The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-23 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Feb. 22.

THORNTON V. PORTMLN.
The Solicitor-General, with Mr. Martyn, were Counsel for the
plaintiff; Mr. Thesiger and Mr. Butt appeared for the defendant.
This case seemed to excite the greatest interest in the sporting
world : the Court was crowded to excess at au early hour. Several
gentlemen of distinction on the turf were present, many of whom
were accommodated with seats on the bench.
It was an action brought to recover back a sum of 1,2501., paid
by the plaintiff to Mr. Portman, in discharge of a bet, lost by
Mr. Portman, to Mr. Gurney at the last Epsom Races, had, with
other members of the Jockey Club, undertaken the settlement of
Mr. Gurney's affairs, and entered into a written agreement to re.
ceive all the debts due to Mr. Gurney, and to discharge in
full all the demands against him. With that view
he obtained from Mr. Thornton, the plaintiff, the sum
for which this action was brought, and executed a written
agreement to pay the demands in full by the end of the Houghton
Meeting. It subsequently appeared that there was a departure
from that agreement, and in some instances no more than I Os., and
7s. in the pound were paid. In consequence of this departure from
the agreement, Mr. Thornton felt himself called upon to bring this
action.

The SOLICITOR.GENERAL then called witnesses to prove the
agreement :

Lord George Bentinck stated that he had no • interest in the
transaction, He had been a member of the Jockey-club for several
years, and also in the habit of attending the Epsom Races The prac-
tice of paying the money lost and won was, for the parties to attend
at Tattersall's on the Tuesday after the races, in order to settle
accounts. When a party does not pay the money he last,
the practice is not to pay him. On the occasion in ques.
lion, Mr. Gurney had made bets to a considerable amount at
Epsom. He came to Tattersall's on the following Tuesday,
to settle his bets, but he paid no money. In consequence of that
many persons who had lost bets to him did not pay. He (Lord G.
Bentinck) was among the number. He refused to pay unless a
guarantee was given for the payment of all Mr. Gurney's accounts
in full by the end of the Houghton Meeting. A guarantee to
that effect was signed on the 19th June 1541, and he then paid the
money. The guarantee was put into the hand of Colonel Anson,
senior steward. It was signed by Mr. Portman, the defendant.
He recommended all who had lost to Mr. Gurney, to pay also, when
that guarantee was given. The Houghton Meeting generally falls
in the month of November. It always commences in the month
of October, and generally terminates in the next month. That
year it terminated on Saturday, the 30th October. The settlement
at Tattersalls was consequently to take place on the 2d November.
He was present when accounts were produced at a meeting of the
Jockey.club at Tattersall's, but the defendant did not appear.
Cross-examined—There was a Mr. Dixon, who had lost money
to Mr, Gurney. The balance sheet of Mr. Gurney's account was
produced, His affairs seemed on paper to be a winning game, but
practically it was a losing game.—(Laughter.) Two persons
named Davis and Atkins had lost money to Gurney, and refused
to pay in consequence of the rumour that Gurney refused to pay
his losses. This was the first case of this description he had
known. The course taken with reference to Mr. Gurney's affair
was sanctioned by the majority of the Jockey-club, and among
others by Lord Exeter, Colonel Peel, Mr Gregory, and Lord
Stradbrook. He (witness) was of opinion, that the stewards of the
Jockey.club should have enforced the payment of the full amount
of the debts due to Gurney, as well as those he owed. The
rules of the Jockey.club are only binding on those who bet at
Newmarket, except with the consent of the parties.
Mr. Edward Hind stated that he had won 5251. from Mr. Gur.
ney, and had seen him at Tattersall's, but received no money from
him. He received subsequently 1851. from Colonel Peel, on
account of Mr. Gurney's debt. He had received no more sinee,
but was satisfied with the amount received. In cross-examination,
he said he received only 7s. in the pound, and signed the release
two months ago.

Mr. TUESIGER then addressed the jury on behalf of the defen'
dant, when

Lord ADINGER summed up, and statod that Mr. Thornton was
not in law bound to pay the 1,250/., but if he had chosen to do so
he had a perfect right to declare the terms on which he would pay
it, and those terms should have been strictly conformed to.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
mages 1,2501.

The Soctcrros-Gamtnsi. informed the Court that money was not
Mr. Thornton's object, but he wished to assert the principle, and
begged to inform the Court that it was Mr. Thernton's intention to
hand over the amount to Christ's Hospital. (That announcement
was received with loud cheers.)

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Feb. 22.
IN RE WILLIAM WATTS.
The insolvent was a horsealealer, and had been before the Court
in the year 1840, when he was discharged. He now appeared again
in Court to receive the benefit of the Act.
Mr. Commissioner REYNotns (addressing Mr. Roberts, the in_
solvent's solicitor), said he was very fortunate in having perpetual
clients.

Mr. ROBERTS-My clients are always satisfied with me.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS—If a person required passing
three times through this Court, I should recommend him to you,
Mr. Roberts.
Mr. COOKE said, upon the insolvent's former application to this
Court, he (Mr. Cooke) appeared as his Counsel, when it appeared
that he had at one time been most respectable, and dealt largely in
horses ; but upon his journey to one of the great midland horse
fairs he received so se►ere an injury by a fall from his gig as to im-
pair his intellect and totally unfit him for business.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS—It is rather extraordinary that
his intellect was equal to one thing and not to another. Ile had
sense enough to run in debt to the amount of upwards of 5001. and
circulate accommodation bills to a large amount. If such high au-
thority as Mr. Cooke were to be of avail in a case like this, he (Mr,
Commissioner Reynolds) feared they would have many cases of
broken heads in Court. .

The insolvent was eventually declared entitled to the benefit of
the Act.

RE WILLIAM HAYWARD.
The insolvent, who was taken from the Prison Infirmary, for
the purpose of being heard on his petition to be discharged, and ap-
peared so weak as to be scarcely able to stand, was opposed by a
person.nained Fox, residing in Farnborough, Kent. He had been
the proprietor of the King of Prussia tavern, in Greenwich, and
attributed his insolvency to long sickness.
The opposing creditor appeared in person, and cross-examined
the insolvent at great length on several matters connected with his
expenditure, amongst which were the expenses incurred at his wife's
funeral. The insohent stated that he sold the interest in his house
to a person named Kingsford, but owing to his being in the infir-
mary was unable to give all the details of the transaction t• his at.
torney in preparing his balance sheet.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS said lie regretted, in the present
state of the insolvent's health, that he should be obliged to send
bun back to prison until the attendance of Kingsford could be pro-
cured, and a frobh balance-sheet filed.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.
John Telford, a man dressed as a sailor, with marks of anchors
and stars on his hands and arms, with weak eyes and long white
hair, such as may occasionally be seen on "Fair Circassians " in the
travelling shows at fairs, was charged with begging.
Police constable F VS, stated that he found the prisoner at a
quarter past seven on Monday, standing in the Strand with his hat
off, some small pamphlets in his hand, and a boarct around his neck
with the following inscription on it--" The Hi' dory of J. Telford
from his infancy to the present period." Did riot see the prisoner
receive any money, nor was there any found in late possession.