was engaged in the
foreign business and was a man of ample means. The counting-
house was in Thames-street, under the name of John Parker and
Co— describing themselves as shippers for the Sydney. and
Texas trade. I hey were also importers of wine. Benjamin
Parker stated to him that his stock of wines was worth
two thousand pounds, that his capital in cash was four thousand
pounds, and that he had a eery good connexion abroad.
principally in the wine-trade. Benjamin Parker had a brother
in his 'service to whom he was introduced by the name of
Joseph Parker. He received directions as to the course he
was to pursue as a buyer, that was, he was to buy such ar-
ticles as were fit for the markets of Sydney and Texas. They
were bought partly for cash and partly on credit, and lie
had nn reason to believe but that they is ere respectable men.
The counting-house was fitted up as f r the shipping trade,
with bills of lading, placards, notice's of ships sailing for the colo-
Sties, &e. AMong other houses he applied to Tarn and Law, with
whom he opened an account for Parker and Co., about the latter
end of May last. ‘;.oine of the goods that were supplied were
paid for within the fortnight. The articles he had purchased
included merinos, black lutestring, pieces of Orleans, cotton,
sheets, damask cloths, printed furniture, pieces of Irish linen,
and calico.: On serveeal occasions these were delivered at the
warehouse of John Parker and Co. They remained for a day or
two, and sometimes went out of the place the same day. He
understood that they went to the packers to get ready for shipping.
it was usual for parties engaged in the shipping trade to keep a
shipping-book, but he never saw ono at Parker's. Sometimes
the goods were removed in his presence. His hours of attend-
ance were from nine till five o'clock, and sometimes goods that
he had left there in the evening, were gone in the morning, or
being then carried away. Ott the 10th of July, Benjamin
Parker said that Mrs. Parker was ill at Brighton,
and went away, and he Lever saw him again. He was not dis •
charged from their service. Shortly before that, Mr. Parker
bad taken an additional warehouse, that he might have more
room, and a press for packing his own hoods. Witness here exa-
mined the invoices of goods supplied" to the firm, and stated
that they were the invoices of goods he had purchased.
He also spoke to an interview between lienjardn Parker and
May before Parker went away, from which it appeared to wit-
ness that there was an understanding between them.
Examined by Mr. Pr Ay—
r Know's the handwriting of Mr.
Benjamin Parker. .The letter hande.l to him was like his
writing.
Examined by the Alert NEY-GENERAL—Went into the
service of Jehn.Parker in .luly of last year. Bought goods for
him tilbthe beghreing of June and July. Had no doubt but
that the business of J. Parker was perfectlycorrect a
Nr.
t thati
time. He had two warehouses and twocounting
13. Parker told hint they kept a aSir nes book houses. .
He was not.
aware of it from his own kieswledge.
Cross-exeinined by Mr. II U REV—Knew Tarn and Law
before the present te ansaction. Law joined Tarn about three
or four yars le fire the p event business. lie referred people
from it horn lie made purchases to them. Recollects the first
purchase that Parker made of Tare and Law. It was on
the 4th of November. The payments for that purchase
were made in cash. Never heard Tarn complain that the
sera li;.st cleepie was dislienoured. S reposed all the goods
eicen to the Par!set s were intended to 1.,:s shipped for Sydney.
bid not advise this Paikers to ads house In Hamburgh to
send them goods. Is a me ive of Meckfeelierg ; lived for some
time in Hainteireh ; has been out of it f,r 2.;) years.
Examined by Mr. V.a LENTINE—IS still a commissine-mer
chant. Has acted for many. years in that capacity. Was act-
ing in that capacity for Parker. Was fourteen years in this
Country. Did not tell the Parkers immediately that he knew
Tarn and Law. Is 45 years of age. John Parker is about
24 years.
Examined by Mr. Romax—Benjamin and John Parker
were in Court. ('I he witness here ideittifiel the prisoners.)
He did business for Messrs. White and Greenvrell. He re-
ferred persons by the direction of Benjamin Parker, to Messrs.
Tarn and Law. Several persona celled on Parker to settle
their accounts. Mr. Fennell was one of these persons.
_ Mr. James Tarn was then called and examined by Mr.
gv.rresr—ls one of the parties from whom goods were °b-
eamed by the pr;seners.
the re by
They
tons
of Arenfeld. The invoices handed to him

are his. The goods they received amounted to 2,760
IThere is a balance of 1,6001. due. The witness was here
handed some cheques on the London and Westminster Bank,
which he identified. Some were paid. They were signed by
John Parker and Co. Other goods, besides those which were '
paid for, were sold and delivered to J. Parker between the 4th
and 12th of June. One cheque was for 3681. Is., and
another was for 2001. Both were paid. He also sold goods
on the 11th of June. That was before he got the cheque
on the 12th of June. When be called at their counting-house
in Thames-street he saw there Arenfeld and J. Parker. •He
( Arenfeld) introduced John Parker to him as Joseph Parker.
Benjamin Parker was not there at that time. He ( Benjamin)
was afterwards introduced to him by his brother John,
under the name of John Parker. Arenfeld also called
Benjamin Parker by the name of John. He now knew
him as Benjamin, and not as John. He spoke to Benjamin
Parker with regard to the goods he delivered them. They
asked him about some calicoes, and with how many pieces he
could supply them. He stated that he could not supply them.
at that time with more than 200 pieces, and that in the course
of six weeks he might supply them with 300 pieces. They an-
swered they did not wish to ship 200 pieces, as it only lowered
them in the estimation of their Sydney correspondent. With
regard to the merinos, B. Parker said they were very cheap, and
asked if they could be supplied with more. He said that what they
received had been shipped. He (witness) had heard that Ben-
jamin Parker had been married to a Miss Bamtield, of Hamp-
stead, and had received 4.0001. fortune. With regard to the
calicoes, he told Benjamin Parker that he did not conceive that
a shipment of 200 pieces would lower them in the estimation of
their correspondents. On the 26th of June Benjamin
Parker came to him and informed him that he had closed
his account with the London and Westminster Bank,
and had opened an account with the London County Bank. He
asked him (witness) what he had done with the cheque. On
the 28th of June he again saw Benjamin Parker. He was
paying him a stun of money to the amount of 180/. That was
riot the entire amount of what was due to him, but he stated
that Miss Bamtield was out of town, and that when she re-
turned to town she would sell out 5,(K)0/. worth of stock,
and he would then pay the remainder. He said he would have
the 5,0001. on the 10th of July ; he also said that he did not
wish to draw on the London County Bank, ass he had only re-
cently opened his account there. On the Ist of July they
received goods to the amount of 465/. 17s. Bd. He would not
have supplied these goods were it not for the representations
that had been made upon the 28th, and if he had not been
led to believe that the goods were intended to be shipped.
By Sir F. POLLOCK-He never knew Mr. Slay before that
time. I am one of the prosecutors in the indictment. Mr. Law,
my partner, is another. There are about five others. We make
common cause and divide:the expenses. Mr. Holmes and Mr.
King are also prosecutors. I first saw Mr. May at the Bank-
ruptcy Court in September, when he was examined by Sir.
Keane. The examination concerned this case in a cer-
tain way, and I thought it right to be present ; but I
' did not suggest the examination. Parker was not to my
knowledge made a bankrupt after that affair. If there
had been any proceedings in bankruptcy, I, as a principal
creditor, must have known it. I was not then fishing up evi-
dence for the present case. Parker was indicted at the Cen-
tral Criminal Court, but May was not known. It was after
this I indicted Mr. May. I only know that May was before
the Commissioners of Bankruptcy once ; but I have
heard that he was there oftener. Messrs. Dixon
and Overbury, my solicitors, conducted that proceeding.
By Mr. H u at PH REY-There was ameeting of creditors in July,
which Mr. Law, my partner, attended, but not I. The first
cheque for 2001., was not returned, but was paid by my bank-
ers ; if it were returned, I know nothing of it. Sometimes we
write the terms on the invoices, sometimes we do not. The
first account with the Parkers, dated the 4th June, was paid
ready money, 2i per cent discount.x The next transac-
tion, on June the 7th, due the second Monday "of
July, was not paid. The next was June the Bth,
for 481., due same day. The next, June 9th, 891. ; one bill
paid June 11th ; 1501. was the next to be paid by a bill at
three months ; next, Jnne 15th, 3591. 19s. 1 Id., was to be
paid by 1001. on the 18th June, balance, a three months' bill.
The 1001. was paid. The next was June 17th, 1001. 3s. 70.,
and paid in cash. But some of the words in the invoice are
not in my writing. The next was June 18th. 631. 16s. 7d., to
be on the same terms as that of the 15th, by a three months'
bill. The next, 23d, 596/. Bs., and he paid 200!. cash
on the 2d of July, the balance on the second Monday
in August. I find some words in the terms not in my
writing, but 1 believe the words were written by my clerk.. The
next is dated 25th June, 154/. 4s. sd. which was paid. The
next for 731. 18s. 6d. paid. The next July I, 861. Os. 2d. pay-
able the second Monday in August. The last was 221 ss. 6d.
of sometime after. Of all those sums about 1 0001. would not
he due till the month of August. Between the 28th June
and the 3d July, I received not 727/. in cash, but I received
several sums as already stated. I find, however, that my
memoranda have been; altered by some other person.
On the 26th June, there was a di-honoured cheque for
971., but Mr. Parker afterwpds paid it into the bank.
John, alias Benjamin Parker, told me that he married Mrs.
Bamfield's daughter, and that she was a lady of property. 1
have since found that he did marry that lady. I made in-
quiries of Mr. Silvester, to whom Arenfeld referred me, and
learned that such was the case. He told me that Mrs. Bamfield
was a person of large fortune. I made the inquiry on the 4th
of June at Silvester's counting-house, in Lower Thames-street.
Cross-examined by Mr. JAMES-I am a warehouseman.
Sly usual terms were two-and-a-half cash, or three months'
bill. I had been in business eighteen months. The goods had
been bought principally from Hind and Co.. I stopped pay-
ment in 1841 for 7,0001. The balance due of 7801. caused the
stoppage. Some of the goods had been paid for, and some not
at the time of my stoppage. I might have answered ten refe-
rences for the Parkers. I might have answered a reference as
late as July Ist. I did not know of any dishonoured cheque.
Symonds never complained to me on the subject. He said he had
a cheque marked which had been subsequently paid. I had
known Arenfeld at Manchester. I knew that he had failed,
and had been found guilty of conspiracy. I never pressed
upon Arenfeld goods for the Parkers more than tradesmen
usually do. The greater part of the goods we bought for
the home trade.

The Jury retired for a short time for refreshment. Before
their return a conversat►on took place between Lord Denman
and the Counsel engaged, as to the possibility of the case
listing over two days.
His LORDSHIP said that he would, if possible, finish the
case in the course of the day.
It examined by Mr. PLATT-It was first determined to in-
ilet May after the two Parkers had been 'ndicted at the Ohl
Bailey. I heard that after they were indicted May had sold
the goods. I stopped payment in August, 1841, about the time
of Parker's bills becoming due. When Symonds asked a refer-
ence I showed him my ledger and told him all I knew of them.
David Law—l was in partnership with the last witness in
June and July last year. I went to the premises, 7i, Lower
Thames-street, on 13th July. I saw a person there represent-
ing himself as 'Joseph Parker. He turns out to be John
Parker. I asked if Mr. Parker was in, and he said "No ; he
expected him shortly." Mr. Dixon, the solicitor, was with
me, and he asked Joseph Parker if his brother's name was
Benjaman Parker or John Parker, and he said his brother's
name was Benjamin although he passed as John. Mr. Dixon
asked if his name was Joseph Parker, he said Yes, and that he
was not one of the firm. Dixon asked if all the goods were
shipped and gone out of the country. He said yes, every
piece of them. On the 14th of July 1 attended a
meeting of creditors at Messrs. Dixon and Overbury's.
May was there. I asked him how much money he had ad-
vanced on my goods. He said, 3,700/. on the goods he had
had from John Parker. He thought the goods worth from
7,000/. to 8,000/. He said he thought the wine would produce
enough to cover his advances. Some one asked if he would
be at liberty to inspect the goods in May's possession. May
said yes, he would do anything in his power to forward the
views of the creditors, and that at all events the creditors
should be at liberty to take back their own goods
on payment of the advances upon them. Nothing was
said on the subject of selling any of the goods except the wine.
I called on May in August respecting bringing the affair to a
conclusion. May said I am as anxious as ever to have it
brought to a conclusion, but you have put it into the hands of a
solicitor. The arrangement was that the wines should be sold.
I understood from May on that occasion that the wines had
not been sold.

Cross-examined by the ArroltNEY-GENERAL.—The
arrangement was that Msy should sell the wines, and when
we knew the produce, we should see how much more would be
wanted to pay him his advances. May said he wanted nothing
more than the money he had paid on the goods. This was
after May had been examined before the Commissioner. I
was at a meeting of the creditors at the office of Dixon and
Overbury afterwards. An opinion of counsel was read. I do
not recollect that that opinion was that there was no case
against May. The propriety of prosecuting May was discussed.
It was mentioned that if May were acquitted he would bring
an action for malicious prosecution, but I do not recollect that
it. was said that in that case he would only get nominal
damages. Dixon submitted to the creditors whether
Ithey would include May in the indictment or not. I did
not hear it said that May should be included, because if
the bill were found he would most probably come forward and
settle it. I did not hear Mr. Silvester's name mentioned. I
do not recollect that any thing was said about the benefit of
creditors as a ground for the prosecution. Mr. Fairlie was
there ; he stated he would go no further with the prosecution,
but I did not hear him state the grounds, and Mr. Boxer his
attorney withdrew his name. Mr. May produced a book at
the bankrupt's examination. No complaint was made while
I was there that May had withheld any information.
Cross-examined by Mr. CHAMBERS—I saw Joseph Parker
for absiut five minutes on the 2d July; that was the first time
I saw him. It was the same person I saw afterwards on the
13th July. On that occasion he expressed his surprise at his
brother's conduct in assuming the name of John, while his
name was Benjamin, and said, if his brother did not return
that night, he (Joseph) would leave the premises. Benjamin
did not come back while I was there. I never asked for
Parker's accounts, and do not know of their ever having been
asked for. I never interfered in the accounts with the Parkers
myself. I left it all to Mr. Tarn.
Re-examined by Mr. PLATT—I attended but two meetings
of creditors. Neither of those meetings had been convened by
the Parkers, nor were they present at either of them. I have
heard that Mr. Boxer is related to Mr. May. I have seen Mr.
Boxer here to-day.
Richard Fennell—l ant one of the firm of Fennell and Sons,
manufacturers of cotton yarn in Alderminbury./ Arenfeld
called on us in June for samples of cotton yarn for
India for the house of John Parker and Co., Lower
Thames-street. He said that John Parker was a man
of large property, that he had married a lady of large pro-
perty, and that he was a great shipper to India ; and that if my
goods suited, he would purchase some to send out by every
ship. I was referred to Tarn and Law. I was to be paid
cash by a cheque on the London and Westminster Bank. I
I went to Lower Thames-street, and asked to see Mr. John
Parker ; and Benjamin Parker, now in Court, came forward.
I asked if his name was John Parker, and he acquiesced by
bowing. I told him my name—he said " I hope the goods will
turn out well. You are to consider Arenfeld as my buyer, he
will call to-morrow and give you an order."- He said they were
for the India market. Arenfeld ordered nearly 4001. worth
of goods, of which we supplied 316/. The last lot was sent in
on the 3d July. I called about the 101. I was to have cash for
my cheque the day after the place was shut up. I saw agentleman
there but could get no satisfactory answer from him. The itiv nee
was not sent to the Parkers for two or three days after the
goods. On the 12th of July I went to May's warehouse. May
is a woollen factor in Ca•eaton-street. It was after I had been
to Thames-street. I told May I had called for some cotton
goods of mine. I told im my name, and he said an attach-
ment had just come in. He admitted they were in his posses-
sion, but would not let me see them. He said he
had a claim of forty or fifty pounds on them. He
said he had received them from John Parker, that he had no
invoice, and understood that Parker had received them for
wine. He said the attachment did not signify much that he
should not give up the goods, for all the creditors should share
and share alike. 1 offered to lodge a cheque in any bank for the
amount May had advanced on my goods, and to idemnify
hint if he would restore my goods. He said he could not think of
doing so, but that he would let me know before they were sold.
He said I need not snake myself uneasy ; there would be
plenty of money for all. He said he had about 10,0001., and
he had advanced 3,000/. on them. He said he had wine war-
rants to a large amount—from 3,000/. to 4,0001.
Cross-examined by Mr. KELLY—This was about the 12th
of July. , It was the same day as the attachment. I had net
any com.nunication with other creditors at that time. I at-
tended at the meeting of creditors at Dixons and Overbury's.
Mr. Boxer, the solicitor, Mr. May's brother-in-law, said that
if we prosecuted May he would file bills in Chancery against
all of us. I said I believed May was a guilty party,
and that I would have nothing to do with the prosecution un-

less May were included. I think Mr. Dixon said that it was
Counsel's opinion that May was just as guilty as the others.
I did not want Counsel's opinion to convince me of May's
guilt.—( A laugh.)
Cross-examined by Mr. Hu MPH REY. —The amount of the
goods obtained we understood to be from 6,0001. to 11,000/. I
heard nothing at all about any goods being paid for at auy one
of the meetings.—(A laugh.)
Mr. HuNIPHREY—Was it not stated that the amount of the
debts of the Parkers was about 2,800/. ?
Witness—l never heard the word debts mentioned. The
goods the Parkers had swindled the creditors out of was, I un-
derstand from 6,0001. to 11,000/.—(A laugh.) There,was one
person there whose goods were worth more than 5,000/.
Re-examined—l never got my goods again.
Joseph Scott—l am the agent for Holmes and Co.,
of King-street. I first heard of John Parker and
Co. in July 1841. Holmes and Co. are general ware-
housemen. iOn 3d July I took samples to 71, Lower
Thames-street. I had to wait some time, and then
I saw a person calling himself Joseph Parker. He said,
wait a few minutes, I expect my brother John in
directly. Mr. John Parker soon after came in. He
is now in Court. ( Witness identified Benjamin Parker as the
person.) I shewed him samples of reticules. He said he had
a gentleman from Port Philip that would be very likely to
take them, and then he bought them. He said he would pay for
them on the second Monday of the following month. He
slid he was a general merchant, shipping different
kind of goods to Port Philip, to Texas, and all
round.—( A laugh)—and also to America. I sold his
goods to the amount of 771. Bs. 4d. They were never paid
for. I called at the warehouse again on the 6th of July. I
again saw the one who called himself John Parker. I again
sold him 1911. 4s. 104. worth of goods to be paid for on the
10th July. 1 saw Joseph on that occasion before 1 saw John.
Mr. 1111311.11 REY here interfered and asked what paper it was
the witness had in his hand. It turned out to be a copy of his
deposition, which he said he had given the attorney
on the 10th of January, when payment was refused. He was
desired to put the paper in his pocket, and the examination
was resumed. Joseph Parker told -me his brother was
worth 20,000/. If I had been aware that the man
passim, as John Parker was an uncertificated bankrupt
1 would not have parted with the goods. On the 10th of July
Mr. Holmes and I went to Thames-street, and saw Joseph.
I lolmes asked for his account, and Joseph said his brother al-
ways paid the accounts, and that he was at Brighton, and
would be back the next morning, when the account would be
paid.
Cross-examined by Mr. BA LLANT,NX—I received that paper
I have put, in my pocket from Mr. Holmes's attorney, about
six or seven months ago, and have kept it ever since. I was
told to examine it well. I have done so. I have read it fre-
quently since. Mr. Holmes was very angry with me about
parting with the goods.
Mr. BA L LAI•trINE—Are you sure that the younger Mr.
Joseph spoke of his brother as John? Witness—Yes, he did.
I never asked one of the Parkers to lend me 101., or any other
sum.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL addressed the Jury for the
defendants.

Lord DENMAN summed up, and the Jury, after a short con-
sultation, found a verdict against the two Markers of Guilty,
the verdict against May having been already recorded.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 26.
(Sittings at Guildhall.)
DUNCAN V. BROADWOOD AND MILLER.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff for the recovery
of a sum of 1,0471., claimed by him as compensation for his
services in superintending the Prince's Theatre, in Oxford-
street. It appeared that in the autumn of the year 1836, the
late Mr. Ward, the well-known actor, had determined
on converting the Queen's Bazaar, in Oxford-street, into
a theatre, and had taken a lease of the premises from
Mr. Hamlet, the proprietor, for that purpose. Mr. Dun-
can, the present plaintiff, who was the nephew of Mr. Ward,
was employed by him to superintend the erection of the new
building. The plaintiff was to be paid according to the usual
charge of architects, 5 per cent. upon the builder's outlay ;
and this per centage, with other charges, amounted to
the sum which he now claimed. In the month of February,
1837, Mr. Broadwood, M.P. for Bridgwater, Mr. Miller,
the present defendants, and other gentlemen formed a Com-
mittee of Management, and interfered to some extent in the
direction of the undertaking. They had also become sub-
scribers to the theatre by purchasing debentures.
The case having been thus stated for the plaintiff by Mr.
Sergeant WILDE, evidence was produced to show that the
Committee of Management had given a guarantee to the
builder of the theatre, ➢lr. Barron, for the purpose of ensuring
to him the payment of a portion of his expenses.
Nir. KELLY stated for the defence that the Committee of
Management ware in no way responsible for the expenses !of
the undertakinc, ; they had entered into no contract with the
plaintiff; and they had ever, been assured by the plaintiff him-
self that they should be liable for no expenses save the price of
their own debentures. It was also proved in evidence that they
had guaranteed his expenses to the builder to the amount only
of the subscriptions they might receive.
Before the evidence for the defence had been gone through,
Mr. Sergeant WILDE stated he did not think he could keep up
the case with any prospect of advantage to his clients. The
case for the plaintiffs was therefore abandoned, and a verdict
returned for the defendants.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION- HOUSE.

- -
Multitudes assembled at the Mansion-house on Saturday, in
consequence of the interest excited by a case in which three
persons were charged with having committed a burglary and
robbery, and three others with having committed a forgery on
one of the bills which were the fruit of the robbery.
Mr. Hobler, jun., stated the heads of the case for the pro-
secution. The premises of Mr, Ruffey, a merchant in Alark-
lane, had, he said, been broken open on the 26th of January
last, and out of the iron safe, which was also broken open,
were stolen three bills of exchange and a half of a 51. note,
which had been deposited there. No more was heard of
the affair until the 19th of the present month, when a
young man, of the name of Wood, went to the
counting-house of Mr. Johnson, of Fenchureh-street,
whose acceptances the stolen bills were, and asked him whether
there was not a bill of his due that day. Mr. Johnson, who
had of course heard of the robbery, desired to see the bill before
he could answer the question, and upon seeing it discovered at
once that it was one of the stolen bills; he also observed that
the name of Mr. Ruffey, to whom the bill was specially en-
dorsed, had been forged, in order, no doubt, to give the instru-
ment (*mosey. Inspector Walker, having received instructions,
proceeded actively in the business, and succeeded in appre-
hending three men, named Saint, Clarke, and Davies, who were
distinctly charged with burglary and robbery. These three
men had, soon after the robbery, gone to a public-house in St.
George's-fields, with their wives, and ran up a score of 255., as
a security for which they left the identical half of the Si. note
which had been stolen out of the safe along with the bills. As
they did not return to take up the security, inquiry was made
at the Bank, where the note was stopped, and it was soon as-
certained that the three before-mentioned prisoners were con-
cerned. Upon further inquiry it was found that Wills, Cun-
niogham, and Lloyd, the three persons charged with the for-
gery, had received the stolen bills from those charged with the
robbery, and a regular connexion was established. It also was
found that Lloyd had endeavoured to get the bill particularly
alluded to negotiated through Wood, the individual who called
upon Mr. Johnson, upon the subject.
Mr. Johnson, of Fenchurch-street, deposed that he accepted
a bill drawn by Mr. Ruffey, for 521. 103. 7d. ; he was applied
to on the 19th inst. by a Mr. Wood, a bill-broker, to be in-
formed whether the signature to a bill, which he had taken, was
his (the witness) or not; upon seeing it he informed Mr.
Ruffey of what bad occurred, and Wood was immediately taken
into custody.
Mr. Stevens Wood, a bill-broker, deposed to having endea-
voured to get the bill discounted, which he had received from
the prisoner Lloyd, but was unable to do so ; he had promised
Lloyd to try other parties and kept the bill for that purpose, but
as Lloyd did not return he took it to Mr. Johnson to know what
to do with it. Before he would endeavour to get the bill cashed
he required that it should be endorsed ; Lloyd to,k it for that
purpose, and brought it back with Ruffey's name to it.
Another witness, Fickard, said that the prisoner Davis
wished him to go and read some bills for him, as -he could not
read ; witness did so, the bill produced for 52/. 10s. 7d. was
one of them'; there were two others similar. "J. Ruffey"
was not written upon the one produced at the time; none were
endorsed; all were payab e to Mr. Ruffey.
Mr. Ruffey here produced duplicates of the stolen bills.
Edward Davies, a clothes-dealer, said that Lloyd asked him
to go to the bank with part of a Si. note to get it changed, and
stated that one of his children set fire to it ; at the bank he
was told the owner must make an affidavit of the fact ; Lloyd
said he would make the affidavit, but he never returned.
Parker, the waiter at the public-house in Moorfields, said
that three of the prisoners, having taken refreshments at the
house, left the half of a Si. note as security ; he afterwards gave
it to Lloyd.
The prisoners Saint, Clarke, and Davies, were then com-
mitted for the burglary and robbery, and Lloyd, Wills, and
Cunningham were committed for, forging the name of Mr.
Ruffey on the back of the bill.
Stockley, who was charged with having converted to his own
purposes French Dutch bonds to the amount of 1,2501., the
property of Mrs. ,Molony, was fully committed for trial to
Newgate.

GUILDHALL.
Andrew Johnson was placed at the bar, charged with steal-
ing a bible, of the value of 4s. tid., the property of Mr. Bar-
rett, bookseller, of Fleet-street.
It appeared that the prisoner was engaged at the warehouse
of Mr. Barrett as a porter. A great number of books were
constantly lying about the warehouse, so that any of the men
who felt inc.ined might easily take one away. The prosecutor
had received a good character with the prisoner, and he paid
him Bs. per week. The book in question had been pledged at
a pawnbroker's shop in Farringdon-street.
The prisoner said in his defence that he had nothing to de-
pend upon but the Bs. per week, and at the time of his com-
mitting the offence of which he stood charged, he was in dis-
tress, and therefore he took the book and pawned it. He was
remanded till Tuesday next_

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING. FEBRUARY 28, 1841.

PRICES OF CANAL,OOCK,ASSUR-

ANCT COMPANY SHAafi:S, Sec:Scc. &c.
LONDON, FRIDAY, FEB. 25.
Number Di aiderd Price

,:f per CANALS. Per
Share'. Annum. Paid. Share.
1,766 7 pet cent. Asnton& Oldharn...Avcrage97l.lBs.sh. 92
1,482 41. Ashby ..de.le.Zouch Average 1131.5 h • 78
1,260 Basingstoke 1001. sh. 5
1,065 sf/. Brecknock and Abergavenny l5O/.slt. 92
8,000 I-16th. 101. Birmingham, 1.16 th share ....MI. & 711. 194
1,000 ......... Ditto & Liverpool 2 unct.Pit'll. sh.loo pd 21
609 31. Bridgewater and 'faunton.lool.sh. all pi -
.100 5!. Cheimer and Black water lool.sh. 101
500 321. Coventry 1001. sh. 300
.. . . ..,. Croydon. Average3ll.2B.lod. sh. -
1,050 51 Os. Dudley 1001. sh. 92
600 131. Derby lool.sh. 120
211,000 4 per cent. 13anitne and Mayne 411.135. 4d.pd 30
3,5752 4, Ellesmereand Chester AVertgel33:ala. 69
231 621 Frewasn
6,4'45 811. Forth mid Clyde ..... .. 100/ sn. 1001. pd. 11•7%
11,453 7t. Grano junction Ititli.sn 125
2,N9f 25c. Grand Union lool.sh 27
',500 Grand Surrey.. ... . ... ._ ......... lOO/.sh. 15
1,0001 41. per cent. Ditto (optional) Loan 1001.
•996 Grand Western
660 131. 1'25.11. Glamorganshire, Aver. cost 1721. 138.4 d. 230
749 Hs. Oran them ..... l5Ol. sh. 220
6238 21.05. Huddersfield Average 5 //. 63.0 d. sit. 21%
100 Kensington lOO sh. allpd le%
26.q23 11.10 s. Kennet and Avon, Av. 391.185. 10d. sh 18%
11,6991 11. 7s. Lancaster Average 47/. Os. Btl 27
2,897: 3W. Leeds and Liverpool I 00/.2 h '730
5451 111. Leicester 1401.11 150
,897 51.05. Leicester & Norttiampton Aver PS/. IN '71%
2,409 1:,1 Monmouthshire lOO/.Bl' 200
250 101. Melton Mowbray . 1081.6 h. 200
ZOO 251. Mersey and Irwell .001. sh. 540
3,000 21. 10s. Macclesfield lOO/. sh. all pd 20
247 17!. Neath I Otll.sh. 365
2,400 51. Peak Forest Average about 71,1. sh. 71
1,418 Ss. Regent's (or London) Av. 33/.163.8d. sh. 10
3,689 61. rtcchdale Average 85/ .sh. 6,2
500 8/. Shropshire 1251.5h. 137
:800 111. 10a. Somerset Coal ISOI. sh. 170
3,6001. 0 per cent Ditto Lock Fund Stock 12/.103.
700 301. Stafford and Worcester 1401.5 h. 686
600 i5l Shrewsbury-. ~.. 125/. sh. '2BO
300 W. 3tourbridge ..........• 1451.5 h. 396
3,647 21. Os. Stratford-on-Avon Aver.... 791. 9s. bd. sh. 33
5T3 In/ Swansea
.3,782 2/. 12a. Severn and Wyc &Railway Av.26/.95. sh. 45
.600 f oh. 'lll. 105. Trent and Mersey, * share lOOl. sh. 475
8,149
1,0005h.1 ,w. Warwick and B;rmiagham lOO/.sn 203
1.000f5h.3 •
930 11. Warwick and Napier, lool.sh. 117
7,060 41. Worcester & Birmingham Av.7B/.Bs. sh. 55
11.000 365. Wilts and Berko Average 671. lOs Bd. sh. 285 i
600 6., Wyslev and Essington 1251. sh '74
.28 W:soeacn '"sl sh. 30
905 Is Wey and Arun. llOl. an. 20
DOCKS.
2,6001
1,0654.h.1 3p. c. Commerc al ~........ 4001.3 h. 81
5 per cent. East and West India
3,238,31011. 31/. p.c t. London Streit 75jg
Ditto Bonds
2,209 3!. 6s. sd. Bristol Average I4"1. 9s. sh. 75
08,3241. 5!. per cent. Ditto Notes, various amounts lOB
351,752 5 per cent. St. Katharine Stock 97
500,000 41 per cent. Ditto Bonds ».1004
200.000 4 per cent. Ditto Bonds for 10 years
•• • Deptford Pier 2O!. sh. 20/. pd 10

BRIDGES.
1,600 1/. liammersmitl 5Ol. sh. 2136
1,231 Southwark, Old Av. 63!. 2s. Bd. sh. 33.
1,700 11. 15s. Ditto, Now, of 71 per cent., ... GUI. sh. 1354i
~000 Waterloo
5,000 225. Od. Ditto, Old Annuities of Ell 60/. pd 21
5,000 19s. 3d. Ditto, New Ditto of 7/. ... 4Ol. pd 18;6
10.0001. 5!. per cent. Ditto Bonds
5,848 27s Vauxhall .........Average 701. 108. 3d. sh 26
ASSURANCE COMPANIES.
2,000 3110 s Albion 5OOl. sh. 501. pd 72
50,000 I.6gcri MI Allianceßritish St Foreignloo/. sh. 111. pd 14 q
50,000 6 per cent. Ditto, Marine lOOl. sh. 51. pd 5
24,000 (1. per sh. Atlas 5Ol. sh. 51. pd 14
I,'2oois h. Si. Birmingham hire 0501. sh. 551. pd 1073{
20,000 41. percent. British Fire 250/. sh. 501. pd 40
12,000 61. per cent. 6ritish Commercial 5Ol. oh. 51. pd 6
5,000 5/. per cent. Clerical & Medical Life, 1001. sh. 2110 s pd 63i
4,000 210 s County lOO/. sh. 101. pd 1,-
9,000 6s. Eagle .501. sh. 51. pd 4%
0„,-, ( er cent.
"u /anpd 301 bs. 1 j Economic Lite 1000/. sh. 2501. pd 406
2,271 228.percent.,European Lilo 201. oh. all pd 22
50,000 2s. Ditto, New .01. sh. 21. pd 1%
1,0000001.(1. per ct Globe Stock 116
20,000 51. Guardian
30,000 4s. Oi. Hope 5O/. sh. 51. pd 5%
2,400 51. 12s. 6d. Imperial Fire 5OOl. oh. 501. pd 136
7,500 12s. Imperial Lile 100!. sh. 10!. pd 11
13,459 5/. per cent. Indemnity Marine lOO/.,h. Si. pd 31
two 31 100 Kent Fire 5O/. sh. all pd 91
31. Ditto Life 5Ol. pd 6 8
10,000 IN. Law Life lOO/. sh. 10/. pd 31%
5,000 10s. London, Fire 251. sh. 121. Ills. pd 17
3,900 10s. London, Ship 251. sh. 121. 10s. pd 1:
1,000,000/. ... ..... Minerva Idle sh.
2 ),000 5/. per cent. National Loan Fund...2o/. sh 2/. IN. pd 2/
36,000 51. per cent. Palladium Lite 5O/. sh. 21. pd 2168
50,000 W. per cent. Protector 1/.f., "01. sh. 2/. pd 17s Od
10,000 4 per cent. Protestant Dissenters .... IGO/. sh. 5/. pd 53¢
2,500 11. Provident Lose
200,1.00 40. Od. Rock Life
89,2201 51. per c.at. Royal Exchange Stock 165
6,000 5 per cent. University Life 100/. sh. 51. pd S%
10,000 4 per cent. United Kingdom Life 1001. sh. 51. pd 7

JOINT STOCK BANKS.
25,000 . ..... ... Agric. and Coin. of I reland2sl. sh. 10/. pd
15,000 8 percent. Australasia 401. sh. 401. pd 53k
10,000 10 percent. Bank of Birmingham 501. eh. 10/. pd 13
(0,000 10 per cent. Birmingham Bank 5O/. sh. 101. pd 1334
31,000 6 per cent. London & Westminster 1001. sh. 20/. pd 227
60,000 51. London Joint Stock 50/. sh. 10/. pd 123 k
3,000 4 per cent. Lancaster lOOl. sh. 201. lid 50
25,090 10 per cent. Liverpool (001 sh. 121/. pd 19
50,000 7; percent, Manchester and Liver-1501.0. 15/. pd 193
pool Discount
20,000 7 per coat. Manchester lOOl. sh. 10/. pd 41.4
20,000 8 per eent. Provincial Bank of I relandlool. sh. 25/. pd 41
11V100 6 i.er cent National Bank of Ireland 50/. sh. 1711. pd 16k
10,000 6 per cent National Provi.,cial Eng.lool. sh. 354 pd 35
10,000 Ditto New... 10t. sh. 10/. pd 10
10,000 Gloucestershire 501. eh. 101. pd 32
6,000 10 per cent. Hampshire 5Ol. oh. 5/. pd 9

GAS LIGHT AND COKE COMPANIES.
2,500 168 Od Bath 201. sh. 16/. pd 22
5,000 British 401. sh. 161, pd 18
.000 151'percent.] Ditto Provincial
and Bs. 6a. 20/. sh. 191. pd 53
928 51 lOs Birmingham 501. sh. 98
4,250 '2/ Os Bristol 2Ol. sh. 36
2,250 3/ les Brighton 2O/. di. 13%
750 3/ 103 Ditto, New 2Ol. sh. IN. pd 9
1,471 4j per cent Brighton General 2Ol. sh. a 11pd 9%
4,000 71.10 a. Continental Consolidated ,.751. 620. pd 110
1,000 101. City of L0nd0n.......... ...00/. sh. all pd 195
1,000 61. Ditto, New lOO/. sh. 75/. pd 150
4,000 3/.os, Equitable "Ot. pd •0,
10,000 Si. per cent. Imperial 5O/. sh. 6034
200 5/. per cent. Isle of Thanet 25/. sh. 20/. pd le%
2,350 61. per cent. 1 ndependent V/. sh. all r.... 56
,61:10 5!. per cent. Primnix 5Ol. sh. 39/. pd 3'2
1,000 4/. per cent. Ratcliff lOOl. sh. t 0/. pd 63
4,000 Swuth Metropolitan 501. sh. 23V. pd 17
9,000 5/.per cent. United General 50/. ah. 471. pd 28
240 5!. per cent. Warwick 5Ol. sit. 50
400 5/. per cent WaKefield
3,000 3/. Westminster Chartered
6,000 12s. Ditto New 5ll. sh. 10/. pd 11
780 3 per cent. Yarmouth 2Ol. eh. 181. pd
WATER WORKS

4,800 31s. Birm ing ham 25' sh. 451. pd 21
1,4:33 71. East London 1001. sh. 16244
5,500 21 15s. Grand Junction Average 411. 13s. 4d. sh. 54
2,000 2!. Kent 100/. sh. 5254
372 10/. Liverpool Bootle 220!. sh. 325
1,500 2 1101 Nevi River London Bridge Water Ann... 60
11,486 2/ lOs Manchester and Salford 1001. sh. 54
1,000 5 per cont. South Londoc lool.sh. .98
8,294 41!. West Middlesex Average 631.1125.9 d. sh. 90
IMO 11 141 York Building f,o. Lessee Prop. 100/. sh. 95