The Sun.
London, England, 1842-12-24 00:00:00

and taken into custody, to await the result of the Coro-
ner's inquest, which was held on Monday before
Thomas Brown, Esq., of Skipton, and a respectable
Jury chosen from the townships of Nesfield, Ilkley,
and Addingham ; G. 0. Green, Esq., of Woodhouse,
was foreman. E. C. L. Kaye, Esq., of Farfield Hall, 1
the nearesident Magistrate, was also in the jury- I
room, with seueral neighbouring gentlemen, and a
crowd of other spectators,
There was great excitement exhibited during the
examination of the witnesses, which occupied about
seuen hours ; but the material facts deposed to may
be more briefly stated.
John Lister, of Ilkley, innkeeper, proved that the
deceased and Joseph Hey, both of whom he well ,
knew, came together into his house on Friday even-
ing, and that they left in company together.
Thomas Hardwick, the house watcher at Middleton
Lodge, said—At ten minutes or a quarter-past 12 he
heard a distant noise from the direction of the river
where the body was found (distance a mile). The
night was windy. It was a man's voice. He went
on the front of the house to hear more distinctly, and
walked backward and forward for an hour, during all
which time he heard repeated sounds from the same
uuarter, as of blows, or as if stones were thrown into
the river, and occasionally from the same voice he
thought he heard words like " Help me Up." or
" Let me get up," but could not be certain. About
one o'clock the sounds ceased. About half-past one
the keepers came to him at the lodge. He mentioned
what he had heard, and set off to lead the keepers to
about the place where the sounds came from. He led
thorn almost direct to the place.
After all the evidence had been heard, Joseph
Hey said,—" After going a short way, deceased began
to stagger, I took hold of his arm. We went gently
on. He would sic down. We got too near the lime-
kiln. He then lay down and said he would stop. I
said, nay, come on. He said, I'll lie down a bit and
then follow thee. I then left him." He went on to
state how he had proceeded homewards, sitting down
in different places, hearing a clock strike twelve, and
getting home at two.
The Jury returned a verdict of " Wilful Murder,"
against some person or persons unknown. The mur-
dered man was not married. Hey, after the verdict,
was set at liberty, and attended the funeral of the de-
ceased next day by invitation of his friends.—Leeds
Mercury of to-day.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec, 23.
(Before a Common Jury.)
POTTER V. STUART.

BREACH Or PROMISE OF MARRIA.GE.—This was an
action brought by the plaintiff to recover compen-
sation in damages for an alleged breach of promise

of marriage.
Mr. HUMPHREY, for the plaintiff, said the parties
were both in a humble station. The plaintiff,
Catherine Potter, who was twenty-five years of age,
was the daughter [of a hair-dresser living at Ken-
nington, and the defendant was a farm-servant living
at Sydenham. The plaintiff had lived in the service
of Mr. Deans, a farmer of Sydenham, as housekeeper,
where she had: become acquainted with defendant,
who was eventually received by herself and her
friends as her acknowledged suitor. So far had the
affair proceeded that the banns of marriage were
put up between plaintiff and defendant, and
on the very Sunday on which they were asked
for the last time the banns of marriage between
the defendant and another woman, to whom
he had since been married, were published
for the first time. The defendant had taken advan-
tage of the plaintiff, and had, under cover of thin
promise of marriage, seduced her. Mrs. Saville, in
whose service plaintiff was at the time, having dis-
covered she was in the family way, sen iher home
to her friends, but such was the hig l *pinion that
her mistress entertained of her, that s n s.: milling
to take plaintiff back again into her sery t .as she
would herself inform them. It was for the Jury to
say to what amount of damages she was entitled for
the misery she had endured in consequence of defen-
lant's misconduct. The Learned Counsel then ealled
he father, sisters, and brother of the plaintiff, and
Also Mrs. Saville, in whose service plaintiff had lived,
orthe purpose of proving his case.
They were severally cross-examined by Mr. Cum-
rom for the defendant, who elicited from them the
facts that plaintiff was about twenty-five years of age,
and that a young man named Roots had walked
home with her from Kennington to Sydenham after nine
o'clock at night. It also appeared that the defendant was
twenty-four years of age, and that plaintiff had been I
told that defendant was engaged to be married to his
present wife before plaintiff became acquainted with
him.
Mr. Cntimas, for the defendant, admitted that it
was impossible to call upon the Jury to give a verdict
for him, but he submitted that the smallest possible
amount of damage would satisfy the justice of the
case. It was preposterous that such a case should
have been brought forward in that Court. The ques•
tion for them was, what dama,,,o-e had the plaintiff sus-
tained by not marrying the defendant? She was a
servant of all work, he was a farm-servant; and as to
his property, there was no evidence of it whatever.
Her child, it appeared, had been born in September,
so that the intercourse mu. t have taken place soon
after her arrival atDean's farm, and soon after she had
been tad that he was engaged to be married to an-
other. If the child were really Stuart's, they might
have gone before a Magistrate, and she could have
compelled him to maintain the child. The father
might have brought his action for seduction, but here
they were left to guess as to who was the father of
the child ; and they had no right to let that weigh in
the consideration of the damages due to her for this
breach of promise of marriage.
Lord DENMAN summed up, and the Jury returned
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 101.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 23
YOUNG U. FISHER.
This was an action brought by an attorney against
a client, to recover the amount of three bills of ex-
:thange for 20/. each, which were given for his ser-
vices as an attorney, and for a further sum of 71. 10s.,
for subsequent services. The defence was that the debt
was covered by the bankruptcy of the defendant, and
that the bills were accepted for the accommodation of
the plaintiff, and that the services for which the ad-
ditional sum was claimed, were rendered before the
plaintiff had taken out his certificate, and he was there-
fore not qualified, and could not recover his costs.
Verdict for the plaintiff.
The Court then adjourned to Wednesday, Jan. 11,

BRISTOL SUGAR MARKET, DEC. 23.—The transac-
tions since our last have been quite insignificant; the
near approach of the holidays and the general flat
state of the trade entirely suppressing all desire to
purchase. During the ensuing week the offices will
be closed.—Bristot Mercury.
CAUGHT IN A SPOUT.—We relate a tale as we heard
it. Mr. • Ridsdale, baker, in this town, occupies a
bakehouse and flour-room over it, not attached
to his house, in an entire yard in Hounds-gate.
On Thursday, the 13th instant, soon after dusk in
the evening, one of his
passedmea
luigpht, theasentrhye
and at once proceeded withoutknew the premises well, to the flour-store, and un-
a board on the floor, with tying a bag, turned up
a view of shooting a quantity of flour through a spout
into a bin, in the bakehouse, as it was his custom so to
do just before they mixed the dough, intended to be
baked as bread. His fellow-workman, waiting in the
bakehouse for the descent of the flour, and perceiving
that none came down, called out to John to know what
he was about, and why he did not shoot the flour down?
John having turned a large quantity out of the bag,
and being puzzled to ascertain what was the matter, at
length thrust his hand and arm down the spout, when
10, and behold ! he met with an obstruction. He called
out hastily for alight, and on a candle being taken into
the room, what should be found in the spout but a man
almost suffocated ; on being asked how he came
there, he replied, that he was only come for a
night's lodgings, as he had no bed to sleep on ;
and fearing, no doubt, that he might not be able
to find anything suitable for a pillow, it was dis•
covered that he had provided himself with an empty
bag ! He was taken before the Magistrates at
the Police-office, and examined on Friday last,
when he gave his name as John Groves, baker, aged
nineteen years ; and in order that he _may not do the
like again at present, for want of lodgings, a bed was
ordered at the House of Correction, to be there oc-
cupied by him for the next six weeks, and during his
leisure time in the day, he is to recreate on the
tread-wheel.—Nottingham Review.
THE COW AND THE SCHOOLMASTER.--A very ex-
traordinary circumstance occurred in Carrick-on-
Suir on Thursday. A cow, the property of a farmer
near this town, influenced, no doubt, by a thirst for
information, forced its way up a long flight of stairs into
our news room, and caused, as you may well imagine, no
small sensation, by breaking, in its way upwards, several
pines of glass in the lobby window, and bellowing
awfully. The proprietor of the house, who is a
teacher, and a person of high literary attainments,
feeling highly exasperated on the occasion, had the
farmer brought before our local Magistrate, and
sought to recover damages for the injury done him
by the cow, which claim the farmer resisted, observing
to the Magistrate, with a good deal of naivete, that
had not the schoolmaster been abroad, the cow would
not have gone in. Upon this very conclusive argu-
ment, the Magistrate dismissed the case. The matter,
however, is likely to claim the most serious attention
"in horse hair," as the schoolmaster,
who the
is ge
ati innein ofe n
means, as well as parts, has resolved
of na
to set himself right by an appeal to a jury of his coun-
trymen.— Tipperary Free Press.
The Lord Chancellor leaves town to-day 'for
his seat Turville, near Maidenhead, where the Noble
and Learned Lord, we understand, intends to pass
the Christmas vacation.