The Times from London, Greater London, England • Page 3

THE TOMBS, IEDNESPAX NOyEMBEja ,9, 188t BOTSLS, ko, TAT.T.AWTMi PRtVATR NtAUUURfm we a. a. kUMUKl KMlJIkM JL5 Uwlv VCtimTllOTKl. London. Restful quiet, near tte lJUnH3.f?i,t,lfcftl uu wait th.

i vl, tmux. ti. imieu. SacWiie eTreft. r2 tu far Imh.

I). ttnrsAi rSSSL a FAMILY HOTEL and rKNSIUW. it teii.iar. www war. nam am Ju ier ba.

Wkhmuait hi. IWbo Hrt. miiirv liMItnn.maii OTSv. aSo a. of TTOKttXMU) (UiTBU).

near Crystal 1 Twtff MC, I naMsttrrtl fcM rAeru4 eiJ rr. eu irm kT4iSO, tww. to ia fuio Koswll's HoM). 3L rrrawal. womeni 0 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF TUB PBIVlf COUNCIL.

Lord Fitxcqlald, Loan Hcbmoitsj; Sot luwcw Peacock, aad fctluauMcocca.) )UX XUBOftS DAM AftD XKOTHtW V. fcXSXXDBA ATH MBCAB AXD OTIIIBS. This an appeal from a decree of a Division Bach of Ite Illfih Court ol Calcutta el Fptember 0, 1834, rsvtning a lodgment of the snbcrdlaata Judge of rnbaa. Mr. J.

D. Mayne appeartd foe tba appellant Mr. Dojtw and Mr. O. W.

JLratbooa for tba rapooJcata. Tha volt waa broacht br tba mpondrota for a declaration that, under certain with of ona liU AVanalh Sircar, dt ceatcd, tba appellant, IUi KUbora uat, tooKt intemt in tha tvnnortr ci hrr lata husband, who vai an ado Tiled nn of the twUtcr. Tha crijlnal Coort dlnnlawd tha re pondcat a nut, tlcwbtins Uie Taiuiltr ot tba wuu, bn llleh Court, on appeal, pronounced the wills to be aenulne tobei'tffcctual in dUinlieriUnc the appellant. The jueatlon now at iMuo waa aa to tho legal affect of tho wills three In number. The arrumenta were unflnUhed when their Lcrdshtps roao lor um aaj, SUWIE5IK O0UUT OP JUDICATURE.

WOHTOSR The "VDLK'HHoUl and In tho ten anal beat Irtx I ta i.u. TvriS and full IT AlTfiTI 1 C.MUl aeanolUa for haoUn poUi LRAKV HOTEL. facing the a (jouth). mmS. aei KUiafd wifa T.bU abM at Kparal Shl IXtf hftV TfrnunaaJ ifXsTI.VfiS and ST.

ON 1 rv orhxo HorKL. ina. rrMn ri.rpi mttt ta TPMfott. Tab! ihiU uva o'rlodt), atarftU UbUa. MmmmJ trtJ Ufbl.

Far Ung alw Manafr. XFUKD. MITRE HOTEL? one of tho most oaooataJ finWeUM'howU tb klarloa. 0 TOTLAN'D BAY Isle of AVisht. Special rrhfcetul ttrmt kin cmarac St from Waterloo, IrKiaAM ao4 Yarawota, whf earrUf wt'l eooT rUltort ir ppUoa to tlw Mumw, ft.

UQwalifO, ToUand. AI.WNE W1NTKK HESIDEXCE. The MALOJA Kt'ESAAU Cfrcr KaraJia, 61UwUod, tjwciaOy coo. lDlt tohoulag. alaiabiac, and iKLWwtaf.

iMtraaienm ooocoru tiot dally. RUSSELS. HOTEL de 1'EUROrE, Place Emk2.ar But attattioa la BruntU. Oid (ta (ituilu trtti 1x41 for uaaliaat mivlartta Hit, aal eositort. A4dr lb Maoar.

KICE. HOTEL dca ANGLAIS. This fint clau Unit, ttoni tb ara aad aodtr KncSab maaaecnMst, KE ittiStD fjrtba ccaKW oa Lb UU OctoW. XtSt, Tbero a lift for Km it a a uaia, Bcrarj. Xa U.

AbobaxMaDa, Londoo; K.C WINTER SKASOXi COLUMBUS HOTEL, Uaclia. fpIa Bt boUl in IVclassU. Vadt EnslUb aAatCMnl. isssut ot racaa, batb ao4 wter dowl to cacb. CxbtMtr cardiea.

6iad roots. nib br ard. wtn. Ineindnd. 10a tar if.

Arm viottr Umrvralcr 6uilrc. Fabrenh with ria LoarfnOx dtr Ualra UoUl Oom(aj, Zamitod. Old JcTT.Ioala.KC. TRADE NOTICES. COURT OP APPEAL.

Ityert Mjurrm tJU Rolu and Losoa Jcsncxa Bowrx and Frt.) vatos, or mi covTJutr or uxboijlkts ot Tins BTAKJt Or tNOLAKD V. TUX BASK Of X5CLAXD. The arcuthettta in this cate. which wera rrmrtckl in TJU Xtavi ol JUondajr, were returned to day br the Attornet uwirnu auiu rr it. urococ, V.v, ir.

ATDUUUWt WIU1 mcmi lor tno UctttirtanU, and by Mr. Finlar, Q.C., and Air. it. U. urar ror tee plaintifft.

The plaintiff were a tt ancient corporation, created by charter porno rcntunra apo for tha encouragement of trade, but now of aome 30 member, who dine together! at certain periods of the year. Their elrrk, a aoiicitor btmed Drew, had tte wholo management of their busine and tho cnttodr of the corporate feal. This he fraudulently affixed to two power of attorney, by mean oi wnicli induceu IL Uank of England to transfer tno wnoie rt tierty of ine corporation, a turn of in Tcsted in Consols and ha then absconded with the irocvodj of th aale. An action bavins been bronchi for the amount. the Bank contended that the plaintiffs by their negligence in tearing alt newer in tlie bands of Drew were estopped from denTine tho validity of tho powers of attorney.

The jury found that the plaintiffs bad been guilty of negli gence, and air. Baron Pollock left the parties to movo for judgments The Diruional Court entered judgment for tho piamiuis, ana ine defendants appealed. The Court dismissed the appeal. The Majstir of the Rolls nkl that tha only question waa whether there had been negligence on the part of tho piaintui in or unmcdutcly connected with the tranafer iUclf that was to say, such licence as to be the proxi mate cause of the transfer. Tho principle on which the case must be decided had been meat dearly laid down in the caaa of Evans's Trustee Tha Bank of Ireland 15.

"1L L. 569). That waa a decision in the House of Lords, which waa therefore binding on all Courts. It Lad been interpreted by subsequent cases and the judgment itself was clear. Although there might be neglect on the part of the plaintlffi.and although it might be such neglect as was calculated to mislead, yet the neglect would not exonerate tho defendants, unless it waa the proximate cause of the transfer.

In this case there was no evidence whatever that tho neglect of the plaintiffs waa the pro li ma to came oi tne transier. Lord Jcsticx Bowzx waa of the same opinion. If the oucetioni had simnlr been whether the nlaintiffs had de parted from the reasonable caution of business people in tho custody of their seal he would hare felt some difficulty in distorting tne rerdict ot a commercial jury, but it was clear that there was no evidence on which the jury could find that the neglect of the plaintiffs was the direct cause of tho'transfer. LoKti JCSTICX FBT said that the case was really India. tinguuhabla from Evans's Trustees v.

Bank of Ireland. Effort Lords Justices Cotton, Lixdlxy, and Lores. HALL V. EWXX. This was an appeal from an order of Mr.

Justice Kcke wich restraining the defendants from committing a breach of a covenant contained in a lease of which the defendant Ewin was the aasignee and under whom the defendant JI'Nefl claimed as under lessee. The action was brought by tho lessor of 339, Edgwarv road, raddingtonvfor the purpose of restraining hwuLa assignee of tno lease ox tne noose, irom permitting it to be used in a manner contrary to a covenant contained in bis lease, and oi restraining at inch irom mine the house for the exhibition of wild, animals. In 1S49 a lease waa cranted br the predecessor in title of tho plaintiff of the house in question to G. Tarlington for tho term of 60 years, and the lessee covenanted that he would not at any time daring the term use. exercise, or carry on upon the said premise," or permit or suffer any part thereof to be occupied by any person or persons wbo snail use, oe capT, or carry on therein any noisome or offensive trade, or employment whatsoever," without the consent in writing of the lessor.

Tarlington mortgaged the pre mises by of reserving tbo last three days of the term of 0 years, and they were afterwards sold to Ewin by tne executors oi me mortgagee unaer tne power saio. In 1885 Ewin demised the premiMS to the defendant MTCeff for a term of 21 years, the latter covenanting not to use the premises for any noisome or offensive "trade, busineM, or employment whatsoever without Ewin's consent in M'A'eff had since set up on the premises an exhibition of some lions, accompanied by a lion tamer of colour, and this action was tfcen commenced against both Ewin and AfXeff aa defendants. The defendant Ewin applied for the dismissal of the action with cosis as against himelfon the ground that he was not responsible lor the nuisance. On the 3d of Hay last lit. Justice Kekewieh held that both the defendants were bound by the covenant in the lease, and granted an injunction against both of them, with covte.

TJ 1 .1 1 1 Tl 1 I 1 i rum uu aecsioa ui acicnaant Ain now appealed. Jlr. Homer, Q.O., and Mr. Fanrell appeared for the appellant. Mr.

"WARiObaTO, Q.C.,and Mr. Decimub BlTECCS.for tne respondent, contended that Ewin was liable, as be had taken no steps to stop the show, and had therefore broken tne covenant not to suffer any noisome trade or bus! ness ta be earritNl in nmn the. demised nremiaes. MAGIC LANTERNS and DISSOLVINO VIEWS. LoKD Jcsncx Cottos said that tie defendant Ewin and ZJLMBIiA 8 LANTEES.

ELIDES, pro thmfnm nnl bound ln r. thn covenants in the lease, and it would bo an extension of the principle; of Tulk v. Moxhay (2 to hold that bo was bound in equity. He had granted a sub lease to. the defendant MiN'efT, in which the latter' covenanted not to exercise or carry on upon the premises any noisomo or offensive; trade or businers without the consent in writing of twin.

it bad been shown that twin bad granted that lease to M'XefT for the txirpose of earrying on this show then it would have been right to have granted the injunc tion against him. It was said he had stood by and allowed MNeff to carry on this show and had so broken his coven' ant. His Lordshin would idve no ordnion whether if ha WEDDINO and BIRTHDAY PRESENTS, at were bound in law by this covenant be had broken it. Bat 2. PkseadtUr.

lAoioa. Ith. tmnnnl. iT ISilV Mnxtui ru tiitt ifcnai.h qj" I underlease waa not bound in law by a reatnctive covenant, liaOL to 3 rvet. if he purchased with knowledre of it, the Court of lla (d.

1 Chancery would not allow him to use the land in a manner will, tfi.f MiVM1.nfc I tvrt 4)iA rtl.intifV did not with to restrain Ewin from doing auything, but wished to compel him to commence an action against a subtenant who was in possession of the premises. But the Court would not make an order compelling him to take such a step. It had been contended that Ewin iud dona nothing whatever, but the evidence showed he had requested M'Neff to close the show. It could only be said that he "PHOTOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT ALBUMS, of the had not taken legal aetion in the matter. On these facts A.

bxt lja ad. 5 Kasimeatal and PraMstaUoa AJbaau, it waa wrong to grant an injunction against Ewin, and the ioi vne acuou ana ui ui appeal. LoRiMt Jcstices LtSDLXT and Lor a gave judgment to tha Ilka effect. oaaa in par 10a C1HRISTMA3 CARDS. A PACKET of SIXTY snt dsM CARDS for St.

91 pott free. DriBA tbeeUarsoe ata3fetcrrr rcnafnder. bmitod nambr onir eaa aappliod al tba tk. S. WAIUt, lUaUotMr.

63, HUbHoiUarfl. CHRISTMAS CARDS, at reduced pricaa. A rictioa ot th btt din of tbs mmm nt on approral to aoj adrM la tk UoiMd Kloadoa'va rrctp'. ot Lai traction. IvKTlUr eaUlorn oa fbocLL SalITU aad BQV, Cbsriac crraa, Loodoo.

SANDSOME PIECE of SILVER. A particularly itMrul SUQAS DREDGE U. staodtna 13 lacb bXch. tm dose top. rrica 7 13a A prct la' tba bt tu.

Fcr approral addr Mus Millard. TrddlBftoa, SCiddleMX. ANTIQUE PLATEji MAPPIN and WEBB. Secad baad SUrar porcfeaasd. Bold, or Valutloa nute for rrobktoorkcur datT, 11 to 22.

Foulirr, Citj. Loodoa I. li 1.1 in KJ fardoB. rs nd and 4 CAPTAIK CABKfET of SILVER PLATE ft. ta tOUX pri'al'T oil rnl solid roarvood.

ne hrtmr irntrd cur. onotaiaim to ploca of real rraaio old ailQ patfera spoons, fork, ladta. ease aobop. aosar itfw. erraa Uir, tt; warranted qaalltr plat on par wbito Bickrt sQ.r, for bard ach au aasfaafr' cnaraatard tntUitr stamp, tijtir iBitfal.

aid trad mark. N'nrr bm wad. aaiutle far military trntlBaa or for boa a. Makm prlot 21 Taa isaUt' porrbator 10 tbca aloa worth i. A pv'il nj Jwtanc So a koca fd rtapoaalal applleabL Addr rw.lIa'rrood TiUa.

SJ, CUrsndao road. Baisvater. W. and ZAMBRA'S OPERA. Race, XI FmU CLAaSKd, la'Uav es aomplet.

two ION TTOiVCOLD IT HAS BEEN. KEORETTI and ri ZAMBCA cdraratcd SELF REG I STEE I TUBR KOMETxerrrwCy ledjaat tbo lowest aad bl(bMt temperature ta tbc abwo ot lb abwrrrr. tarai br My a'bacea proeesi, fir faller datats aad more brautlfal tStCM TEGRETTI and ZAMBBJUOptidani to the Queen, 1 Britka aad Forcira Careramenti, Ac Tb accuracy of all la Stfsarsff ruracUed. Tb trade, aad sblpprrs llolbora tiadacf, EC. Rraacbn 4S.

OrohUl 122, Ee. euKtreet Fbota rlbkfti9vCrrtairalac. Talepboo SPECTACLES." Spectacles nnsuited to the tight trnamllj eaaa bUadiMM. JCr. H.

LAURAVCK, Oeuliit OptiKta. I. Oil Boad Mrwat. auktad bf a onalifiri medical ariaitaar. seirnttfieaar adapt bis iraproTed trtfetaela to a sol uui wrakect djbU Fampblet, Tb Ef la Hat aad DiMae." pot fn.

CStr tiraaeb. e. Poabrr. Ka Uea Bix takrptCMti VrSictCaaM takuaol tati4arr Oa 21a Cd. llattto tS ssa Od.

ti IlHnmat Cum Jewel Caa QnniU Clnr Cahlncti 01. to TiwiViM 2 Ol ta' 13 taai.eotbou3a.aa3 alrtiaiortMoSorBorlUa.froai lo b. HODRIUDES TRAVELLING DRESSINGBAGS, and OaltHnarkad aUrer Sttiaci, fi .5 13 IX. Iartmaateaus. witb Urr fwO" Citias.

baod Imcv earriar bars, and bats of all kinds rnana, ooroopa. od erocodila. 42. necadillr. Umdon.

r4acrBbraaMacdSererealeatber and liath, wltb.rTrtlb: non 10 portriU. Al TTISITI50 CARDS at HENRY RODRIGUES'. AirtpUUaoTloilaprflnor4prlnVdfor.6d. pncraaa mteia. aol guest card, all the Dewpaturos.

7tar4aBlurttaUoiwlocwroaatiy aodbreaUass, IsvilaUoos aaA amanj. ad eoio prUea. 42 Pieoadlll. PORTRAIT ALBUMS (PARKINSandGOTTCS). kr'ia aeorptable as a portrait altmm.

Upon tb drawing. tu It hi Llwtri a soorta of Intoml aad oaraUon. mi mA 1 ri Tinrg mrtn Tmw i i miiif taosiarilaAat farkios. and Uetto a. U.

OzfonUUevt, Loodoa. Tl pARKJ5S and GOTTO, Q0UBT STATIONERS. V'SIJINO CARDS printed at three hours' oajrarwl is tbe eaott faablonab: rU and ebeapr sou la Loedon. 100 rapvrfia Irorr card prtotod from on tr. PAiMSaDdUQTTO.OitoTd trit.W J)IBTHDAY GIFT8.

PARKIN3 and GOTTO'S rjJl1rsl bpt. aod beat cboioe la Europe, ir 1 Portrait Alhoiaa KortlU la Brass vSd5m'j, I rmn 0a IakJtanda. Clooka JLrfal aod tnvtytnUU artleia f. oa to 10. OaUloco fyraa FartlaaMMl Qotlo.

M. 66. tO. 62. Ost ord treet.Loodoa 'nMmK nnwvnDT m.

fi f5H0HS CAKTZK8 patnti4orboldtat a aiTtft rnerenalr.t,.or aof a. wuctouaij lazortoos. iaaoa.W. rsiloo Tne oal aaareaa. MA LITERARY PvUdoualr I ax an on.

'n BED. JOHN CARTER'S Uo. TIXq BfD TAliLV, adfasUbU to aar balsb.or loali WoSilt0 Price frn2 J. brawLuJi trea Outer, ta. CarodIibtrt.

I'ortlaod place, W. URE. JOHK CARTER'S OOCCHE8 and OB AIRS. 1 1 reolULnc boards. leoatmode 1 mil m.i portaMe waterloiria.a tratawd tk'tZfSTT: IX; bed uUa i3a bed lift.

10a Ka (. "T.vT,"'3?1 tor uraau ana Wcaa Carter, ta. Hew tnTahda.aa.Drawlnzs CeidlaB tr4.rortlaodiaoaJ W. JJATH jnUlRB, 1 invalid catrriagea, very e3nproaeUjprrpaU XWact appearaoaa. Baa JJJ wattbalator Ci Crawins fre.

J0UJf etfft. rortlaad plaor. W. AjAl CHAIRS. JOHN CARTER'S tf.ltJ?.

an lbrvlid aod dowa Main or pa a UrawiBnpostbwa Joba SEa2Pa5L.L2, A8Y CHAIRS, 3 2i. 10a. 5 rxareWaf chain for lodKUoo. DraWti poetfrJOlii (fw i rvearu. Aa Drawkia CereadiiBearyet, ponWIace.

VV7 PERAMBULATORS, 1 iJtrau. Sa. Stew ji.1I mm. OORS AppUedtoottUixary ti4nZKt'w1'm oLiia4oA ra a aa aajeVwahfJiJ tlreoVaaado not 'iShZ. dta.fr rarsAabad sorfaeahtsH 10a td.

3rTkjT i aUk, 4. Mowart, Half a gallon will IHOH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION. (Bfcrg Mr. Jcsticx Exsirwicn.) 1 SLX 0R8M0VD DStT kY T. The arguments of counsel in this case concluded on the 1st of November, when his Lordship gave his decision on One of the points involved, reserving judgment on the other point, as reported in The Timet of November 2.

Tbe question on which judgment waa reserved waa as to the effect of an assignment for the benefit of creditors, by the executors of an insolvent testator, of the testator's assets. The "plaintiff, a specialty creditor, who did not executa tha dead, asks in the present action for a declaration that the deed may be declared void as against herself snd other noo araenting creditors, and for administration of tbe real and personal estate, with incidental relief. Mk. Kxkxwicu now made the following important observations I reserved judgment on. some nice questions on tbe deed of alignment, and I have directed the case to be put into the paper, in order that I may make some remarks for the guidance of the counsel engaged in it.

I cannot hold the deed good in its entirety on any of the grounds argued by Mr. Warmington on tha ground of preference or sale of assets nor do for the moment, inquire whether' what has been done is strictly, a dra.f art another of Mr. Warmirgtou's points. I am satisfied by tbe evidence that the plaintiff is entitled to prove against tbe estate under covenanti in tho lease granted by her to the testator, and that, whether anything was due at (he data of the deed or not, all parties must be taken to have known that she would Esve a i claim." Apart from other considerations, the trust of the 1 rurpluA for the benefit of the estate (for that is the mean ing of the deed) enables the plaintiff, through the executor or in the presence of the executor, to claim an I will not now criticise the deed minutely, but ita provisions (1), for continuing the business, and (2), for payment of the costs, are important, among others, in tha point of view. The plaintiff might have asked to come in under the deed on the terms of not disturbing former dividends, and this could not ha ve been refused.

Then she would have released like the rest. Bat she does not do The plaintiff might have asked Court to avoid the deedf entirely, to treat it as wholly bad, and to charge, not only the executor, but the trustee with tbe full amount of the assets, so aa to satisfy herown debt. I do not 'say aha could have succeeded, hut that would have been consistent and intelligible the plead lnga point to that and touch of the argument alio. But tha pUlntiffdocarjtaak this idie aakjfor an aecoont of the propertt come to the hands of the trusty, and also an account of the payment as well aa the receipt. I am not prepared ta aay shels not tight to jo dung, but it it difficult formulate inch relief, and stiU mere ifficnlt to tee how any relief granted on this footing can be of the rilgbte rtS benefit to tbe plaintiff.

BeMue. Interferea with the asaaia which tha other creditor have agreed to accept, the must let; them ta i on rtne was, ana will only stand on an equality with Uiea i aa regards tne whole estate, uy any suca Sintlff ukt the would take the benefit of the deed; How. eela to nsale hlat The rioncsty of the wholo transaction is not impeached it is not tnrttd that the IniMee haa ated toproperiy. Most be notbe lademsi Sed aa any other trustcaT Ti anest on mlrt wtiil hut It it right to point out this difuculty, and also tba difSeulty that tho plaintiff net oil behalf of herself and all other the ttBtatiaBed creditors, aad; taya the estate Insolvent, and expect, of ccorta, to get costs aa between solicitor ana client. Bat for whose benefit does she tut Herown only.

Would, then, the rale be applicable The ease hat not been thorouglily threshed out, I will not tuggest why or how this came to pass, but whatever may have been tba reason many points which have ocenrred to me were not noticed, and notwithatandintf auzioni consideration I have found myself unable to dispose of them without farther assuunce. 1 do not propose to iriruer elaborate those peinta now I have lufflciently indicated them. Probably others will appear on further Investigation, for the case tt one of novelty as well at of difEculty. I must, theref orej have the case reargued. Counsel, whether for tne plaintiff or defendant, will of course not discuss questions sufficiently answered bef ore and respecting which I then Tbnouneed a definite opinion, bnt I do not otherwise wish to intcrfero with their discretion.

I aa aware that this course involve not only delay, which will be slight; bnt costs, which will be lane in nronortion to the amount at stake. I deeply regret this, bnt my duty it to administer justice, promptly and cheaply 11 possible, but at au costs justice. 1 do uot sco my way to that end in this particular ease without bearing further argument. His Lordship accordingly directed the case to be at the head of the paper on Monday next. Mr.

Upjoha is for the plaintiff, and Mr. Waimlngton, Q.O., and Sir. Oswald ara for the defendants. QUEEN'S BENCH DIVI8ION. (Ihjart MB.

JcBTICK EtetjiIU aad Jcmci ClIAIOXI.) jioiiiia t. vni.i.itsTS. This wu an action arising out cf cne cf those singular agreements which are seme times entered into. The action wastry the official liquidator of a company called the Houso Improvement and Supply Association fLimited) on an agreement entered into by the defendant (described as a on the 13th of April, 1SS3, and under which, aa waa alleged, he agreed to repay the company the sum of 75 advanced for the purchase of a bond in thai company by 20 quarterly instalments of 3 Ids. 3d.

each, which would come to 7C 6., and in case of default in payment cf any instalment the whole to become due. It wu alleged by the plaintiff that after payment of instalments amounting to 19 Is. 3d. default was made, and to the whole of the balance became duo that is, the turn of 57 3. Od.

The plabtiff. under the bond, was entitled to interest at 6 "per ana he went on paying tbe instalments at long as the company paid the interest, bnt when it waa wound np he ccafcd to pay his instalments, and so this aetion waa broucht. in which tho plaintiff sought to recover judgment frammarily for the balance. In support of the application for judgment the liquidator made an affidavit that the defendant was the holder of a drawn share in the association, which entitled him to an advance of 75 upon such security as tha company should approve, and be elected to taxe a uona tor tnat amount, and the company advanced the sum of 75 to the defend ant to purchase one cf its own bonds, which was issued to tho defendant aa luily paid up, and deposited with tno company for the due repayment of the 75, and he then entered into tho agreement, which was in these terms: Received of the House Improvement and bnpply Associa tion the sum of 4275 as a loan on the security of a bond of the association for 75, which I have deposited with the association pending the repayment of the loan, to be re naid. The lw uidator stated that the defendant had received interest and bonuses in respect of the bond, and it and it waa further stated that the association had deposited with trustees the title deeds of certain property as security to the bondholders.

The defendant made an affidavit that he bad received neither tho 75 nor the bond. Tho Jndge at Chambers bad only given bun leave to defend the action on condition" of brincinff tho amount into Court. He appealed from that decision. Mr. Box ALL appeared on his behalf, and urged that he oueht to be allowed unconditionally to defend.

He had a. deaired to borrow bio, but had only incurred a iiaomty to pay it. There waa a pretended loan and pretended purchase of a bond, but he had got neither money nor bond, for the bond was retained by the company and in truth he only incurred liability instead of obtaining fMs, stick CHARLES. But what is the lecal defence you The company ha vo failed to pay the in teres' were is a laiiore ui cuxu iuer iuuuuu uuzc is a act off Steel Company v. JNayior, JUaw Reports." O.B.D).

a ASMTOX CROSS, on other side, urged that there was no defence. The Court to held in August last in Hobbs v. Greef similar case, and in Lancas ter IMee (10 Law Reports." Ciu nfrrvl it was held that in such a case there it no act oil or mutual credit." Tbe Court tad that the arreement wat so peculiar that the defendant ought to be allowed unconditional leave to del end. BALBXRO MORRIS. This ease raised tho somewhat important Question of the liability of sheriffs to an action for damages where the roods of a person other than the judgment debtor have been by mistake seixed hy tbcm in execution, It appeared that judgment had been recovered aga inst the defendant upon a bill of exchange.

Tbeafacriu issued execution unon the roods at the house of the address siren by the defendant upon, tho bill of exchange, whereupon the father of the defendant claimed the eoods as being his sole property, also stating: that his son did not even reside there. Thereupon an interpleader summons was issued, when the sheriff acknowledged that be had made a mistake, and an order was made for his withdrawal, which indeed had already taken place before the hearing of the summons. The lather had, nowerer.commeneea an action fordamaces against the sheriff, which the aster bad staved, but upon appeal to Mr. 1 Varan Pollock the Master's oraer. wu revenw ami kuwi pouj i mti tuum allowed to proceed.

The matter now came before the Divisional Court upon the sheriff's appeal from Mr. Baron Pollock's order. Mr. Aiixn appeared far the sheriff, and contended that at most bo bad only been guilty of a mistake. But it was a bond file one, and he honestly believed he was seizing goods belonging to the son.

He cited 'Billiard v. Hanson' Ra. Cb, C9) and "Smith v. Critchfield" (14.Q. 15.

873). In the latter case the Master of the Rolls said that the therm will be protected when be has only made an honest mutaJce in executing the process ol the (Jourt, and but lor such mutaJce everything that be has done would be Justi fied by the writ," The affidavits in tho present caae, he contended, showed that the sheriff had made i no. nines as to the ownership of the goods, and that he was informed and had every reason to believe that they belonged to the son. Mr. Staslxy Bocltxb, for tbe father, submitted that the Court would not anticipate the trial of the action and go into the merit of the dispute at the present stage of the proceedings.

Moreover, tho affidavits on the other side had only been served yesterday, and no opportunity had been afforded his client of answering thorn. In any case the cost of. tho appeal should not. he respectfully contended, be allowed, inasmuch as the order of the learned Jndge in Chambers might have been different if the present material had been before him. atr.

uunnam appearea ior tne execution creanor. Mr. STxrazx. in dving judgment, said that it was clear tbat the sheriff must be protected. The affi davits undoubtedly showed that had made all proper and necessary ino nine.

The sheriff had evidently made a mistake, but ho nad taken reasonable precautions to find out who wa the owner of the goods. The appeal would be allowed, but without costs. (Beor Mb. Jcsticx Makisty and a Special JuryO HAS! T. MILLER.

This was. action for breach of promise of marriage. Tbe defendant denied the alleged promise, and no other issue was raised on the pleadings, but the case developed during the trial into one of a very extraordinary character. Mr. Foley and Mr.

Parke appeared for tbe plaintiff and Mr. Waddy, Q.C., and. MrT. Willea Chitty tor the defendant. The plaintiff case having been opened, Mrs.

Annie Hiae, the mother of the plaintiff, wa ealled, and said tbat she kept a boarding house "in Tbe Grove, Hammersmith. In May, 18S6, the defendant and his wife came to reside with her, bat leit in June, aoous tne following Christmas tbe defendant called on her and showed her a separation deed between himaelf and hi wife, who, the witness stated, was given to drink. A week or two later he called again and told her that his wife had had a fit and wa confined to her bed. and that be intended to marry again a soon as prudence permitted. He added I fell in love with your little daughter the first time I saw her, and ar soon as I can I shall make her my wife." On September 12, lbbo, she received a letter from the de fendant announcing his wif e's death.

He called again on the Sunday following, and reminded her of his. conversation at Christmas, inquiring after her daughter who was absent from home. On a subsequent call he repeated the words he had Used at Cbristmaa, said he should marry within eight or ten months, and that be could well afford to keep a wife and six children.hi income being nominally 100 a year, though by depreciation of house property it might be red need to 1,200 or .1400. On her daughter ftho tJaintiff coming in. he asled them to come and tee him on the following Tuesday.

They went, and he showed. tbem over bis bouxe. On a subsequent occataon he took the plaintiff to the Colonial Exhibition. After that he conducted himself in every way aa an encaged man. kitting the plaintiff in witness presence, and frequently alluding tb what he would do when they were married.

A number of tbe defendant a letters to tne plaintiS were here put in. They contained no very significant expressions of endearmentnd were mostly in a yocoso vein, being profusely adorned with rough illustrations, which created some amusement in Court, A letter of January 6. 1SW5. contained what counsel for the plaintiff characttffixed as a very important' expression on the back the word Barkis it Willin Another of January 10 enclosed a picture of a lady aad gentleman arm in arm, and a drawing of two hearte marked respectively with a and a and transfixed by a dart, with the word underneath Oh lawk tnussytne I Continuing, tbe witness said that on February 11 her daughter made a communication to her, in consequence of which she wrote to the defendant. This letter waa read, and contained a remonstrance on the defendant's having talked to the plaintiff respectinr hit marrying another lady with a request that he would reply by return whether he intended to marry the plaintiff or sot.

Further correspondence followed both with the mother and daughter; in which the defendant strongly denied having made any proposal of marriage, and on being threatened with legal proceeding! stated that he waa prepared to deny any pruxaise on oath. Crcaexamined by Mr. WaDDT, Q.C., tbe wltoca said. I have resided at The Grove, Hammersmith, fire or six year. My daughter waa in a situation aa companion to two young ladies who were travelling about.

She ceased to be to in August or September, 18b. She lefV because I considered that the was going to be Mr.Miller'a I know no other reason, 1 believed that my daughter' en jtagement wat aa ragagement far an honourable woman to an honourable man, I know of no reason to the contrary, My daughter's fall name it Annie Kate Hate. When defendant asked for my daughter's address in October I told bira I could not give it. I did not know where the young ladies were. My daughter never lived at Tavtstock roaa.

a never lived there. 1 do not mow a person eauea Bernard. At this point Mr. WlPOT asked to bo excused for a moment, and conferred with Mr. Four, to.

wham be bAnded a doeamenk. Tho plaintiff then' left the Coort. On her re torn, Mr. Waddt aidV I hoped to hare avoided putting this to you, but I must now aikyou this At that time did you a At a mm a a xnow uat your daughter waa living at i.avtoca roaa under the name of Brine, tad that aha waa confined of a a a eniia on August 17 'WUneat Na. MB.

JcbticxMaxistt. Wait a moment. HI Lord ship referred to the pleadings, and went on to say that the only defence wa a denial the pramiae. Be did not understand what the case Air. WADDT.

My ease that the deleTidant tooa: a friendly interest in this young woman, that he wa willing to assist her in her education, that he withdrew from the houso on seeing this child, and that they then brought this charge against him. The Witness. Oh. that is my stepdaughter child be is talking about. Of course it Is.

Mb. Jcsticx Maxistt. To deny that he ever prornlftffd and then seek to destroy ho1 character is a vcry serioas matter. Mr. Polxt.

I have put the matter to my client, and desire to say that she is prepared to deny it on oath. Mr. Waddt. I only desire to show the whole facts. It is not my client wbo has destroyed her character.

If I can "show all that I have said when this charge is brought against my client, surely that is relevant. Surely that goes to credit. Mb. Jcancx Maitistt. That is the usual way ot getting in evidence which is properly inadmissible.

Circumstances may occur to make it admissible, but at present I hall not admit it. Cross examination continued. I do not know that defen dant came to ray house and saw my daughter with a baby on her lap. He may have seen me with one often. I remember telling him it was my stepdaughter's.

I think that waa in November, 18SC My stepdaughter' name i Annie Kate Haae. His LoBDsnir having again interposed. Mr. Waddt asked to be allowed to amend the record so as to raise this charge fairly and fully. Mb.

Jcsticx Makisty. No. I do not think yon ought to ao it. Mr. Waddt.

Then I shall ask to be allowed to put tno question to the plaintiff. Annie Kate Haae, the plaintiff, waa then called. She said that in October, 188C, her mother forwarded a letter from the defendant. She subsequently saw him, and agreed to go with her mother to his house in Abingdon sington. He showed her all over the house, and on a sub sequent occasion she went to tea there.

He gave her a coral necklace. On October 25 he took her to the Colonial Exhibition. He asked whether tbe waa surprised at what her mother told her. She said she he replied that he had fallen in love with her when be first taw her. She promised to think the matter over, and soon after she con sented, took her home to tea, was most and kissed her.

After tea he showed her his late wife's jewels, and told her to try on the rings and that he would 1 1 1 1 give ner one. lie gave ner a silver Draceiet ior a oiruuuy present. After November 11 the saw him frequently, ana be took her out. She practised the piano at hit request: Every time she saw him no alluded to the marriage. In November be gave her a sewing machine and a copy of Byron's works.

He gave her a gold watch with the initial on it, stating that he did not nave an added because it would not alter nicely into an M. He asked her oa one occasion to go and see his mother. The last time she went to his house was on February 11, when he began to tell her about a Mis Millar who had 30,000, and whom he could marry if be chose. He continued to talk in this when witness got home she told her mother to ask him what he meant by it. He had shown her a lot of papers respecting his property, and said he should come into 17,000 on the death of his mother.

Ho said hi income was from 1.200 to 1.500 a year. Cross examined. In August, 1886, I was at Guildford and in London, staying at the Charing cross Hotel for two night. I was travelling about, with iadiea. I had been a companion to these' two ladies about six months before August.

Before that I wa with others! I waa in business in Bond street at one time. I left that at the latter part ot 1885. I have a stepsister called by the same name as my sell, cannot say wnere sne lives, one waa engagea ta a sewing machine shop in High street, Eton, When I was about XI. 1 am now la. I have never visited my stepsister, and do not know any thine about her.

Mr.WADDT hero requested a gentleman in court to step forward, and the plaintiff said she did not think she had ever seen him before. Mr. POLEY objected to this question, but after consider able argument the learned Jcdqe directed Mr. waddy to Sut it. The witness repeated her answer, and denied that le gentleman had ever attended her aa her medical man.

In reply to his Lobdsiiif, the gtntleuan said hi name wa rredenck Ernest rocock. moss examination resumed. 1 was not confined of a boy on August 17. 1S8G, and Mr. Pocock.

did not then attand me. Mr. Waddt then asked Jane Herbert to stand forward, and the plaintiff denied that this lady nursed her during her illness on August 17 and following days. In answer to further questions, she said she did not go on September 21, 18S6, to the registrar's office to Silver Street, Kensington. She did not there give information about the birth of a child, and sun a book.

Mr. jcsticx Maxisty, pointing to a document which Mr. 1 addr held. Then put the si mature to her. Mr.

Waddt. I have not the book, my lord. This is only tne oinciai cenincate oi tne entry. Mr. Jcsticx Maxisty.

If you have not the book there you ought not to ask tbat. Mb. Waddt. I submit I can ask her as to the fact of her signing. I undertake to have the book here to morrow morning.

Cross examination continued. I know a Mr. and Mrs. Cole. They lived somewhere in Westbourne park.

I do not know that they lived at 49.Tavistoek road. I believe I staved' with them one 'night, but it was four or fire year ago. I was not staying there, to August, 188C, when Mrs. Goles was at home and Mr. Colea was away.

I did not stay at any house in Tavistock road during butt year. I was not eneased to any gentleman before Mr. Miller. I do not know a person called Bernard. Mr.

Miller first promised to many me at the Colonial I left the young ladies Iwa with because they were going to Ire land, and I had heard about Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller had recommended me to keep in my employment. I never complained to Mr.

Miller of my mother conduct to ma. My mother knew my address from time to time in August and September! Mr. Miller might often have seen a baby in our house. It was one of my stepsister's children. My stepsister's name is Annie Kate Has.

It sbe married I do not know. Mr. Jcsticx Makisty. I do not think that Is a proper question. Are we going to try the question whether the stepsister ha bad an illegitimate child Mr.

WADDT. Year lordship does not see the point. The question is how if she has children her name is still Hase. aiB. jcsticx aiakisty.

i cannot nave mar. His Lordship then adjourned till to morrow morning. (Befort Mr. Jcsticx Matbew and a SpeeM Jvry.) BTLDE8TIXIMXX. AKD XACLXSXB V.

UESDZLSSOH. In this action, the plaintiffs prayed for an injunction to restrain the defendant, frcm reproducing, publishing, im an Hi re Hwga ring wqeattonor from the first eaaeavoaredto avoid afl thfa tteabTadsairrisBr bis daman t4l aol of Court oysor with the trade. The learned oocneel also dealt wHh th qoestioa cf damage whieh, he submitted, when they had heard the whole of tJie evidence, they would be of optoioa were nothing like what wa toggestod by tha plaintiff. Mr. Mendelssohn and other witnesses were then called and gave evidence la eupport of tte learned eoonsel's ITheloScrTOaGsgrxxAl.

summed np tte defrnrTant's Bib Charles Rtmxrx haying replied. Mr. Jcsticx Matthew summed up tie ease to the fury and left them to asses the damages, rmfrotingthera that by reason of the defendant's admissifm that was the only question remaining for their dediian. The Jary after a abort deliberation found verdict for the plaintiffs, damages 300. Mr.

Dicrrxs asked for judgment and aa order that all the plaintiffs' cards now in the poasession of the defendant should be handed over to the plaintiffs, cn their undertaking to destroy them, Mr. C3TICX ilATnxw gave judgment aceordmgiv, and stayed execution on the. terms that 400 wax paid into Court within one week, flejort Mb. Jcxtics Bctt.) LXX Y. MTTHIE3, This action, tie trial of which enrnrnrnred on Saturday, was brought to recover from the iCev.

William loticx aa administrator of his son. Mr. Yorick G. gmythie deeeaaed, a moiety of a solicitor's bill of for which the plaintiffs alleged that the deceased was liable jointly with hi brother, Mr. William G.

8 mythic. The rued related to two matter in wmeh the plaintiff firm, Messrs. Lee, Houseman, and Brodie, had been concerned on behalf cf the Messrs. Smythies and their farnly fa 187S and following years. The first of these was an action by a money lender against Mrs.

Smythies, the wife oi the defendant, and her sister. Alias uoroon. The second' was the paying off of a mortgage upon an annuity payable to Mrs. Smythies out of certain funds in Chancery and the execution of a new mortgage to Messrs. W.

G. and Y.i G. Smithies, the two sons, in order to put the annuity out cf tbe reach of the mother's creditor. The plaintiffs', case was that they were retained by William Smythies and Yorick Smythies to defend the action on behalf of Mrs. Smythies, and also to transact tho business connected with the mortgage, on the understanding that each brother would be liable for one half of the costs.

Evidence to this effect wa gjven by Mr. Houseman, one of the plaintiffs, and by Mr. IV illiam G. Smythies, tha surviving Drother. Their contention received substantial corroboration from the correspondence.

The defendant disputed the retainer so far as the deceased wa concerned, and objected that no signed bill of costs had been delivered. No witnesses were called foe tha defence, but it appeared to cross examination, that only Hr. William Smythies had ibeen debited in the plaintiffs books, that the bill had originally sent in addressed to him alone, though at his request this was corrected, and that no bill ever was delivered to Mr. Yorick Smythies, who had died abroad in 1832.1 Mr. William Smythies.

however, said that he was acting generally for his brother during his absence, and the learned Judge held that this was a sufficient delivery. In giving judgment yesterday. His Lordship said he could see no moral justification for defending th'is action. On the evidence ha held that no lecal defence was made out, ana tnerefore gave judg ment for the plaintiffs for the amount of the claim and corts. Mr.

Muir Mackenxie appeared for the plaintiffs: and Mr. Jelf, Q.C., and Mr. Henry Winch for the defendant. KXLU9GLZY Y. TVILKXJS.

The plaintiff in this ease claimed damages for injuries to a dredgmg punt called the Eva, oeiongmg to mm, through being run down and sunk by the defendant's barge Sylvia in the Upper Thames. The plaintiff held a licence from the Thames Conservancy to dredge for sand, and on the 26th of February last his punt was dredging immediately below Shepperton Lock when the barge1 came through the lock on it way down stream. According to the plaintiff's case, tha men in charge of the punt took the proper course by pushing out of tbe navigable channel against the Surrey bank, and the collision was caused by the negligent management of the barge in such a manner as to bring her into a cross current prevailing at this point and throw her athwart the stream. The defendant denied tha alleged negligence, and contended that the accident was caused by tho punt going to the wrong side and by the men to her shouting to tho boy in charge of the barge horse to stop. After hearing the evidence, MR.

justice bctt gave judgment yeateroay icr mo plaintiff for 25 16. and cost. Mr. Crump. Q.C., and Mr.

Tatlock were for the plaintiff and Mr. Bncknill, Q.Cand Mr. J. Bankes for the defendant. (Sitting, tn Bankruftey, Ufort Mb.

Registrar Lutelatxb.) IX xx ALTK.ro T. YOGLZB, This was an application for the approval of composition resolutions passed by a statutory majority of the creditors. The receiving order was granted in October ,1886, the bankrupt being a commission agent in Cannon street, and proofs to the amount of have been lodged with the trustee. The assets were returned in the statement of affairs at 412,. but the! trustee reported that, they were likely to realize 14G only.

At a meeting recently neia tne creditors agreed to accept a composition of 5s. in the pound. nlr.Aldridge appearea ior tne umau neceiver; ana Mr. Raphael for the trustee. Mr.

Gkajlilse, for a creditor, opposed on tbe ground that a secret bargain bad been made by which some ol the assenting; creditors received a larger amount of composi lion than those who dissented, im. oe contenaeo, was fraud unon the bankruptcy laws. He stated that at the meet in? resolutions were passed accepting a composi tion of 5s, in the pound, but it appeared that one of the creditors had received 10. and another 20s. in the tctjtmI Mr.

F. M. Abrahams, for the bankrupt, stated that the funds necessary for payment of the creditors had been provided by the bankrupt's father, and that, patting the debts of those creditors wbo received more than e. in the pound out of the way, there waa still a majority in favour of the resolutions. He submitted that it waa not obligatory upon the Court to refuse the application in consequence of what had occurred, but that it might exercise a discre tion.

Mb. Registrar Likklatzr. What the bankrupt said at his public examination is this "My father is making an offer to the creditors he provides 5s. all round ana mtta anroA Id, and same 20s. in the Pound The bankrupt waa briefly examined, and as the close ox hi evidence.

Mr. Abrahams admitted that, in' the circumstance, he could not ask the Court to confirm the resolutions, The application wa then dismissed, Mr. itZOXSTBAB LnrKLATXB intimating that this would have been the inevitable result. ljr BX CHABLK3 THORP AJTD EOXS. The receiving order to this case was made to March.

1886, and tbe bankrupt now applied for an order of dis charge. They had traded at Bermondsey and Crordon as paper hangers and oil and 'colour merchants, and their liabilities were returned the accounts and the trutteo had realized about 3,700 from the assets, and a further sum was anticipated. Mr. Aldridce appeared for the Official Receiver Mr. Bingwood for an opposing creditor and Mr.

F.C Willis for the bankrupts. It would appear that tn reoruary, uso, tne nsnrrupts, IL. H. and A. Thorp, took over the business of their late father, giving mortgage to their mother and Two aod asotfcer Jar tte erifsaer.

mi tte to fire yearr peasi wi tltuis. TxAXafia or Cacx A transfer of uaChmy. North, to Mr, wieh baa been made. 7 twovsd saatott I Asista JW V. I UCU WO ft mmm mJm mm.

mv porting for tale, or otherwise circulating colourable imitav 1 sister respectively aa security for their share in his estate. tiont of the whole or any part of two publications, entitled Through the Meadows," and The White Swans," the property of the plaintiffs and from doing any other act to infringement of the plaintiffs' copyrights. Tho plaintiffs further prayed for the delivery np of all such unita i i Z. 1 j. uons WHICH axe in lucitunuiwo ur uajuui ui um uncur ants.

The plaintiffs claimed damages for the alleged in fringement and penalties unaer ana vie, can. ana in and 26 cap. to. ne oeienaant aamtuea that tne works in ouestion belonged to tbe plaintiffs and that thej were duly registered under 5 and 6 Vic, cap. 45.

The defendant tubmitttd to the injunction as endorsed upon the writ and paid is. into court as suincient to meet any damages which the plaintiffs might have sustained by way of damares. He denied that the plaintiffs were registered proprietors under 25 and 26 Vic, cap. 68. or tbat he had none any act making him liable to penalties under that a I AClm pon tnese pieu usao waa jomca.

Sir Charles Uussell, Q.C., Mr. Anderson, Q.C., and Mr. Ilenrr P.Dicken apneared for the plaintiff the Solicitor General (Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C.), and Mr. John U. Witt were for Ihe deleodanu.

Sir Charles Bcssxll opened the case to the jury; telling them that the only question for them wa one of damage by reason oi tne oeienoant aamissions. ine learned counsel explained that it was the eastern of the plaintiff 'to produce the pictorial design to these and other book in progressive series. They would first publish a A uie book in ill roost expensive lonn aocuv o. wuicn. when that edition waa told, would next be produced in a smaller edition, and again a yet smaller form.

Finally, the illustrations would be produced to the farm of Christaas cards. In the present case this was what had been done. The work Through the Meadows bad cost about 4'LeC0 to bring out and publish and The White Swans about 1,500. The illustrations of the former were by the well known artist Miss Edward, and those of the latter by Miss Alice Havers. In November, 1866, the plaintiffs, be said, were making preparations to bring out a series of Cbrfstma cards From the "designs in thesa works, which so far had been a great success.

It was discovered, however, that the defendant had already pro duced colourable imitation of the plaintiffs' design a Christmas cards, and consequently the plaintiffs were obliged to abandon thtr mtect.cn, as they knew it would be useless in face of what the defendant had done. They had at once written to the defendant complaining and demanding action. This letter was not and in due course the writ to the action was issued. The learned counsel then explained to the jury tbe manner in which their business had been injured by thee infringements of the defendant, and then called evidence in rapport of his case, during the bearing of which the original books, cards, and the defendant's copies of the tame were put in and shown to the jury lor comparison. At the close of the case.

The Soucttor Gxsxbat, opened the defence. He urged that the defendant, thooh admittedly liable at law for "these infringements, was entirely innocent of any .1.1:1 it. would tall them how he had received order front cus tomers to produce certain detigns which were sent him and which in course of his business he had produced and published, never dreaming that, by so doing he was injuring anybody. He would tell them that ia fact he had never aeen either of these works of. the plaintifV or any of their pictures.

The reason why he. had rot answered the plaintiffs' letter of complain was that at the time it had arrived be was absent to Germany for a fw days, and hi letter bad not been forwarded. The moment ha found out what he bad done he took every possible atep to rectify H. He had always been and etill waa ready and willing to have the tataAter cwillod laiily aiid racolAr. Ha ted They, attributed their failure to bad debts, depression to tnde.

liabilities on bills discounted, and exaess of personal eipenditure over profits. The Official Receiver reported tbat the book' kept by the bankrupts did not sufficiently disclose their business transactions and financial position. A creditor (Mr. Joseph Robinson) also opposed on the ground of fraud in relation to certain bill transactions which had taken place between him and H. Thorp.

Mr RmurraAR LnrEEATXR. havinc beard the evidence, came to the conclusion that the charge of fraud bad not been established, but upon the ground at the insufficiency of the bookkeeping saspended the order of dis charge for six MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. mmm una itovemoer cession ior criminal duiukh wnw aeia to day at thai Sessions houfe, Qerxenwell, before Mr. P. H.

Edlin, Q.O, the Assistant Judge, Mr. J. Chairman of the Second Court, and other Jnsticea, Dxxwis BAYirxa, SB. and wixxiAJf ODoxovAJf, were mdicted for stesiiag a locket, value 2 10s from the perns of William BelL Bayne pleaded Mr. Geoghecan prosecuted.

On tbe evening of the 3rd of November the prosecutor, who is an engine fitter at New cacue, ana wno naa come up ior a visit uaauaa, am uiw two prisoners a pabuchouae in Staahopo street. He paid for several drinks for then and offered to take them a 3 1 to a theatre. Ai ter some tune, nowever, uey oecjaea not to go to a theatre, and returned to the mbucbouse to have a parting glass. WhOe there, 'Donovan seized the prosecutor from behind and rifled hi pockets; while Barnes snatched the locket from hi chain. The jury found OT)onovan Guilty.

Sergeant Gartner, Division, proved prerious conviction against was sentenced to 13 months' and 'Donovan tc six months' iinirisoeament with bard labour. Thxodobx Silvers. 61. was indicted for maliciously wounding George Swyke. Mr.

B. Kelly proseetited. On the LSth of October tbe prosecutor was to the waiting room ot the casual ward of the Mile end Workhou. There several other persons present, among tbem the prisoner, who began smoking. The prosecutor told him smoking was not allowed there.

The prisoner became very excited, and taking a knife out cf bis pocket stabbed the prosecutor on the shoulder. He afterwards said ha would stab the prosecutor to the Cieen Victoria The wound was not a dangerous one. Tha prisoner, who now said he was very sorry, waa sentenced to stx rnnntha imprisonment with hard labour. Wzxliaw. RoaxKS.39.

wm indicted far breaJdn and entering the dweliinaVboose of Leon Dury. and steaunz a bag and other articles, value 3. Mr. Kelly prosecuted. Tho prosecutor is jeweller, living at IA ct John street, Clerkenwell.

About, haJfpest o'clock on the evening of Sunday the 9th of October he left hiapremiaea unoccupied, closing the front door after him. He returned shout anl hour! afterward and foand. that tbe front door wm fasteHied ca tte DAskie sm te gala admit tance. He wtmt at once round to the back of tbo premiacs to Meredith street, where be saw tte prisoner and another man, who was carrying a black bag, climbing over 'the wall ot tho yard. The man wrta tae nag escaped, but his fell and dropped tha bag, which was picked up by tha and louaa to eontaia some spoons ana other sntctes to the prosacxtosv abs prorecstor foilowed tte prisoner, who had no ui on, ana saw bob throw away arane fays.

He lost sight ef tte prisoner who, it appeared, haa some friends waltiiw for htoi eioae bx one of whom sapplied hte wita aaotter AboctlOoclock tha sasst evening the proaecntor. tewerer. saw tte prisoner again ia a pahlichooaa at St. John tree gave bhn tote eastody. Ia tte prosecutor'a yard were found a jesnray," aad a hat which fitted the pnoaer.

Tte isry faaad tte At Bowrsjarr, yaaterday, bef ore Mr. Vaaxtea, I bef ore tte rising of tte Qnrt. W.K.Tbotnpsett, tt, TMrb Mr 1 1 11 1 1 Tnrr aTfiTfj fcnrnalist, of 3L Orlsndo Albcrt W13KX8, of Eanderincrtrcad, deacribad a a Jeornallst, aad JflcTS Ksiobt. a printer, were charged with being loose, idle, aad disorderly persons, disturbing the public peace with intent to commit a felony. Winka and Bsrletgh were further charged with obstructing and reaisting tha paHce while ia the eiecrrtion of their duty to Traalgar snuar.

Mr. Thoopson ked thai the ease might be brought oa ia order that the defendants might be admitted to hail. Mr. Vaughan said he could sot bear tha case thea a it wax much after 5 o'clock, and it wa stated that there were znairy witnesses. He referred the matter to the police la tpector, and after some discussion said ha coull aot exer cue aay authority over tte police on tte question of ball.

The ease will be heard this morning; At Mabxxobocqh stbxxt Eyas Lxwu Edwaxdu, tailor, Qiaringrcrosc road, was charged oa remand with, catting and wounding Constable Magin, 2WjC, by stabbmg him in tha neck with intent to do him scene bodily harm. I When the case first came on for hearing tho officer was un able to appear owing to tte injuries ho had received. Magin. who was accommodated with a aeat ia tte witness box, now deposed that on tte 29th aboot 20 minute past 11 o'clock, he was called to assist to ejecting the prisoner from a lodging boose. The accused was drank and wanted to fight tho deputy, who complained that he had no right on the premise as ha had not paid his lodging money.

As the accused would act leave he was elected, and when to the street tha officer left him, advising alia to go away. Snbequently Main waa called to a tohkCcooist's in Cran boarna ctreet, and while on his way there felt a blow at the side of his neck. Instantly his mouth was filled with blood and, putting his band to his neck, he found it bleeding. He tamed round and noticed the prisoner running away He pursued him and eaoght him and, having given him iiito the custody of another ofScer, got into a cab aad wa conveyed to tte Charing cross Hospital. Ia reply to tho prisoner tha constable said ha did not strike bins ia tha eye; llrl Edward Bower, house surgeon to tha Charing cross Hospital, said that he examined, the injured maa when ho waa brought to that institution.

He was saff arinz from a punctured wound to the neck, which penetrated into tha cavity of the month. The woend was vary near aome cf the large vessels, aad had they been severed, death would have been inerrtabla. Tte wound was a dangeroax one, but the constable was now oat of danger, Ia del enow, the accused said ha was not guilty of striking', tte constable with a knife. The officer gave him a black eye aad kicked him, and he hit him back while ha had a pipa hi hi, hand. It wa in this way that he had been injured.

Man Held committed the prisoner for trial, savins that he would be indicted at the Central Criminal Coort lor attempting to murder toe conszaoie. At Mabtlxboxx, Bxx JAMET Jouxsoy, 44, a Iabooser, ot Malvern road, was charged an remand on a warrant with assaulting and beating Sarah Johnson, bis wife. Mr. Samuel TOley, solicitor, defended. Tte evidence of the prosecutrix was that the resided at Cambridge road, Kil born, and had beea separated from tbe prisouar under an order of this Court.

On the lfith the prisoner caaa to her house under the pretext of bnnrmg her some brushes, asd entered her room. She ordered him oat of the boose, aad he said he would not go for her or for 50 policemen. She rjushedhim to cat him out. when he hit ter and twice afterwards knocked her down. He alto said that unless the allowed him to come home te would take her life.

In croa examination tha prosecutrix admitted that she aad her husband took part to a pablie demonatrsoa oa tte day of the alleged assault, bat she. denied asktog her husband home to tea, Sha sent him aome into the passage of the boose to stop bis objectionable language. A son. having corroborated the assault on the prowcatrix, Mr. TOley appealed to the magistrate on behalf of the prisoner, who, said, wa a very quiet, respectable, well condacted Tnrt, The accused wa unfortunate enough to have a lady for a wife wbo did not posses one of the sweetest of tempers.

The only fault the prisoner seemed to nave was that he lacked the moral force of character that a maa should have to the inanagemant of ins boose. As bo waa instructed, the prisoner did notHCommit an assault on his wife, his only indiscretion being that te went to the boose, Mr. ilaver, cheesemonger, ot Mai vErn rcad, gave tte prisoner an excellent character both as to quietness, ia dostry, and respectability. He had known tte prosecutrix to assault her husband and ha had not retaliated. Mr, Cooke said tte case waa a serious one, been mo it was a breach of the Act of Parliament under which tte separation order was made, and besides that the prisoner had been bound over since the mking.of the order.

The prisoner had by the order been deemed not fit to have control over his wife. Therefore, te ought to bavo obeyed tte order and stayed away from her. He sentsnral him to two month1 Imprisonment. At WxsTMrssTxa, Jahxs NrwrOBT, 28, a powerful young man, described as a canvasser, wa charged before Mr. D'Eyncourt, on a warrant, with assaulting hi wife Frances on the night of the 4th tost, Tha complainant, living at CO, Shawfleld street, Chelsea; deposed, that sha had been married to the prisoner for three and a balf aad during neariy alii that period sha had kept him by leading an immoral life He knew perfactiy watt how tte rot mansyurd on the night of the 4th she went home after being out in the streets, te asked her tef much she had got and whore she had been.

Sbe told him. but he was not satisfied, for ho knocked her down and put hi foot on her chest. A te did this be said, with aa oath, I will tread the life oat of yon. Ia answer to Mr. D'ByncouTt, the prosecutrix said that her husband had only done 'a fortnight's work in tte last two years.

Sbe had kept him the whole of that tima. Formerly she worked at the drvsmaking to tte day and went oa tte street at night. Susannah who panned the same wretched life as. the prosecutrix, stated that tha three of them lived to two rooms at 59, Stewneldrtreet. Prisoner wa quite familiar with, their mode of life.

Witness had seen tte braises on his wife's chest. Mr. D'Eyncourt told tte prisoner that he deserved six months hard labour, or, for the matter of that, 15 months bat tte assault was not sufficiently swvere to call it aggravated, and te could only send him for two months. A maa like the prisoner living 00 his wife's prostitution was a disgrace to humanity, aad be ought to te ashamed to show his face. anywhere.

n.n Ji A l.V, mmmm ,1 mJ i i i.m rmm. i xw Atiiu. wtsiil.si 0 1 msmmsm Mr. LVKjnooort whs wilfully and maliciously breaking windows at a shop' ia EedeStoa street, S.W the piupeity of Mr. James Phillips, aa engraver.

Tte prosecutor said that he took a lease of the above premises with the tnteo tioa of opening them as an engravrrs and prirrtseilers shop, bnt in ccmequence of Htoess to Hvfsjni Xj he bad not done so, and he put the prisoner ia poaseaaioa aa a care taker. Nine days ago ho gave her notice to leave, aa te found that the premises were not being conducted pro perly. On tho pre rious nieht on vaiting the place he discovered that the windows were broken ana that tte prisoner was drank. Prisoner, said hcv instructions from the pronator were to let the premises as a brotheL She hid been conducting tbe houje as such for a loxr time past and had taken as much as 30s. a night from IfJ couples.

Prosecutor made her go put and give cards away, ta admtue tbe vtlaee. and she nearly rot locked up fn conse quence of givmg them to repeetaUe people. Mr. FhilHps, recalled, said the woman' statement was a fabrication. He had obiected to her lettin? tte boose improperly.

Mr. ryEynconrt. Where do you reside? Witness. I Hve in Cbesterfidd etreet. XbVs eross.

and I do not often go to this house in Eeclestaa street. In answer to further ques tions tteprosecutor said that tte shop was not open at present. There were two bedrooms furnished, and te slept there occasionally himself Prisoner. There are three bod rooms and I was told to take people in till 3 to tte morn tog. Mr.

D'Eyncourt. I ahaU remand yon for a week, and the police will make inquiries aboot tte boose. i fft I rTriT.i rm romand with assaulting Witmm Elliott by beating her over tte head with a revolver at in apartments to Peabody buildings, Orcharf treV Westminster. Mr. Kymer defended.

Last week, whan tte matter was first before the magistrate, it was stated that the avsault was of a serious nature, and the accused was without boiL It seems that he invited tha prosecutrix, who puxsue an immoral life, to his rooms, and that there a dispute ocenrred hrmt mnnrr. Sha alleged that te beat her about fta head with tbe butt end of a revolver until she was almcat unconscious from loss of blood, bnt bis account of the matter was that she robbed him of two sovereigns, and that to the course of a struggle ahefefl and cut her head. Prosecutrix now attended the court to a very drunken condition, and a medical gentleman said that her rajarie might have been occaaioned as ate described or by fatting. They were not serious. Tte magistrate discharged the scented.

At WoShip 8tbxxt, Ctblx. GxxxxnjXD, laid to be 15, but looking ranch elder, and describing as an acrobat, of Willow cottage, HcJloeray plaee, Haatmgs, was charged, on remand, with stealing 15a. tn notes gold and silver, a vest, a pin, and a pair of braces valued at ao, tne prouerty cf gichard Sew ell. iJetecuve ergeans Alexander, DrvMon, said there were now several charges against tte rr liana, tte vfoaeentora comins one from tte City, one from Woolwich, three from Lambeth, and one Irom Ulapton. The prisoner had been respectawy orouni no and he wa well connected, but although so younr, tha evidence would show that he had been engaged in whole sale swindling.

Sewell'aease was first taken, Tbe prosecutor, a young man, dewcribing himeea aa a elerfc, stated that he resided in Glenarm road, CHepfcs, Ha' knew the prisoner, and on Monday, October te (net him. He said something to the wrtoeas aboot his patents being away from hoese and witaeas took him home to sleep with him. Tte witness went oat early tte aext xsorninc, leaving tte pnsoner to bed. Hr. and Hrs.

5wH aUo went oaten business and the prisoner waa jeft alone ia the tease, bat Mrs. Sewefl tea taken tte precavution of locking all the doors except too prisoner bed reosa aad tte kitchen. She ratarned aboot aa tear later and toned that all the rooms bad beea broken into aod ate saiswed the articles mentioned ta tte eharge. Tte prosaewtor afterwards beard that tte prisoner wa at tte tense of a mataal friend at Lambeth, aad oa gofag there tesaw k4av ridtox aboot outside on a bicycle. He ran away wtea te saw tte witness, bat on rytrirnisgte was apprvJaiended aad then it waa foand that te was wearing; tte vest sad btaees whieh ted been stolen Tte prisoner waa wtea atoed with stealing tte bicycle aad aeaing it aad tten again obtaiaasg pnsaeaeion cf by aeaxTof a trie freer tte person to wheote ted seH ft.

Tte owner ef wtekaaeie was TmrnTTntTi rmnrrl Tfnbnl TTiiihImii I. snd testa trd :MmtrJ.mmVmmr' I3oteLFamng48a trat, Tte srisaBer ted stsaadtera lewdaysatfbe betel aad told tte neaale 1 a protesocBal btcyeast, Tritoea taH aata ttet tesabf a axagr aaaew wcraa.