Middlesex Sessions, Thurs...
The CoijRtr was occapiea to.day in heari'n-g-p an TKIE EAST LONDON WATEr.lVORKS C03[PANY V. TIIE POORS' RtATE OF TIIE PARISLZ OF ST. DIARY, STIZATFORD,1W BOW Altr. SCAIRLETT, WhO was retailed spedally in this casc, in. formed the Court that the parties had agreed to ref'er the m'atter to the judgment at Air. Alderson, with a view to a permanent arrange- menit upon the subject. Two other similar cases, in which the same qompaay were ap- pellants, were disposed of in like svenngr. St'. JAMES, WESTMINST15.ER, V. ST. LUKE, CHELSEA; This case turned upon the question, whether tite puper, Eliza- beth Hollandt, was a legitimate or illegititnate child. 1t appea2ed that the chitd's father, whose name wam Holland, had lived with her miother under the name of Canipbell, but was at the time mar- ried to another woman. Hehad ahouseforMrs. Campbell,and passed asherhusband, buthewasneverimarriedtolher. Aflerhcrdeath he had her (laughter educated ata boarding-school,as his legititmate child, and took her borne to live with lhim until hie was 1A years of age, when, in consequence of' her disagreeiig with Avl . Holland, he ,uarrelled with her, and she was obliged to seek relief of the parish. his beinig proved by the father himilself and another witness, The COURT confiramed the order. BRIGHITON V. ST. PANCRAS. The question in this case was, whether the two youngest of four Cliri(iren belonging to a Airs. Holding, were to be presuined to be the chilaren of her husband, J. Holding, or not; as, in case they werc, then, and not othierwise, they were entitled to a settlement with tile other two children and their mother at Brighton. Jt was stated by Airs. Holding, that Holding went to America about 12 years ago, since when she never saw v im but oitice for five minuteaabout five years ago. I"rOm that tiae to the present she has never learned what became of him, nor does she know whether he is living or dead. For the few years last pratt she lived with a wan named Johtn O'Hara, now dead, and passed in every respect as his wife. I-eir two younger chiildren are 2A yearsi, and II monthis old, and O 'Hara was their fathier. DI rs. Helding's son, and two wQouen who had lodget for a consi- derable timc in ner house, swore, that since before the births of these two chtildren they never saw any parson come near hier as her hus- band but O'Hara. It waas contended that thlii was not sufficient preof in law of non- access on the part of the husband * but The COURT was of a diflrent opinion, and allowed the appeal, subject, however, to a case. Most of the appeals having been disposed of at four o'clock, the CssIIAhRarAN directed thie retirainder to stand over until to-nrorxow. RRtENTFFORD.BRItDGE. When tile Court was about to caU on somtea lictning petitions, illr. AIILLs rose, and called the attention of his brother magistrates to n matter ot some importance. By the tenus of the contract for building Brentford.bridge, it was agreed to supply the best granite fromi Aberdeen; instead of which %that which had been sup- plied was admitted to be of a very inferior eerIftion. Having b*n one of the fornier commnittee, lie felt he owed. it as a duty to the public to bring this matter under their notice, and not allow the county to be imposed upon. After a fewr observations fromt one or two other mtgistrates, they agreed uenaninaously to re-appoint the former commaittee, and refer the nmatter to them to report upon. YttEATRICAL AND MUSICAL LICEXCES. r1r. ADnOisP'iS pplied for a renewalof tbe licence for Bagnigge- WVells.-Granted. Mlr. rsEnL.iNG made similar a'pplications for the Adcelphi, the English Opera, White Conduit-house, the Mriermaid, Hackney, and Sadler's Wealls.-Granteil. MIr. BARRY applied for licences for The Toy, Hlampton Court and the King's Ancient Concert-rooms, Tottenbhamucourt-road._ Granted. Mr. ADOLPUUS applied for a licence o) behalf of Mr. Ham- mond, for a new theatre at Hackney, for musical entertainments, ballets, and burlettas. The petition was signed by some. of the churchwardans, overseers, and inhabitants of the parish; but as it had not bean oidned by the iniutY4 j Aor Dubuitt4 t9 th? 6e1ct idifry for their applo adon, ihe Court Suggested the expediency of withdrawing the getitioL; which was. accordingly done for the preseut. TrEX P?ANTITEOSS. M1r.ADOLPSerUS Moved, on behalf of N. W. Ctundy, for a renewal of the licence for the Pantheon, Oxfordl-street The clerk of Mr. Seymour, solicitor to the proprietors, stated that the licence could not be granted to Air. Cundy, for he was not in possessionr of the premises; Air. Cundy said he was authorized to apply for the licence by the ragonty of the shareholders; and that the premises were now hi8. Ar. Seymour's clerk said that Mr. Cundy had ceased to have even a colourable title to the premises, for the lease under which he claimed expired last Michaelmas. Air. ADOLPHUS objected to this irregular kind of opposition by the solicitor's clerk. The Clerk stated, that Mir. Seymour was not aware that this appli- cat'lon would be made, or he would have been prepared to oppose it in the regular way. The CHAIRIMA2? asked if there was not a baUoon there at pre- sient P The Clerk said that MAr. Graham was there at present, being paid by the proprietors for takinAg care of the premises. .Mr. Cundy stated that Air. Graham had been cut of them these three weeks. The COURT observed, that the only objection they had to grant- ing the licenee was, that it did not appear that AMr. Cundy was in possession of the premises. Dlr. ADlOLPITUS finally withdYew his application. ftflT)T)IlV..QV.Y-,4VQ--Tnm. N-- ..