The Sun.
London, England, 1825-11-29 00:00:00

ABERNETHY V. THE LANCET.

Mr. HORNE moved that the injuiictiso-ng;;;lted in this case
be dissolved. As no counsel appeared for the plaintiff, and
regular notice had been served upon him of this motion, the in-
junction was dissolved accordingly.

CONST V. HARRIS.—COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE.
Mr. HEALD pressed for a speedy hearing of a motion re-
specting the receiver which by the order of the Court had been
appointed.
A long conversation ensued, which went chiefly upon the
general order of motions and their relative degrees of conse-
quence, and it was kept up for some time between the Court and
the counsel.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the Court must gene-
rally be at the mercy of the counsel, who ought to, judge fairly
and conscienciously of what importance or urgency motions
were, and inform the Court accordingly. Cases of injunction
to stay waste, or any wherein irreparable injury was threatened
to property, or to parties, were first entitled to consideration.—
But there really was no rule, and counsel ought of themselves,
in regard to the interests of their clients and of suitors, gene-
rally to establish a rule for the priority of other motions. At
present it was impossible to get on with the business. His Lord-
ship also complained that parties were in the habit of address-
ing letters to him in private upon their cases, not recollecting,
perhaps, that he could know nothing, exsept what was advanced
by counsel regularly instructed in the causes.
The conversation was resumed at the close of the sittings upon
the case above stated.

Mr. SUGDEN said that he had made a motion, which was
not yet argued, for the discharge of the receiver, which ought
certainly to have priority of Mr. Heald's motion.
Mr. HEALD said his motion was only to ascertain through
the Master what the present receiver was to do with the money.
Being appealed to once more by the Court, the Learned Coun-
sel said that he did not know that his motion was of such vital
importance as to make it necessary for his Lordship to come
down out of the regular days of hearing, as he had been pleased
to propose.
'fire LORD CHANCELLOR said, that if such was the opinion
of Mr. Heald, and the motion was to be taken only in regu-
lar course, he would not come down on Wednesday for that
purpose, as he had proposed, nor would he give that day to
Judgments, but he would give the judgments he intended on
Thursday or Friday.

DE 11F.AUVOIR V. RHODES.
Mr. nORNE appeared fir the plaintiff in this cause, who
was heir to the lessor of certain building ground at Hackney,
the lease of which, the Court had declared that it could not
upon the present evidence make void, to say that his client,
having well weighed the alternative offered by his Lordship, of
a re-hearing upon additional affidavits, or an issue at law to the
alleged fraud in obtaining the lease of the lands before-men-
tioned, had decided to take the issue.

There is an injunction pending in this case to 'restrain the
action of ejectment.
The CouRT gave the Learned Counsel to understand that
the injunction must abide till the return of the verdict upon
the issue.

111 r. HORNE objected. His instructions did not go to the
acceptance of the issue on those conditions.
The Loki) CHANCELLOR directed that the intentions of the
parties should be finally made known to him on Thursday.
HABEAS CORPUS.

Mr. HEALD moved, that Mary Fowler, who had been com-
mitted to Newgate under the very large powers of the late act,
by the Commissioners in a certain bankruptcy; for delaying to
answer questions, be brought up and discharged, and that she
be allowed to gnand answer before the said Commissioners.
The plaintiff was a servant in the house of the bankrupt.
It was not upon the affairs of the bankrupt that she had de-
clined answering., but upon a question as to what was the name
of her fellow-servant, and where she was then to be found. The
commissioners had made out a warrent for her committal, but
had suffered her to go borne. She had attended at the next
meeting of the commission upon a summons irregularly served,
and she swore that she went to the Gray's-inn coffeehouse, with
the design of answering the questions before put to her ex.
plicitly. The commissioners put no questions to her, ordered