The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-11 00:00:00

IRISH POOR-LAW,

The Bill was postponed, we believe, till Friday.
Lord DONDONDERRY presented petitions against the
Bill.

NEGRO SLAVERY.
Lord LYNDHURST presented several petitions against
negro slavery.

(LEFT SITTING).

TATTERSALL'S-(THIS EVENING.)
ASCOT CUP, P.P.—(TIIIJRSDAY NEXT).
5 to 1 agft Caravan—taken
5 to 4 agst Grey illomus—taken
5 to 2 agst Epirus—oilked
5 to 1 agst Red Shank.
TIIE ST. LEGER.
7 to 1 agst Colonel Peel's lon—taken
8 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Don John—taken
12 to 1 agst Lord G. Bentinek's Grey Momus—offered
14 to 1 agst Mr. Coombes's Cobham--taken
16 to 1 agst Lord G. Bentieck's D'Egville—taken
12 to 1 agst Appleton Lad—offered
20 to 1 agst Charley Boy—taken
30 to 1 agst Wee Willie
25 to 1 agst Albemarle—taken
1000 to 30 agst Rosomond—taken

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, JUNE 9.

HOLE V. ESCOTT.

This is an appeal from a decree of the Master of the Roth.
Mr. Hugh Escott, under a marriage settlement, executed in
1804, was entitled to a life-interest in certain freehold pro-
perty, with a power of appointment jointly with his wife, fur
the benefit of their children, the wife having also a separate
power of appointment in the event of her surviving her hus-
band. In 1830 Escott became bankrupt, and in 1831 he exer-
cised his power of appointment, in conjunction with his wife,
in favour of two of their children, the present defendants.
The assignees under the commission sold the interest of the
bankrupt in the property, and it was purchased by a Mr. Hole,
under whom the plaintiff claims. The question in the cause
is, whether the bankruptcy did not so operate as to take
from the bankrupt the power of appointment under the mar-
riage-settlement, and vest all his interest, after the death of
his wife, in his creditors. The Master of the Rolls was of
opinion that the bankruptcy did so operate, that the plaintiff
had no power to exercise any appointment in favour of his
children, and that the joint appointment of the husband and
wife, and separate appointment of the wife, were equally

Wicaam was heard on Wednesday in support of the
decree of the Court below.

Sir W. FOLLETT now appeared for the defendants.
The Loan CHANCELLOR took time to consider his judgment.

COURT OF QUEENS BENCH, JUNE 9
BLUNT V. iIASLOP.

This was an action on an attorney's bill. At the trial of
the cause it appeared that the bill was delivered on the 12th
July, and the action was brought on the 9th February. It was
objected by the Counsel for the defendant that the plaintiff
could not maintain the action, inasmuch as the bill had not
been delivered one month before the action was brought. A
verdict was taken for the plaintiff subject to a motion on this
objection. Air. ALEXANDER accordingly obtained a rule for
setting aside the verdict and entering a nonsuit.
Mr. CHANNEL showed cause against the rule.
The Court made the rule absolute for entering a nonsuit.

ROLL'S COURT, JuNE 9.

DAVIDSON AND OTHERS. V. THE MARCHIONESS OF HASTINGS.

Mr. KINDERSLEY moved for an order to reverse a sequestra-
tion against the most Noble the Marchioness of Hastings,
Countess of Loudon, under which her property at Kensington
had been seized by the officers of this Court. The plaintiffs,
executors of the late Mr. Lyne, to whom the late Marquis of
Hastings and the Marchioness had given a joint bond for an
advance of 8,0001., had filed a Bill against her Ladyship,
while residing out of the jurisdiction of the Court, and had
served the letters missive and processes at a furnished house
rented by her at Kensington ; but as it is necessary before a
sequestration could issue to make a service of the provisional
order on her Ladyship personally, they waited upon her at
Loudon Castle, in Ayrshire, Scotland, and there served her.
The Learned Counsel contended, first, that the leaving the
letters missive at the house at Kensington was not a regular
and legal service ; and secondly, that the service of the con-
ditional order was irregular and void.
Lord LANODALE would see if he could not find some cases in
elucidation of the point mooted before he gave his judgment.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jun vi 9.
FENDALL,/). NGAKEs.

This was an action brought to recover 331., the amount of
a tavern bill. The plaintiff was a widow. and the landlady of
the Exchequer Coffee-house, Palace-yard, and the defendant
was an attorney, of Charlotte-street, Bedford -square. The
trial took place on Wednesday last at the Session House,
Westminster,
before Justice Bosanquet, when a verdict
was found for the plaintiff for 51.
The Court granted a rule Nisi.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JUNE 9.
A " DESIRABLE TENANT."
George Board was opposed by Mr. Cooke for his late land-
lord, a Mr. Seager. The insolvent, a chairmaker, took a house
monthly of Mr. Seager, and stocked it with "pigs." They were
noisy inhabitants. Mr. Stager gave him notice to quit his pre-
mises; he refused; his pigs continued on the premises; and to
Fan possession of his property Mr. Seager brought an action of
ejectment. Still this " desirable" tenant held possession ; and
at length a verdict was given and possession obtained in the
due course of law. The insolvent was then non est inventus,
and on being captured for the costs, petitioned the Court for
his discharge. The complaint on the part of Mr. Seager
was that he had been put to 271. expense by the conduct of the
insolvent. The Insolvent was discharged.

ARREARS IN THE QUEEN'S BENCII.-Lord Den-
man (the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench) has prepared a
But " to enable her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench to hold sittings
in Lana; in time of vacation ;" that is, as far as that Court is con-
cerned, to enlarge the Term time, or the sittings of the four Judges, a■
at present arranged. The arrears, in consequence of which this altera-
tir.ll is nr9posed by the Npb'e are rttributcd to the great increme
Crown paper, which cecupies so raMch of the Judges' time, that private
causes are thrown very backward.