Court Of Common Pleas, Dec. 14. (SUWngs at Wun Frius, at Gui(dW? I*fem tae LORD OCEra JUsnTcZ ad Spcial urite.) The first cue was a very complicated action aig gut of the affairs of the Agmr Bank. Mr. Brown, Q.O., Mr. Garth..4., Mr. Mathew, and Mr. Jenkins were the counsel. The p!ai"ti Mr. Triztf sed the oicial liquitor of tho ,'A Bnk for comnission which he claimed oD eerti. sale= ho triallastdU alj all the dey but at last the counsl on each side agreed to leave the wholo matter to the learhed Chief .utice. E}sroL am osaid that the eame I"rasr peculrone, an d that, a no pIneple would be mvolwd, E tlht thUshoWd b:averdicforthe platIff fcc 325Lbayosd the sum pu& into ut TO8Ba V. It&OMNO. Thu co3Utor qeneraS Sir qwo- V q,1 QQ% a&ud tr. T. Sdabr fo; the plaintiff; Mr. Serleant Ballautine, Mr. Brown, Q.. ia Andr rchibaId for the defendant. The plaintiff, irWlli Foster, ed the dcendfant, who Isa genteman of fortume in Kent, s endorer of a bDI of exchange for 3,00(. The defence was that the bill inDesttion was a forgery. :0 So=ci1To&.GgzxAL having shortly opened the case. Sir GbonUE HONYwJo called dBdwari BanuistereCalow, who was brought up in the dress of a convict from MilThbnk House of Correction. He said,-I was formerly secretary to the ElaLm Valley Rail- wy Co-pony. fIhe deFendant was fomerly member for Rye, and a upperter of this Une, which passed throngh his property. Hia son wag a director. I appald to him for assistance in carrying out the line-to give a guautee to a bank. He did It ws difcult on acoaunt of the state of the morey-market to carry out the Elham linoe The SEabrooke Harbour and Dockr scheme was sitrted jointly. Mr. MaciMOno was very anxious about the sucoes of the Bill. In Novesaber 1W7, wewere in want of ftmds. (Th bil declared on, drawn by a man: named Cooper, was pro- dnoed) The signatore 'Coopee' is that of a clerk in our offime. Hodrewaad endorsed the biUl. On the 11th of November I took tEe bill,accepted by myself, and I went to Mr. eackinnon's house, Aerise-prk. Mr. Smllbone, my fatber-in-law, and a boy went. I saw Mr. 1aclinnon, jun.. firt; afterwards the defendant. We had some conversation about the harbour, and I naked if he would gve a guaantee for that, as he had done for tho ralwa. I reminded him that the railway had gone all right and asked him to s'sn the bill. Imeraly askedhimtosign his namothere. faskedforitasa gna- rantee. I did not tell him it w a bill he signed. We returned to Sandgate. I handed the bill to Wr. Parker to got it discounted on the 13th. 1 was convicted this year of forging check of the Ebham Railway. Oroseexaninedby Mr. SerjeanutBALIAITTsL .-.I told him it was a guarantee. Cooper's endorsement was already on the bilL 1 forged ix or seven checks I pleaded guilty. The amountws 6a5. They were dated in August. The bill was haDed over to the plaintiff for a debt. Mr. Georgo Alexander Poolev deposed that he got the bill from Mr. Parker tbrough Mr. tiving. He went to Glyn's and saw Ir. Currie. He showed him the bill, and made in- quiries. Ho subiequently advanced some money on it. Afterwardshosav Mr.NMackiunon. Ele ns onhorsebsek. HE asked if the document was all right. He said it was not all right; it was most extraordinary. It was not his sig- natare, hut if it had been shown to him he should have thought it was. His son or his executors would have paid it. Whienapplied to, Mr. Mackinnon said he had noteigned the bill. Mr. Mitchell, cashier at Glyn's bank, gave it as his opi- nion that the signature purporting to be that of Mr. Mac- kinnon was genuine, as did also Mr. Hardy and other wit- nssses, who were subjected to a minute cross-examination, founded upon a comparison of specimens of handvriting, by Mr. Serleant Ballantine. The plaintiff, a soecitor at w lorwime, stated that im r. Poley owed him much morn than 3d0oum. in the spring of this year. eo bad pressed for securlty, and Mr. Pooley pro- mised to rend binm this bil, which he 2dof My witheut being aware that there w;as anythirg wrong about It. Mr. Serjeant BAxiaTrrnex in his address to the jury said that the defendant wvould come into the witness-box and swear that be did not sign the document in question or any other documesst, as stated by Callow, and called Mr. MIackinuon,who denied that he had signed the bm in question. On the occasion when Calow called on him his son was in the room aU the time. He was not suro whether he i ed anything else. Hie did not remember whether CaUow aXked him for a guarantee. He was very cautions, for he suspected something Callow was hslf.way to conviction. 'e was sure he signed nothing of importance. He had on a former occasion given the railway money. Mr. MIackinnon was cross-esamined at eome length, and with considerable success, to show that his memory was not quite to bo depended upon, and was somewhat impaired by age. ERe denied having igned many documents whichit was clear he hRd signed, and said he had not given evidence before a committee of .the House, when it was certain that he had done so ; and generally his recollection of ast events seemed rather hay. e insisted, however, that he had not signed any such paper as that now sued on and produced. At the close of hIr. Maskinn,on's cross-examination the Court a,ajourned. SECOND COURT. (Before UIr. J.usticc MOSvTAu uE S3aT11 and a Common Jury.) No case of intere3t was tried during the day. ICOURT OF COMMON PLEA. Dwo. 1i