The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-18 00:00:00

RE AROOKBANK.

Dr. Phillimore also applied for probate of the will of
Joseph Brookbank, who died in South America in Octo-
ber, 1860. He left the whole of his property to his wife and
children, but there was also a creditor who had given notice
to the parties concerned that he should apply for letters of
administration to the said will. No answer to that citation
had been returned, and therefore the present motion was
made.

DYKE ♦. WALLIS AND OTHERS.

Probate granted.

In this case Dr. Griffith Jones propounded an instrament
which purported to be the last will of Sophia Bellis, of
Woburn-place, Middlesex, by which the whole of the pro-
perty was bequeathed to him. In the course of the trial
he admitted that he had been guilty of perjury, and he
was sentenced tol2 months imprisonment. The defendants
claimed to be second cousins and next of kin to Sophia
Bellis; while the Queen's Proctor alleged that she was
illegitimate, and died intestate. The object of the present
motion was to direct them to amend their plea by setting
forth their pedigree more fully.

The Court deferred making any order for the present.
BORROUGHS V. BORROUGHS AND BILCOCK.

Dr. Swabey made an application on the part of Mrs
B rroughs, for leave to amend her answer to the petition
of her husband to this court praying for divorce on the
ground of adultery.

Dr. Spinks, for the petitioner, opposed the application,
on the ground that there had already been sufficient delay
in hearing the case.

The application was granted on special conditions as to
costs .

It was afterwards arranged that the trial should be taken
to-morrow fortnight.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Registrar Higgins.)

IN RE KADIR RUKSCIT-TUE RESULT OF AN ACTION POE

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

This bankrupt was an assistant in the Turkish Baths in
Finsbury, and this was a meeting for first examination, but
no creditor appeared to prove, and therefore no assignee was
chosen.

It appeared from the account presented by the bank-
rupt that he had been arrested for costs in an action for false
imprisonment. The bankrupt and his wife had been in the
service of Moolize Mussheeoodd, the proprietor of the
baths, who gave the plaintiff in custody on a charge of
stealing various articles from the establishment, but on an
examination being taken at the Marylebone police-court,
the bankrupt was discharged, and an action was brought
and heard before a special jury, but as it was proved that
the bankrupt's wife had taken away some trifling articles
unknowing to the bankrupt, the jury gave a verdict
for the defendant, and the costs amounted to £ll5, for
which the defendant was taken in execution. The other
debts, however, were insignificant, except the costs of Mr.
Sorrell, the defendant's solicitor, for £l2O, also for costs in
the action.

Mr. Sorrell appeared to support the petition, but did not
prove his debt, and supported the bankrupt, and asked for a
day to be named and protection for the bankrupt.—Granted.

IN RE HICKFORD.

This bankrupt was described as of Gallingay, grocer, and
this was a first meeting. Messrs. Hart Brothers and
Hayles are the accountants, but as the accounts had not
been filed, an adjournment was ordered.