The Sun.
London, England, 1831-09-19 00:00:00

ROUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.)

li ,„„ iit-tV-day at ten o'clock to hear Scotch
rrrillo, the taw of " Harrisan v. Kemble, which was
eDe6A.
aPpoitited for to-day, being postponed, in conse-
quence of the indisposition of Mr. Pepyd-
;rile Lords present were—the Lord Chancellor, the
41.114 of Winchester, Lord K-nyon, and the Bishop of

71_ HUNTER V. DICKSON. •
appellant in this case, Mr. James Hunter, was the
oitrying trustee of a gentleman named Roughead, residing
amieeneld, who in 1814 married Mrs. Isabel D ck-
eitn' the FeVondent. That marriage turned out an un-
pitir one in consequence of the very great dis-
wtY in the age of the patties, and a deed of A,paration
altZatee4t`ed hetWeen them, by which the respondent
"`" to accept an annuity of SQL in fu'l of all claims
...P"a_ her husband. The respondent alleged that she had
red to the acceptance of the annuity in consequecce of
r_, Rutherford stating himself to be exceedingly poor.
.`.l.'t.the death of that genth-man in 1824 his property, to.
raer With a sum he had received on tht death of hia
brother, had accumulated to upwards of 8,000/., and by a
Lt4i4nosition he conveyed his whole property, in trust
alWilarit and two other gentlemen, now dead, for
Ip I,l:tturaldaughter, and at her death,for his grand-c' ildren.
one of that deer', Mr. Hunter took possession of the
ea Mr. Rougheads's funds, hut the respondent tieingdOed that she Was not bound to acknowledge the vali.
44;1114r the bond which she had been prevailed upon to
livw.! any further than as providing aliment while she
tot- t'eParate from her husband, and that it could
lego elve the effect of depriving her of her
ooti`
Lela.ims al the widow bf Mr. Roughead,
"aving been unable to obtain any terms of set-
-oeitt
hi fhotn Mr. Hunter, brought an action against
(e for the purpose of having a full disclosure of the
vie and vtirctg of Mr. Roughead, which she content-le:I
eauwas entitled to. Upon the action coining before the
Own to Scotland, on the part of the appellant, it was urged
Mrs. Dickson had no right to what she insisted on in
of Eton, having barred herself by the terms of the de: d
ok:e Paration and aliment, in which she renounce.' all
14 in virtue of her jus relictce. Lord Meadowbank did
consider that objection of much weight, and ordered the
rlodent to give in an account of the funds possessed by
1,•• Roughead at the time of his death. The case
11: then brought before Cie Court of Session, who found
t the respondent was not barred by the contract
t_ilePiration, and was entitled to her legal provision as
,
'citzwiclow of Mr. Roughead. Against that decision the
nt appeal was brought.
Dr• Lushinuton and Mr. Rutherford appeared as
to„
rkael tor the°appellatit, and the Lord Advocate and Mr.
Patton for the respondent.
The case was proceeding when our reporter left.

OLD BAILEY.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
1,4 very respectable young woman, named Eliza Lang,
ki;in, was indicted fur stealing a handkerchief front the
..Itheph Miller.
Jury found her Guilty, and recommended her to
%reY on account of previous good character.
d;"" Longhorn, a lad about eleven years old, was in-
,fet''d for stellity,* a handkerchief, the property of a Mr.
"colon, Verdict—Guilty.