The Sun.
London, England, 1824-02-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENON,

COURT OF CHANCERY.—(Tuts DAY.)
COVENT•GARDEN THEATRE.-CONST HARRiA,
Mr. SnA n wEr,r, appeared this day for Mr.
Harris, and, after some observations as to the no,
ture of Mr. Harris's claim, the Lord Chancellor
requested Mr. Shadwell to turn his attention to
it this evenina, and, if he had nothing further to
add, his Lordship would give judgment positively
to-morrow morning. His Lordship observed;
" You see I must really get rid of this case, for!
am so very uncomfortable in Covent-Garden
Theatre, that I care not how soon I get out of it.

WARD OP COURT.
Mr. HART begged leave to mention the case of •
' a Ward of the Court, who had run away with the
Rev.- James James, a Clergyman in Wales..;-.
When the petition was presented, his Lordship,
was pleased to order the parties to attend th
e
Court, but it being suggested that they might be
innocent, and great expence would be incurred,,
his Lordship -was pleased to. direct that affidavits
should be made, which order had been complied
with, and Mr. Hart now wished his Lordship• to.
read them. His Lordship having heard a brief--
statement of their contents, intimated that Mr.
Evans, and Jas. James the Clergyman,,appeared
to have freed themselves from blame, and ordered
Mr. James James to attend on the. second day of
next Term. The fortune of the young lad y
amounts to 12,000/.

COURT OF KING'S BENCII—(Tuts DAT.)
JUDGMENT ON FIELDER.
This defendant, who has been several times,
before the Court, appeared, on the motion of the
ATTORNEY-GENERAL, to receive judgment, for
keeping certain gambling-houses in St. James's.--
Some affidavits were put in by Mr. Anor.ritus, il4
mitigation of punishment, after which,Mr. Justice
BAYLEY deli% ered the judgment of the Court,
which was, that the defendant be imprisoned in
Newgate for one month, and pay a fine to the
King of 3,0001., and find sureties for five years,
himself in 5,0001., and two in 2,5001. each,

[PROCEEDINGS OF YESTERDAY.]
LIBEL—TILE BRITISH PRESS.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for a rule, calling upcn.
the defendants, who are the printer, publisher, and proprietor
of the Britith Pres: newspaper, to shew cause why a criminal
information should not be filed against them, for a libel which'
appeared in that paper, imputing to George Chetwynd, Esq.
M.P. for the borough of Stafford, corrupt and improper conduct
in the discharge of his duty as Chairman of the StaflOrd Quarter.
Sessions, upon the trial of Mr. Charles Flint, an attorney's clerk,
at Uttoxeter. In support of the motion the Learned Counsel
put in the affidavit of Mr. Chetwynd, denying that he had
acted previous to, and upon that, in the way in which he was
in this libel to have acted—Rule granted.
TIIE BRITISH TRAVELLER.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL obtained a similar Rule against
the printer and publisher of The British Traveller for the like
publications.
THE KING V. MEAD.
This was an indictment against the defendant for wilful and
corrupt perjury, assigned upon evidence given by • him in' support of an information in the Exchequer, against a per:..:
son named Law, for being concerned in some smuggling
transactions on the coast of Yorkshire. The defendant
had been found guilty before the Lord Chief Justice, and
subsequently to the trial, Mr. Law, the prosecutor, was.
killed in his native country by a gun-shot wound. The d?,
fendant Meati was tried at the last Summer Assizes fo7,
Yorkshire, for the wilful murder of Mr. Law, but was
found guilty of manslaughter only, and sentenced to aik.
term of imprisonment in York Castle, where he re-
mains, as we understood, in execution of his sentence.—
In Michaelmas Term last, a rule Nisi for a new trial in
the perjury prosecution was granted by this Court, on she
ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidenceomd
the probabilities of the case, inasmuch as it was perfectly posal...
ble for Mr. Law to have been a party in the smuggling transac-
tion to which the defendant had deposed in the Court of
chtupaer.
Mr. D. F. JONES and Mr. CITITTY now shewed cause
against the rule for a new trial, and producing affidavits tend-
ing to confirm the evidence in support of the prosecution for
perjury, and to shew that Mr. Law, the deceased, could not
have been a party to the smuggling affair in question.
Both parties assenting that a rule for the new trial should be.
made absolute on payment of costs, it was made absolute ac-
cordingly. It was agreed that the evidence of Mr. Law on the
former triai should be read on the second trial, and also the
evidence of any other witness who might have died in the in.
tzrval.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said he should abstain from.
making any observation on any part of the case. The Gen.
tlemen at the Bar would understand why he so abstained.--
Rule absolute.

LENT ASSIZES.—OXFORD CIRCUIT.
Before Mr. Justice PARR and Mr. Baron GARRow.
Berkshire - Monday, March 1, at Reading.
Oxfordshire - Wednesday -3, Oxford.
Worcestershire
Saturday -6, Worcester.
City of Worcester
Staffordshire - Thursday - 11, Stafford.
Shropshire - Wednesday - 17, Shrewsbury.
Herefordshire - Monday - 22, Hereford.
Monmouthshire Saturday - 27, Monmouth.
Gloucestershire w
ednesday -31
City of Gloucester , Gloucester.