The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-30 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

His Honour the VICE-CHANCELLOR took short causes, un-
opposed petitions, and motions to-day.

EX PARTE THE POOR PERSONS RESIDING IN THE PARISH OF

BIDFORD.

This case came before the Court upon the petition of the
Clergyman and Churchwardens of the parish of Bidford, pray-
ing that a sum of 5001. might be laid out in the purchase of
3 per Cent. Consols, and that the accumulated interest an that
sum, amounting to upwards of 3001., might be appropriated
to the purposes of the charity created by the testator. Many
years ago a gentleman named Wilcox left by will the sum of
5001., the interest of which was to be divided every Christmas
among the greatest objects of charity in the parish of Bidford,
those objects to be selected by the Clergyman and Church-
wardens for the time being. The interest of the money never
having been appropriated to the purposes intended, the present
petition was prc.ented by the Clergyman and Churchwardens
to enable them to do so.

The COURT granted the prayer of the petition.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)

IMPORTANT TRIAL ON WRIT OF RIGHT.
(THIRD DAY.)
DAVIS V. LOWNDRS.

The evidence for the demandant was continued this morning.,
Various deeds and other documents were put in to esta-
blish the different links in the chain of relationship by which
demandant ( Mrs. Davis), was sought to be proved a lineal de-
scendant of Mr. Selby, the testator. Among 'these docu-
ments one of the most interesting was an ancient roll of parch-
ment. containing one of the long pedigrees so common in
Wales, connecting the Lloyds, of Pembrokeshire, with some
of the old Welsh Princes.

Mr. Sergeant NIVILDE submitted that this pedigree con-
tained, on the face of it, something that rendered
it inadmissible as legal evidence. It was stated,
to have been " compiled from parish registers, wills, monumen-
tary inscriptions, family records; and history." Now, as to
family records, nobody knew what they were—probably they
meant ar.y memoranda that anybody might have written in any
book belonging to the family; and, as respected the " hi:.
Cory," any person who wished to store his mind with amusing
fables, might obtain an ample supply from " Welsh history."
—(Laughter.) Most undoubtedly, however, these traditions
were satisfactory to the Lloyds of Pembroke that they were
descended from Welsh Princes—they were not evidence for a
Court of Justice.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL followed On the same side.

Sergeant TALPOURD largued that though the more ancient
portion of the pedigree might not be evidence to be relied on,
yet as William Lloyd, who died in 1737, had mentioned it in
his will as the true pedigree of his family, it ought certalnly to-
be admitted in evidence at least as far back as his grandfather
and great-grandfather—whoie descent must have been natter
almost of personal knowledge to him ; and to that extent only
did he (Sergeant Talfourd) desire to use the d4cultent. As
to the statement that the pedigree was complied of wills,
parish registers, and history—that ought to bastssaredea
singula, singulis—it meant " history" was the 'source- from
which the more'remote links of the pedigree were draws ; • and
that personal belief and knowledge was the authority from
which the more recent branches of the descent were derived.
History could never have taken note of the Lloyds of compa-
ratively modern date ; and only referred to the dim light of
tradition ; and though fabulous derivations were not evidence,
that part of the pedigree which was within Wialatu Lloyd's
belief or knowledge was surety receivable.
.11r. WILLIAMS, on the same side, said he had the honour to
have some Welsh blood in his veins—( Loud laughter)--and
as Sir J. Campbell had sneered at Welsh pedigrees, be (Mr.
Williams) would have a fling at Scotch traditions.—(Load
laughter.) If the Earl of Fife were to make out a pedigree,
professing to trace his ancestral line through the ancient
Thanes of Fife, up to the Macbeths—
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL—Macduffs.—(Loud laughter.)
Mr. WILLIAMS—WeII, the Maedutli. If the Earl of Fife
were to attempt to prove himself descended from the fifty or
sixty Kings hung up in Holyrood House—for whom there was
not an atom more evidence than for the Lloyds of Pembroke—
( Roars of laughter)—surely it would not be objected that the
pedigree could not prove the more immediate ancestors of the
Earl ?

The COURT rejected the document ; and Sergeant Talfourd
stated that this rejection would form one ground for a bill of
exceptions. _

The Trial was proceeding when we went to •

EXCHEQUER COURT-(THIS DAY.

SPECK V. PHILLIPS.

This was an action for a breach of contract
The defendant was about to set up in the whalebone trade,
and not understanding it himself, he engaged the plaintiff,
who was a good workman, and in regular employment at 255.
a week, to serve him for a year at 355. per week. Plaintiff
worked with him for six months, but on the 16th June, with-
out any complaint, he was discharged. It was proved that the
latter six months of the year were very slack ones in the
whalebone trade, and that a person out of employment in June
had very little chance of obtaining a situation before the be-
ginning of the following year, except at very reduced wnges.
The defendant had paid 51. ss. into Court, and his Counsel now
contended that that sum was enough to cover any damage sus-
tained by the plaintiff during the three weeks which elapsed
between the discharge and the bringing of the action.
The Jury, after some little calculation, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff, with 30/. damages, beyond the 5/. Ss.
paid into Court.

BALLOONING—HAMPTON P. CROSS.
This was an action against the d&:ndant, who is the pro-
prietor of the Surrey Zoological-gardcUs, for the sum of 601.,
which he had contracted to pay the plaintiff, for two ascents in
an air-balloon. The defendant pleaded that the plaintiff's
balloon was not a proper one for an ascent, and that such an
ascent could not be made without danger to life and limb, nor
could the balloon come down without committing a trespass ;
and therefore the contract was illegal,
After some discussion between the Counsel and the Court,
His LORDSHIP d►rected the plaintiff to be nonsuited.