The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-27 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, v. 26.
MILLIGAN V. MITCHELL.
Mr. Wroansi opened an appeal in this case on the part
of the plaintiff. The bill was originally filed in 1833, its
object being to obtain a declaration of the Court that no
minister, save one who belonged to the Presbyterian Church
of Scotland, was entitled to officiate in the, Scotch Church'
at Woolwich. The church in question was erected about
1794, by the subscriptions of persons professing to'be mem-
bers of the Presbyterian Kirk of Scotland, and that no one
Lilt a minister duly authorised by the General Assembly
should be permitted to preach in it. Up to 1830 the wishes
of The founders were strictly fulfilled, but oh the death of
Mr. Bligh, who had been Minister for a very long period,
thvongregation eected Mr. Alexander Scott. This gen-
tleman, after a very short interval, was discovered to be 4
dissenter from the doctrines of the Church, and complaints
being made to the General Assembly, be was ultimately
deprived of his license. A majority of the congregation
were, however, determined to have Dr. Scott as their mi-
nister, and they accordingly re-elected him, and the sole
question in the cause was whether a majority of the pre-
sent congregation have it in their power to bestow the ap-
pointment of minister on any person who does. not agree in
belief with the original subscribers, the founders of the
church. The arguments were not concluded at the rising
of the Court.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 26.• •
THE KING V. THOMAS.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was instructed to apply for a
rule to show cause why an information in the nature of a
quo .warranto should not be issued to a Mr. Thoitias, com-
manding him to show by what authority he claimed to ex-
ercise the office of Town-clerk and Clerk of the Peace for
the borough of Tewkesbury.—The Court granted the rule.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jex. 2G.
RYAN V. STACKPOOLE.
This was an action for work and labour, upon a quantum
7//eniii, by which the plaintiff claimed compensation for ser-
vices rendered by him in the character of agent to the de-
fendant. The case, it will be remembered, arises out of
certain proceedings taken by the defendant in France, to
enforce a decision pronounced by the House of Lords in
the case of Stackpoole v. Stackpoole, declaring the defen-
dant to be entitled to a great portion of the Stackpoole
property, against the assets of Count Stackpoole, who was
then resident in France ; and in the course of which the
plaintiff was commissioned upon certain terms by the de-
fendant to proceed to France, and endeavour to bring the
matter to a successful issue in the French Courts. At the
trial, which took place at Westminster, before the Lord
Chief Justice, during the sittings after last Trinity Term,
a verdict was found for the plaintiff, damages 1,5004 ; and
in the course of last Term a rule nisi was obtained by Mr.
Kelly either for a nonsuit oe a new trial, on the ground of
excessive damages.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD showed cause against the rule.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE was heard on the other side.
The CHIEF JUSTICE—We'II ccntinue this on Saturday
mm ning.

CONSISTORY COURT, JAN. 26.
WILLIAMS V. FARLAR.

This, which is a suit for brawling and chiding, is pro-
moted by the Rev. Theodore Williams, against Mr. Wm.
Farlar. The Rev. Gentleman, who is the Vicar of the pa-
rish of Hendon, Surrey, attended at a vestry, held in the
vestry-room of that parish, and was called to the chair by
the parishioners presimt, among whom was Mr. Farlar, the
party proceeded against in this suit. During the course of
the business the latter gentleman, whilst reading some re-
solutions which had been passed, omitted to aspirate the
word " Hendon," upon which Mr. Williams taunted him
respecting his education, and he, in a moment of exaspera-
tion, replied that he (Mr. Williams) was no gentleman ;
that his conduct was unworthy of a clergyman ; and that
he was a disgrace to his cloth. For these, and other
offensive expressions, which were pleaded in the libel, to
have been used by Mr. Farlar, this suit was instituted. An
allegation responsive to these charges was this day offered
for admission.

The KING'S ADVOCATE, for Mr. Farlar, supported the
admissibility of the allegation.
Dr. ADDAMS, for Mr. Williams, contended that though
the allegation as a whole was admissible, very many altera-
tions were necessary.
The Learned JUDGE having suggested several reforma-
tions, which hc_eonsidered necessary, referred it back to
Counsel for that purpose.

INSOLVENT DEBTOR'S COURT, JAN. 25.
IN THE MATTER OF THE BARONESS MUSKERRY.
Mr. \VOODROFFE applied on the part of the Baroness
Muskerry, who had filed a petition to be heard praying to
be discharged from custody, for leave to file another, nunc
pro tunc. The one filed was in the name of the Baroness
Muskerry, and, as her Ladyship had married a gentleman
named Radford, recently deceased, it was feared that an
objection would be made on the hearing which would have
the effect of vitiating the proceedings. The Learned Com-
missioners ultimately ordered the petition to be filed in the
name of Sarah Radford, known as the Baroness Muskerry,
notwithstanding the one already on the files.

COUNTY COURT, KINGSG.ITE-STIZSET, JAN. 25.
THE ARCHITECTURE OF A COBBLER'S STALL: INS
was an adjourned case that had been referred for arbitra-
tion. Two carpenters were to decide as to the architectu-
ral beauties of the erection, and two veritable translators of
soles were directed to examine the building as to its fit-
ness, &c.

COMMISSIONER—Swear all the parties.
Here the two carpenters and two cobblers were sworn,
and the following unique dialogue took place :
The Carpenters—Sir, we have examined this 'ere cob-
bler's stall according to your orders, and we finds it all reg-
lar, and well made, with a door at each end on it, and a
winder in the middle. The work's werry well put together,
and no cobbler don't ought to grumble.—(Laughter.)
COMMISSIONER—WeII, but was it big enough ? The
Carpenters—That depends on the size of the cobblers, my
Lord.

COMIIIIISIONER—ExactIy so ; but is it made according
to order? Both Cobblers together—No, my Lord, it aint
water-proof—it's full of cracks—it—
CommtssioNEß—One at a time, gentlemen.

A Cobbler—My Lord, neither you nor any other gentle-
man could impossibly work in it ; it's a disgrace to the
harchitecture of this ere hage.

Here the builder or architect stepped forward, and most
indignantly affirmed, that Christopher Wren could not have
built such a stall, an assertion which the jury did not seem
'nclined to doubt in the least. A modol of the stall was
produced—one part/ insisted that It was too little, and the

A NOVEL WASER.—A coalheaver, with the usual
appurtenances of huge knocked knees and round herculean
shoulders, known at the City Basin as " Yaffling Biily,"
summoned a brother coalheaver at the same wharf for 10s.
Mr. Dusots—What's it for ? Plaintiff—Vy, my Lord,
I'll tell you. We chaps as likes 'ard work likes lots o'
beer and wittles, and sometimes we tries (tie) which on US
can heat most, and drink mo=t beer, and you'd be asto-
nished if so be as you com'd amang us some ngfit, and seed
us.—(Laughter•.) Well, I makes a wager as how, arter
we'd unloaded Lord Melbourne—

A Juryman—Unloaded who, Sir? Plaintiff—Vy, Lord
Melbourne, and a precious big barge, too, I can tell yer,
only precious leaky. I expects we shalt all go down in her
someday—(Laughter)—but that's neither here nor there.
Howsomdever I betted a bet as how I'd drink twenty pots
of heavy all to my own cheek, in twenty quarters of a hour.
—(Laughter.) Vell, ye gets rid of oh! cranky (the barge),
and I goes regler to work on the beer, and I vim it, my
Lord—(Laughter)---I drink't every drop on it, and'ad a
quarter of an hour to spare ; and then this 'ear unhonour-
able feller said he initial got no money, and so I took legal
,adwiee, and took the for on him.
COMMISSIONER—What do say to this ungentlemanly
transaction ? Defendant—Vy I 'nose the lorsas well as !.e
does, and you 'nose as how he can't rekiver not in I.int
for ; its a grinding transaction.—(Roars of laughtso,
bet you two to one you'll sartiiily hill over-
board one of these 'ear days.—(The latter observation was
made very significantly.) You 'nose hour rules, yer war-
mint.—(Laughter.)•
COMMISSIONER—Order, Sir, and don't threaten the poor
man. 'lie jury cannot entertain the case. It is dismissed.
Defendant, waving his genuine fan tiler in triumph,
turned to the plaintiff, and said, " Now, whii 'nose the lor,
hays, my little yaffler ?"—(Laughter.) The smutty liti-
gants left the Court highly complimenting each other; after
the highly approved .fashion of Puddle Dock..

CE INTELLIGENCE.

•- . • • -414TTON:G.ARDEN.
Yesterday Mr. Rao, the landlord of the Turk's Head,
King-street, Bloomsbury, was summoned for suffering dis-
orderly characters to assemble in his house, and with having
assaulted Mr. Greenwood, the superintendent of the E divi-
sion, and inspector Campbell. Elizabeth Fay and I•Villiam
Fidler were also charged with assaults. The- Case bcimr,
clearly proved, the defendant Flagy was convicted in the
penalty of 21. for suffering disorderly characters in his house,
and 51. fir the assault upon iuspequr Campbell. Fov was
fined 8/.,•0r six weeks' impriscriment ; and Fidler 2/., or a
month's imprisonment.
Mr. LAING told Mr. Flagy, unless his fine was paid for
the assault, he would hd committed to the House of Cor-
rection for two months. The, money was eventually paid.