The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-01-25 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, TUESDAY, J.tx. 24.

marts V. HARRISON ANVI
Air. Roos, on the part of Thomas Crofts, the plaintiff, moved
for nn injunction to prevent the defendants from continuing the use
of the name of James Crofts us one of the partners of their Ifirm.
It appeared that the plaintiff and his brother James Crofts tarried
on business as tailors, in an extensive establishment in Fleet-Street.
for several years. In the year MI the defendants proposed to put,
chase the good-will of the concern from the brother,. An attign.
ment was accordingly made of the business. and a condition specified
that the purchasers should be at liberty to Insert the names of
James and Thomas Crofts, as partners in the firm, for the space of
a year. At the time when tide assignment was passed the brothers
entered into a contract, whereby they were respectively precluded
front affording the sanction of their name, for private advantages, to
any concern, without a mutual consent. The plaintiff was there•
fore much surprised when he ascertained that, hint; after the lapse
of the prescribed year allowed by the assignment, the defendantS
continued to use the name of his brother James as in their firm,
though the plaintiff's consent, which was requisite according to the
compact between the brothers, had never been obtained or Raked SIC
the purpose. Under an apprehension that the plaintiff might ans+
rain serious injury, if bills were negotiated by the firm Of the de.
fendante, wish the additional name of Crofts as a partner, the
present application was made.

r Mr. Sis; psi NSOW. for the defendant, stated the circumstances of
the assignment, which they had purchased for 3,5001. After the
expenditure olio large a suni, it was natural to expect from the
venders the eserciae of every mode which was calculated to secure
the validity of the assignment. Accordingly, when the original
proprietors of the Fleet-strect establishment resigned it to the do.
fendant, and went to reside in Sackville.street, a circular letter
was issued to the customers by Thomas Crofts, announcing that hit
brother James had retired from the baaineas, and that the new pan.
nets had been introduced. for /whom their favours were solicited.
The name of Craig was subsequently removed altogether from the
firm, but was renewed in consequence of the following cireurn.
stance :—Jonathan Crofts, it brother, but never a partner, of James
and Thomas, having retired from the Commissariat service, pro..
cur, d a li.t of the customers of the Fleet-street eatablisbment.
Fortified with this document, he waited last year on the defendants,
and proposed that they should admit him into the partnership. la
case of a retinal be threatened to deprive them of the custom of the
persons mentioned in the list. They did not accede. and he pro.
cceiled to execute his menace by forming an opposition. The tie.
fendants thus attacked, and apprehensive of losing those benefits
which they had purchased so highly, applied to James Crofts, the
senior partner of the original establishtnent. He, feeling the in.
justice of the measures adopted by Jonathan, and wishing to ob.
viate the occurrence of any detriment to the defendants from such
a procedure, again allowed to their firm the influence of his name.
For this purpose solely the defendants had employed the name.
and they denied that it had been used by them in respect to bills of
exchange, or in boy other manner. As it was admitted into the
firm metely as a protection against Jonathan, and in confirmation.
of the assignment, the breath of the private compact between the
plaintiff and his brother Thomas could not be made the ground of
an injunction.

Thc VICE-CIIANELLOR adverted to the particulars of the M.
signment, and the construction of that transaction. His Honour
was of opinion that the defendants, who had paid so large a soot
of money, were entitled to protection ; and oven if the compact be.
tween the brothers had been violated, still the plaintiff should
show that he had thereby sustained positive injury. In this
he had failed, for it was dear that the name of 't liomaa
had been introduced merely to guard the firm against the plans of
Jonathan, who, by the influence of his name, was otherwise likely
to deprive the defendants of some of their customers, a list of whom
he had procured in a manner not difficult to be surmised. His
Honour, therefore, dismissed the motion, with costs:

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WrsrmtssTrß,

We are happy to say that the Lord Carte Jusvict was 60E.
eiently recovered from his late indisposition to. be able to attend its
Court this morning. His Lordship however still appears to be la-
bouring under the efreets of a severe eold, and towards the close of
the day his Lordship was evidently moat eihausted.

THE RING L. DUGDALE.
Mr. Du R stEY preyed the judgment of the Court against John
Dugilale, who had been convicted at the Sussex Assizes of wilful
and corrupt perjury.
The prisoner hoped the Court would be merciful towards him, in
consideration of his good character, and of his having a wife and
six children who were entirely dependent upon him for support
lie said he had formerly served his country in the Tenth or the
Prince's Own, and had since then, by his own unassisted industry,
raised himself from a state of poverty to that of competency ;
he hoped that the Court would not, by any severe punishment, de.
prive hint of the fruits of his labours. Lord Hobert Manners, •
General Quintin, General Hamilton, and Colonel Palmer, could
have spoken to his good character, but he had not been able to see
them.

Mr. GURNEY addressed the Court in aggravation of punish.
!Tient. _

Mr. Justice BAYLTY, in pronouncing the judgment of the
Court, observed to the prisoner that he had been convicted by •
Jury of his country of a must heinous crime, both in the sight of
0041 and man. ('pow a petition in Chancery he had suggested that .
a gentleman of the name of Stamford had. in some money transac.
turns with him. charged him at the rate of ten per cent. This was •
proved to be false. lie had afterwards joined in an assignment of'
his property to the same gentleman, and had sworn, that at the
time he did so he was in a state of intoxication. That elso had
been proved to be false: and so far from showing contrition, he
had not in the least, by his address to the Court, mitigated his
offence. The constaptences of the guilt of the head of the lamilg
must of necessity fall upon the wife and children ; but the Court,
in consideration of his having already bcco some time in confine.
ment, sentenced him to be further iniprittoned in the house of cor-
rection at Lewes for one year, and in the mean time to be con.
mined to the custody of the marshal of the Marshalsea.
CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
Mr. PARL moved for a rule against a Mr. Parker, a Magia.
trate residing io the neighbourhood of Coine, in the county of
Devon, calling upon him to show cause why a criminal informa-
tion should not be filed against him for having illegally convicted
two men, named Baldwin anti Whitaker, under the Game Laws.
It appeared by the affidavits upon which the Learned Counsel
moved, that a Mr. Shaw. a gentleman of respectability, residing
in the neighbourhood of Colne, being properly qualified under the
flame Laws, went nut in the early part of September last for the
purpose of coursing. On that occasion he took with him a person
named Baldwin, and kpting intrusted the hounds to that indivi-
dual, he retired to an crated spot, from whence he could are the
sport, and Baldwin, with the hounds, coursed two hares, but was
unsuccessful, for the fleetness of the barn outstripped that of the
bounds, and no pme was taken. ,A few days afterwards Mr.
Shaw again went out, anti took with him Baldwin, and also a per.
son ranted taker, anti lie then. at on the tormer occasion, re-
tired to the elevated ground, and directr.d Baldwin and Whitaker
to course the hounds, that he might at but leisure enjoy the sport.
The hounds were more fortunate this time, and succeeded In catch. .
ing a bare. Upon both occal'amis it was sworn that these men
acted under the immediate aid express orders of Mr. Shaw. It
further appeared that Mr. Parker had another residence abnatt
twenty miles diluent from the place where the land on which Mr.
Shaw coursed was situate. and he was at that time Tostdingthene. ,
It was also sworn that them were three other Magistrates living
within three and eta miles of the where the supposed offence
was committed. Bus. instead off inhumations being laid
before either of those gentleman. they were, notwithstanding

i

The rids to show 'eauSewu then granted.
COOKE C. ISAIKIP.

ARNDT,' N. REDFERN AND ANOTDZI.

ATI( tKSON L. ATKISSON.

PEYTON V. NELSON.

CASE OF SAMUEL DONALDSON

the 20 miles distance, kid before Mr. Parker. The informatior.s
were lodged by a person either in the service or in some way con-
nected with Mr. Parker, who was well known as a sporting tharaz.
ter in that neighbourhood, and • Magistrate particularly zealous
enforcing the penalties of the flame lows. The first informe.
ion woe against Baldwin, foe the Ant afthnec committed by him
alone; and when brought before lie. nu-ter, • witness was called
who derwed to his having seen Baldwin with the greyhounds in
ibe fields ; be, however. admitted that he observed Mr. Shaw in an
adjoining held, and whose attention was directed towards the
bounds as they were courting. Mr. Shaw then came forward and
altered to explain the nature of the transaction; he showed the
Magistrate his qualification, and said that on the day in question
Ilaidwin wee in his employ, and that on former ocenelorie Baldwin
had been unplowed by him in a similar manner. The Magistrate,
bewevet, tefusid to administer the oath to Mr. Shaw, or to attend
to anything he had to my. Mr. thaw then mentioned the ease of
Lewis t. Taylor, in which it mu decided that an unqualified Per-
son going out to course under the immediate orders and direction of
a xenon who was qualified, was not liable to the penalty ; and be
referred Mr. Parker to the book which the latter then held in his
hand, its which that case was cited ; but that gentleman refused to
I,nk at the authority, and immediately fined Baldwin the 111111 i
..1. A second information was then laid against Baldwin for the
.)ffence committed on the subsequent day; but as soon as Mr.
rather understood that Whitaker was in company with him on
sv.at slay, he. without hearing any evidence of that fats; directed
detain to be acquitted, and assigned all a reason that both
cnt.ld not be found guilty upon that information. Mr. Shaw
14piia came forward to explain the circumstance, bnt the
aptstate refused to listen to anything he had to soy. It was cam-
era/ail that the object of the Magistrate was to get an information
134 against Baldwin and Whitaker. in order that they might both
he convicted ; because, had Baldwin been convicted on the second
iinformatime Whitaker would then have escaped.
Mr. Justiee BATLEY did not understand why they could not
beds flare been convicted for the second offence.

—Bin P/JUIL replied that they were separate informations.
Jnstire BATLIT—OIvtI. Have you siren the necessary
siotate of this application to the 3lagistratc ?
Mr. PAIK.-..-VeS, my Lord.

It will be remembered that this was an action brought by the
plaintiff, who is one of the members of Lincoln's-Inn, against the
defendant, who had been authorised by the parish officer* of St.
Andrew, Holboto, to levy adistras on the plaintiff's goods, for
poor-ratter and the question to be tried was, whether that part of
Lincoln's-inn which is known by the tame of Stone-buildings,
town' II part of the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn, or wasestra-
pouch:al,
_and cotaequenily not chargeable to the rates and other
tears 'levied fur the purposes of the parish.
The facts •of the case having been several times already before
the public, •e not consider it necessary ro repeat them. After
evident* had been ray fully gone into on both sides at the trial.
the Jury found a verdict for the defendant, thereby deciding that
Stone-buildings did form part of the parish of St. Andrew,
llo!born, and was consequently liable to be rated as such.
The ATTORNEY-OE74EI'AL. in Easter Term last, obtained a
rule,Tahing on die deft:Want to show cause why a new trial should
nor be had.

Mr. SCAM-TT-if, in Trinity Term, argued against the rule
Itetivi made absolute.
o-day 41r. nEwEntra followed on the same side.
Mr. Cot.ratoos: was also about to address the Court against
the _ rule, when

The LORD Cuter JUSTICE interrupted him, and said that
the question was considered by himselt and the other Judges of
sufficient Importance to induce them to think that the rule for a
new trial might w be made absolute, and that the costs of the
iODDIf trial should abide the event of the net► one.

tScaILETT hoped their Lordships would also make it as
one of the terms for the new trial, that the plaintiff should pro-
duce the title .deeds mentioned in 111 r. Lane's book, which was
produced on the trial, and stated to be In the possession of the
lienchers.
_ . . . . . . . .

ThtrecitotY said it was doubtful whether that book ought to
have been produced at all ; and if not, then the wife oould not
have had any proof that there ever had existed such deeds as were
*called for. Under the circumstances, they did not think they
could impose any terms un the plaintiff, especially when it was
moldered that a lapse of several centuries had taken place without
the parish of St. Andrew enforcing what they now conceived to be
then right. It might be possible that had this question been
raised years back, the plaintiff would have been in possession of
evidence to support his title, which lie was now unable to produce.
Janie made absolute.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, TUESDAY, Jar. 24.

The Court this morning gave judgment in this cause.
The motion before the Court was to increase the amount of da-
mages in the cause. The plaintiff was agent in r?.cotiand for the
Jifendants, and in the course of his transactions with them there
wen a balance due to him, for which he bad brought his action to
mover, and obtained a verdict. The question was, whether inte.
riot coeld be added to the debt, deeming it an English transavion,
a whether it was not a Scotch transaction, and by the Iswe of that
country interest could not be charged.
*The Court held that the whole transaction was English, and that
the plaintiff sae entitled to interest ; a Jury had the power to in.
crease damages where there was any unreaacnable
Tl.e Court was occupied during the mousing in hearing motions,
irtereating only to the immediate nudes.
'At twelve o'clock the Court rose, and the Lord Chief Justice sat
is Nisi Prins. The causes tried were of no general interest.
&mend persons summoned as jurymen applied to his Lordship to
he excused, assigning various reasons.
*The LORD Csigr JUSTICE informed them, that under the
:ate Act of Parliament he had not the power to excuse any persons,
without it being shown by affidavits that there was good reason fur
e.eir being extv.pted.

1110 H COURT OF DELLI;ATES, TUESDAY, JAN. 21.

In this case Docto-MAWMid,-b-aUix-sTi,--.1.-iddains, and Pinckard,
presided.
Dr. LossuroTou stated that this was a snit instituted by Mrs.
Atkinson in the Ecclesiastical Court of Canterbury, praying for a
.livorce from her husband, Gs the ground of cruelty and adultery.
The case was brought by appeal from the Court of Canterbury ;
and he now moved their Lordships to assign it to sentence before
I.l*.
_whole Cormission.

The 11It11rrEtt said the practice in this case had not been in
precitte accordance with the order of the Court relative to rendering
up of warrants to the Register, in cases of grievance.
The Conn r decided that it possessed the option to enforce the
performance of the order alluded to, or to decline enforcing it. The
nonperformance of this btrl et form was not sufficient to induce the
Cowl to refuse the assignment moved for by Dr. Lushington.
Aotion granted.

in this case, which was one of appesl from the Prerogative
iCtaut, Doctors Arnold and Lee were commissional to preside as
Delegates.
Al r.Lengdea, the appellant's Pro:tor, was assigned to prove and
exhibit the appeal.
LONODLN said he declined proceeding any further for the
The appellant appeared in person, and requested the Court to let
the case stand over until he had time to appoint another Proctor.
Mr. WRzicrit, the Proctor fur the defendant, urged the incon.
'eeasencs of delay, and alleged that the defendant had had sufficient
time to hare chosen a Proctor.
. .

Dr. ARNOLD inquired how long piece the appellant received
miring that hii Praetor declined pruceeding?

Us. lA/NW/Ell said about a
days
ifourO.
'
Ur. LEE thought the Proctor shou.tt give some satisfactory reason
wig M had declined proceeding for his client.
Ali. hoxcnax did not deem it IteCebtittry to explain.

Tao appellant said he believed be could state the objection which
ate Proctor had to proceed for hint. Ile had been burdened with
a bill or costs SlDeurting to 384/., which he refused to pay until it
had been taxed. If one could not get justice without entailing on
itesself 'such an expense as this, he asked where should a poor
aon-go

AIRNOLD said this Court had nothing to do with the costs,
rill* mu.% have arisen from the process in another Court.

it7vras Aaaily ordered that, on the next Court day the appellant
ar.atild be prepared, by his Proctor, to prove and exhibit the appeal,

Ifs-SOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Tr Esomr, JAX. 24.

The Cruz? Coselll3StOSZll said that the Court had deliberated
on this ors, which involved some legal difficulty, and were unaiii.
mends, ofepinion that the insolvent lied rendered himself amenable
toThe provisions of the 17th section of the Statute, by assigning
neer 'clew to his brother, in contemplation of insolvency. The
f:tfurt therefore sentenced him to be confined within the walls of
the prison fur twelve calendar months from the date Of his
petition.
Diving the examination of Robert lloodrick, the Court pointed
out several detects of notice to creditors, among others, to Earl
Cromenor • when the Attorney in the ease declared, to the surprise
o' the whole Court, that he had not been able to discover the Noble
k.aers residence
Arta few unimportant cases had been disposed of,
The Cult? COMMISSIONER observed that 'the Court felt
obliged to add a new rule to those already atablished by them,
vAich should be formally drawn up and :milled. The Court took
ivlsite puns to correct the errors into which the Attorneys were'
100 sssotly falling. They had hoped in 'iambi remedy all these
ergs, but hal not as yet been flattered 'with the last presage of
assess. There were many prectitiooces M that Court the was
wiry to gays who took no trouble to inform themselves of their
cnents' cases, and the natural mosequence of tpis'eultiabie neglect
waa the re ions injury of the insolvents. 'l'heVourt regretted being
compelled to make a nil,. whith would press hard upon Solicitors
of ..tosniatability ; but ?yet it was rendered necessary by the gross
n..irkgence of die maarity of that body. as well as by the ignorance
those roman pusses whcon they employed as sleeks. The Court
*oat require, therefore, after the lit of February. that seheJules
smash: be signed in the presence of the Attorneys themselves, and
a;sothet the Attorneys should we've their retainers in person, and
ct.mild certify to the Court their pemorial communication with the
*natant% their clients.
hie. torsunissioner sowrsr equated teat the signing of the
siiimittile in the presence of spy Attorney might be deemed valid, to.
%%et the Court &seeded. ••

Wm. Loring was opposed by Mr. Pri t.t.oc it on the ran of two
of his creditor,, Burke and 'capl:y. Being examined in the first
place with respect to his pmperty, tt app-a', 41 that he was part pro-
prietor of a stage.tosch, ant( had been nine yeses a coathinan ; he
acknowledged haring been prosecuted for an assault a year ago, but
denied having made at that time any assignment of his property in
order to save it from the effects of the action. His brother-in-law,
Mr. Staintr, who keeps an inn at Wilmer, a.ivanced him money
from time to time, to be repaid from The profits of the coat'.. lie
denied having made over his property to Mr. Staines, who never-
theless came into possession of all his horses as a security or com-
pensation for money advanced. This affair was managed without
an attorney. fie had alio assigned to another Creditor all his in-
terest in his fither's will.
Mr. Tapley. one of his opposing creditors, was examined.—lle
was a horse-dealer ; the insolvent called on hint in November last.
said he wanted several horses, went through the stables, anti
at last fixed on a bay gelding, the price of which was 45 guineas ;
the deponent demanded ready money, to which the insolvent as-
sented, and desired that the home should be tent to him next morn-
iag
; the horse was sent, but witness never received the money; his
servant wan Instructed to bring back the money or the horse.
Joseph Finch examined—lle was employed to take the horse to
the One Bell in the Strands there he saw the insolvent, who or-
dered the horse to be taken into the stable, and salt that he was
going to get a cheek changed, anti that he would conic back end
pay ; he came back complaining that he could not get the change,
and he said ha wonld go directly to Mr. Tapley. Witness left the
horse and returned home. but was sent back again (the insolvent
not having kept his word) in about three hours. Ile saw the in.
solvent again, who excused himself by saying that be had been en.
gaged in the search Of sonic Ntolett harness, but declared that he
was about to put the horse in his chaise anti to drive to Mr. Tap.
ley s. Ho did not go however. Next morning the witness went
again to the Strand, and found that the horse had been taken
away the preceding night. Witness left a boy named Jackson to
watt for the insolvent ; but shortly after seeing the latter in the
street, he asked him whether he had seen the boy 1 to which he
replied. yes; I have given hint the money and a note.
'The foil/using was 'lse brief note received by Mr. Tapley :
' I will call on you about twelve o'clock. Yount. &c."

Mr. Tapley. when cross-examined, did not recollect hi have had
any previous dealing a ith I.ming.
The examinations for the opposition of Sir. Tapley being con-
cluded, the further hearing of this case was poltponett oil to.
morrow, some important witnesses being expected from the
country.