The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-22 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

idIaUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 21.
SHAW V. LAWLESS.
In this t6se, which was not concluded yesterday •ichen
We went to press, their Lordships deferred judgment. -until
after the Easter recess.

PREPOGA7Ecor37RT 2114nen °L.
rox u. MAnsToN.
Tik Was a question as to the admissibility of art hllega-
tion respecting the validity of the paper propounde;j as the
last will and testament of the hte Mr. John Fox., who died
at Uttoxeter, in the county of Stafford, on Ode 12th of
May, 1835, at the age of seventy-five years. "Ile deceased
left personal property to the amount of 10:0001., and real
property to the value of 50,9001. Thor a were debts due,
however, from the dcee.'sed to the 'Anil amount of the per-
sonal estate, Tin deceased exe::uten a will, by which he
gave fr,!`2l-aold pi operty to a :einale named Ann Bakcweli,
,vlth whom he intermarried subsequent to the date of the
paper in question, a provision being inserted in it that she
should continue to enjoy the proceeds while she remained
single. The remainder of the property was bequeathed to
the nephew of the deceased; to whom also was given the
freehold property set aside for Ann Bakewell, in ease of
her marriage. The will was dated on the 17th of January,
1885 ; on the 25th of February following, the InPrriag,4l
between the deceased and Ann ri.kkewell was 'boiemnisurt
on the 12th of May the testator died ; '&1,1 on the itiak of
October a posthunkuns ehild was tlern. 0:1 behalf ok the
nekthew tho allegation was
opposed.
thilhil°,l"..c_4ll.l7,ooE gave sentence this day, :,iatlecided
~,role evidence in this case to rebut the prescrip-
.,on of law was admissible. Under these circuinsiances the
allegation was generally admissible, but requirrA a few re-
formations, which the Court pointed out.

ARCHES' COURT, Maacir 21.
TREVANION V. TREVANION.
This was originally a suit for divorce in the Consistorial
Court of Lincoln, promoted by Mr. Trevanion against his
wife. After the libel had been given in, and several alle-
gations on either side had been admitted, another allega-
tion was offered on behalf of Mr. Trevanion, pleading fur-
ther acts of adultery, alleged to have been committed in
the neighbourhood of Dover. To this a responsive alk-
,gation was given .in on behalf of Mrs. Trevanion. The
Learned Judge, however; of the Consistory Court of Lon-
don rejected the principal facts of this allegation, and the
question as- to the admissibility of the responsive allegation
was brought to the consideration of the superior Court.
On this point the Lesrnod JUDGE gave his opinion this
day. If irrelevant raatter were to be admitted, it would
always lea't ',A) endless delay and needless expense ; and it
wag highly conducive to public good that allegations like
the present should not be admitted. The Court accord-
ngly confirmed the judgment of the Court below.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, MARCH 21.

Hein; ielz Kleimnzatin, a native of Prussia, was opposed by
Mr. WOODROFFE on the part of many creditors, merchants
at Breslau, Prussia ; and supported by Mr. COOKE.
The circumstances of this case were remarkable. The
insolvent had been a merchant at Breslau, in partnership,
he stated, with a person named Lunge. He suddenly ab-
sconded from his creditors in March last, and arrived in
this country in April, bringing (as was alleged) with him a
considerable sum of money. Ho was traced and arrested
by the foreign creditors. He was heard on his petition in
January last, and his case was referred to Mr. Cresswell,
the Examiner of the Court, for investigation, who expressed
his opinion that the insolvent had either concealed or made
away with considerable•property, sufficient to pay a large
dividend, if not the creditors in full. The insolvent had
negotiated for a house at the West-end, and the internal
evidence went to show that he was possessed of property.
On the other hand, it was stated that he was in indigent
circumstances, and that the Governor of Whitecross-street
prison had contributed out of the charitable fund at his dis-
posal to bring the insolvent before the Court on the pre-
sent occasion. It was stated that the insolvent had not
come up before on the ground of his poverty.
Mr. WOODROFFE urged the necessity of a lengthened
remand of the insolvent for a concealment, or making away
with property.
Mr. Coorm contended that there was no evidence to show
that the insolvent had concealed any property.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS said in this case there was
an important question in regard to the international law of.
the country, on which he was anxious to consult with his
Learned Colleagues. They were now on their circuits,
and the case must stand over till Monday, the '24th of
April, for the attendance of a full Court.