The Sun.
London, England, 1823-07-25 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY, JULY 24.
PERuviAN LOAM, ..
.. . .
• • •
. - • . 4.ciarts AND OTHERS V. KINDER AND OTHERS.
~ Mr. WEtritnEw. replied this day in the above case.
.. , The Loan CHANCELLOR asked whether there was not a
serious Objection to this bill, which would at once dispose of
the injunction? ~ It seemed to him 'to-bean almost admitted ,
' fact; that" the persons who filed this bill could not file such a .
• bill. on behalf of themselves and others; and if they could not
do that, hew came it that there were three to-plaintiffs ? Here
. were. three persons who had a separate demand at law and at
ic(iiiif they had any demand at all), and their bill was filed
. ,
jointly on their own behalf, and on that of other subscribers,
. which they had certainly no right to do.
' Mr. WeTirzut al. said It was his intention to have directed_
- his Lordship's notice to that.part of the ease presently, but if
' the Court thought it A„ sufficient objection, it would be useless
for him to proceed. _,,
The Loan CHANCELLOR Said he certainly did, and there-
.
, fore he. ordered the injiinction to be dissolved; in dping se,
- • however, it would be understood that the parties should have
immediate *Ake thereof ; and if they parted with the Money
le jedged in their hands, it would be entirely at their own peril.
He wished not to impress that he sanctioned the parting with
P' the money.
`,.- • • ' Mr. IlEs.r.D.--Nor the contract ?
'i'. '' The Loup CHANCELLOR.—Nor the contract. In short, he
went upon the • principle that he had nothing to do with the
:. transaction. He decided the application simply on the ground
that if he had known-the state of the record and of the exact de-
mend, at the time the injunction was applied for, he would hot
(
have granted it in the-first instance, and in parting with it now,
he desired to. be understotid as saying that he gave no opinion
whatever as to the 'right of the parties keeping or parting with
the mollies.
Mr. HEALD.-:-The parties holdingholdiog the money were merely
trustees, and be would ondertakeio say that they would not be
actuated by any views ofix persbnal nature.
Mr. WETHERELL said, he was going to read to the Court,
as well as he was able, a part of the Sierra Gazette in the ori-
ginal Spanish, where this., Loan was SPolenof rather in terms
of approbation than otherwise._
The LORD CHANCELLOR knew nothing of any Sierra Ga-.
zette—but this he knew (NM looking at the Newspapers under.
_ the :head " Coastal, namely,. that they ;were of little more
- value now than theywere.Whot he heard of this case. - '
' Mr. HART hoped hie clients' (Messrs. Everett's) costawould.
.. be in some way ilrov*l for.
The Loan ClTaiscELLon.—Let.theni be costs in the cause.
If the money.was ...in my hands, I should not be backward in
paying my own costs out of it---(A laugh): . -
Mr. NV,writEittt.t..—l don't apprehend your Lordship will
be ever troubled in this case again.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.--I don't apprehend I shall.
Injunction diesolied. , . - • •
.
. • .rioxtaNA.—stanwoon a.:•rii co. V, EGAN.
. Mr. lIADRrELL moved for an injunction on behalf of the
plaintilrs, who, are,well known publishers•in Paternoster-row,
to restrain the defendant, who is as well known through his la-
bours in pugilistic literature, from using the title of one of his
works, the copyright of whichl he had made over to tflem. It
Appeared that the work in question, entitled "Barlow'," was
commenced by the writer in 1818, in consequence of an engage-
ment into which he had entered with a 3lr. Smecton, to give to
the world an exact and authentic history of boxing, so far as
remaining records and tradition, would allow of it, from the
time of the renowned Slack and Broughton down to the cham-
pion fight of Cribb. These conditions, as it further appeared
to the honour of the defendant, had been more than fulfilled,
the book Which followed having been allowed on all hands, to
be not only replete with touching incident, but no less remark-
;able for the wisdom and inherent equity of the mailing and
rules which it develops concerning that noble structure ofjuris-
Prudence now established in the laws of the ring. The first
number of this work was published without the name of the
writer, under the indefinite title of an " Aniateur." It was so
successful, that it speedily took the size and substance of a
• volume,_ 4rttl-. then it seas ayowetlly edited by Pierce Egan,
-tsq. The'capyriglit passed' into the hands of the plaintiffs,
-' who contracted with the writer fora second volume, upon which
they paid him 851.. for a perpetual copyright ; and in 1820 a
third volume appeared, in consequence of similar suggestions
from the same quarter, fbr which transaction the plaintifili al-
leged as proof the receipts which they had of Mr. P. Egan.
Some time after this, Mr. Egan put his fancy into fresh
exercise, and hactadvertised for publication on his own occount
Part I. of Vol. IV. of Boxiatui, with words ,denoting the very
.title which he had sold to Sherwood and Co. Now-the plain-
, . tiffs were ready to admit that they could have no right to the
letter-press property of the new series,
_but they bad to the title
.of the first dirge volumes; and Mn. Egan, after parting with
them in the way he had, ought not to use the same title. To
this extent lie hoped the Court would grant the injunction
agreeably to the doctrines already laid down in various copy-
nght cases to be found in the books.
The Lora) CtiANcELLon joked upon the boxers having
beaten each other into Chancery at last, and requested to have
. the books handed up to him. ••
Mr. SHADIVELI. said, that they would be found to be harm-
less, and therefore entitled to protection. Ito might say of it,
us he said of lieppo a day or two ago, that it contained fun,
though he must admit that there were in it some points of high
theology, which were adjusted by the, writer in too Calvinistic
a spirit to accord with the 39 Articles of the English Church.
lie had no doubt but the injunction would be granted, because
it was not a very great while since his, Lordship had decided on
behalf of Lord Byron, that a party who had falsely used his
. Lordship's name to a work which that Nobleman did not write,
must be restrained... • . .
. Mr. Egan then rase, and having chosen .a favourable atti-
tude, addressed the Court. He began with an apology for ven-
turing to take up his Lordship's time, which, however, he
_ would not waste at any great length. He was surprised at the
, omission of one little circumstance in the case, to which he had
expected the attention of the Learned Counsel to have been di7
tee*. if e begged, therefore, to ask him, had his clients an
assignment of the work in question upon a legal stamp ? be-