The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-24 00:00:00

THIS DAY'S NEWS.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(THIS DAY.)
The House sat to-day to hear appeals. The Peers present
were Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell.
Their Lordships were occupied the whole morning with a
Scotch appeal of no general interest.

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor sat in his Court at Westminster to-
day, and took appeal motions.

ROLLS' COURL-(THIS DAY.)
Motions and the part-heard case of " Vessey v. Fyson"
occupied the Court the whole day.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Vice-Chancellor of England was occupied the whole
day with motions of no general interest.
(Before Sir J. KNIGHT BRUCE.)
His Honour, after disposing of several motions, proceeded
to hear the further arguments in the part-heard case of
" Law v. Law," which occupied the Court the remainder of
the day.

(Before Sir J. IN-muAm.)
His Hosora, after disposing of the different motions in his
paper, proceeded to hear the further arguments in the part-
heard case of Warren r Russell, Which occupied the Court
the remainder of the day.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
TRIAL AT BAR.-THE GREAT DISTILLERY CASE.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GEORGE SMITH.

Perhaps there are very few cases that come before our
legal tribunals that have excited more interest, and more
genuine feeling on behalf of the defendants, than the
case of " the Attorney-General v. Smith." From the pro-
ceedings that have already taken place, our readers must be
aware that the defendant is charged by the Crown with de-
frauding the revenue to an enormous amount. That charge
he repudiates, and calls upon a jury of the country to decide
whether he be right or wrong. Upon several occasions the
case has come before the Court, but no result has been
arrived at. The case was specially appointed to
come before the Court to-day, and its interest was
such, that long before the Learned Judges took their seats
every part of the Court was crowded to excess. Shortly
after ten o'clock the Lord Chief Baron (Sir F. Pollock), Mr.
Baron Rolfe, and Mr. Baron Platt, took their seats on the
bench.

In answer to the question of the Lord Chief Baron,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated that he, together with Mr.
Sergeant Wilde, Mr. Jar'vis, end Mr. Wilde, jun., appeared
for the Crown ; and Mr. Kelly, Mr. Martin, Mr. Wilson, and
Mr. Greenwood were for the defendants..

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, in opening the case, said that it
would be in the recollection of their Lordships, that a few
days since his Learned Friend, Mr. Kelly, had applied to
their Lordships to permit the jury to have a view of the
premises of the defendant. At the time that that application
was made, he did sot consider himself justified in acceding to
it; but since that time, having maturely considered the
whole subject, be thought the best course for him to adopt was
to accede to that view, and acting upon those principles and
views, he was now prepared to say, on the part of the Crown,
that he was not only desirous, but anxious that the view
should take place.
Mr. KELLY thanked his Hon. and Learned Friend for the
candour he had exhibited, and would at once accede to his
proposition.
The LORD CHIEF BARON said that he had taken consider-
able pains with respect to the present subject. Ile bad con-
sidered it fully, and after that consideration he continued
to be of the same opinion that he had expressed
before, that the Court had no power to grant a
view. The doctrine of view was of modern origin. It was
said that it was error not to grant a view where justice de-
manded it. That proposition was a fallacy. Grunt a view
where it was necessary if they pleased; but in the present
instance, in his opinion, everything tended to show
that all had been done that could be done. It had been said
that it was error not to grant a view—that it was against all
precedent to avert such a proposition, he had only to refer to
Jacob's Law Directory.
The foreman of the jury wished to know how they were to
ju
rymen,
he For his own part., and on those of his brother
he begged to say that they could understand the model much
better than viewing the premises.
After some further discussion, the jury retired to take a
view of the premises, and the further consideration of the
case was adjourned till the jury should return.