The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-28 00:00:00

PHILLIPS V. GORMAN.

This was an action to recover from the defendant, as stake-
holder, the sum of 251., being the amount of a stake paid to
him by the plaintiff, to abide the event of a foot-race between
the plaintiff and one Scanlon, to which the defendant pleaded
that he had paid the same to Scanlon, by the direction of the
plaintiff.
Sir. Sergeant Ludlow and Mr. W. J. Alexander appeared
for the plaintiff, The defendant was represented by Mr.
Sergeant Talfourd and Mr. F. V. Lee.
It appeared from the evidence produced for the defendant,
on whom, from the form of the pleadings, the affirmation of
the issue lay, that a wager of 251. a-side having been made
between the plaintiff; Boulton Phillips, of Newcastle, and
Charles Scanlon, of Macclesfield, on a foot-race for 200 yards,
the match came off on the turnpike-road near Leek, on the 6th
of June last. It was agreed that the signal for starting should
be the discharge of a pistol. They started accordingly the
race was a very close one, but finally Scanlon came in two
yards ahead of the plaintiff. The plaintiff then raised an objec-
tion to the fairness of the start, and a written notice was in the
course of the same day served on his behalf upon the defendant,
directing him not to pay over the stakes to Scanlon, Upon the
same evening all the parties meet at the Red Lion at Leek,
whin the umpire, agreed on between them, having declared
that Scanlon had fairly won the race, the plaintiff was urged to
withdraw his objection, and admit that he was beaten, upon
which the plaintiff said, " Then, if he has won, pay the money
over to Scanlon." The money was accordingly paid to Scanlon
in the presence of the plaintiff, who subsequently stated that he
had nothing to do with this action, which was brought by his
backers on the race.

The Jury, after a little hesitation, returned a verdict for the
defendant.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—Derby, July 26.
(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
EXTRAORDINARY CASE.—John Radford, jun., aged 16,
was charged with having feloniously and maliciously cut and
wounded Ann Hicklin, at the parish of Walton-upon-Trent, on
the 17th of March last, with intent to kill and murder her.
• The case excited extraordinary interest, as well from the
connexions of the prisoner, who is the son of a gentleman
farmer, as from his extreme youth and the romantic details of
the case.
Mr. MACAULAY, having addressed the Jury, called the fol-
lowing witnesses:—
Ann Hicklin, the prosecutrix, a fresh good-looking country-
girl, said—l am in my sixteenth year—(the witness looked
more like five-and-twenty.) I was in the service of Mr.
John Radford, of Walton, in March last. 1 went into his
service last Christmas, The prisoner is a son of Mr. John
Radford. He lived at home. He became acquainted with
me, and frequently spoke to me. He asked me if I was
willing to talk to him, and to have him. I said his father
and mother would not be willing, and I would much rather
he would let me alone. He several times afterwards
asked me to have him, but I always refused. He said if I
had any conversation with any one but him he would cut
my throat. lie struce me with his fist several times on
different occasions. He has struck me on my side till I
could not l'rcathe. About three weeks before he committed
the offence with which he is charged I was in the kitchen ; the
rest of the servants were out, and family were in the par-
lour. The prisoner came in, and asked me if I intended to
have anything to say to anybody else. I told him I should
have nothing to say to him. I then saw a razor in his hand.
I don't know where he got it from. He told me he would cut
my throat, and then he opened the razor. He laid my
head on the side of the table, and held the razor over me, when
Mrs. Radford (his mother) came out of the parlour, and he let
my head go. Soon after I went out in the evening, about seven
o'clock, to get some fuel. He came to me, and asked me if I
intended to talk to any one beside himself. I made him the
same reply as I had before. He then took a razor from his
pocket, and, taking hold of me, said he would cut my throat
unless I would promise to have no one but him. He was in a
great passion. He took hold of me round the shoulders, and
I promised him what lie wished. The same evening he came
to me in the house, and asked me if 1 would do as I pro-
mised? I said I should not. Ile then struck me several
times. Mrs. Radford came in, and I told her what I had
promised. I cried out, and I suppose she heard me. Some
time after he knocked ine down in the yard. On the evening
of the 17th of March, I was cleaning a room up stairs between
six and seven o'cloek in the evening. The prisoner came into
the room, and asked me again what he had before. I said
that I should have nothing to say to him, whether he cut my
throat or not. He said he would cut my throat if I would
not promise him, and keep my promise. He then opened a
razor and asked me if I wanted any repentence. I told him I
did not, because I thought he would not do it. He then took
me round the shoulders with his left arm, and put the razor to
my neck. I remember feeling it touch my neck, but Ido not
remember anything after. Mi. Sharpless, a surgeon, was sent
for. I had recovered my senses when he came. I had never
given the prisoner a• y encouragement at all. My neck is now
quite healed up, hut it is very tender. At times I have a
great pain it, and it swells much. lam not now in Mr. Rad-
ford's service.

Cross-examined by Mr. HILL—I first discovered the wound
when I was in the kitchin, whilst trying to turn my head.
Thomas Henry Sharpless—l am a surgeon residing at
Burton. I was called in to see the prosecutrix on the evening
of the 17th of March. I found a superficial wound about two
inches in length on the left side of the neck. It was about the
eighth of an inch deep. I dressed the wound three times. It
was nearly healed when I last saw it, which was about a week
after I was first called in.
Abraham Lyon—l am inspector of police at Portsmouth. I
apprehended the prisoner on the evening of the 31st of March,
in Portsmouth, for a disturbance at some low house. He was
taken before the Magistrates. On the way to Portsmouth gaol,
he said, " I'll tell you all about it." 1 cautioned him. He
replied, " You may tell Mr. Janes, the Magistrate ; but don't
make more of it than I have said." He then said, " I was
jealous of my father's servant; so, I cut her throat with a
razor ; but she's better now."
This being the case for the prosecution,
Mr. HILL proceeded to address the Jury for the prisoner.
He was not there to justify the act which the prisoner had
committed, neither did he (the prisoner) wish to do so him-
self. He knew that he had plunged his respected family into
the deepest sorrow; they had expended large sums upon him
to fit him for coming out in life, but this strange passion having
seized him, he had acted in this unintelligible manner and
blasted his prospects in life before he knew their value. —( The
prisoner was deeply affected at this description of his position,
and wept bitterly. )—The Learned Counsel proceeded to *ay
that the prisoner's only object was to f,ighten the girl into
love with him ; and, in the course of an eloquent address, en-
deavoured to convince the Jury that they could not not find the
prisoner guilty on either of the counts in the indictment.
The Learned JUDGE having summed up,
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of an assault only.
Sentence was deferred.

NORFOLK ClRCUlT—.Narwich, July 26.
(Before a Special Jury,)
CROCKFORD V. YOUNG AND ALLEN.

This was an action in which the plaintiff sought to recover
a large sum of money by way of compensation from the de-
fendant far damages consequent upon their breach of a contract
entered into by them with him under the following circum-
stances :—The plaintiff is a mail of wealth, whose name is
familiar to all the habitues of St. James's, and the defendants
are two gentlemen in whose hands was entrusted a power of
selling the perpetual advowson of the living of Necton, in this
county. Being desirous of purchasing a living as a gift to his
son, who had entered holy orders, Mr. Croekturd entered into
a negotiation with the defendants, which terminated in a con-
tract of sale of the advowson and right of presentation to the
rectory of Neeton, with all the great and small tithes of the
whole parish, for the sum of 11,9601. The plaintiff accord-
ingly paid 1,7901. by way of deposit money, and 430/. fur
auction dots, after which the lawyers were set to work to in-
investigate the title. During this inquiry it turned out that
instead of all the tithes being at the disposal of the defendants,
which was the main reason for the interfererre of the
plaintiff, they had only one-half, the other moiety being
impropriated, and in other hands. Upon this the plaintiff
withdrew from the further pursuit of his object, and insisted
upon a return of all moneys paid by him on the faith of the con-
tract entered into by the defendants, who, he contended, were
also bound to make good a large sum of money which he had
given as a " fancy price" for several acres of profitless land,
which he had been induced to purchase solely by reason of their
contiguity to the glebe and rectory. The claim being resisted,
the present action was brought ; but when the facts were stated
to the Jury, the Learned Judge interposed, and suggested that
the difference between the parties ought to be adjusted at once
by a private rather than by a public inquiry. In his (Mr. Baron
Alderson's) opinion, the plaintiff could rent maintain his claim
in respect of the losses consequent upon his other purchase, as
he thosght the damage was ton remote. He, however, was as-
suredly entitled to recover the deposit money and auction duty,
with interest thereon, as well as the costs attendant upon the
investigation of the title, and as far as those sums went the de-
fendant would do well to meet the plaintiff and consentto a ver-
dict to that amount, whatever it might be.
In consequence of this suggestion, the Learned Counsel laid
their heads together, and a verdict was taken by consent for the
plaintiff—Damages 2,4001.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT—AP pl 1? Jul; 25.
( Before Lord DEsmAN
COULTHARD r. BiItNEY AND OTHERS.
This was an action to recover damages for an injury re-
ceived by the negligent driving of a coach by a servant of the
defendants.
Mr. Dundas and Mr. Watson conducted the case for the
plaintiff; and Sir G. Lewin and Mr. Monteith that of the de-
fendants.
It appeared that the defendants are the proprietors of a
coach, called the Engineer, which runs between Edinburgh
and Lancaster on week days, and between Carlisle and Lan-
caster on Sundays. The object of the coach seemed to be to
meet the increased demand for passage, occasioned by the rail-
way to Lancaster. It was horsed with three horseswas, and, as ap-
peared by the license from the Stamp-office, licensed to
carry four inside and two out. OA Sunday the lot August the
plaintiff and six others mounted the coach to come south. There
was a pile of luggage on the top from three to five feet high.
The coach started at a quarter before nine o'clock, with orders
to travel as fast as the mails, and keep a-head of them. The
[ mails started at nine o'clock. All went safely till they