The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-30 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nor. 99.
BACON V. CLARK.
This was an appeal from the Vice-Chancellor. The bill
was filed by the plaintiff against the executors of the late
Mr. Fairlie, a merchant, of Calcutta, to compel them to re-
pay a sum of ten thousand pounds received by him as a
trustee. The sum in question had been remitted to Eng-
land in bills drawn by the house of Ferguson and Co., on
that of Fairlie, Buchanan, and Co., of London. Unfortu-
nately, the former house was declared bankrupt before the
bills arrived in this country, and, still more unfortunately,
the house of Ferguson and Co. failed before the bills, which
were immediately sent back, could reach India. Under
these circumstances, it was endeavoured to fix the private
estates of Fairlie with the liability to make. good the trust

money.
Mr. TeEsLovE was heard for the plaintiff ; and the So-
LiCITOR-GENERAL was for the executors, but the argu-
ments were not concluded at the rising of the Court.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 29.
RICHARD MATTHENVb V. SCOTT.

In this case, which was not concluded yesterday when
we went to press, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.
Dal:loges, 2001.
DRUCE V. CATHERINE FITZGERALD.

Mr. rrIiESSIGER stated that this was an action to reco-
ver a sum of 08/. for goods sold and delivered. The de-
fendant was a la3y who had resided in London, and the
plaintiff carried on b,:siness as a butcher, and had supplied
her witb meat. This actiOn was to recover the price of the
meat thus supplied, and the tis!endant had pleaded that at
the time of the making of the promises in the declaration,
that she was the wife of one John Jacobs. The plaintiff
bad replied that the John Jacobs mentioned in Cll6 ;lea,
had been tried, convicted, and transported. The de-
fendant had rejoined that John Jacobs in the plea and re-
plication mentioned was not transported. The only issue,
therefore, which the jury had to decide, was whether the
man John Jacobs had been tried, convicted, and transpor-
ted, as alleged by the plaintiff. John Jacobs was tried at
the Surrey Winter Assizes, in 1825, for bigamy, he hav-
ing intermarried with the very defendant, Catherine Fitz-
gerald, his first wife being alive. A point of law had been
reserved by the Learned Judge, and was laid before the
twelve Judges, who decided against the prisoner, and in the
Summer Assizes of 1826, he received sentence of transpor-
tation.
The delivery of the goods, and an admission of the de-
fendant as to the amount, were proved, the admission being
in answer to an application by the plaintiff's attorney that
the defendant was not able to pay all, but that she would
pay 101. in January, and the rest by instalments of 51. each,
till the whole 381. was paid.
The copy of the conviction of John Jacobs was then put
in and rend.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Damages, 381.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 29.
LIVINGSTON V. WELSTED.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who had for-
merly been a considerable manufacturer in Scotland, and
had since been an artist, and who was engaged also in sel-
ling certain periodical publications, to recover from the de-
fendant compensation for trespass and false imprisonment.
The Jury, after hearing evidence, returned a verdict for
the plaintiff—damages 501. ; and that the sum of 1/. for
the trespass was sufficient.

EXCHEQUER COURT, Nor. 29.
CARRINGTON V. KENDRICK.
In this case, which was not finished yesterday when our
Reporter quitted the Court, and which was an action of
trespass, the Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, with
101. damages.