The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-29 00:00:00

inquiries. With his probable cause of knowledge he
ought to have ceased cohabitation. Ther.e wits ho
'nsts.-ice of a husband coming betoie the Court for
relief who, after be had reason for grave suspicions
against his wife, continued to cohabit with her. But
after his libel had been admitted in the suit, and the
witnesses were being examined, on the 30th of May and
the 4th of July, his conduct and deportment towards his
wife indicated that he considered her perfectly innocent.
He came to the front of the house where she resided,
and invited her to come out, walked with her arm in
arm, conversed with her gaily, remained with her a con-
, siderable time ; they shook hands and kissed at parting,
and behaved, as one of the witnesses observed "like
lovers." Such conduct, though not amounting to direct
condonation, established constructive condonation. Even
if the Court should come to the conclusion that it must
attach weight to the evidence on the libel, still the con-
duct and demeanour of Dr. Dillon showed that he was
not sensible of any wrong done to him.
The reply stands over till a future Court-day.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Jan. 23.
IN THE MATTER OF JANES GOLDIE.

The insolvent in this case was a distiller in White-
chapel. He was opposed by Mr. Cooke oa the behalf of
an old woman, named Martha Stevens.
It appeared that the insolvent, accompanied by a
friend, was proceeding in a gig from his country-house
at Wandsworth to his residence in town, when the op
posing creditor, who was crossing the road at the time,
was knocked down by the insolvent's horse. She was so
severely injured that she was compelled to be taken to
the London Hospital, w here it was found that her thigh-
bone was fractured. Proceedings were subsequently
taken against him by Mrs. Stevens. when the Jury re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff of 200/. with costs.
The insolvent immediately afterwards became bankrupt,
but had not as yet got his certificate. On the verdict
which had been obtained he was arrested, and he now
applied to the Court to be discharged under the Act.
The LEARNED COUNSEL for the opposing creditor con-
tended that, under the circumstances, the conduct of the
insolvent called loudly for the reprobation of the Court,
as he had, in defending the action brought against him
by Mrs. Stevens, expended 301., with which he might
and ought in justice to have relieved her.
The LEARNED COMMISSIONER said, that under the
discretionary clause of the Act, he found there was no
provision to meet such a case as that before him. In all
cases where damages had been awarded for Cruse. Con.,
or such charges, the Court seldom considered such cir-
cumstances in pronouncing its judgment.
The insolvent was then ordered to be discharged.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

THE JURISDICTION, OF MAGISTRATES IN CASES OF
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MASTERS AND APPRENTICES.
—The LORD MAYOR stated that the City Solicitor had
received a letter from Devonport, on the subject of the
authority of Magistrates in matters of dispute between
masters and apprentices. The question was one of great
interest and importance, particularly in
.the extensive
manufacturing towns of the three kingdoms, and the
confirmation of Mr. Pearson's opinion by the law officers
of.the Crown, would, no doubt, give high satisfaction.
His Lordship then read the letter, which is as follows, in
order that its important contents might be as publicly
known as possible:

Devonport, Jan. 22, 1842.

is with pleasure I inform you that I had
the honour of forwarding a memorial, from the
merchants, manufacturers, and tradesmen of the borough
of Devonport, to Sir George Grey, Bart., M.P., for pre-
sentation to the Secretary of State, praying the inter-
ference of her Majesty's Government on the subject of
the Jurisdiction of Magistrates in cases of difference
between masters and apprentices, where no premium has
been given to the former ; and that Secretary Sir James
Grt.ham has been pleased to submit the question to the
Law Officers of the Ciown. . . .

And that I have—received a communication through
the hands of Sir George Grey, from the Home-office,
dated Jan. 17, 1842, that the Law Officers of the Crown
have reported on the above subject, and are of opinion,
that the Magistrates have jurisdiction.
I beg to say, that you are at liberty to make what
use you think proper of this communication ; also if a
duplicate of the original papers from the Home-office,
will be of any service to you, they shall be forwarded at
your request. —I have the honour to be, Sir, yours
respectfully, HECTOR MUNRO CROCKER.
To Charles Pearson, Esq., the City of
London Solicitor.

His LORDSHIP observed that the communication was
likely to produce a very favourable effect, as numbers of
apprentices had in various places manifested a very
formidable spirit of insubordnation, in consequence of the
general impression that an apprentice with whom no pre-
mium is given was under no obligation to attend to the
commands of his master.

Mr. Hobler said he was present when the City Soli-
citor delivered his opinion, and his Lordship acted upon
it, by sentencing a refractory apprentice to imprison-
ment ; and he had learned since that that decision had
completely changed the tone of those apprentices whose
masters were humane and considerate enough not to re-
quire any premium.
BOW-STREET.

Baron Charles de Behr, a native of Germany, was on
Thursday placed at the bar, before Mr. Hall, charged
with obtaining from Mr.W tin. Osborne Rich, a gentleman
holding a situation in the War Office, the sum of 501.
on the 18th of December, and a further sum of s€l. on
the 20th of December, by false and fraudulent means.
Mr. Steele conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Bow-
ditch appeared for the prisoner.
Mr. Rieh being sworn, said he was intimately ac-
quainted with Mr. Snow, the banker, and his wife, but
was not aware that any proceedings were pending be-
tween them in the Ecclesiastical Court previous to the
18th of December, on which day the prisoner, with whom
he had 110 acquaintance, called on him at the War-office,
and said he had come from Mrs. Snow, who told him she
required some money for the purpose of obtaining certain
papers of great importance to her. Having presented his
card, and introduced himself as the lady's friend, he
said, " I suppose you know what is going on ?
" No, I do not," replied witness, " but I'm very
anxious to know." He then said there were certain
letters in Portland-place, of great consequence, which
should be obtained from the housekeeper there. He also
said, " I have advanced all the money I had in her ser-
vice, and must require of you the sum of 3001. or 500/.
for the purpose I have mentioned." Witness told him it
would be impossible for him to command either of the
sums mentioned; upon which he said, " Damn it, man,
we must have money; what can you advance?" Witness
observed, that at this season of the year it was very in-
convenient to make up so much cash, but perhaps he could
find him a less sum, and he handed him 50/. in notes
(having first taken the precaution to mark their num-
bers), with which he went away, saying he would call
again. He accordingly came again on the 20th of Decem-
ber, to say the housekeeper was not satisfied with the
amount she had received, and as the papers were of the
utmost importance she should have more ; to which wit-
ness made some demur, but ultimately gave the prisoner
451. in notes, the numbers of which he took, together
with five sovereigns, with which he went away, promis-
ing to get the letters in question. In a few days after
the prisoner again called, and said he had ob,amed all
the letters, which were safe ; and, in addition to the
sums witness had given him for the housekeeper, he
(the prisoner) had advanced her 1301., together with a
promissory-note for the remainder. On the 30th of De-
cember the prisoner paid another visit at the War-office,
and complained that Mrs. Snow was in great distress for
money, that she could not get on, and that she must
have 1601., which witness said he could not give, as
he had already advanced all he could command. The
prisoner then begged witness would accept a bill of ex-
change for the amount, which he declined, as he knew
nothing about bill transactions ; but, on prisoner's ap -
pealing to his feelings, by saying it would be very unkind
to Mrs. Snow to refuse, he was prevailed upon to accept
a bill for the amount required. The prisoner then told
him he might make his mind easy, as he would be re,
sponsible, at the same time giving him an undertaking
to that effect. The prisoner procured a stamp, and said
that he would be in the receipt of a large sum of money
in January, when ho would answer it. Witness had re-
peatedly seen the prisoner since, but did not discover
that he had been deceived until within the last ten days.
Cross-examined—The prisoner gave an undertaking
and the bill was not yet due. The two 501. were not in-
tended as ii temporary accpmmodatio.n for him.
Mr. Bowditeh here handed in a letter, which the
prosecutor admitted he had written to the prisoner, to
show that by the purport of it the money advanced was
merely in the shape of a loan.
Mr. Steele said the question before the Court was not
to whom the credit had been given, but was such credit
obtained by means of fraud.
Mr. Rich being recalled, said he would not have
parted with the two 50/. had the prisoner not told him
the money was for the use of Mrs. Snow, and nut as the
prisoner pleased to apply it.
Mrs. Georgiana Snow proved that she did not know
the prisoner.
The prisoner here shook his head and smiled.
Witness did not remember ever to have seen him
before, nor did she ever authorise him or any other per-
son to apply to Mr. Rich for her, and if he obtained any
Money- on such a representation it was false.
Mr. Bowditch—Do you mean to say you never have
met the prisoner before ? Witness— Never.
denAyfitne
Mr. HALL having perused the letter put in for the de-
fence, sgarideatthedilsaicirgeupaagneeyinhiet
eansdhothuledlegtotebresfhoroeulda
twwaese eirty
and the
asnidi there
evidence
givett
Jury, bhyutthitewparsosaecutor.
bailable Toffheenceaes,
be annexed to the depositions.
Mr. Bowditch having recalled Mrs. Snow, asked her
if she did not meet the prisoner shortyleyaarsfteinr htherisreturn
from Paris on the Bth of December last, to which she
answered in the negative.
I_,Al
es
rrr
was,H ,s
SteeleLL thatsian
ihqdeu
he
nreiei inquired in
td
apportionv what condition
sc coin,
ectinthi
the
eieohn
Judges
il accordingly?
—Mr. trv,
ner
yrait;
coun-
try, and as he occasionally appeared in Windsor with a
e
cabriolet and horse, apparently his own, he supposed he
went to make up a
could procure good bail.
Mr. HALL said he could not tell what success the case
would have in another place, but
lhiseswould require would be
such a loss to know what constituted a fraudulent pre-
tence,lit
utfuerl
shot oo
purrkesn't eonnwoetei.ci'le'7T The mateybai I
that one of them on a late occasion said he should
the prisoner in 200/. and two sureties, with twenty-
in 100/. each, to answer the charge
of misdemeanour at the next Sessions of the Central
Criminal Court.

UNION-HALL.
Henry Headington' a young man in the service of 7,1 f.
Cook, a surgeon, in Stamford-street, was charged with
wounding his employer, and attempting to stab a police-
In tunsion in taking him into custody.