The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-21 00:00:00

------_,
C lAi N ri-L-1,-. ~
4 ..-L ‘-'-U4n, X COURT._(THIS DAY.) that the fraudulent intention was siifficiently proved by the
- i .„ . .
;i1 e cc,-; ~I ti:;. defendant, aft or notice 1:,,k,i t -., ~ . 1., r,.
GAltuNEii. V. LAUCtILAN.—JUDGMENT. him that his false representation had been repeated to the
The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in th;s plaintiff. The declaration sufficiently averred the fraud,
ease, which came before his Cordsiiip upon appeal from the i and the plea was not a good answer to it.
decision of the Vice-Chancellor. The only question in the
case was, DEVAUX V. JANSON.
fendar whether the notice of the assignment to the de- This came before the Court on a special case. The
of it was sufficient under the 21st section of the Statute action was brought on a policy of insurance made upon a
James-_ta A person, named Scott, being indebted to the merchant ship, which was to sail to and from Calcutta.
In assigned all the freight of a ship to him, giving The insurance was on freight, and the plea was that the
made to that effect to Lauchlan, to whom the freight was loss of the vessel was not incurred by any of the risks in-
ch e PaYithle. Upon the case corning on before the Vice- eluded in the policy. The case would include almost
Wnancellor he was of opit:ion the notice of the assignment every that could arise upon a policy of insurance. The
toassuflicient, and declared that the plaintiff was entitled vessel having sprung a leak on her outward voyage, was
the freight, and from that decision the defendant. ap- forced to put into a port on the coast of Coromandel for
pealed,
of the Vice-andthe •- 1 " bilged" and broken up by an
His Lordship was of opinion that the judgment repair,
Chancellor was correct, and dismissed the ap- accident which took place during the attempt to remove
Peal with costs.
her from the dock.
Sergeant WILDE appeared for the plaintiff, and his
arguments lasted to the time of our going to press.

. DAS.
His LORDSHIP aIsoSCoTT gave vjudgment in this case. The
Plaintiff in the cause was entitled, under the will of her
father, to an interest in 2001. Long Annuities. That inte-
rest was settled up on herself, not to be liable to the control
of her husband. The plaintiff, together with her husband,
Sold all her interest to
one of the defendants, who was the
trustee for 2,0001. ; and the object of the bill was to im-
th e that transaction. Upon the case coming on before
Vice-Chancellor, his Honour declared that the 200/.
Ltdig Annuities was still liable to the equities of the
dis
plaintiff. With that judgment his Lordship concurred, and
tnissed the appeal with costs.
DENT v. BENNETT.
to T arguments in this part heard case, were concluded
. gayThe LORD CHANCELLOR postponed giving judgment.

BOW-STREET.-(THIS DAY.)

A middle-aged man, named Win. 114-addox Turner, was
brought up by 109 F, who stated that he found him
last night asking alms in Covent-garden. On being ques-
tioned if it was his first offence, the complainant said
that he had o❑ several occasions seen him begging, and,
as he could not keep him off his beat, he took him to
the station-house.

The defendant said he was driven by " hard penury"
to ask alms. In early life be held a confidential situa-
tion in a banking-house of much repute, at which time
he w;:s possessed of property to a considerable amount,
but having squandered the entire of it, he was reduced
to the necessity of gathering bones in the streets to gain
a scanty subsistence, and after suffering more than human
nature could well endure, he was compelled to excite
charity from any benevolent people he could meet with.
Mr. THISTLETON, a County Magistrate, commiserated
his reverse of fortune, and said as the offence had been so
repeatedly committed, he had no alternative but to send
him to prison for a month.