The Sun.
London, England, 1808-03-02 00:00:00

Thomas Cox and John Dixon, of. Coptltall:court,
morton-street, bakers.
Ann lenkinson and Burgess •lenkinson; of Huntingdon, sta-
tioners.
lohnKemp and Henry Carr Kemp, of Prittlewcll,
millers.
John Stewart, John Alston, john Bell, John Hervey, and,
Patrick Duis4all, jun, of Paisley, mantiladuras. -
Richard Baldwin, John Gray, and Thomas Rydeing, of Li-
verpool, ship. builders.
James Knowler and William HoWland, of Boughton-under.--
Mean, Kent, bricklayerk.
Androvv Reinholt A f Uhr and Hans Peter Engstrom, '.of
Lawrence. Pounteney-lane, merchants.
Nicholas Routledge and Adam Halliburton, of Carlisle,
curriers.
• John ,Peter Holloway and William Over-stall, of Martin's.
lane, Cannon-strect, wine-merchants,
Samuel Hollingsworth and•lohn ToWnsend,,of Crane-court,
F ieet-Street, printers. •
Daniel Walker. and William Hassal, of Rochdale. wool.
staplers. •ti
Rich.' Bayly and John Leonard Dutreull, of Newington-
Butts schoolmasters. • ,
john Alexander Snow and Joshua RoWe, of TOrpoint, Corn.
wall, manuladurers of, black varnish.
losepli Gregory and Thomas Slagg, of Prestwich, Lanca-
shire, bleachers.
John Uolllingbery S tringer and •Charles Hiortiof Canterbury,
wool len-drapers.

LAIP REPORT.

COURT OF .CHANCERY, Mnacit 1.
OPERA-tiousa btsruTEs.

The interlocutory motion made on behalf of Mr.
Waters, praying the CHANCELLOR to remove Mr.
Taylor from the management of the opera-House,
and to appoint a_ Receiver of the
:Funds' of the
Theatre, was again discussed this day.
. .Sir ARTHUR PIQOTT, Mr., {ICHARDS, Sit Set.
ROMILLY, and'Mr. E3AAT,were heard..for the re-
spealive parties, when
The CHANCELLOR' obierved, that the Bill was ,
otiginally filed as a bill of 'foreclosure, and now 'he
was called upon, on an interlocutory motion, .to.re-
move Mr. Taylor from the., management, though
expressly covenanted as such by the Deed 1893,
and also to appoint a Receiver. In .such., a •-state
of the proceedings he did not feel that
:he had
jurisdialion to do what was asked of him., The
difficulties were almist as insupeiable with him as
with the concern itself, and if individuals porches-
ing and engaginb in theatrical property would make
improvident bargains, they had nu right to complain
of a Court of Justice for not relieving them train
difficulties which they could devise: cio. Means: of
relieving themselves from. He, was .also , called
upon to enforce the specific performance of the
covimantS contained in the Deed of :1804 ; That
deed .appointed Mr.. Taylor sole manager, after the
death of Mr. cr'oold ;, yet the covenants prevented
him from appointing 'a door-keeper _or 'a•candle-
sntaer without thejdinteonsent of Mr. coold's ex-
ecutors. Therefore, if he was to say that Mr. Tay-
ler Was not a tit Manager, and was to appoint ano-
ther, it, would be of no use, as the parties, if they
chose to quarrel, might withhold their consent to
his a6ts, and consequently plunge the concern into
still further embarrassment. In cases of .partnership,
the Court might be called upon to give relief, or to
do away the partnership ;time-ether; but it hadnever
been OtpeFled of a ChanCelror that he should carry
on the trade for the benefit of the parties, So hi the
case before him ; it he wad to deal with the appli-
cation as a bill of foreclosure, he -would,see what re-
lief could be 13iven ; but he would not sit there to
manage the. Opera }Towle concerns, and were he
disposed to do it, he lacked a fashionable education
to qualify him for the task. Again, if,he appointed
a Receiver, what was- to be done with the rents and,
profits In short, the concern was so bewildered,
and the deed upon which he was called upon to:act,:
so full of blunders, that ar•every-step he took fresh
embarrassments arose; he would, however, take time
trouble of reading the, documents submitted to him
once more before he gave his judgment ; and in ttie
mean time he would repeat, that the parties thein-
selves were their own best Chancellors, ,if they right-.
'ly knew their interests.

COURT OF KING'S 131iN61-1, MARCH 1,

111114tER V. ATOCKDALIZ.

This was an aetion, brought by the son and
daughters of the late Rev. Dr. iluNTEkras.-his Exe-
cutors,. to recover of the Defendant, a. respectable
Bookseller, the balance of an account, the DoCtor,
in his life time, having written the klistory.of Lon,.
don-for hitt). It appeared that he was to, have three
guitteati-a sheet for his labour,. and Dr. BEATTIE. was
called to prove the reasonablettess.of the oharge.
said that Dr. HUNTER was an elegant writer; but he
was not aware whether the work in question was the
effort of the Doetor's own researches, or whether it
was a compilatiOn. The price, Itowever, was',not
disputed, and as the tnatterresolved itself eventually
into'a dry question. of account, it was agreed to refer
it to Mr.