The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-09 00:00:00

DUCHY OF LANCASTER.

Upon this case being called on,
Lord BROUGHAM, perceiving Lord Campbell (the pre-
sent Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster) sitting
without the bar, among the Queen's Counsel, observed
to his Lordship that there could be no doubt that he had
a right as a Privy Councillor, though the principal party
in the cause to sit within the bar. He recollected that
such a course was pursued by Mr. Sheridan, in a case in
which he (Lord Brougham) and Mr. Warren were
counsel against him, and he could not forget also, that
upon that occasion Mr. Sheridan not only argued his
own cause, but did that which he was sure Lord Camp-
ball would not do, abused the counsel that were against
him.
Lord CAMPBELL felt indebted to their Lordships for
their proffered courtesy towards him as a privy coun-
cillor, but following the example set him by Lord Holt
he would waive his right to sit within the bar, and
prefer, as Lord Holt did, to remain by the side of his
counsel, to offer limy suggestions that might be ne-
cessary.

Lora BROUGHAM believed that upon the occasion
alluded to by the Noble Lord, Lord bolt sat with his
bat on, and instructed his Counsel.
Lord CAMPBELL felt no desire to exert such a privi-
lege, bat in doing so he was anxious that his not wear-
ing his hat, or sitting within the bar, should not be
considered as a waiver on his part of any right his suc-
cessors in office might claim.
Lord BROUGHAM observed that there could be no
doubt of the right of the Noble Lord, if he chose, to sit
within the bar.

Lord Campbell retained his seat outside the bar,
and after a short discussion the case proceeded. The
matter came before their Lordships upon an appeal from
the decision of the Chancery of York, and the question
in the case was, whether her Majesty, or the Chancellor
of the Duchy of Lancaster, was entitled to letters of
administration to the effects of an old lady named Ann
Rothwell Wignall, who died without any apparent next
of kin. The Chancery of York decided in favour of the
claim of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and
from that decision the present appeal was brought by
her Majesty's Proctor, on her Majesty's behalf, to their
Lordships.
The Queen's Proctor, the Solicitor• General, and Mr.
Chetton, were counsel for the appellant ; and Mr. James
Parker, Dr. Jenner, and Mr. Ellis, appeared in support
of the judgment of the Court below.
The case, it is expected, will occupy two or three
days.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Dec. 8.
SPOTTISWODE u. CLARKE.-PICTORIAL ALMANAC.

My. STUART, at the sitting of the Court to-day,
applied in this case, in which his Honour the Vice-
Chancellor of England refused yesterday to dissolve an
injunction he had granted ex parte, restraining the
defendant from publishing a work, entitled Old Moore's
Pictorial Almanac, in imitation of The Pictorial Almanac,
published by the plaintiff, for leave to give notice of
motion for Thursday to discharge his Honour's order.
His LORDSHIP granted the application.
STOCKER V. DAWSON._

The remaider of the day was occupied with the further
arguments in this part-heard appeal.

VICE-CHANCERY COURT, Dec. 8.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND).
SHALE V. BECRFORD.

The further arguments in this part-heard case occu-
pied his Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England the
whole morning.

(Before Sir J. K. BRUCE.)
FINCH V. SECKER AND ANOTHER.

This was the petition of two infant plaintiffs, praying
for a reference to the Master to make certain inquiries,
with the view of compelling the defendants to execute
the trusts of a will. It appeared that Mary Shield, the
testatrix, by her will, of March, 1841, after directing
the payment of her debts, &c., devised the residue of
her property, consisting of an estate of 3501. a year and
large personal effects, to Mary Finch, for r use during
her life-time, on condition of her remaining single, and
after her demise, to go to the plaintiffs, her niece and
nephew; but in the event of her marrying, she was to
have an annuity of 301. a year, and the residue was then
to go to the plaintiffs and their heirs. The testatrix by
a codicil to her will, appointed John Seeker and James
Mason her executors, and for the trouble they would
be subjected to, she bequeathed them a sum of 1001.
each. She subsequently revoked the appointment of
Mason, and substituted a Mr. Bryant, one of the defend-
ants, and he contended that he was entitled to
the legacy of 1001. under the testament of the
testatrix. This claim was opposed. Mrs. Finch
had married and consequently forfeited her right
to the residue of the property of the testatrix,
which now became vested in the infant plaintiffs. It
appeared that certain funeral expences haa been incurred
for the interment of the testatrix, which had been de-
frayed by two of the legatees, but which it was eon
funded were too exorbitant and were resisted by the exe-
cutors on that ground.

Messrs. Cooper and Hall appeared for the plaintiffs,
and Mr. Bacon for the defendants.

His llomourt granted an order for the master to en-
quire intu the circumstances of funeral expenses, and to
special circumstances.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BEACH, Dec. 8.
BARCLAY V. EMERSON.

This was an action brought to recover the sum of 1501.,
amount of a bill of exchange, given to the plaintiff by
":'.«lefentlant for teaching the son of the defendant what
aintiff represented to be a newly-invented method
ei oil painting, a knowledge which would enable
the defendant's son to make a fortune. The
plaintiff, Captain Barclay, had advertised this grand
secret in several newspapers, and defendant's son hvd gone
down to Exeter to plaintiff to be instructed. The de-
f!nee was that the alleged discovery was not new, and
that the knowledge communicated was valueless.
Several artists, who were called by defendant, de-
posed to the utter worthlessness of the alleged discovery,
Lord DENMAN, in summing up, observed that the
question for the jury was, whether the plaintiff at the
time of obtaining the bill believed that he had some
secret of value to communicate. There could be no
doubt that as to the real value of the secret it was worth
nothing at all. It had been proved in evidence, by per-
sons competent to form an opinion, that the secret was
of so little worth that the young man would have to
unlearn all that he had learned. A showy kind of
painting had been taught, but not the manner of pro-
ducing a picture valuable to persons who were judges of
these things. With regard to the representation made
by him of having received two gold medals, it
appeared that they were only two silver ones,
and those had been obtained by requiring a second plain
medal, and detaining the first. If the jury were of
opinion that the plaintiff had grossly misstated the con-
sequences of the communication of his secret, they would
find a verdict for the defendant.
The jury, without a moment's deliberation, returned a
verdict for the defendant.
Mr. Crowder appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wat-
son for the defendant.

COURT OF G0,114.110A PLEAS, Dec. 8.
noLDswoaTu V. GIBSON AND OTHERS.
On the opening of the Court, the evidence on behalf
of the defendants was proceeded with.
Major Ford, an officer in the army, examined—l was
in Plymouth in 1845, and was then a temporary member
of the Royal Western Yacht Club. I saw Dr. Holds-
worth and Mr. M'Donald there at the club. I was in
Plymouth three months. I recollect meeting 1)r. Holds-
worth and Mr. M'Eonald one night in July, when I went
from the club in company with them and some others.
We were invited to sup at Mr. M`Donald's lodgings.
We had an excellent supper, and we played both before
and after supper. We did not play very high before
supper, but we did after. We played at ecarte, which
was proposed by Mr. M`Donald. The latter played
against m,> the whole evening ; and Dr. Holdsworth
always bet on. Mr. ;'Donald's side. The stakes got
higher as the evening advanced. As far as I know, the
cards were the same throughout the evening. M`Donald
won everything. Dr. Iloldsworth moved about a
good deal, but he mainly stood behind my back,
and could see my cards if he desired. The
kingis considered a capital card at ecarte. If a person '
has a king, he is sure to win every game. On that oc-
casion ;'Donald turned up a king almost every time,
and I remarked I never saw such turning up before.'
We played till early in the morning. My losses to both
were about 1.0751. Shortly afterwards I paid it.
Cross-examined by Sir F. THESIGER—I paid the
money by letter. lam rather fond of a game of cards,
but not of gambling. I never played for such large
stakes before cr after. The largest stakes I have ever
bet on any other occasion was 5/. The largest loss I
have had otherwise at cards was 100/. I am not very
lucky at cards generally. I do not know how much
in
question may have lost in my lifetime, apart from the evening
question ; but I do not think that the losses have been
2,0001. in the aggregate. I have since played at
cards, but it has been whist, at ls. or 2s. 6d. a game,
never higher. I had seen Dr. Holdsworth at the
club before, and played, I think, a game or two at
*carte with him. We commenced at Si. a game,
and run it up to as much as 4001. We had only one
game at the latter sum, which I lost, being 2001. to
;'Donald for the game, and 2001. to Dr. Holdsworth as
a bet. I lost 505/. to Dr. Holdsworth, and the re-
mainder to Mr. M'Donald. There was a Mr. Craigie
present and another person, Mr. Ayre, I believe.
Re-examined—We played about three and a half
hours after supper. I never was a winner during that
time.

Walter Lormer, secretary to the Royal Western Yacht
Club, examined—l have been seeretn.ry nine years.
There are in it 312 members at present. It consists Of
a number of noblemen and gentlemen, who take a plea-
sure in yachting. It is a rule of the club to allow any
member to introduce a visitor for a month, at the end of
which they must be elected or give up attendance. I
recollect seeing Dr. Roldsworth
and Mr. M Donald in
1845, at the club. According to the books of the club
Dr. Holdsworth was introduced by Mr. Ayre, as a
visitor, on the 10th
of June. I had not known Dr.
Holdsworth before. It is necessary to give
the residence of visitors introduced. On this
occasion Tours was given as Dr. Roldworth's
residence. On the 25th of the Seale month, E. 11`Donald,
li.i} gentleman from France. On
Esq., PILFAVOci4c.
the IVS... ' re elected members. On
Atkin - Yrinti, Mr.- Ayres were the proposers and
300 34:`lifejr,Nro .pfitlais occasion described on
1Z '11:;.;'1,1'..431.P )15t., ~--'-'..?-'''''.2'. )44
' de,VW ':'.7.lr--,.:11 58.7
m Loy
w IT-71-'-7--;,. - ii•N;.674i,
9,7

N