The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-06 00:00:00

CHANCERY COURT.-(TH IS DAY.)

DE BIEL V. THOMPSON—JUDGMENT.
The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in this
case, which came before his Lordship some time since
upon appeal. His Lordship ordered the appeal to be dis-
missed with costs.

MOSS V. BALDOCK-JUDGMENT.
The LORD CHANCELLOR also gave judgment in this
case, reversing the decision of the Vice-Chancellor, and
directing a reference to the Master, to inquire what stuns
had been advanced by Moss for the execution of certain
contracts mentioned in the bill. •
PASSINGHAM V. SHERBORNE.
The LORD CHANCELLOR also gave judgment in this
case, dismissing the appeal of the trustees with costs.
MARLING V. KIRDY.-JUDGMENT.
The LORD CHANCELLOR also gave judgment to-day
in this case, the arguments in which were concluded
yesterday.. The case came before the Court upon appeal
from the decision of his Honour the Vice-Chancellor, re-
fusing to grant an injunction to restrain the defendant
from infringing a patent obtained by the plaintiff fur
making solid-headed pins, his Honour thinking the right
of the plaintiff ought to be established at law first. His
Lordship agreed with the Vice-Chancellor, thinking
that an action should be tried for the purpose of esta-
blishing the right of the plaintiff, before the Coilit ought
to interfere.
BANKRUPTCY-(H' IS DAY.)

IN THE mirrEn OF THOMAS S. CAVE.
The bankrupt, who was described as a merchant, re-
siding at Walmer, in Kent, appeared in Court on his ad-
journed examination. The liabilities upon the estate
were said to be very large, but their amount was not as
yet ascertained. The assets were also.described as con-
siderable, the bankrupt having been the proprietor of the
mines in Cornwall known as the Trevithan Downs, the
Owen Veen, the Rospeath, the Wheal Fortune, and the
Wheal Prosper mines, which had been advertised for
sale on the 12th inst., and upon which it appeared in
his balance sheet the profit and loss account, including
capital and expenses, am'unted to 397,7921.
Previous to entering upon the public portion of the
business under this fiat,
Sir C; WILLIAMS said he had to complain of the con-
duct of certain Learned Counsel, who, through careless-
ness, or press of business, failed attending according to
appointment before him this morning, to argue a point
in this case of the greatest public moment. He (Sir C.
Williams) attended in Court at half-past ten o'clock to
hear the arguments, and he considered that common
courtesy alone should have induced their attendance.
Mr. Nias, who. appeared as solicitor for a number of
the creditors, wished to submit to the Learned Commis-
sioner whether, under all the circumstances of the case,
it would not be better to give them a private meeting,
as he (Mr. N.) was desirous of examining the bankrupt,
as well as other parties. There were many points con-
nected with the case which required a deliberate inquiry,
which could be only considered properly at a private
meeting ; and, therefore, at whatever time it suited the
convenience of the Learned Commissioner to adjourn,
whether to a week, a fortnight, or a month, all parties
would best consult their own interest by postponing the
sale of the bankrupt's mining property, and having a
private meeting..
Mr. Cave said whatever time might be appointed by
the Court would satisfy him, as his sole object was to
render all the accommodation in his power to every one
interested in.the fiat.
Mr. Nias, on the part of those whom he represented,
said that so far as the proceedings had at present gone,
he felt bound to express his approbation, and also to
state that the course now proposed would be a benefit to
Mr. Cave himself.
After some further conversation between the Learned
Commissioner and the' solicitor, it was ultimately deter-
mined to fix the day of adjournment on Monday, the Ist
of November next.

SURREY SESSIONS.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. HEDGER and a Bench of Magistrates.)
George Wix was indicted for stealing six ducks, the
property of T. D. Dann, at Nutfield.
It appeared that a constable at Bletchingly had seen
the prisoner on the 27th of July, at about eleven o'clock,
passing through Bletchingly under suspicious circum-
stances ; had stopped and searched him, and found six
dead ducks in his possession, which proved to have been
stolen from the prosecutor.
The prisoner said he had found them.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sen-
tenced to six months' imprisonment, with hard labour.
In the above case one of the witnesses (the constable of
Bletchingly) was severely reprimanded by the Court for
chattering with the Jury while they were deliberating
on their verdict.
John Morgan was indicted for stealing from the person
of (Patrick Murray a purse, twenty-six sovereings, and
twenty-four half-crowns.
The prosecutor and the prisoner were brothers-in-law,
and the prosecutor had been left penniless in consequence
of the robbery. The prisoner had escaped, but wrote a
letter to his sister cautioning her as to what she stated
about him, and, in fact, admitting the robbery. This
letter fell into the hands of the prosecutor, and the pri-
soner was apprehended.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sen-
tenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour.
George Young was indicted for stealing a jacket, a pair
of trowsers, and other articles of wearing apparel, the
property of William Prior, of Shirley.
It appears that the prosecutor is a labouring man re-
e'rtrworYtNitlSF.,7 Jilg himself and his wife left home, to
July, and Prior locked the doitidelblkuiNg i/Witil his
pocket. On his return in the evening he found the win-
dows of his house broken, and on examining his box the
property in question was missing.
A pawnbroker at Croydon produced the property,
which was identified by the prosecutor ; and the pawn-
broker's assistant, who linew the prisoner well, identified
him as the person who had pawned it.
The Jury found the prisoner guilty, and he .was sen-
tenced to six months' imprisonment with hard labour.

BOW-STREET-(THIS DAY.)
John Thomas, a tall able-bodied man, was placed be-
fore Mr. TwYFORD, charged with stealing five half-quar-
tern loaves.
Hugh Mackay stated that he was servant to Mr. Mar-
shall, of Hungerford-market, and was out this morning
delivering bread. Having to call at Charing-cross, he
left his barrow in the street, and while he was absent
the prisoner was seen to go to the barrow and take out
the loaves in question. As soon as he returned the pri-
soner was pointed out to him, and the witness gave him
into'custody.
The prisoner said,, in his defence, that he was com-
pelled by want to commifihe offence, that it was the
first Mintz he had ever been placed before a Magistrate.
Mr. TWYFORD asked if the prisoner was known, and
several officers in Court stepped forward and stated that
the prisoner had been before committed for ..a:: similar
offence. _ _

The prisoner still denied that he had ever been before
a Magistrate on any charge, but
Mr. TWYFORD said he could not believe that a strong
and able-bodied man, like the prisoner, would be com-
pelled by necessity to commit such an offence ; and he
was confirmed in his belief by what the officers had
stated. lie should, therefore, commit him for trial.