The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-02-01 00:00:00

LAIkNCITICES.

' COURT Or CIIANCSRY.
VICI-egANCLULOR. ,
it*" immuanens, rtesprto*s, to si kris%)

TDDI DAY.
Exeentiona tar; bespoke to-:.:JOne4 t Harrison.
Curling • Hmehirann, demurrer Timkron v Haller, dernt#4?
Levin* v dicky, plea Knowles • nation, ezeiOttood
4nherte v NichOls, demurrer part heitr4
Jackson v Rowe, plea and di- I %S, tiers t Taylof, eiceptiori per
murrer • order
Alderman v Bannister, plea %raters T Taylor, ezeeptions per
Same v Skne; plea order •
Caher v Long. demurrer Blaekirell, • Long; reception!
Dealt and Chapter of Ely v pet &Met
Eagle, demurrer t

CarigT.
IitNERIL PETIIION ItAT At TOE E01.i.3., TrESDAY THi
14T14 OY FtIIRI7ART, AT NINE IX TIIE MORNING.
Petitions must be set down and enries leR with the Secretary
before tire o'clock on the preteding day.
The 111amer of the Rolls will hear Causes, farther Directions,
and Petitions, by consent, oil Saturday next, the 4th of Febniary;
at nine in the mottling.
Cause; and Petitions must be set down by two o'clock on the
prevAling day.
ttlion Causes at ?tie ROM on Weflnettlay the 15th of February;
at ten lit the motnittg.

COR'F OF I WM; VP4CH.
iiirtn.rsis cairns fp EY Tlll2ll aft itoi ictirst

Doe. on the demise
of Long, a Robson
Doe, on the demise of
Chandless.ittobson
Wililey V Squires
Hire r Filiiiigham
Whitelanci • Beet.
Hodson ♦ illnrher
Reissman s llott

'ems nat..
Ilartqwn ♦ Granger
Buttefotorth•Rothe.
ram
Greenlee! t V;Agos
Same v Same
Cowell v Yalloi!ey
Grab= t Splatt
gime v Bean
Due, &c. v Rowe

Armin' i A litsr•
Turner v Jiff..
Turner v Arnie
Hamilton v Radford
(Irian v Bedford
Jlorrii v Breedfoot
llall v Burgess
Miller v Osborne
Riehingl

COURT OF COMMON FLIFAS.
tostnew OARS*, TO RE TRIED AT TAR SECOAD SITTING IY
• HILARY TE/tpt THIS DAY.
Stephenson and ors.' Evans • Everett and Forell and another
• Taylor and an. I otferet • Stephens
other. Tuely • Butcher

cot
CAVIII

ART OF EXCHEQI:
:s to Bt lICARTIP TUII
Bamtbvtl v Archie
()alt' ♦ Evans
Watkins v Smith
Ripley v Stoeitley

.7tR.
[i DAY.
Rawl•v r Civet;
Mayor v N'xon
Tarpky v Lt:,nelt
Ward t Surd!

v JaelflOD,
parr heard
Colebrook v Need
Norton v Hammond
I). ft Chap. or Turk
v )liddleburgti

I,4lre:lNlTiLioltAte.

VICE.CIIANCELLOR'B C01:11T, TUESDAY, JAN. 3; .

• AUSTCUTIIEIt v. CHALMERS.
This was a petition praying that a will might be construed ac.:
cording to the laws or P.eotland, the teitatrix having been born in
that country, and havingrwie the will in question during a viait
to it. fly this will she had let the greater part Of her property to
Sir Alexander Anstruther,, who died before the testatrix: T&s
lady, who had been nominated hi. executrix by hit will, wan the
plaintiff in the present action. The Prerogative Court to which
certain questions bad been referred had miaunderstood the point--
imagining that all parties had agree.' to permit Mrs. Campbell to
take not fetters of administration, and had thereby considered her
as entitled to the property, when it was only for the purpose of dis-
tributing it to those who really were entitled. The question nose
was, who titeie parties were.,
The Counsel on the other side not being prepared to argue the
point, it was agreed that it should stand over Mr Monday neat.

. . .. U
.
Ix THE )(ATTER or WYATT, A BANKRPT.
This was a petition to supersede a commission of bankrupt, on
the ground that no act of bankruptcy had taken place.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
,appeared in behalf of Mr. Wyatt-
the alleged bankrupt. From the circumstances of theorise this com-
mission has acquired the name of the Christmas-box eoramisttion
of bankrupt. This appellation agree! with the real gist of the
case. The alleged act of bankruptcy mote merely from the sup-
posed bankrupt having directed his serVent to deny him on the 2ffih
rat December to such persona as might: call. for Christmax.boxes.
The petitioner is an eminent builder in Oxford. Ur. Jones, •
creditor to the amount of GO/. called the day after Christmas, and
was at first given to understand that Mr. Wyatt was not at home,
but 3lr. Wyatt hearing Jones, called out immediately that he wai
at home, and the amount of the debt was paid by a bill. Jones
departed apparently satisfied. Mr. Wyatt was also indebted to a
Mr. Copper in a sum of 341., and this Mr. Copper was now the
petitioning creditor. This creditor had been induced and in a
manner compelled to take out the commission, and had since
expressed his regret at having done so ; but had again
lent himself to the designs of the Commis:jotters, who were.
with the exception of a single individual, "aliens," as it were, in
the affair, not being resident in Oxford, but having been sought ref
in all the adjoining towns. Varioy and cmtradictory affidavits
were read, affirming, on the one side, thii Wyatt had made pro:-
pose's of accommodation, and, on the other, that all these proposals
had originated from the opposite quarter, and that it had been pro-
posed, on the part of Copper, to ray the peace' dings if Wyatt would
grant him a writ of indiannity. There had been a most marvellous
expedition in the publication of the bankruptcy in the Oxford pa-
pers, notwithstanding the order of the Lord Chancellor to prevent
the publication in the Guzetie. The cause of the proposal respect-
ing a writ of indemnity was to be sought for in thealterationa lately
made in the Act of Lord Hardwicke, in.conscqueuce of which soy
composition made with aereditor amounted to an act of bankruptc ,
and any person might be declared a bankrupt. A person ni; t
ne,
even declare himself a bankrupt. Can't:42g one's self to be de sit
to a creditor is an act of bankruptcy; but it must be prved that tits
denial is made with the design oldelaying the creditor.
The Vicg-Ctiarrecttort said he would have no hesitation in
granting the order if he could come to the conclusion from the
evidence that there had been no act of bankruptcy. It is true !bat
the mere denial does not constitute the act of bankruptcy ; but
though the servant states that her only order to deny Mr. 'Wyatt
was to such persons as called for Christmas-boxes, she does not say
that she supposed that Mr. Jones called for a Christmas-box ; on
the contrary, she calls him in another part of her evidence tee
gottlernan. 31r. Wyatt's son had also been examined by the Coth-
miasion, and had stated that he believed his father to have been for
some time in embarrassed circumstances. Berryman, a Slieriff"e
Officer, had made aflidavit that about a month before the bank-
ruptcy he had distrained upon 11'yatt's premises, Ilid had arrested
him three times. There was therefore considerable doubt, and it
would be necessary that the principal witness !the servant) should
be examined before a Jury in a Court of Common Law. In the
mean time the commission of bankrupt must proceed.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH. WEaT3riss7tre, JAW. 3!.

TUE 00V,ILIVOR AND COETANY OT 711 E BATA : OF ExatAxa

DAVTS..IN ERR° ft.
This was an action bronglit.. by Mr. Davis (the defendant in
error) to recover from the flank of England (the plaintifti in MOT)
a sum of money; being the a mutation of dividends fur upwards
of two years on certain Be k 8 xk, standing in his name in the
books or the Bank of Ent and, but which had been drawn out by
the brother of Mr. Davis, yme ns of a forged power of attorney.
It appeared on the trial of Le ca -se in the court of Common Pleas
that Mr. Davis was swat e of felony committed by his brother.
and had refrained from apprising the Bank of the circumstance,
until the delinquent had made his escape out of the country; and
it was therefore urged that he had been guilty of !aches. and woe
not entitled to recover. On the other side it was contended that no
forged power of attorney could affect the stock of the person whose
nettle the instrument purported to bear, and that therefore nd
length of time could deprive the party of his dindenda : and it was
insisted to be a duty. incumbent on the Bank to adopt those means
of caution to agent= whether the instrument was or not genuine,
which would prevent the possibility of fraud. The jury found a
verdict for the Bank of England on the second and fourth counts
of the declaration, and for Mr. Davis upon the first and third
counts, upon which error was now assigned.
Mr. Sergeant BUSAXQUET this day argued at great length on
the pan of the plaintiffs' in error ; and Mr. Tindall was heard un
behalf of the defendant in error. _

The Court were of opinion that the counts upon which Mr.
Davie had obtained a verdict were bad in law, and accordingly
pronounced judgment in favour of the flank of England.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, TUESDAY, JA t. 31.
Sittings is Banco.
GROVE v. RICHARDS.
Mr. Sergeant Il'itnn applied, on bt half of the Warden of the
Fleet, tor a rule, calling on the defends t to answer certain matters
contained in an affidavit. It was ata ed that one of the prisoners
in the Fleet, who was supetsedable, I ad received notice from the
Warden to quit a room which he there wcupied. It was Mier&
that, instead of doing as directed, there had been some fraudulent
collusion by which this prisoner had persuaded another to lodge a
detainer against hitn for • debt Amounting to 2001. and upwards.
The Warden, therefore. apprehending some difficulty, applied to
the jurisdiction of the Court.
Mr. Justice OASELEE—It is a strange thing that people cannot
be cot out of a prison.
The loom) CHIEr JUSTICE—Who is the Attorney?
31r. Sergeant WILDE —A Mr. Brewer, my Lord.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—Let him be served with a notice
to answer the matters contained us the affidavit. Should thee not
be answered satisfactorily, it will amount to a conspiracy. Let it
be nerved on the plaintiff, the defendant, and the sollekor.
This application may be considered as • eonsequente of the
order, which, our readers may recollect, the Conn made on sater •
day, desiring the Warden to discharge all peraboa who we" '2r
might become supersedable.
Sittings at Nisi PrriuArm.
EbStfutr.euthuesll4.oxivn. Cu ai
Air. Sergeant TADDY Said that this was anbt2uffhiAl
the phtintiff, whb Ita tearer to Iron" and teihi"ta. ware: