The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-28 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

the fillets as described in the patent ; but it seemed established
that their servants took old and new brasses, and after tinning
them in the usual way, had, while the brasses were hot, with a
stick of tin, laid on as much as they could to the extent of from
the 16th to the Bth of an inch. Many of these brasses were
new, and it was not, therefore, the mere patching of old ones.
Was that substantially an adoption of any pr_rt of the patent--
had they, by thus laying on the tin, smoothing it in some
cases with a soldering-iron, as described, obtained some
portion of the benefit of the invention; and was that part aew?
The jury, after being out a considerable time, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 1,0001.
This case was the last on the list, with the exception of an
action for illegal imprisonment in violation of the plaintiff's
protection under the order of the Court of Bankruptcy, which
was still proceeding when the report came away.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Aug. 26.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice CRESSWELL and a Spe-
cial Jury.)
DOI, DEM. HUTCHINSON, V. THE MANCHESTER, BURY, AND
ROSSENDALE RAILWAY.
Mr. Wortley and Mr. Crompton appeared for the plaintiff;
Mr. Baines, Mr. Martin, and Mr. Brandt for the defence.
This was an action of ejectment, to recover a piece cf land
which had been taken by the company for the purposes of the
undertaking. In opening the case the Learned Counsel stated
that it had formerly been occupied by the lessor of the plaintiff,
who had a house upon-it, and afterwards by his tenants. He
held a lease from the Earl of Derby. The company, requiring
this ground, and being empowered to take it under the com-
pulsory clauses in their Act, had taken possession of it. The
lessor of the plaintiff had, it was alleged, been willing to let
them hare it on fair and reasonable terms, but these they had
declined, and had, it was contended, in taking it under their
Act, not complied with the provisions therein contained. The
Act was passed on the sth of July, 1844, and in the course of
the same month Mr. Hutchinson got notice that this land would
be wanted. It was finally agreed to settle the amount to be
paid to Mr. Hutchinson by arrangemont between him and a
Mr. Statter, who was to act for the company. They met, and
agreed that the purchase money should be whatever any re-
spectable insurance company might fix on as the value of the
lease. The annual value, however, the parties could not agree
upon, and the agent of the company wrote to Mr. Hutchin-
son, saying that it must be referred, as usual in such cases, to
a jury. After some further correspondence, and a proposal
of reference by Mr. Hutchinson, notice was given by the
company of an offer by them of a certain sum, which, if he
declined, was to be settled by a jury ; and, accordingly, in
twenty-one days from that time, a warrant issued under the Act
to empannel a jury and assess the compensation. Mr. Hut-
chinson wrote to request a postponement, on the ground of ill-
ness, but the inquisition, on the 13th of January, took place
notwithstanding ; and the company, under this authorithy,
took possession of the land. It was said by the company that
they were entitled so to do, because the owner had neglected to
make out a title, in which case the Act vested the land in the
but this the Learned Counsel said
company, at once ;
was not so. It was no doubt necessary, for the sake of the
public, that railways should be constructed ; but the companies
in exercising the very extensive powers granted them by the
Legislature, must strictly act within those powers, which in the
present case they had not done.
Evidence was then adduced to show the possession of Mr.
Hutchinson and his tenants for a great many years. It appeared
also that, at the investigation before the jury, leases had been
produced on the part of Mr. Hutchinson.
For the defence it was said, that Mr. Hutchinson had acted
vexatiously throughout the whole transaction, and that the
company, who had had no disputes with any other parties but
himself, were at last obliged to avail themselves of their Par-
liameatry powers, and take possession of the land under their
parliamentary title. The various clauses of the Act were re-
ferred to to show that the company had acted according to its
provisions, in taking proceedings before a jury. They had
taken this course after having in vain tried to come to terms,
and they had refused to postpone the investigation, because
from the previous conduct of the party they doubted the sin-
cerity of his intentions. The inquiry had been conducted by
counsel on both sides, and the jury awarded a sum of 4,0801.
It was alleged, too, that the lease produced on behalf of Mr.
Hutchinson was dated but three days before, that it was pro-
duced by Mr. Statter, who was Lord Derby's agent, and was
retained in his possession. The company under the circum-
stances were, it was contended, authorised to look upon the
lessor of the plaintiff as neglecting to make oat a title, and they
accordingly paid the money into the Bank of England, and
took possession of the land.
Evidence was adduced on the part of the company as to
what took place respecting the inquiry before the jury, and a
long correspondence was reed on the subject of Mr. Hutchin-
son's title. It appeared that 11r. Hutchinson's solicitors had
deffianded from the solicitors for the company a draught of a
conveyance to be executed, while the others insisted the land
had already vested in the company, and no conveyance was
wanted.
His LORDSHIP said the question between the parties seemed
to be whether the lessor of the plaintiff was bound to show a
title or the defendant to demand one. He thought the latter
was the case, and a verdict was finally entered for the plaintiff,
with nominal damages.
CROWN SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron RoLrE.)
John Thorley Ball, Richard Cantrell, and John Holborn,
were indicted for a conspiracy to defraud.
Mr. James and Mr. Atkinson conducted the prosecution ;
the prisoners were defended by Mr. J. Pollock.
The evidence against the prisoners was very complicated and
ran to great length, but in substance it was male to appear
that the prisoners and others had taken establishments at Man-
chester, Liverpool, and Ceester, under pretence of carrying on
business, and by this means, and with the assistance of cross
references to oneo.notber at these various places, had obtained
quantities of leather, pickles, steel, porter, and other miscel-
laneous commodities, which, on coming to hand, were imme-
diately disposed of at any price that could be obtained for them.
A principal witness was a person who had been in their employ-
ment, and an accomplice in the fraud.
The prisoners were convicted, and
His Loansure sentenced Ball and Holborn-to be imprisoned
for two years, and Cantrell to be imprisoned one sear.
August 27.
NEWTON V. THE GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action to recover compensation from the com-
pany for the alleged infringement of a patent taken oat by the
plaintiff on the 15th of May, 1843, for improvement in the
bearings of the axles of railway carriages, and other axles
where great friction existed. The invention purported to have
been a communication from a Mr. Isaac Babbelt, an American,
from Boston. Mr. Babbelt was in Liverpool in the year 1843,
and had permission from the Liverpool and Manchester Rail-
way Company to make experiments on two of the engines on
their line. The result was satisfactory, and he afterwards sold
the discovery to the present plaintiff.
A great number of pleas were put on the record—first,
" Not guilty ;" secondly, that the plaintiff was not the first and
true inventor; thirdly, that he did not duly enrol his specifica-
tion •, fourthly, that it was not sufficiently described in the
specification ; fifthly, that the invention was not an improve-
ment ; and sixthly, that at the time of taking out the patent
the invention was not " a manufacture, nor used and known
within the kingdom," as described in the statute of James.
The case commenced 'yesterday, and a great m... of ...id....
was adduced, to show the nature of the invention, its novelty,
and the importance of the results in diminishing the wear and
tear of locomotive engines. It appeared that the invention
consisted in lining the semicircular brass " step" of the axle,
which rested on the axle, and bore the weight of the carriage,
with an alloy of a softer metal, of considerable thickness,
which was prevented from spreading and yielding to the pres-
sure by a brass fillet along its edge. The step was lined by
first. polishing the inside, tinning it, and then placing within it
a mould the size of the axle or "journal," as it was called,
running in the alloy while in a state of fusion. This alloy in
cooling adhered to the tin and became incorporated with the
brass step, fitting closely to the journal or axle which revolved
in it.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(Before Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, Assistant Judge, and a Bench

of Magistrates.)
On Wednesday Charles M'Donald was indicted, charged
with having stolen a leathern belt, a knife, and other articles, of
the value of 10s., the property of Ebenezer Speneer.
Mr. Prendergast appeared for the prosecution, whilst Mr.
Payne conducted the defence.
It appeared that the prosecutor is a respectable tradesman in
High-street, Shoreditch, and that in consequence of his suspi-
cions having been aroused as to the propriety of his wife's con-
duct, as well as that various articles had been stolen, he had
engaged two of the police force to watch the premises and the
procee. ings which were carried on therein during his absence.
The officers, therefore, were stationed in a recess under the
shop on the evening of Sunday, the 10th, upon the occasion of
the prosecutor leaving the house. Shortly after the latter had
quitted the premises his wife was seen to walk into the shop
and then to let some one in. This individual she instantly
ushered into a back room, where he had not been long ere the
officers had abundant proof of the unfaithfulness of the wife.
They continued watching until they observed the prisoner, for
he it was who had been admitted, put a leathern belt into his
pocket, whereupon they rushed from their hiding place. The
prisoner, however, ran off, an example which was quickly fol-
lowed by the wife. They were, nevertheless, soon taken, and
the prosecutor was sent for. Upon the prisoner being
searched, the articles named in the indictment were found
upon him. When the things were discovered, he said that they
bad been given to him by the prosecutor's wife, and appealed
to her for an acknowledgment of the fact. The wife replied
that she had not given him either the knife or the pencil-case.
In the course of the statement of the prosecutor, it was elicited
that he had been married to his wife for upwards of fifteen
years, sad that she had borne him seven children, of whom
five were still living. With respect to the articles stolen, he
denied that he had ever authorised his wife to give them away.
He had commenced an action against the prisoner for
crim. con.

Mr. PitErrnEaGAsT eventually—having been called upon by
the counsel for the prisoner to make his election as to the par-
ticular article upon which he would, on the present indictment,
go against the prisoner, because it was manifest that the whole
had been taken at different times—elected to go upon the
leathern belt.

The articles were then produced, when it turned out that
there was not any " belt," as described in the indictment, but
that it was a piece of leather only.
The Learned CHAIRMAN thereupon told the jury that they
must acquit the prisoner.
The jury, apparently with much reluctance, returned a
verdict accordingly.
The prisoner was then triad upon another indictment, which
charged him with having stolen a piece of merino cloth, the
property of the former prosecutor's father. In this instance
much difficulty arose in consequence of its being set up by the
prisoner that the merino belonged to his mother.
The prosecutor's family swore positively that it was his pro-
perty, and that it had been in the possession of his father and
grandfather.

- On the other hand, the mother of the prisoner produced a
quantity of merino which exactly matched, and stated that the
bit in question had formed a part of the larger bulk, and,
moreover, that it had been in her possession for 15 years.
She also said that the prisoner and his brother occupied a room
in her house and that this merino had formerly been a portion
of the bed furniture in that room.

A number of witnesses were called, all of whom spoke in
high terms of the prisoner's conduct in every relation of life.
He was a member of the theatrical profession, and had occu-
pied situations at the Victoria and City of London Theatres.
The Learned JUDO& having summed up,
The jury Acquitted the prisoner.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.
Yesterday William lrinkley was again placed at the bar,
charged with having illegally pawned watches left with him to
be cleaned and repaired.
Three cases were distinctly proved.
The prisoner, who appeared to be a very young man, said
he was extremely sorry, but hehad met with misfortunes which
threw him into difficulties.
The LORD AL/YOR said, it was necessary that people to
whom the property of others was intrusted should know the
serious punishment to which they would be subjected in vio-
lating the law, as in the present instance. The 39th and 40th
of George 111., cap. 99, see. 8, stated, that if any person
knowingly and designedly pawned or unlawfully disposed of the
goods of any other person, he should be fined in a penalty not
exceeding 51., nor less than 2Ps., and also the full value of the
goods ' • and if thepenalty were not paid forthwith, the offender
should be imprisoned, with hard labour, in Bridewell, for three
months; and if within three days before the expiration of the
term of commitment the forfeitures were not paid, the magis-
trate might order the convicted person to be publicly whipped.
The prisoner was then fined according to the Act, and com-
mitted in default of payment for the three separate offences.
BOW-STREET.
Yesterday Howard Augustine Styles, remanded from last
week, was placed at the bar to answer further charges of
forgery.
No addition was made to the cases investigated at the last
examination. The present inquiry related to a bill of exchange
drawn by the prisoner, and purporting to be accepted by
Gunter and Co., confectioners, the amount being 561. 195., at
two months. It was shown to a tailor, named Cook, living in
Upper Charles-street, Westminster, who was asked by the pri-
soner to get it discounted for him in the City. Cook procured
a cheque for it, and handed ch. produce to the prisoner- who'
so,. Liao au urger for two coats, and paid down 71. in advance
on account.
Mr. T. W. Gunter, and his partner, Mr. Bishop, (confec-
tioners in Berkeley-square) attended to prove the forgery.
They had occasionally done business to a trifling extent with
the prisoner, but never accepted a bill from him or any other
party.
Cook stated that he had known the prisoner many years,
formerly as a chemist in Regent-street, but latterly as a general
dealer. He believed him to be a respectable man up to the
present transactions.
There were yet several other charges against the prisoner,
but owing to the unavoidable absence of a material witness,
their investigation was deferred to Saturday next, to which day
the prisoner was again remanded.
So numerous have been these forgeries, that Messrs. Gunter
and Co., harassed by applications for the bills purporting to
bear their signature, were compelled to publish a caution upon
the subject.

A great number of witnesses were called to prove the ad.
vantage of this arrangement, in diminishing friction, in pre-
venting the heating of the axles, in needing a smaller supply
of oil, and in enabling the bearing to run for a much longer
time without the necessity of renewal or repair.
Mr. Fothergill, foreman to Sharp and Co., stated that he On Tuesday evening Fe LAMBETH.
uill lied for many years been empldaed in the manufacture of rail- fore Mr. Henry with annoyingbe-
way carriages, and that this improvement was new to him
and his domestics, at Lambeth Palace, was taken before Mr.
y Duke, the surgeon of Lambeth parish, and that gentleman,
until the appearance of the patent in 1843. It was a ver
great improvement, and extremely useful in diminishing after a short examination, and putting some questions to the
friction and preventing heating,
unfortunate man, pronounced him insane. He was in conse-
On cross-examination he stated that he had previous to that quence taken into the workhouse, preparatory to his being
time known tin and lead used to repair old brasses when they placed in some asylum.
had ceased to fit from wear, and there was not time to sub- Elizabeth Paxman and Ellen Jones were charged with
stitute a new one. The lead or tin was run in to make it fit begging.
until a new one could be supplied. He had known various Police-constable 160 L deposed, that for some time past fre-
bearings of solid block tiir used, but they did not answer. quent complaints had been made of the conduct of a set of im-
Mr. Robert Stephenson, engineer to the London and Bir- pudent beggars who infest the neighbourhood of Vauxhall,
mingham line, was examined. Be gave similar evidence as particularly on the nights on which the Gardens are open, and
to the utility of the invention. He said if the inside of the extort contributions more from fear than benevolence. Fur
bearing were merely tinned, it would prevent heating, and in the last fortnight he had observed both the prisoners in the
that thin coating would not spread by pressure. It would vicinity of, and on the bridge, and had frequently cautioned
wear out sooner, and the fillet in the plaintiff's invention was them against begging, and told them the very first tame he
useful in enabling them to run in a mass of alloy in a melted caught them at it, he should take them before a magistrate.
state, which coated the step to a considerable thickness with- They carried lavender or some trifling articles with them as a
out spreadin gby pressure, as it would do without the fillet. blind, and kept so close a watch upon him that it was difficult
Mr. John Fairburn, engineer at Manchester, gave similar to detect them. On the night before they had a tall man with
statements as to the utility and novelty of the invention. He them, whom they were enabled to ply freely with grog, so that
stated that he had known block tin and various alloys used for he was three parts drunk. He watched them closely, and dis-
bsarings, but always in a solid black. The novelty was in tinctly saw both beg from several persons on the bridge.
having an outer case and running in the alloy.
The prisoners pleaded hard to be let off, but
Mr. Thomas Wilkinson, foreman to Bolton and Watts, Soho Mr. INORTON said he was determined to put a stop to so
works ; Mr. Jones, clerk to the Liverpool and Manchester serious an offence, and committed them both to prison—Jones
Company, near Newton, and others, were examined. Their for one month and Paxman for three weeks.
evidence was to the same effect. St )I,ITH WANK.
Mr. Michael Allison, out-door foreman of the locomotive Yesterday George Paulo Fitt, nicknamed the " Kent-
department:of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway Corn- street Lawyer," was brought before Mr. Traill, charged with
party, stated, that there had been a very great and marked ohtaining by false representations the sum of 21. 12s. 6d. from
improvement in the running of the engines since the intro- Isaac Thomas Spierman under the following circumstances :
the of this invention. The Kingfisher, the Heron, and Mr. Roberts attended as solicitor for the prosecution.
the Ostrich were fitted up with these bearings. Formerly Isaac Thomas SpiAman stated that he was a labourer, re-
the brass bearings on the old construction would run from siding at Thames Ditton, and that having had a son corn-
-400 to 1.000 miles. They would run, when fitted u
pursuant to the patent, from 4,000 to 10,000. The King. consulted
mitted for trial at the late Surrey assizes, he (the father)
consulted the prisoner on the subject of his defence on
fisher had run 20,000, and the bearings were still in goad con- the 7th of July. The prisoner informed him that he would
dition. A bearing now produced had run 32,000 miles with- require 10s. 6d. for drawin a petition to the judge
out repairs. g up
Mr. Benjamin Lewis, Mr. Edward 1114Connell, engineer to
to enable complainant to receive WI. towards defraying the
expenses attendant upon his son's prosecution. Subsequently
the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway Company ; Mr. the prisoner called on complainant, and said that he had re-
Benjamin Cubitt, Mr. Fernihough, Manager on the Eastern tamed Mr. Charnock as counsel for his son ; but that gen-
Counties line; Mr. Melling, engine-maker, at Rainhill, and tleman informed him that three counsel would be employed
others, repeated in a great measure what had been said by for the prosecution, and that it would be advisable to retain
the other witnesses as to the novelty and the utility of the in- another advocate ter the cl,fence. The prisoner then
vention.
said that 21. 2s. would be required fur that pur.
Evidence of the infringement of the patent was also ad- pose. and the complainant advanced that sum. The
duced. It appeared that in the case of many of the old brass bill of indictment was ignored by the grand jury, and a second
bearings, as well as in new ones, when put in for the first counsel was not engaged in the defence, neither had he ever
time, the workmen were in the habit of tinning the inside of obtained any portion of the 10/. which the prisoner had under-
the brass, heating it and then rubbing a stick of tin on it so as taken to procure for him. The complainant was compelled to
to cause as much as possible to adhere. This had been pointed dispose of his bed in order to raise the money, which was
outot to the
the results Directors on several oCcasions by their managers, handed over to the prisoner for the above purposes. His state-
i preventing friction, and diminishing the ment was confirmed by his wife, who-was present at the inter-
expebetween nditure of oil, were mentioned. A long correspondence view between the prisoner and her husband.
the plaintiff and the secretary of the company was Mr. Charnock stated, that on his arrival at Croydon assizes
put in and read, the plaintiff claiming compensation from he found at his lodgings a brief marked one guinea, having re-
the company for the use of his patent. In one of these letters ference to the case of the complainant's son. He had no re secretary, while be denied that the company was infrinn lection of having had any communication with the prisoner on
the patent, added, that the use of the tinning, in the wagY the subject, and he never advised a second counsel to be re-
described, was of very little benefit, and that they thought o tamed for the defence.
abandoning it.
The prisoner now asserted that he had delivered no such
At the close of the plaintiff's case his Lordship rose,
message, and that the two guineas advanced went for the ex-
This morning Mr. Woe-reels addressed the jury for the penses attendant upon the proceedings previously to the bill
defence, and called a number of persons to show that at Nant- being ignored.
wich, Bury, and other places, where the brasses used in cotton The complainant said that he consulted the prisoner in the
mills had become worn, or did not fit, it was very usual to run first instance, under the supposition that he was a " regular
in a quantity of an alloy of tin. One of the witnesses said this bred" attorney.
was done by means of a mould inside, in which the alloy was The prisoner, in reply, declared he never represented him-
run in a state of fusion. Another witness, Joseph Clarke, self as an attorney, but as clerk to Mr. Hardman, the attorney,
stated, that he had long before the existence of this patent with whom he had been for a considerable time.
purchased a lathe, the bearings of which were a good deal Mr. Roberts said that when the prisoner was taken into
worn, and that he filled them up by melting an alloy into them custody that morning, en his arrival from the masquerade at
so as to make them it.
Vauxhall, he declared that he had never received any money
Mr. Hodge was called as a witness, and stated, that man
years before the existence of this patent, in 1825, he had made Mr. TRA ILL said he should give the complainant an oppor
a lathe, being then resident in Cornwall, the bearings of which
y of the complainant.
were provided with a fillet and lined with an ahoy, tunny of taking the case to the sessions, and for that purpose
cisely in the manner described in the patent, the object beahoy, run in p re-
should adjudge the prisoner to find two sureties of 20/. each to
nr
e attend at the next sessions.
that. which the patent proposed—the diminution of friction. CLERKE N WELL.
There were then many bearings of the same kind in use in IVIr. Storey, a solicitor, residing in Vernon-street, Lloyd-
Cornwall. 'This lathe he afterwards took to London, and sold square, was charged with using language calculated to cause a
Lloyd-
is there. He had not heard of it since, and did not know that
this improvement was then generally known. He afterwards breach of the peace to Mr. Edward Laforest, a merchant living
made an experiment with a view to improved bearings for the Mr. James, the barrister, appeared for the complainant.
at 26, John-street, Bedford-row.
axles of a saw-mill. The improvement was the making of Mr. James stated, that on the 17th of June the complainant
three longitudinal grooves along the surface of the brass bear- had occasion to make a call in Wharton-street, in company
ing, and filling them up with the alloy. Nothing further, with a lady, and Wharton-street being a declivity, Mr. Laforest
however, was done in the matter. The witness afterwards ordered the coachman to draw up the carriage in Vernon-street,
Nowt
to America, from which country he had but lately re- which adjoined it, and it so happened that where the vehicle
turned.
Mr. rested was in front of Mr. Storey's house. Balsas replied, commenting strongly on the conduct
William Harris, Mr. Laferest's coachman, was standing at
of the company through their officers, who, he contended, had the heads of his horses when Mr. Storey thrust his head out of
the window, and exclaimed, " Draw those horses on." Wit-
his discovery without paying him that reasonable remuneration
plaintiff's patent, and to get the benefit of
nest, in the absence of his master, refused. Mr. Storey then
went for a policeman, who, on his arrival, declined to interfere.
tsoouwehhitethoheevawdeasthenetitied.
jHis Loenstrir summed up. He said the question for the Mr. Storey asked witness his master's name, and he would not
ure would be whether the defendants had violated the plain-
tell him. Mr. Laforest soon after came, and Mr. Storey asked
ties patent by using the whole or any part of his invention.
him his name, but he refused to give it. Mr. Storey said he
If a patent is granted for a new combination of things known
was no gentleman, and added " You have come here for no
before, that does not prevent any other party from using that
which was old. There was no evidence that the defendants good
voto purpose." Mr. Laforest made no other reply than" Thank
bad used the whole of the plaintiff's invention in the steps with '