The Sun.
London, England, 1838-12-01 00:00:00

ii.OLLs' COURT.--(1 HIS DAY.)

This being the First Seal, the Master of the Rolls took his
seat in the Rolls' Court, Chancery-lane, at ten o'clock, but
was obliged to rise immediately, in consequence of Mr. Pem-
berton being engaged in a cause in the Cock-pit.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

IMPORTANT TRIAL ON WRIT OF RIGHT.
(FOURIII DAY.)
DAVIS V. LOWNDES.

The ATTORNET-GENERAL this morning replied on the part
of the tenant. He vindicated the abolition of this form of
trial ; which abolition he said would tend to quiet possession,
and to secure the law of inheritance, for the stability of which
he was most anxious : and he took occasion to declare that he
should ever maintain the law of primogeniture, which, how-
ever unsuited it might be to thu circumstances of other coun-
tries, was, he believed, especially calculated for the institu-
tions, the habits, and the character of the people of this
empire. The Learned Attorney-General went at great
length into an examination of the evidence given in
proof of the various links in the demandant's pedigree,
and had not concluded when our Reporter left.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

FORGERY .—john Hurries, aged 46, was charged with having,
on the 28th of June, forged an exceptance to a bitl of exchange for
100/. with intent defraud Messrs. Biddulphs. He was also charged
with having uttered the same, knowing it to he forged.
Mr. PHILLIPS appeared for the prosecution : Mr. CLARKSON
defended the prisoner.
Danid Harries James—l reside at Llwyndyfe, in the county of
Carmarthen, and am a magistrate for that county, and also for the
county of Pembroke. The prisoner is my brother-in-law. The
acceptance on the bill produced is not my hand-writing, nor did I
authorise the prisoner to use it. The bill I ascertained' had found
its way to Messrs. Biddulph's bank. 1 went to the Carmarthen
prison to see the prisoner, I said to him, " you have forged my
name, you must abide by the consequences, for I'll never pay one
farthing of the money." He said nothing. I then left him. The
signature resembles mine.
This witness, on his cross-examination, amongst other ad-
missions, stated that accommodation paper had passed between
them.

William Hall—l am clerk to Messrs. 13iddulph. I saw the
prisoner on the subject of the bill. I believe the acceptance to be
in his hand-writing. The bill was due on the 17th Sept., 1837.
We made a demand on the acceptor, and gave notice to the other
parties. I told the prisoner that the prosecutor said this was a
forgery. He said there was a conspiracy against him, or an at-
tempt to transport him, and that it was not a forgery. I don't
know who brought the bill to the bank. I believe the prisoner
did not.

Cross-examined—The prisoner carried on a large business at
Carmarthen, and was considered a very respectable man.

After some further evidence,

Mr. Baron ALnERSON inquired what evidence there was of
either the prisoner's forging or uttering? It was not in evi-
dence that the prisoner uttered, but it appeared rather the other
way. The hand-writing was not sworn to be that of the prisoner.
It was sworn not to be that of James.
A verdict of acquittal was then taken.
Mr. PHILLIPS said there was a second charge for the 2001. bill,
but he should offer no evidence. The Jury, therefore, returned a
verdict of Not Guilty.