The Sun.
London, England, 1840-12-08 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, DEe.7.
ORD V. LYONS.
Mr. K. BRUCE'S reply in this case—the arguments in
which have already taken up three days—occupied the
whole morning.
The LORD CHANCELLOR postponed giving judgment.

ROLLS' COURT, DEC. 7.
WILSON V. LEONARD.
This case was partly heard on Saturday, and reported
in our evening edition. The arguments of Counsel
were resumed this morning, and at their conclusion,
The MASTER of the ROLLS said be was clearly of opi-
nion the loss incurred by the non-performance of the co-
venants by Surtees, the assignees of Dr. Chadwick, etas a
loss with which the assets of the Doctor must be charged.
With respect to the amount, his Lordship had some doubt,
and upon that point would look through the evidence, and
mention it on Wednesday morning.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, DEC. 7.

ELLIS V. GOODSON.

The bill in"this case was filed for the purpose of having
the accounts taken of certain plantations and estates in the
island of Grenada, belonging to the representatives of a
genCeman named Law. To that Lill a demurrer had
been filed, on the ground of multifariousness and want of
equity.
Mr. WinaAu opened the demurrer on Saturday, and
to-day the arguments were resumed, and occupied the
whole day.
At the conclusion of the arguments, his Honour, the
VICE CHANCELLOR, ordered the demurrer to be overruled,
with costs.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, DEC. 7.

(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE and a Special Jury.)

GUY V. GREGORY-LIBEL.

This was an action against the proprietor of the Satirist
newspaper, for publishing a series of libels upon the plain-
tiff, who was represented as a gentleman of property, and
who had in the beginning of the present year taken a house
in St. James's-street, called the Cocoa Tree, for the pur-
pose of establishing a club house. The alleged libels were
published in three succeeding numbers of the Satirist,
namely the 22d and 29th March, and the sth April, They
were headed " Pandemonium," and charged the plaintiff
with having established a gaming-house, where loaded dice
were used; and the most disreputable practices resorted to,
ai.d recommending the parish authorities and police to in-
stitute proceedings against the house.
Mr. Thesiger conducted the case for the prosecution,
and Mr. C. Jones and Mr. Huggins for the defence.

For the plaintiff two or three servants, who had been
employed at the plaintiff's house in St. James's street,
were examined. Their evidence generally was to the
effect that the house was merely used as a club-house, where
refreshments were supplied to gentlemen. There was a
billiard and bagatelle table, but very little playing. None
of the witnesses saw any dice used. •
Mr. C. JONES addressed the Jury at some length for the
defendant, contending that it was the duty of a newspaper
editor, when he had good grounds for supposing that such
practises existed, to hold them up to public reprobation.
The LEARNED JUDGE having summed up, the Jury re-
turns d a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 1001.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 7.
WALTON V. POTTER.

This action for the infringement of a patent, excites
much interest amongst the cotton and woollen manufac-
turers of the north and south of England, a number of
whom filled the galleries of the Court before the trial
came on this morning. The plaintiff and defendant are
both extensive cotton manufacturers at Manchester, and
the former claims to be the inventor of an im-
provement in the carding of wool and cotton by
introductien of elastic India rubber backs to the cards.
For this improvement be several years ago obtained a
patent, which he now charges the defendant with infring-
ing. The latter pleaded that the invention was not that
of Waltons, but of Hancock, prior to Waltons' Patent ;
secoadly, that the card-backs used by the defendant are
not of the same construction as thine made according to
the plaintiff's specification ; and lastly, after several other
pleas, that the
.specification itself is not sufficiently cor-
m ct to give force to the patent.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE having heard two of the
plaintiff's witnesses, considered that the case would occupy
more time than could be afforded in the present sittings,
and adjourned the trial to next term.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC. 7.
JACKSON V. HODGSON AND ANOTHER.

This was an action to recover the sum of 1001. for two
years' service given by the plaintiff to his deceased father.
It appeared that the deceased had been a cowkeeper in
London, who had bought a farm at Cheshunt. His first
wife died, leaving a family of eight children ; he married
again, and had two other children. In 1835 the plaintiff,
the eldest son, returned from a voyage to America ; after
residing with his father for a short time he proposed to go
upon another voyage, but his father said he was getting
old, and if he (the plaintiff) would remain at home and
manage the farm he would allow him 50/. a year. This
was agreed to, and two years' service was clue upon the
death of the father. The first family were not
well pleased with the settlement of the property. The
action depended upon letters written to the plaintiff by the
desire of the father, and was only defended because the
executor had not found any evidence of the contract among
the papers of the deceased.
The Jury found for the plaintiff.
COATS V. FRANKS.

This was an action upon two Bills cf Exchange amount-
ing to 961. odd. The defendant had pleaded a set of, but
his Lordship decided that under the pleas upon the record
he was precluded from entering into it.
A verdict was accordingly taken for the plaintiff.
This was the last cause in the paper. The Court rose
at half-past twelve o'clock.