The Sun.
London, England, 1822-01-15 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, J. 14.
This was the first seal before term, and the Court a-at oc-
cupied in hening motions.

DAVIS AND OTHERS V. FISH AND OTHERS.

Mr. Slut-I-mm.l. moved for an injunction to restrain the de-
fendants, members of the society called the Norwich Union
Fire Insurance Company, from continuing to carry on the bu-
siness of that society. The motion was made under the follow-
ing circumstances :—A society called the Norwich Union So-
ciety had been established for a considerable time, upon prin-
ciples specified in certain articles agreed to by the founders of
the society, by one of which the parties bound themselves not to
enter into connexion with any society which might have the ef-
fect of injuring or prejudicing the 'Norwich Union Society.
Some time ago, a large number of the members of the Nor-
wich Union formed themselves into a society, called the Nor-
wich Union Fire Insurance Society, which differed in many re-
spects from the original society. The persons on whose behalf
the present motion was made were members of the old society,
and they complained that the new society was fraudulently- to be
imposed upon the public as a continuation of the old society.
Mr. HART and Mr. WETHERELL, on behalf of the de-
fendants, contended that the new was merely a modification of
the old society, and that the power to remodel the society was
vested in the majority of the proprietors.
The LORD CHANCELLOR. said, there was a difficulty which
had always pressed upon his mind with respect to societies not
possessing a corporate ct.aracter—namely, how the members
could sue one another. In the case before the Court, four per-
sons sued in behalf of themselves and all the other members of
the old society : hut that declaration was evidently false, because
among the « others" the defendants themselves were includ-
ed. There were many other difficulties connected with the
case of too important a nature to be determined upon an in-
terlocutory motion, and he therefore thought it most advisable
to refuse it.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, J. 14.
HANSON AND ANOTHER V. ARMITAGE,

This was an action for goods sold and delivered, tried at
London at the Sittings after last Trinity Term, before the Lord
Chief Justice, when a verdict was found for the plaintifF.
The plaintiffs were wholesale dealers in tea, and the defend-
ant was a retail dealer in the country. They had received
through their traveller an order on the defendant's account, for
two chests of tea, on the 3d of Jtine, which were sent to Staun-
ton's Wharf, and were put on board a vessePfor their destina-
tion on the 10th of Jime. The vessel was lost, and the ques-
tion on motion for a new trial was, whether the defendant was
liable, he not having received any invoice, although he had re-
ceived notice of the loss.
The case was argued by Mr. SCARLETT for the plaintiff,
and Mr. GURNEY for the defendant.
The Co CRT took time to consider of its judgment.
SELF AND OTHERS V. FAGG AND OTHERS.

This was an action against the defendants as common car-
riers, to recover the amount of a parcel of bank notes, valued
at 10,501. At the trial before the Lord Chief Justice at the
Sittings in London, after last Trinity Term, the plaintiffs had
a verdict.
The plaintiffs are bankers, at Christchurch, in Hampshire,
and the defendants are owners of several stage-coaches. The
plaintiffs banked with Messrs. Rogers and Co. London, and
the latter being in the habit of monthly remitting to the
plaintiff the notes paid for the plaintiff at their house, sent
them a parcel of their paid notes, to the amount of 13051., on
the Ist December, 1819, which parcel was booked at the de-
fendant's office, to be sent by the Poole Mail. The parcel
was, in fact, sent by the Southampton light coach, addressed
"R. Anger, Esq., Christchurch, Hants.' Before it had gone
many miles out of town, it was stolen out of the seat of the
coach, and the next day its contents, to the amount of 10501.
were presented for payment at ,Messrs. Rogers and Co., and
paid. On motion for a new trial, the question was, whether
the defendants were liable for the loss ?

Mr. SCARLETT was heard for the plaintiff, and Mr. Pam:
for the defendants. _

The COURT were clearly of opinion that there was no ground
for disturbing the verdict, and therefore the rule for a new trial
was discharged.

OLD BAELEY.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL ASSOCIATION.

Yesterday, at 28 minutes past five the London Jury
entered their box.

The two shopmen of Carlile who pleaded not Guilty on Sa-
turday night, were then placed at the bar, and said they wished
to retract their " traverse" made on Saturday night, and t 3
take their trials that evening.
C031310N SERGEANT—YOU have traversed already ;
the Court will not be played with, you must be taken to jail.—
What is the case ? _ _ _

Mr. AD OLP HU S—lt is for selling a blasphemous and sedi-
tious libel.

Defendants—May we be permitted to bail.
The COMMON SERGEAxT —Yes; yourselves in 1001. and
two sureties of 501. each ; and it will be requisite for you to give
forty-eight hours' notice of bail to Mr. Murray, of Sohn-street,
Bedford-row.

The two persons were then removed from the bar.
'William Holmes and the unknown Man were then put to tl7e
bar to plead ; when the unknown Man said, he wished to have
the indictment read.
Mr. Clark, the Deputy Officer of Arraigns, then prckeeded
to read the indictment, which was of great length, and contain-
ed a number of parts extracted from the libelous work.—Upon
the reading being concluded,
The Clerk of Arraigns said, Are you Guilty or Not Guilty ?
Man unknown —ll ow does it apply to m•, • there is no name ?

COMMON SERGEANT—Are yOtiGuiltior Not Guilty? If
you think the concealing your name will be of service to you,
you are much deceived. The charge applies to you. Are you
Guilty or Not Guilty ?
The man made no reply.
The COMMON SERGEANT then consulted with Mr. Shelton
for a few minutes; and addressing the prisoner said, the Court
will give you till after the next trial to consider your plea.—lf
you do not then, you must take the consequences, of which I
shall not tell you now.
COMMON SERJEANT—Hohnes, have you chosen to take
your trial now, or traverse it till next Session, which you have
a right to do ?
The prisoner wished to sec Mr. Harmer ; when that geritle.
man's clerk consulted with the prisoner some minutes, and
Holmes, addressing the Court, said, I wish to traverse till next
Session.

Both the prisoners were then removed from the bar. The
unknown not having pleaded wlien called upon to do so at a
later period, was remanded till t:ie next Secsion.
Elizabeth Clements was convicted un an indictment charging
her with feloniously intermarrying with James Townsend, her
former husband being then alive. Sentenced to six months
imprisonment in the House of Correction.

Good oysters were last week hawked about
Reading in considerable quantity, at eightpence
per gallon : they come from the Sussex coast.
Shoals of herrings still continue on tl►e coast ;
and 13illings!:,,ate market is so amply stocked
with those fish, that they are retailed in the
streets at twenty-four for a shilling.