The Sun.
London, England, 1837-04-17 00:00:00

THE KING V. THE RECORDER OF POOLE.

Mr. BINGHAM applied for a rule to show cause why a
mandamus should not be issued to the defendant, command-
ing him to enter continuances, and hear an appeal against a
rate. A rate hadb een ordered to be levied to pay the ex-
pense of carrying into effect the new Municipal Reform
Act, and a Mr. Francis Turner gave notice of appeal in
the following terms :—" I Francis Turner, being an inha-
bitant of Poole, and being called on to pay the rate herein-
after mentioned, hereby give notice that I shall appeal," &e.
The 92d section of the Act declared " That if any person
shall think himself aggrieved by such rate he shall appeal t'
the Recorder, who shall have the power to hear and deter-
mine the appeal against the rate." It was objected that
there was no direct statement in the notice that the appel-
lant was a party grieved, and that statement was considered
by the Recorder, and be refused to hear the appeal on ac-
count of the want of that statement.—The Court granted
the rule.

ABBOTT V. THE LONDON AND SOUTHAMPTON RAILWAY

COMPANY.

Mr. \\Turn moved for a rul., to show cause why an
order of Mr. Justice Coleridge, setting aside a judgment
signed rgainst the defendants as for want of a plea, should
not be rescinded. This was an action brought under
4 and 5 William IV., c. SS, the local Act establishing the
Company. By section 10;3 of that Act it was declared
that no plaintiff "shall recover for any irregularity in the
execution of it, if there shall be a tender of sufficient
amends to the party complaining of such irregularity ; and
in case no tender shall be made it shall be lawful for the
defendant to pay into Court such sum as he thinks will
cover the amount of the damage claimed." In this ca4c
the defendants had pleaded a tender of amends, but had
not accompanied that plea with the payment of any
money into Court. The defendants by their plea ad-
mitted that they had done an injury.—ltule granted.

BAIL COURT.
ST. LUKE'S CHURCH, CIIELSEA.

Mr. CLar.xsoN moved for a rule to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue to the Magistrates of Middle-
sex, in Quarter Sessions assembled, commanding them to
hear a certain appeal. By an Act passed in the 59th Geo.
111., cm Lain trustees were appointed who were to erect a
church in the parish of St. Luke, Chelsea, and to maintain
suitably the Clergyman officiating therein. For this pur-
pose they were empowered to make rates on the pa-
r►shioners, as also for repairs to the Church in question,
should occasion for them thereafter arise. It was also
enacted (by the 99th section of the Act) that the accounts
of the trustees should be twice during every year submitted
to the auditors of the parish for their approval, and that in.
case of any dispute arising on the subject of those accounts
an appeal should be lodged by the parishioners before the
..liddlescx Magistrates in Quarter Sessions assembled, whose
decision upon them was to be ultimately binding. Now
for some time past there had been in the parish considera-
ble difference of opinion on the subject of the rates levied.
for the support of the Church, and an objection was lately
raised, on the ground of inaccuracy in the accounts, t
the levying of an additional rate that had been imposed,
and of that rate being unnecessary. Au appeal was con-
sequently made by the parties in question to the Quarter
Sessions, but the Chairman's construction of the Act did:
not in his opinion justify him in receiving the appeal, and.
it was accordingly dismissed. The Learned Counsel now--
applied for a mandamus to compel the Justices to hear the:
appeal. Rule to show cause granted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, APRIL 15.
The Barons of this Court, after accompanying the other
Judges to Westminster Hall in the usual procession, took
their seats upon the Bench this day, being the first day or
Term, shortly before two o'clock. The following gentlemen,
who have recently been appointed King's Counsel, tack
their scats within the bar, in the order in which their
names stand :—Messrs. Rogers, Andrews, Chelton, Evans,
Crowder, Whitmarsh, and Cooper. Mr. Jervis obtained a
patent of precedence ; and is succeeded in the post of tub-
man by Mr. Turner.

MAIIIHOTT V. SIIAW.
Mr. lIumFREY applied to the Court for a rule to set:::
aside the nonsuit, and enter a verdict for the plaintiff in this•
cause. It was an action of assumpsit to recover ale stakes
deposited with the Cicik of the Course of the Newport_,
Pagnell Races ; and at tile trial before Mr. JuV.ice Little-
dale, at the last Assizes for Northampton, the -plaintiff was:.
nonsuited.—Rule refused.

lIE ALE V. ERLE.
Mr. WATSON applied for a rule to enter -a suggestion oni
the roll, to deprive the plaintiff in this ce se of his costs,,
under the provisions of the Bath Court rd Requests Act *
Both the amount claimed and the residence of the party
gave the local Court jurisdiction ; but as judgment hat
been allowed to go by default, and final judgment had bees
signed, both for the amount claimed and taxed costs, a diffi-
culty was placed in the way of the present application, to
confine plaintiff to the amount of the original debt alone.
Mr. Baron PARKE—You may take a rule, but it must
be so shaped as to pay the costs incurred since.
Rule granted.

ARCHES COURT, API:IL 15.

This being the commencement of Easter term, prayer*
were read by the Chaplain, and the Court was opened wits
tale usual solemnities.

SCRIVENER V. SCRIVENER.

This was an appeal from the Consistory Court of Lon-
don, in a suit for divorce on the ground of adultery by Mr.
W. Scrivener against Margaret his wife. An objectioa was
taken to the instrument of appeal, r. hick, when attested y
a notary within the legal period, did not contain a specift-
cation either of the nature of the cause, the Court, to tLe
parties, which had been supplied since, and it disr:overe,!,
moreover, erasures and interlineations.
Sir H. JENNEB, would zveertain what bad. hem the usu ii
practice before he decided the question.

110011 E V. MOORED

This was an appeal from the Co-art of the Dean ami
Chapter of St. Paul's, in the rej'ection of the libel in it
suit for divorce, by reason of inViiery, by Mr. James Moore
,against Ann, his wife. The Voel pleaded that the part i:•S
were married ir. 1806, cohreited at the house of M.s.
Moore's father till 1809, when Mr. Moore became a
clerk to an attorney at St. Neot's, leaving his wi e
with her father in London, who died in 1817, the wi is
continuing to reside in the house till 1818 ; that fin ir
children were born, three of whom (daughters) sure ix
and are married ; that, in 1818, difference's arose betwe,
the parties, and they agreed to separate, Mr. Moore .1-
lowing his wife hut COL per annum ; that in July, %8t 9,
Mr. Moore, on visiting his wife; to make arrangcme• its . or
the papfient of the ellowance, found her, to his SIM ,rise, in

an advanced stage of pregnancy ; and that in 1333, when
she kept a boarding-house in different parts of London,
the carried on an adulterous intercourse with some of her
lodgers.
Dr. ADDAMS, for the wife, supported the judgment of
the Court below.

Sir 11. JENNER pronounced against the appeal, and re-
mitted the cause.

Richard Henry Winstanley, Esq., notary public, was
introduced in the usual form, and, upon taking the custo-
mary oaths, was admitted of the number of procurators-
general exercent in this Court, by virtue of a receipt from
his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

HATTON-GARDEN.

On Saturday Mrs. Ann Neil, of the Nag's Head, St.
John-street ; Hanry Ni.r, of the Northumberland Arms,
Bagnivge-wells-road ; Mr. Tucker, of the White Bear,
St. John-street ; and numerous other licensed victuallers,
were convicted in the penalty of 20s. and costs for suffer-
it.g gaming and disorderly conduct in their houses.
Ann Pearse, an elderly woman, was brought up, charged
with being drunk, and incapable of taking care of herself.
The prisoner was a member of a Temperance Society, but
she was continually intoxicated, and since she had signed
the declaration to use gin only medicinally she had been
three times committed to the treadmill for drunken and
disorderly conduct. She was fined a shilling and dis-
charged.