The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-03 00:00:00

CH ANCERY.--(THIS DAY.)

This being the first day of Michaelmas term, 0%
Chancellor, after entertaining the Judges, Masters in n
eery, Queen's Counsel, &c., to breakfast, at his Loral
residence, George-street, Hanover square, took his sot;
Court at Westminster ,at half east one o'clock. gis
ship was accompanied by the I‘2,:ster of the Rolls, the
Chancellor of England, the Vice-Chancellor
Masters Farrar and Sir George Rose.

MANN V. RICKETTS.
This appeal motion, on the application of count►
ordered to stand for hearing on Thursday week.

COUISTRING V. COULSTRING.
This was an appeal motion, ex parte, from the pal
of the Master of the Rolls refusing to grant an apple?
the part of a married woman to sue in forma pauper
application was made on the ground of separation.
The case was ordered to stand over till to-morrow. _

- ..... ......,
It was expected that his Lordship would have rises
o'clock to attend a Cabinet Council.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England did not,
day till half-past one o'clock, it being the first day of IX
mas Term. His Honour took motions.
and'
In the course of the morning Mr. Sergeant Shea
Montague Chambers were called within the bar.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS _DAY.%)
The Learned Baron entered the Court at half-pv
o'clock.

THE QUEEN'S COUNSEL.
Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr. M. Chambers, of the col
law bar, having appeared on the floor of the Court the
Baron called upon them severally to take their seatoi
the bar, her Maj( sty having been most gracicusly ple74
appoint them to the dignity and station of Queen's CO'

I.OCIZIIAkT V. BERNARD. ,
Mr. Sergeant BYLES said in this case, which
before Mr. Baron Alderson at the late assizes ft
county of Bedford, and a verdict found for the
fendant, he had to move for a rule to show cansfi
the verdict should not be entered for the Pa
with 100/. damages. He moved upon points which weo
served to him by the Learned Judge who tried the
The declaration being in assumpsit stated, that
defendant caused to be printed and publiw,
certain advertisement, setting forth that a cf,
parcel, contaiaing bank-notes and hills of exchange,
had been forwarded to Sir Charles Price and Co
had been either lost or stolen ; and the defendant:o
that advertisement, promised that whoever
give such information as should • lead to the.d
mediate recovery of the parcel, or to the early apprebo
of the guilty party, if stolen, should receive the re°
1001. The declaration then went on to say, that the Ph
did give such information, and the defendant thereby
bed
liable to the extent of 100/. ; and concluded by
~,,all,d
a breach of the promise in the advertisement. 111
fendant to that declaration pleaded non-assumpsit, sl°
the plaintiff did not give the inforniation and the jurYo
for the plaintiff on the first issue, and for the dete,.or
on the second. The facts of the case were
these :—Bernard, the defendant, was a bank'
Bedford, and in September, 1840, he sent up a parcel bity
Times coach, from Bedford, containing bills aud
notes, being of the value of 1,000/. and uP rio!
In the course of its transit to Sir Charles
and Co., Mr. Bernard's agent in London, the.
,s,r)
was lost; and, in consequence, on the 27th of Septeinut,
Bernard published a hand-bill, and that hand-bill coluLt
the offer of 100/. to any person who should give such /VI
mation as should lead to the immediate recovery of the,
if lost, or to the early apprehension of the guilty P
stolen. It appeared that shortly after this a persoU,
name of Richards came into the shop of the plaintii!,
was a draper and general dealer at Dunstableli
the county of Bedford, and asked for some
~d
stockings. The goods were supplied to him, avo
tendered a 101. note in payment. Now the eondod
this person excited the suspicion of Lockhart, $4l,
consequence of that suspicion he went to a person Po
Cheshire, another shopkeeper in Dunstable, and Well tl
the circumstance to him. It then turned ow'.
Cheshire had received a 101. note from the same perso4,
under almost precisely similar circumstances_ The Or,
cordingly went together and gave information to tDeili
stable constable, and eventually Richardson was n,
while in bed at one of the local inr.s, and subsequentOed,'
at the Dunstable sersions, found guilty, and transportnii
being ccncerned in stealing Mr. Bernard's parcel. r.Che,
i,tr,
tiff then made application for the reward, ;cif
was refused, and the result was the present 'l,O
On the trial, however, of the cause the jury returned,„ol
diet for the defendant, on the ground that the informatt:,,f
not given by Lockhart alone but jointly with anotll7,))
son, and, therefore, Cheshire and Lockhart ought 'Ol
joined in the action. He (Mr. Sergeant Byles) lediot
contended that Lockhart gave the information indivi pe
and consequently he had to move that the verdictii,
aside and a verdict be entered for the plaintiff; Wl'
damages.
The Court confirmed the verdict of the jury, ana
that the action ought to have been brought jointly b,'
hart and Cheshire.—Rule refused.

CRIMINAL COURT.—(THIS DA'
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)
THE RAILWAY ROBBERIES. All;')
On the opening of the Court this morning, ChaTlt
card, alias Charles Gregory Maynard, 47, house ag° •
placed pt the bar on the charge of felony.
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Bodkin appeared for the Pr/
tion, and Mr. Ballantine for the defence.
The prisoner was indicted on several counts ; withfe,
a writing desk containing a sum of geld and sorlisZidlo
missory notes, belonging to Mr. Prance, solicitor,
water; also with receiving the same, well knowing it f
been stolen ; and likewise with being an accessory tifte
fact
M.
ecl'tr. CLARRSON opened the case on behalf of the pros .obll.'d
going at some length over the points he intended to e:air,
in evidence. He said it was his intention by the falso,,,i
be intended to adduce, to show that the prisoner IY•ja',o
was in league with the prisoner Garrett, who had Pi'e
to the charges of felony- preferred against him; avt ve
the former was a party cognizant of the felonirtea tb•
actions of the latter. The Learned Counsel then ot,"e,
attention of the jury to the case he was now about ii• '"01
lish against the prisoner, namely, that preferred
Prance, solicitor, Bridgewater. It was that of stelt teoi
being a receiver after it was stolen, well knowing "aoa,o,
such, of a writing-desk, containing a sum of money asst''
promissory notes, the property of the prosecutor illirr,„y
The Learned Gentleman then recapitulated the lea
cumstances already familiar to the public three,ll,cot,
lengthened police examinations at the Guildhall, re;rtteilt!
the letters to Mr. Prance, supposed to have been
Garrett at the dictation of Maynard; the steps t' of,g•
Nash to inculpate the prisoner; the examinatioot,by,
lodgings of both prisoners; the discovery of the shi:°'re4i
notes, &c., on Maynard's premises, deciphered by Mr•
and found to correspond with those letters sent thr°"ev
post-office to Mr. Prance, offering to negotiate for the ,
of the property.
Mr. Prance, solicitor, examined—Deposed to lialdlA
a passenger on the Great Western Railway *on, set
water to Paddington on the Bth day of July last. plow
a writing desk with him, which he saw labelled ari4is
on the truck. It contained ten sovereigns, and " e.P?
issory notes. and property, in value near t°_,
He missed it on his arrival at the Paddington statioe,alat,
desk now produced was the one he lost. On his Lec'e,s:,,i
Bridgewater he received a letter through the post- o"tng
the London Cavendish-street post-mark on it, stttliorfi
the writing-desk of witness, with the property con'!gea're
it was safe, and wishing to negotiate through an ;0014'
the return of the property is question. The other r
ceived by witness in the same handwriting, were P e/
put in an read. 'cleecd
The Hon. Edward Petre was called and gave eLI
That to the best of his ability the handwriting of t"wile,,lo
letters produced was, that of the prisoner Garret. ray
been in his services prior to 1838, and was familiar Do
handwriting. le
tee
Mr. Prance resumed. In consequence of thesis
applied to the Great Western Company. • A iSreote'
Mr. Collard, superintendent of police at the Gres"ad,i'.,of
station, examied.—Said he found certain short-h 4 00," ,
now produced in Court on the person of the '
Maynard. hort'
Henry Gregory, short-hand writer, said the s
notes produced were put into his hand to deciPu &MO
Nash, the solicitor, about two months ago. Thep°
were the same as the first letter read. The syster°
Ar
hand used was Gurney's. eS" 5"
doe„ r°
Mr. Nash examined—Was present when theer it
ciphered by the last witness was found on the prit„ the
nard. Several scraps of paper were also flaund,i,"taea
of Maynard's house, which, when put togetherer°,',Ar rec" A
cise copy of the short-hand notes and the first-• letter aid
by Mr. Prance.
Pe„zeac'tiag,
The Court rose for a short time, the Common ,T,, fo
Mr. Alderman Copeland, who was also on the 13-111'terle
been called on to meet the Judges to arrange arse bed
the ensuing mayoralty, eel fa'
'd ti a
Mr. Alderman COPELAND, on rising to retire said L cite
to mention the case of a boy who was tried /astoe i 5
ward Adolphus Hughes, aged sixteen, and whose core'",,tor`;
a good deal of commiseration. He was without 1 0111;t1",1
relations, and had no one to look-to for guidanc a. °t
ts.,
circumstances which were aggravated by his be'r4Pt 11°
weak intellect. The boy had been acquitted, hfiteri
since been maintained in gaol till steps could be tr'editc,"eiee'
case. The parish authorities of St. Leonard's, Sh° 0 re' ttle
been applied to oil his behalf, but an answer had bee 010,4110
declining doing anything whatever in the casei °tie 116
benevolent intention of the judges, the jury, a"( Titteu:tte
sio r',
had commiserated his case were entirely frob,"be e`
stated this fact that publicity might be giver, to
,
On the return of the Common Sergeant the exal.'
tet'
witnesses in Maynard's case was resumed the let-.othe
Mr. Prance's examination resumed—From ared 't al"'„
had received, and the advertisement that aPPe,eloce out'
Times, he consulted with Mr. Nash, and an arralofErithese'es-
made for an interview with the prisoner. 49;1011 d tale
place in company with Mr. Nash, in the Gin
..oarse ia
house. Witness asked the prisoner then in the
..'o,rereig_,Pe
conversation that ensued, if there were not W e aa°
it? and he replied, Yes. Witness inquired howl' neeatoef
the desk? and his answer was, that his
sP,,,a, on, there
stumbled over it in the road. Witness's name.„.„ara.,,t he
documents contained in the desk. He told x_Ne
was no use in saying the desk had been foun
closed 00"
hicll
aware it was stolen. An arrangement was „t „oaf
the desk was to be returned on the payment ot.-e•he fel;rere
ment was drawn up, and at -the suggestion ot '`"
several words respecting the property being
n1:0°
5"
struck out. vitness t ar
Mr. BALLANTINE cross-examined the
length without affecting in any material the exa
A. De
chief. d of A°6-rvie"'"
Mr. Nash, solicitor, deposed that, on the 2 inte
met with the prisoner Maynard, and had several/1.. vr
t
with him afterwards respecting the ieturn or ,
property. Witness here detailed what tuotkbeP;isoner,,hte
interviews that led to the apprehension of
_wished.
_wen
particulars of which have been already fullyyl,_ving.NNl;,, the
leading short-hand as the prisoner's admission_
.t. 116..riucip L. 0
down: in at the declaration of Ills r its
returnei nhe
• r....
terms in which the property was to be ti, te His
h
witness could judge; the short-hand notes were
same as those produced to-day. Up to 0, hi, hai,i
was given in custody he hod no suspicion ra
that
~ote ,
connexion with Garrett.
station, gave evidence as to having le
Mr. Collard, superintendent of police at tiihtrielial;gerderf.
on existeuoent'
One of them, a diary, showed that a connexion house and person, and finding certain documents
of Pt °, for A
consit of daily memoranda, in which the nsen
relation to business:transactions with the prieheretr: •
band, c
appears. Part of the diary is written in
cially the name of Garrett, after the beginning
of Jd
eware-road pd
Elizabeth Ludeman, of New-street,
L gh r t„.
that Maynard had often called to. see the posed that the prisoner Garrett lodgedeeatth:
gssre
,
They appeared to be very ird-stre ethe.
Mr. Roberts, landlord of the Dolphin,
seen them
etc!g ,4 at
evidence to the same effect. He had oftee_njeuely
last,The last
at his house. Garrett, up to the end
three
well acquaiite&fi
onths.
hie house. He had been a lodger former WA'