The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-11 00:00:00

•
AI'PEAL.
HOUSE OF LORDS, Ttmau.sw, MAT It
Counsel attended in expectation that the Chancellor would give
his judgment in the Thellumn case, the Judges having delivered I
their opinions on Illonday, but, after prayer, the House Freeloaded ;
immediately to the Scotch appeal cause, wherein the Honourablel
Mrs. Fullarton, whose maiden name was Hamilton, is appellant,
and Sir Hew Dalrymple and others ave respondents. The subject
matter contested is the immense estate of flelamy, settled by John
Hamilton, in 1638, and repudiated by an ancestor of ",ir Hew, who
was a Hamilton, but who, with his maternal estate, had taken the
name of Dalrymple. Has next brother, finding himself an old
man without issue, then executed a settlement, wh?reby the property
was to revert to the elder brother, who had repudiated in his fa-
mfr. This last settlement is contested by the appellant, but the
ilespendclifs not only claim ender it, but that failing, under the
lserint title of the settlement in 1688, which, they contend, the
el( er brother had not the power of repudiating.
Mr. MowcatETF (of the Scotch bar) was beard at length for the I
- _

FENCE.

LAW IN l'E LLIG.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, TCISDAY, MAT 11.
COORE, ESQ. V. JUNKS.
This was a anise tried At the Sittings after last Michaelmas Term
before Mr. Justice Littledalc, and a Special Jury.
It will be remembered by our readers, that the present Ina an
action of trespass brought by Mr. Cooke, the barrister, against the
defendant, for entering his preening and seizing his goods, for
alleged poor's rates due ro the pariih of St. Andrew, Holborn ; and
the question was, whether the chambers of Mr. Cooke, which
wen situate is Stone-buildings, Inneoln's-Inn, formed part and
parcel of the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn. On the part of
the plaintiff it was rontended that Lincoln's-inn had a peculiar
jurisdiction Intl although it might be locally with the parish
of St:Andrew, yet, for the purposes of supporting its own
poor, and all the other rights incident to a pariah, it was
tali' parochial, and therefore not liable to be clued by the
churchwardens of St. Andrew's parish. By the delen4ant it
was contended, that Lincoln's Inn was not extra parochial, that
there had been perambulations triennially which included Lin-
coln's Inn, and a book was referred to, by which it appeand the
property had been conveyed by a certain deed, wherein it was de.
rcribed to be situate within the pariah of St. Andrew. A verdict
was found for the defendant: thus deciding that the Mau is quo
was within the parish and liable to be rated.
The Ayr on ?: E A.-GENERAL obtained a rile last Hilary, codi-
ng on the defendant to show cause why the verdict should not be
set aside, and a new trial granted.
AIL SCARLETT this day showed cause against the rule, and
argued at considerable length in support of the verdict.
Mr. 6 t• e NET was on the same side, but the Court requested the
Attorney-General to reply.
The ATTORNEY-GENE/IAI, then contended, in the first place,
that the book which was so much relied upon at the trial was not
legal evidence, and ought not •o hare been received : and, second-
ly, that even if it were good evideoee, it did not support the 'act
in proof of which it was produced. The Learned Counsel relied
upon these two points, and lett it Mr Mr. Nolan to enter into the
detail of the case.
Mr. NOLAN ruse to address the Court, but it was intimated that
as he could not conclude his argument before the rising of the Court,
be had better postpone it altogether till to-morrow.
THE KING v. SWEF.T.
Mr. BROUGHAM moved fur a rule calling on the defendant to
show cause why an attachment should not be issued against him
for having, in his character of Sheriff's Officer, extorted larger
fees from one John Isaacs than by law he WAS entitled to. Ile said
he made this application upon an old rule of Court, or more recent.
ly upon the Lords' Act, being the 32d (ieo. 11., e. 211, see. 11,
which directed that upon petition to the Court, the Court should
have power to make such order in the premises as should appear to
them proper.
The LORD CHIT? JUSTICE said, the rule had better be, that
the party should appear personally in Court, and show cause why
he should not refund so much as the Court should adjudge, and
pay the costs of this application ; this would be free from all ob.
jection ; whereas be might say in answer to a rule for an attach.
ment, that he could not answer without subjecting Munch to a cri-
minal information.
Rule granted in the form suggested by the Court.
—eats—
COIIRT OF KING'S BENCH, DUBLIN, MAY G.

O'GRADY V. CASEY.
Mr. GEORGE BENNETT, K.C., applied to the Court this day,
for a criminal information against the defendant. grounded on the
affidavit of the plaintiff, which stated that Mr. Casey, who had
been a College acquaintance of his, met hint in Sackyille-street, on
the Ist of March, 1824, and, in passing, said, " 11'ho is the reek
now ;" alluding, as the affidavit stated, to a dispute which had
taken place between Mr. Walter O'Grady and Mr. Rice, the Mem-
ber for Limerick. The plaintiff replied, "My cousin." Mr.
C. then aid, " 11'ho made the apology ?" to which Mr. O'Grady
answered. " Rice." Mr. Casey said, "By God, you lie !" and
went away immediately. The next day, on meeting Ir. O'Grady,
he said he was only joking, and they parted friends. Further dii-
pates, however, took place, and a challenge ensued ; but, before
the time appointed for the ineefng, the parties were arrested, and
bound over to keep the peace fur a year. 11r. O'Grady hearing no.
thing more on the subject, concluded that the mattes was dropped.
Thirteen months elapsed, and on the 27th of April, a gentleman
named Lea, who was totally unknown to Mr. O'Grady, carne to
his father's house in Stephen's-green, and told him that " the year
was out. and he came to demand satisfaction, as the friend of Mr.
Casey." The plaintiff stated, he could not give him, an answer till
the evening, pro; 'sing in the interval to communicate with his
friends, and procure the assistance of a gentleman to act as his se.
crud on the occasion. On the 2d of this month, Mr. O'Grady
was walking with a gentleman in Stephen's-green, when the de.
fendant passed, and looking in his face, said, " There is as rank
a coward as ever stepped." The affidavit went on to stste that he
gave the defendant no provocation, and that he believed it was his
intention to provoke him to commit a breach of the peace.
Conditional rule granted.