The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-12 00:00:00

Rah, Enttiltgente.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF TILE PRIVY
COUNCIL.

PreFent :—Lord Brougham, the Chancellor of the Ihwhy or Lan-
meter (lonl CaropLetl', the Master of the Rolla (Lord Langdale),
the Chanothor of the Duchy of Cornwall (the llaght llon.r.
• -

_
bolos Leigh).
THR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY OF GRENADA V. THE CHIEF.
JUSTIN& OF THE SUFHEME COFHT.—The arguments in
this ease, which were commenced on Tuceday, were con-
cluded to-day.
The case come before their lordships en a memorial and
appeal presented to her Majesty in council by the Hose of
Assembly of Grenada, complaining of the conduct, ever slues
his first appoinfmcnt in the year 1832 of John Sand rson,
Esq , chief justiceof that island, end praying his dismissal
from that high office. The conduct of the chief justice com-
plained of by the memorialists and appellants may be thus
summed up, from the statements iu the case of the memo-
rialists,—Exhibiting habitually on the bench a harsh and
offiefsive demeanour towards the bar, the magistracy, and
the grand juries, and addreseirg them in intemperate
and violent language, and expressions unbecoming his
dignity as a judge; denying the co-ordinate and co-
eqeal jurisdiction of the puisno judges. as established
by statute, and taking constant occasion to assume a
superior and independent authority: refusing to carry the
statute law into effect, for which he was suspended, and
only restored upon his undertaking to enforce it. Disbar-
ring Clement Thomas Richardson, a barristar, without no-
tice given to him, or an opportunity afforded to him of jus-
tifying or defending himself. Ordering Fielding Browne,
another barrister, to be committed for miring to have the
previous order of disbarment rescinded, and that, notwith-
standing the other judge of the court, who has co-ordinate
jurisdiction, objected to such order being made. Procuring
from the Governor of the island the suspension of Mr. Jus-
tice Wells, for rescinding the above-mentioned order of
disbarment; a suspension which was revoked by her Ma-
jesty, under the advice of the law officers of the crown in
England. ?staling without knowledge or concurrence
of the puisne judges two rules of court, by which the
puisnejudges were forbidden to transact any hued-
nese at chambers ; rules which were rescinded by order
of her Majesty, under the advice of the judicial committee of
this most honourable council. Sentencing summarily and
without trial, one Andrew Lambie, a witness for the defence
on the trial of an indictment, to a month's imprisonment,
and a fine of 101. for prevarication • a fine which was di-
rec .te by order of her Majesty's Secretary of State for the
ColAial Department to be repaid to him, and an imprison-
ment, which was only not remitted because it had been suf-
fered. Imprisoning John Rosa M'Comlie for three months,
and imposing on him a fine of 1001. for animadverting in a
I newspaper upon the committal of the said Andrew Lambie;
an imprisonment which was likewise half suff, red before it
could be remitted by the governor, though the fine was by
his order never demanded. Ordering Daniel PdfLeen, a
prisoner on hie trial, out of court during the examination
of the witnesses for the defence; and fining, in opposition
to the opinion of the pubes, judge sitting with him,
Robert Gentle, Esq., and Jonas Browne, Esq., two justices
of the peace, for the alleged irregularity of taking down
in writing certain depositions of witnesses in the third
person instead of in the first person, notwithstanding the
custom had been to take such depositions in the third person,
and no warning had been given to either of such justices
that any alteration in such practices was desired—a fine
which, by authority of bee Majesty's Colonial Secretary, and
by the consent of the Chief Justice himself, was never de-
manded. By the memorial of the respondent, the Chief
Justice of Grenada, he insisted that a judge was not legally
liable for anything done in the exercise of his utfict, unless
chargeable with corruption, and complained of the nu-
merous and inveterate controversies in which it had been
mischievously contrived to involve him with vast trouble
and ruinous expense in bygone matter since 1832,
and which had from time to time been disposed of
by competent authority, being opened and removed
With respect to the complaint of the respondent, the
memorialists asserted that the bygone matters which
the respondent stated had been disposed of by competent
authority, had not, in their effect upon his conduct and
character as a judge ever been before considered by any
authority or tribunal whatever. The evidence and docu-
ments in support of these charges, and in answer thereto,
were very voluminous, but it is not necessary to go into
them at any length, there being no attempt on the part of
the Chief Justice to deny any of the material Lets; and the
main ground taken by his counsel, in argument being,
that all the really serious cases occurred so long ago, the
last being in 1839, that they might airly be considered as
having been adjudicated upon or condoned by the silence of
the complainants ; and with respect to the only one which
was not too stale to be made the ground for such a proceed-
ing.
_via., fining two magiatrates for taking depositions in the
third instead of the first person, the utmost that could be said
slit was, that it was an error of judgment, the Chief Justice
conceiving that, under a statute of Philip and Mary he had
power to treat depositions so taken, as in effect not taken at
' all, and, accordingly, to fine the magistrates for that neg.
lest. It was also said that supposing the other charges
were to bear at all upon the question, the facts
merely showed intemperance of manner no great
berm was done in any of the cases : and it was admitted
dry would never have been brought forward but fOr the last
set, the attack upon the magistrates, who were members of
the house of assembly. But the Chief Justice also attacked
the motives of his assailants. He stated in hie caw, and this
was urged with great force by his counsel, that he bad made
himself unpopular with the planters of the Wand, from the
active part he bad taken in carrying out the provisions of the
slave emancipation acts ; and another topic relied upon for
averting. a harsh decision was, that the learned gentleman
had arrived at a very advanced age, being about 78, and
that, in all probability, before any order directing his remo-
val could be sent out to the colony, a mightier power even
than that of their lordships might have removed him te
&nether sphere.
On the other hand it was urged with great force, that al-
though the lateness at which the other canes were brought
forward, might be a ground for not proceeding upon them,
if upon those cases alone the remindsl of the Chief Justice
was Liked for, it was no reason why they should not be
looked at, now that, in 1844, a new and substantive case of
misconduct had arisen, for the purpose of enabling their
lordships to come to a correct conclusion on the conduit 'of
this judge, and his finals for the office. It was not attempted
to be denied that he was a person of irritable temperament
and violent conduct; and that be had been guilty of the
venous acts alleged in the memorial, which were of the most
arbitrary and illegal kind. Was it any answer to such
charges to my that .scate of the members of the House of
Assembly, who had at Length felt themselves bound te pre-
sent this memorial to the Queen, praying for his "-
mists], were planters who era' een him for soma of
his decisions with retard to the apprentices ? To
my they were errors of judgment, was to admit the as
cessity for removing a judge ei reek infirmity of mind. The
age at which he had arrived, no doubt, strongly sppealetto
the sympathies of all, end mod be expected to have Male
effect on their lordships; but Ms wee not smatter of ham
but of justice to the colony. The misorialisesiileommem
with the whole inhabitants of 01111•411111.116
quite enough during the fourteen yeas filrlunhatilm4
UM **aloe of chief judge in hawing eke morn eel
continually interrupted by his freaks; sal was it lar be ofd
that beams he was a very old gentimwm and they
is the coarse of nature, not be troubled with him hug,
were to have no redrew? Towards the swariss of the
argament—
Lord Brougham, who, with the rest of thmirlorahipc, had
at different times expreised the strongest disapprobetion at
the conduct of the Chief Janice in .snout inalsame—par-
titularly those of Mr. Richardson, who was diebserod with.
out a hearing ; Mr. Fielding Browne, another berristeri
who moved that the order disbarring Mr. Riehnedniatl
escinded, for which offence he was ordered to be Rossi seal

imprisoned, &c.--suggests 1 that if a report of what had now
taken place before their lordships were sent oat to the colony,
with their expressions ot opinion upon the various acts tom-
plained of, nothing of the sort would probably take place in
fixture.
Wilde, who, in the absence of Sir F. Thesiger,
wee called upon to reply, and very ably discharged the duty,
mid that such a course would not be satifectory to the cola-
ands, who conceived that their lordships were called upon to 1
report to her Majesty their opinion upon the conduct of Mr.
Bandenon, and although they did not presume to say what
that report ought to be, they trusted it would be such as to
came in Grenada and other colonies a more pure end per-
fect administration of justiee than they had enjoyed sauce
the appointment of this gentleman.
At the conclusion of the argument, their lordships re-
mained iu deliberation for some time, and on counsel being
readmitted,
The Master of the Rolls stated that their lordships would
report their opinion upon the case to her Majesty ; it not
Icing usual to state the grounds of their decision publicly.
MOUSE OF LORDS.
!talent the Lord Cluarellor, toed Mummer's', and the Bishop of St.
Afisph. and, towards the close of the day, Lord Brougham.
WILsoN e. WiIAON.—HUSHAND AND WIFE.—ARTICLES
Or SEPANATION. --BPDCITIC PSELVORMANCE.—This appeal,
which was opened last Tuesday (and of which an outline was
given in this paper on Wednesday), was now further argued
by Mr. Turner. the second counsel for the appellant, Mr.
Henniker Wilson. The learned counsel contended, as hi.
leader, Sir F. Kelly, did on Tuesday, that the Vice-Chan-
t:tiler's decree ordering specific execution of the articles of
separation was contrary to the policy of the law, a violation
of the sacred obligations which the parties contracted at the
time of their marriage, and unwarranted by any former de•
cseion of any court of law or equity. He referred to a great
number of cases in illustration of these several poeitiona, con-
cluding from them that the courta never exercised jurisdic
tiers over ape( meats between husband and wife except whim
the sgreemews were completed, and not while they were
only executory, as the articles in this case were. This de-
cree would have the effect of separating the husband and
wife, and releasing them from their marriage vows. The
same arguments and cases he applied to another port of the
decree, which granted an injunction to restrain Mr. Wilson
from proceeding in the Ecclesiastical Court to refute the
charge of impotence made against him by his wife, and to
seek restitution of hie conju rights. The decree, be
further contended, was also -gal
bad in rejecting the evi-
dence of medical men tendered by Mr. Wilson in
his erowebill to prove his competency, so far as
Mrs. Wilson's allegations in her answer impugned
it. If the decree were reverted, he would completely
disprove this odious charge in the Ecclesiastical Court, the
only proper tribunal to take ellnisence of matters of that
sort. Mr. Busk and Mr. Henniker also appeared for the
appellant. Mr. Bethel!, on the pert of the respondent, Mrs.
Wilson, hoped that he would be able to show that the decree
complained of was, in all its parts, in perfect accord with the
long established rules of the courts of equity. He proceeded
to show that there was no troth in the appellant's statements,
on which he'grounded the prayer inkis cross bill for delivering
up the article- in deed; namely, that he was so alarmed and
deprived of his self-possession by the terrible imputation of
impotency, that he was taken by surprise, when he cemented
to the articles. In order to show the contrary, the learned
counsel proceeded to read the evidence of Mr. Carr Fader,
Mrs. Wilson's solicitor, relating to the numerous interviews
he had with Mr. Wilma previous to the articles being
drawn. Adjourned at four, to Monday.

EQUITY COURTS.
Before the Vioe-Cbaneellor of Enekod.
RICKARDS v. PATTESOI4.--CONSTILOCTIO4 ar k WILL.—
A question in this east arose upon the construction of a
codicil to the will of the Rev. Geo. Richards, dated March
9, 1837, whereby the testator gave and bequeathed to his
wife, Hannah Maria Richards, and William Hale Hale, all
his property in the Ross= and Austrian funds, and also
that invested in a Swedish mortgage security upon trust to
pay the interest and dividends to his wife for life, and after
her death upon trust that the said William Hale Hale should
apply and &pee of the principal and interest for certain
charitable purposes mentioned in his will. Mr. Chapman,
for the executors, opened the awe. Mr. J. Parker and Mr.
Calvert, fur Archdeacon Hale, who represented the charity,
*untended that under the words of this codicil the testator in-
tended to pass twelve Swedish mortgages, upon which he had
invested altogether the sumef 10,0001., and which formed part
of his property at his decease. Mr. Bacon and Mr. Speed,
for the residuary legatees under the will, contended that the
testator bad only given one mortgage security, and ss it was
impossible to say which of the twelve he intended to pass,
that the gift was void for uncertainty.
The We-Chancellor said, it appeared to him, under the
words of this oodicil, that the testator, in using the expression
"all my property in the Russian and Austrian funds, and
also that invested in a Swedish mortgage eecurity," intended
that the word " that" should refer to all his property, and
he clearly went to pass all his property invested in any
Swedish mortgage security.
BUTCH6Ii O. 'Dagasza.—PUßLlC OFPIIF.II or A COM-
rANY.—Mr. Bagskawe moved fur the production of certain do-
cuments in the possesionofthelorkshtro Banking Company,
and stated that when the bill was filed the defendant
Drearier was the public officer of the company, but before
the answer was put in Dresser was removed, and a person
named Scott was appointed. It was urged that as by the
act for consolidating clauses relating to public companies, it
was declared that no suit should be allowed to abate, this
motion must be allowed—Mr, Stuart opposed the motion.
The Vice• Chancellor said u the defendant Dresser did not
actually represent the company at the time the answer was
put in, the admissions contained therein were not binding,
and the motion must be refused.

Before Vice.thancellor Knight lime.
OLLSCOTT O. LANG.—BOTTOMRT BOND.—FRAVD.—This
was a suit instituted by the mortgagees of a ship called the j
Margaret Ogilvie, and of her freight and earnings, for the
puqsose of having a bottomry bond, which had been executed 1
at Trieste, delivered up to be cancelled, as being in fraud of
the plaintiffs ; and for an injunction against any proceedings ,
in the Admiralty Court in respect of the bond. The injunc-
tion had been granted some. years
. since by the Vice-Chancel- ,
lot of England, and his decision had been affirmed by Lord
Cottenham ; and the cause now came on for bearing,
generally, before his Honour. It appeared that John Ogilvie,
the owner of the ship, executed a-rter party with Messrs.
Freeland. Her, Collings, and Co., of Rio Janeiro, dated in
Sept., 1835. By the terms of that instrument the vessel
was to sail to the port of the river Clyde, there
to take a Ind of merchandise from the factors of
the freighters, resident at Glasgow, to sail thence
to Rio Jsneiro there to unload and to reload with sugar, to
sail thence to !Priests, and unload part of the cargo there,
and thence to sail to England. The owner was to receive so
much per ton of sugar, less 3001., which was to be paid him
at Glasgow before clearing that port. The 3001. was paid to
Ogilvie on the 25th September, 1835. On the 24th of the
following month, Ogilvie mortgaged the vessel and freight
to the plaintiffs (redeemable on the 31st March following)
for monies previously advanced. That mortgage was en-
dorsed on the certificate of registry of the vessel. Mr. Her,
however, of the house of Freeland and Co., who was resident
paetaer in Scotland, was advised that the plaintiffs, not
having
be entitled to retain
Lhen possession
•ofare account of
would
in priority to the plaintiffs; and he so informed his partners
at Rio, and his partner, Mr. Lang, at Trieste. The vessel
sailed for Rio in January 1836, and arrived there in
April. While there, the sum of 2621. was advanced
by Freeland and Co. to the master for repairs and
necessaries. The vessel, after unloading and reloading, sailed
for Trieste and arrived there in October. In September,
formal notice had been given to Ker of the plaintiffs' mort-
gage. In the same month instructions were given by the
phuntiffs to their agents, Reyer and Schliek, at Trieste, to
take possession of the ship, but upon their attempting to do
so, it appeared that the whole freight had been secured to
Freeland and Co. In addition to this, the master of the
vessel who had sailed from England having died, Lang, Free-
land and Co., at Trieste, appointed a master in his room,
who on the day after his appointment executed the bottomry
bond in question. The bond was given to secure to Freeland
and Co. 4831 10e. for necessaries and monies advanced over
and above 7991. 165.,. which was the amount of freight and
earnings as far as Trieste. The vessel afterwards sailed for
England, sad Lang Freeland and Co. transmitted the bond
to this conntry, and 'had commenced proceedings on it in the
Admiralty Court here, when they were stopped by the
present suit. Ito notice of the necessity of the bond had been
given tothe plaintiffs, or their agents Re;er and Schliek, or
to Ogilvie.
Mr. Russell. Mr. Heathfield, and Mr. Prendergast, for the
S,t an
iffs, contended that the conduct of the defendants
Freeland d Co., in procuring this bond to be me-
m especially after notice of the plaintiffs' rights as wort-
was a fraud upon the plaintifili. The bond could by
net executed only on an extreme emergency, and no
grounds for its execution appeared here. It could not be a
security for the advances at Rio, for when the vessel arrived
at Trieste, where the bond was executed, the dangers of the
seas_ from Rio, wereover.
Mr. Wimram and Mr. Stinton, on the other aide, tendered
evidence to show that the bond was given for necessary

rieliessinir and, that the ward fra d " as atm used
in this mare 1;11
as to trammels* over ' 7he apart bad
jarbsidiea. le tease east Strata* meal
net ma the sense it might le be media Mee. atild=o.
against the defendants was palmed, easisistest with the
opinion that they acted swig seam the immemisa that they
were in a proper maw enheeing their just rights. Thu
ease, however, was one ef viny eamitemea His
Hewer was see setielbed. imaribrl.lkg eirogOste's intense In the
suttees bed sot beta alkeeted—had not been imam-
bared, this bond maid so an
Purrs, have stood
for the whole eammat ter which it imrported to
have been given. Bet that was not the only ques-
tion, It was ea isms* which, R not wholly
(alienated, was heavilyas*e imundsweet no lateinnambramem
The to the g• a isa the beadwen thiplier ;Made
ows*MA had a pewee el eats wed after them-
mime they wereld be eireetatebie be the watable„ say, of
the peassede et the sale ; they thendme bad en Yea* in
the quietism es to the validity the bead, indegesdently
of sad Wised the mere seenzity to themeless he air elm
martyr Now the existence of their sesutty wee luaus to
weary perm maserned in them transeetieas ; sad *Y .
eat watering Ow it was not seminary to maw)
into all the details of the ease with mmiatamens
it was saillelent to mil WWI* peiatmily te the
leYr of the 16th fleptembr, which /teens` by mom
dedinthily mere rhea a ma* the treasedlea el the brad.
Tb• Wier wady, el Mr. las width Well Maw (Eh
Ream biro Mid the lettsr.) fbaskheW all the theta of
*tisk the sod the Wade homes bed nodes, eeaddetinft
eepriallifftbh istier, bit Mawr wee of opinions tt err ba-
=the lee* of Lang and Co., at Trieste, either on
of themeetves or the beam at Rio, to obtain hams the
Penes Item wheat they obtained it, whether or and or
WO% Po** or alitilah the bond is tomtit:el ae it

was obtained, namely, without notice or application to
Ogilvie, ur to the plaintiffs, or to Reytr and Scltikk. Upon
that ground, but not upon that ground alone in case other-
s isc circumstanced as this was, his Honour was obliged
dt dcagro that the bond could not stand, and that it WAS a
fraud upon the plaintiffs in the sense he bad already men-
tioned—a sense not disrespectful, not disparaging to those
who had used it in the prosecution and defence of whet they
believed to be, and what an honest and reasonable man
uould believe to be, their just rights. His Honour added
that he must make the decree against the defendants, with
costs.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
TUE QUERN V. THE TOWN COUNCIL OP BIRMINGHAM.
—COST OF MAINTAININO IN WARWICK GAOL PRISONERS
COMMITTED FROM THE BOROUGH OF BIRMINGUAM.—This
was • special case arising out of a writ of mandamus to the
Town Council of Birmingham, commanding them to pay
a cum of 11,742.1. 3s. 9d. to the treasurer of the county of
Warwick, in respect of the maintenance of prisoners com-
mitted for prosecution from the borough of Birming-
' has to the county gaol since a separate Court of Quarter
Sessions has been granted to that borough. The claim
was made up of two classes of items ; the one, the amount of
the expenses of each prisoner, estimated at lid. per day ; the
other, certain expenses due from the borough as part of the
county of Warwick as its share of the expense of the purchase
of Coeentry RAOI, incident to the annexation to the county
of Warwick of the county of the city of Coventry. The
amount of the first elms was chimed under an agreement
alleged to have been made between the justices of the county
and the town council of the borough, but made, in fact, be-
tween committees of those bodies. The defendants alleged
that the agreement was inchoate only and not complete,
and, at all events, was informal, because not under seal
p; or
that, if it was binding, the prosecutors could not go beyond
it. !dr. Mellor appeared for the prosecutors, and Mr. Hill,
Q.C., and Mr. Gale, for the defendants. The court deferred
the judgment.
Niro Pana.—Before Mr. Justice Erie.
Souven e. GRANT.—INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT IN
COPY-110018.—Sir F. Thesiger, Mr. Watson, and Mr. Ogle,
appeared fur the plaintiff ; and Mr. Serjeant Talfourd, fdr.
Knowles, and Mr. Warren fir the defendant —The plain-
tiff and defendant were both publishers in St. Paul's
Churchyard, and the action was brought to recover damages
fur the pirating, by a Mr. Daniell, of a copy-book for chil-
dren, originally invented by a Mr. Ferrite. A great deal of
evidence was called, on the part of the plaintiff, to show
that the system of Mr. Foster was original, and that it had
been copied in the publication of Mr. Daniell.—For the de-
fence it was contended, that a copy-book, being the vehicle of
teaching a mere mechanical art, did not come within the mean-
ing of the statute for mist rring the copyright of these works to
authors, and also that the system was nothing new and ori-
ginal, but' was and had been used commonly soul generally ;
and witnesses were called to prove these facts.
At the close of the defendant's case, it being then half-
gad six, the CAW was adjourned.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Nun pause.—Before air F. Pollock, C.A., and • :Medd Jury.
WAKLEY, m.r., V. COOKE AND BEALEY.—LIBEL.—The
AttornepOeneral and Mr. Bramwell were counsel for the
plaintiff—Mr. Cockburn, Q C., and Mr. Lush, tor the de-
fendants. This was an action for a libel brought by the co-
roner of Middlesex against the defendants, as registered pro-
prietors of the Medical Times. It appeared that an action
similar to the present was instituted by Mr. Wakley against
both those defendants in January, 1846 ; the libel then corn.
plained of being in the form of a letter signed " Vindicator,"
and publi-hod In that journal.
.The defendants in that case
suffered judgment to pass against them by default, and a
writ of inquiry to assess the damages came on to be tried be-
fore the Lord Chief Baron on the 21st of June then follow-
FM. On that occasion Mr. Healey conducted his own case
with so much moderation and discretion that the learned judge
pahliely expressed an opinion that the offence complained of
hod, in no degree, been aggravated by the manner in which
the defence was conducted. The result was, that the jury,
taw deliberating for two hours, found a verdict, aasessing
the damages for the plaintiff at 1601. The libels which
formed the subject-matter of the present action, arose out of
that trial. The ensuing week's publication of the Medical
Times contained a report of the proceedings upon the trial of
the writ of inquiry, as well as the lettersigned Vindicator,"
in full, and certain editorial articles and comments, containing
the meet offensive and disparaging reflections upon the
character of Mr. Wskley. It was boasted that nothing
alleged agairuit the plaintiff had been shrunk from, or
in any way denied during the trial; that the damages
were paid with pleasure, as th -y amounted to much
lees than would have been charged by the public newspapers
for the publication, as an advertisement, of the libellous
letter complained if. Subsequently, in September of the
same year, another editorial article, containing very offensive
strictures upon Mr. Wakley's character and conduct, ap-
peared in the Medical Times, and , to recover damages for
the libellous matters contained in those articles, the present
action was brought. It was contended, on behalf of the
defendants, that the plaintiff, as a politician, and as the editor
of the Lancet, was a public character, and, as such, that his
acts and conduct were fair subjects of criticism by the com-
munity at large.
The Lord Chief Baron left it to the jury to say whether
the articles published in the Medical Times did not go
beyond the fair limits of criticism. His own opinion was
that they had gone very much beyond the justifiable hails;
and he altogether repudiated the notion that, bonnie the
sisiindants had already paid damages for • libel upon the
=lithat they had purchased a license, thereby to repeat
ruse course of libellous publications with respect to him.
—The jury consulted together for upwards of an hour, and
then returned a verdict for the plaintiff.—Dansages 175/.
REEVE O. THE MARQUIS or CONYNOHANL—HUSBANDS
NOT ANSWERABLE FOR DEBTS CONTRACTED BY THEIR
WIVES, LIVING SEPARATELY ON A SUFFICIENT ALLOW-
ANCE, EVEN THOUGH CREDITORS HAVE NO NOTICE,—
Mr. Hurafrey, Q.C., and Mr. Temple, appeared for the
plaintiff ; Sir F. Kelly, QR., Mr. Godson, and Mr. Lush,
for the defendant. This was an action brought the plain
tiff, an upholsterer in Piccadilly, to recover the value of fur-
niture sold upon the order of the Marchioness of Conyng-
ham. In 1844, it appeared that her ladyship frequently
called at the plaintiff's house, and ordered an ottoman to be
sent to the Duchess of Richmond's, and a pair of valuable
screens to be sent to a house in Hill-street, the names of
the occupiers of which were not known to the planter,
witnesses. These articles were daily delivered as ordered,
and the marchioness herself, upon another occasion, called
and took away a hand-glass, valued at 30s. As none of them
were paid fur, the present action was commenced against the
noble defendant.
The Duke of Richmond, who appeared as a witness, stated
that he offered to pay the plaintiff's demand when he heard
of the action, but the offer was declined.
The Lord Chief Baron intimated that if a wife, while
living separately from her husband, ordered things to be sent
to the houses of other persons, she did not thereby pledge her
husband's credit, and the tradesman who so delivered the
goods took his chance whether the goods had been ordered
with the husband's consent or not.
Sir F. Kelly, on behalf of the defendant, entered into •
lengthened statement of the domestic affairs of his client, who
he said had married the present marchioness in 1824,
and obtained with her a sum of 10,0001. Having then but
a comparatively small income he succeeded, in 1832 to his
father's titles and estates. The latter nominally iroduced
2'2,0001. a year, but in reality not more than 12,0001. a year,
owing to heavy incumbrances by which the estates were
affected. In 1843, from same unhappy differences, the
defendant and his wife agreed to separate, and although he
had two sons and four daughters to maintain and educate in
a manner suitable to their station, and wasobliged to provide
• considerable income for his *on, an officer in the Guards,
he allowed the marchioness 2,4001. a year for her mainten-
ance.
That stipend was regularly paid from the day it was '
upon up to the Ist of the present month, although
Meleifendant, from the distressed state of his tenantry is
Ireland, where his property is situate, was unable, for the
last two years, to collect sufficient to suable him
to pay even the interest upon the inamalmnsan
If the present was the only debt incurred by the sandsimarn
the defendant would meet willingly pay it, but, bum On
incessant repetition of such occurrences, it became alsaksidy
necessary for him to make a determined stand and mat the
extravagance of the noble marchioness.
Mr. Humfrey said be would dispense with proof of the
defendant's circumstances, if it appeared that the mar-
chioness had received 2,4001. a ear since 1843, as was alaind.
Sir F. Kelly expressed his o • obligation for the use pas,
sued, and called two vitamins, w o deposed to the feet as
stated.
Mr. Humfrey then said he was not prepared to contend
that that was not • sufficient allowance, but submitted that
to establish a.propsr defence to the action it should be shown
that the plaintiff was aware at the time the goods were
ordered that the marchioness had a separate allowance from
the defendant.
The Lord Chief Baron intimated that that was by no
means necessary.—The plaintiff was nonsuited.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Coeunlefloner Goulburn.

Ancrionaxamo.—This was an adjourned choice of
assignees, in the ease of the bankrupt Rainey, who was an
t in Regent-street. Mr. Frampton, for the eredi
Eieesennte.c4to t/liee interest,eong toaa.pWrore Lioorf t1211.3g/7. and of
(Mr. rranspto. n) contended that there was only one
sum of 2,0001. upon which his lordship ought to be
allowed to receive interest. The proof was admitted.
—Mr. Paine then proposed Mr. Lea as assignee,
which was supported by proofs to the extent of 8,0001.
He then applied for a pnvate sitting for the emaidnation of
Mean. Coutes', to whom the bankrupt had itspaied of his
estate. The rents were 7001. a yearn nd it woos be Import-
ant to have an examination. pplkialkm ems granted,
and Mr. Lee chosen assignee.
Susrmistots or CIRTIFICOM—The th ssty
bolimppill
Mayhew, applied for his certilleate. TIM in
his examination said that Mr. Holt bid ldia
to join the Iron Time, bat being esinneeted with
lams. Bradbury and Evans, who be believed bed
ea intention of bringing out is morning railway peter, he
doellaed onto de. Although Holt my/resonate* him that it
womb& be as good as a thousand a year, he declined to swept
the Oar. He took a house in Parson's-green, which had
been the eases of Ms failure. He only got 501. from eke
tress Timm, and being afraid of giving • fraudulent
preference, his dare being in an entharramed
state, he took advantage of the bankrupt law.—
Hr. Commissioner Boalbuga remarked that it was rather
! an imgeovident stmenleilism la going into the Shrubbery at
PexemiNsvese.—Tbe briekrept mild that he looked • to lt
eassfelly, mad, be cg 2 ef ma bapilmi ammentling
between Ift sad sad llemas,le *ought that he
shwa be able to pay. bed aseeraed to Ts the
edits, half of his earnings, but had bask rfusj by Mr.
&Won and another creator. He °Minot about 3001. of
Yews. Breibary and Hyena, having been the original pro-
, meat " reads." lie thee& It was areal to bete

year's notice. lie claimed 2001. from Mark Lemon for par-
ticipation in certain works for the "Ladies Club," "Grand-
father Whitehead." and several °than.. The " Gen-
tleman in Black" was brought out entirely by him
(Ma)hew). In May he left Punch, and in February
the Iron Times. He bad lost about 1,6001. a year fir the
last three years by regular engagements. If the creditors
bad let him have full play of his talents, he would have
earned 2,0,g)/. a-year ; and on the day he became bankrupt,
he lost 1,200!. Messrs. Bradbury and Evans, and Mr. Mark
Lemon, denied their liabilities to the bankrupt.
His honour said he deeply regretted having the case of
so talented a person as Mr. deeply_
before the court, but
looking at all the circumstances of the ease, he must suspend
the certificate for two) Mg, and give a short protection for
the bankrupt to arrange with his creditors, but if he did not,
he would have no protection.