The Sun.
London, England, 1809-07-18 00:00:00

BURGESS V. LAMB M OTHERS.

This cause stood over, ny order ofthe Lord Chan-
cellor, in order that notice of the motion might be
given to the Defendants. who w7..re iti remainder,
atter the Plaitititfras tenants for life, and also to the
renuiinckr-intin.

Mr. LEECH now appeared for them, and declared
their consent and" apiltobation, both of the put-
(-hag,- made h Mr. Lamb, and also of the adi done
by him, in proceeding to cut the timber, as tenant
fop life, in possession, without impeachment of
waste. . •

In the course of some further 'argument, on each.
side, it was sta;ed by Sir ARTHUR PiGoT, on be-
half of she Plaintiff, that, since .the last day, every
offer of compromise 11;.e,1 been made,- by Sir James
Bland Burgesg, and. his sun, the Plaintiffthat,
upon the Defendant bringing in -the 11001. the pro:-
duce of the timber already cut, they would pay,
our of their own pockets, the balance of 16001. the
price of the timber purchased on the-erute; to be
laid our for the befit of the Defendants—offering,
at the SA- .e time, to tie themselves up not to -cut
down a single tree they-should so pay for—but this
had been refused.

Sir SAMUEL RoMLLLY avowed, that this refusal
had emanated horn tile advice of Mr. Lamb's Cou-
nsel, who considered themselves hot only the guar-
dians of his- interests, but of his honour, which,
they considered, would be sacrificed by a compro-
mis(•, after the charges made against him;• by the
bill, .of a breach of his word. Under this imputa-
tion, they considered the decision. of as Lordship
alone capable of washing away the.stain:tait upon
hlth. _ _

Mr. WETHERAL disavowed any intention of the
Plaintiff to turow arty improper innputati n on the
Defendant, as the words used in the bill were merely
technical terms, necessary to bring the matter be-
fore the Court.

The LORD CHANCELLOR declared he had fully
made up ins Mind on the subjeCt;. and, it com-
pelled to q, by the parties not coming to some ar-
rangemtnt in the interim, he would give his judg-
mem' at thesitting of the Cqutt, on Tuesday morn-
ing next.

LONGMAN and OTHERS, PrOpriCifOS of The .Court
Colenatr, v. the PROPRIETORS of The Ingierial

Calendar.

Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY, on the part of the Plain-
tiffs, applied for a Rule, calling on the Defendants,
to shew cause why his Lordship's Injuaotionshould
not issue; restraini..g the Detendatits trotn,selling or
disposing of the latter publication, it being nothing
but a pirated edition of the former. This applica-
tion was grounded on the allegation that the Plain-
tiffs had long been proprietors and publishers of the
work called 4_c_ The Court Calendar," commonly
known by the name of-" The Red Rook ;" and
that the Defendants, intending to injure them in
their propyrty, had published the very. same' work,
varying trom it only in the title. This, he said,
was manifest to the most common ,observer, merely
by a comparison of the two works, in the latter of
winch; the very errors o( the former were faithfully
preserved. This he ins►anced in two or three ludi-
crous passages. In the title-page of the Original,. it
,was said to have been compiled by " Grissin (by
mistake for " Griffith") Wilson, .Vsq. Mr. Shaw
Lefevre Was-coupled with Mr. Simeon, one of the
Masters in chancery and thus, by this appoint-
ment of the tamer to that office, ,a thirteenth was
added. In another Part; mentioning the Lying-in
Hospifat for the Wives of the Soldiers of the LAC-
Guards, the ,word " Wives" "was, by Mistake,
otnitted, and the pasgage runs thus :—" Lying-in
Hospital for the : Soldiers of -the Life-Guards."
Even his friend, Mr. Richards, who sat next him,
had not escaped, but .was exalted to the rank of
" Under Sheriff of the City of London." These,
with a multitude of similar error of the press, were
copied from the one work into the other, putting it
beyond the possibility of doubt that this was a dire&
invasion of the propeity of the Plaintiffs.
The two copies ‘uere handed up to the CHAN-
OELLOR. Upon looking into and comparing them,
his Lordship observed, c' Here is another mistake
copied, which you have not noticed; 1 see a Gen-
'tleinati named to a very good estate, to which he
has no manner of right or title.—Talte the Rule."

BON NER t'. BONN ER.

Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY moved, that the Defendant
in this case do stand committed to prison in four
days, unless he, within that period, lodge in the
hands of the Allister certain deeds in this cause, that
are in his possession, or make affidavit that there
are none such, In his answer, the Defendant had
admitted, that, as exebutor or trustee for the Plaintiff
and others, he had delivered the deeds over to
l‘lessr.s. Tweedale and Brown, Solicitors, for put-
posci.s connected .with the trust. The appllcation
was extended w the Solicitors also, who excused
themselves, however, by alleging, that they had
lodged the deeds with the bankers who had granted
certain annuities, in terms of the trust, for; their

security,
The LORD Cniasrogi.r.ott granted the Order
against the Defendant; but refused it as to the So-
licitors ; and, on the ground that they were not par-
ties io the cause, granted them their costs, to be
paid by the Defendant.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

PRESTON RAcES,'TtiußsnAy, JULY

701. given by Lord Stanley and S.l-16rrocks, Esq. for all

• ages.
Mr. W. N. Hewet's b. h. Stilton, 4 yrs old
'l4 Derby's br. lacobus, 4 yrs old. -
Same Day.—A Sweepstakes of to-Guineas eachofor Hunters
not thorougk bred, to carry rut. z tlb.; Mares list. t ilb.
Twice round the Course,. -
Mr. Scarisbrick's br. g. by Trickle Toney
Mr. Standish's b. g. Dragon, by Anthdny 2
Mr. Hargreaves'ro. g. by Noble. 3
Mr. Alostyn's gr; g. rim Bobbin, by Sir Thomas 4
M r.• 11. Trait,ru's br. h. Confidence • - • _ $
rar. Benson's, b. it. ConLeybcan - 6
Senn paid.

I 2 I
2 I 2

LON DQN : rlintcd by RI
At the StrN.Ork,