The National Register.
London, England, 1821-02-18 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

?"The Under Sheriff of Warwickshire returned that he
had not levied a cc:LIM fine in consequence of having
received a letter from the Solicitor, requesting that he
would take no :teps as the matter was under conside-
Tailor,. Mr. Hama Darrow deired it to be understood,
that the Sheriffs were not at liberty to make such retire-
untations. ()fuer% .111,1,1 S were ako made on the want
of precision with which reco.;ilizances were taken, in
consequence of which the riwitir could not find the
party to levy the fine, and the Under Sheritls were di-
rected to intimate to clerks:of magistrates, especially
those actim; c.f. large towns, that more precision yas
ex)keete.l.
lite Lord Chancellor will hear re-hearings and ap-
peals, and such Call4C3, pleas, demurrers, exceptions,
and further directions as are set down before hint, al-
ternately, (except on Seal Days, and such days as his
Lordship is occupied in the House of Lords) :
Every day from Wednesday, February YI, to Wednesday,
April 4, twin invlu•ive.
First Seal—Tueschty, Feb. 20.
Second Seal—Thursday, March 8.
Thiid Seal—Thursday, March 22.
Fourth Seal—Thur,day, April 5.
Petitions—April S.
Seals, &c. before the Vice Chancellor, after Hillary
Tenn, 1821 :

- _
Firia Seal.—Tuesday, February _o.—Motions : from
Wednesday, Fch.Yl, to forint:ly, March 6—tauses.
Seecond Scal—Thunittay, March B.—Mutioas, Further
Directions andCattsei., Friday, March 9, to Wednesday,
March 24. _ _ .

Third Seal—Thursday, March 22—Motions: Picas, De-
murrers, 1-:•ct•ption,, Further Directions and Causes,Friday
March 23, to IVedocsiiii), April 4.
Fourth Seal—Thur,dB), April S.—Motions.
Friday, April 6.—Petitions.
MONDAY, TEE. 12,
S. HALL (of Basford, Notts.) v. TOWLE and others.
Mr. !fart moved for as injunction to restrain the
defendants front pirating and using the invention of the
plaintiff (who is partner in the house of G. F. Urling
and Co. in the Strand), for improving thread or yarn,
in infringement of the patent he had obtained for the
exclusive use of that invention. The letters patent were
obtained in November, 1817 ; and they stated that the
object of the improvement was to remove the projecting
fibres from every description of thread or yarn, and ren-
der it stronger, smoother, and finer. The plaintiff had
expended in experiment, anterior to the completion of
his invention, 50001. and upwards; and, front the date
of the patent till the present time, had been in undis-
turbed possession and use of the invention, with the
exception that, for some time past, the defendant had
been secretly using it, which, if they could do safely,
it was very natural they would , for the plaintiff's inven-
tion had obtained a celebrity of a very distinguished kind
amongst those who were fanciers of lace under the
name of ' Urling's new impros ed lace.' It was a subject
of very great profit to the plaintiff, and his lordship might
form some idea of its excellence, as her late majesty had
granted to titling and Co. permission to supply her
exclusively with lace, her majesty being a good judge of
specimens of mg kind. This appointment, together
with other circumstances which had givers a decided
superiority to " Urling's lace," had induced the attempt
of the defendants to infringe upon the plaintiff's patent.
The plaintiff was not able for some time, to bring it
home to the defehdants; but in the course of the present
month of February, in consequence of his suspicions,
he placed a ladder at night, against a witiduw of the
defendants' manufactory, and there very clearly saw the
defendants carrying on tli^ proce,s of improvement in-
vented by him. This was continued by four oilier per-
sons, and certainly the very midnight mode of carrying
on the work was strong evidence of concealment, and
an intention of pirating the iurention. His lordship
}lasing examined several specimens of the lace thread
of which it was manufactured, granted the injunction.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
FRIDAY, FE8.16.
Radial! Cliffse.—The King •. 11. Bunt

Mr. Walton opened the pleadings. lie said the in.
formation was filed by the Attorney General to recover '
two penalties of 1001: each from the defendant, one for
making an imitation of coffee fur sale, and the other for
having sold the same.
The Solicitor General stated the case, and then called
his witnesses.
Samuel Linstead stated, that he is an officer of Ex-
cise, and in the month of February last he went to the
defendant's manufactory, 97, Broadway, Surrey, and
asked to buy 141 b. of breakfast powder; he saw the
defendant's son, who said they did not sell less than
tBlb.--he then bought that quantity, for which he paid
Bd. per lb. The defendant's son told him it was better
than coffee—that they were selling a great deal of it,
and had sent a great deal of it to Liverpool.
The witness went away, and returned with other
excise office's, one of whom, W. East. seized all the
powder that was matimactured. or that was in the pro-
cess of manufacturing.
When the olicers came to seize, and told the de-
fendant their business, he said, if they did loot seize
immediately, lie would kick them out.
On his cross.examinat ion by Mr. 11111, he said, neither
defendant nor his son called the powder coffee, our was
there the least concealment. Die witness asked for
breakfast powder.
W. East, surveyor of excise, proved the facts of the
seizure, as stated by the first winless.
Mr. Hubert stated. that he is a dealer in coffee, and
accustomed to eaaniine coflee, and all its mixtures, by
chemical tests. Pro.lnced part of the powder seized,
which had been given him fur examination ; said, it
resembled coffee in many particalars, and if one-fourth
real coffee were mixed with three-fourths of the powder,
he would not, by utuking it the usual way, and drink-
ihg it. be able to discover the difference between it and
real collee, but should for that purpose have recourse to