The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-04 00:00:00

court.

CHANCERY.-(1111S DAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR sat to-day in his Court, in the
Old Hall, Lincoln's-inn.
His LORDSHIP having disposed of all the unopposed
lunatic petitions, of which there were between 30 and 40
on his paper, proceeded to hear appeal motions, but no
case of interest came before his Lordship during the
morning. His Lordship will not sit again before the first
day of Easter Term.

ROLLS' COURT.—(THIS DAY I
His LORDSHIP, the
eta crsnteeroyf
.tihaen
to-daysat
,inahnids Courtgave
It
in the
.o,ll's-yard,
several plug
meats in cases that had been heard before
him; this bring the last day of his Lordship's sitting prior
to the first day of Easter Term.
SANDERSON V. THE COCKERMOUTH RAILWAY COMPANY.
Ili* LORDSHIP gave j wignu-nt in this case. His Lord-
ship was of opinion that ttie plaintiff was entitled to the
speci°c performance of the agreement entered into be-
tweek, him and the defendants, and as it appeared pro-
great reluctance, directed a parttes, he, though
that ntohotturrgahngevirethen..t could be come to between the
were
ference
necessaryto t h e
owdaayt
oann do
fslips
lienqft,trirtehwe haaectormoanid
whose land was divided by the railway. His
Lordship had no hebitation in saying that the matter in
dispute might be arranged by au indifferent party
in. a few minutes, and he could not but
Artoasbteormt'ai
think that there was something more then ap•
peared on the face of the bill to induce the parties
to incur the expense of a long reference sooner than
settle the matter amicably among themselves.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE CORPORATION OF

LONDON.
The MASTER of the ROLLS also gave judgment in this
case, which was argued before him a short time since,
upon certain exceptions taken to the report of the Mas-
ter, who had allowed certain exceptions taken by the
Attorney-General to the answers put in by the de-
fendants, the Corporation of London, to the information
filed of the Attorney-General. The information was
filed by the Attorney-General, for the purpose
of having the question settled, which was ex-
isting between the Crown and the city of London, as to
which of them were entitled to the bank of the Thames
between high and low water mark. The Crown by its
information insisted that it was entitled by the
common law to the banks of all rivers in the
realm between high and low water mark, while,
on the part of the corporation, it was con-
tended that they held their right by prescription, and
that the Crown had no right to interfere with it, and
they declined by their answer to produce their title. To
this answer the Attorney-General took exceptions which
were allowed by the Master, and to the report allowing
those exceptions, the defendants took exceptions, and
upon them the Master of the Rolls now gave judgment.
His Lordship after going at some length
into the case, stated his opinion to be, that
the defendants, the corporation of the city of Lon-
don, were not entitled to refuse the discovery they had
done; he must therefore order the exceptions to the
Mast( r's report to be disallowed.
At the suggestion of the SOLICITOR GENERAL, the de-
fet,dants were allowed two months to put in a full
answer to the information.

SAEMCN V. GREEN-JUDGMENT.

The MASTER of Alit: ROLLS also gave judgment in
this case, in which the question arose under the will of a
gentleman of tile name of James Salmon as to tho par-
ties entitled to participate in his residuary estate. his
Lordship was of opinion that tire two daughters of the
testator took a joint interest in the residuary estate,
and that that interest passed to their representatives.

ATCHESON V. ATCHESON-JUDGMENT

The *MASTER Of tilV ROLLS also gave judgment in
this case, .stating his opinion to be ft at the legacy
ought to be carried over to the joint estate of the hus-
band and v.ile, au(' that the dividend should be paid
to the husband during their-joint lives or until farther
order.