The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-10 00:00:00

FLEMING V. NEWTON.

This case came before their Lordships upon appeal
from the judgment of the second division of the Court
of Session in Scotland, granting an interim interdict
or injunction to the respondent, eight of the Judges
of that Court being in favour of the respondent and
four against him. It appeared from the statement of
counsel, and from the case drawn up by both parties,
that the appellants are the members of a society esta-
blished in Scotland for the protection of trade, and
are in the habit of publishing a paper, which
they call The Scottish Mercantile Society's Record, but
which is much better known in icotland under the
name of " The Black List." In that publication the
names of all persons who dishonoured their bills, and
had them protested for more payment were men-
tioned. It appeared that the respondent had ac-
cepted two notes for a person of the name of Andrew
Miller, one for 481. 13s. 4d., and the other for 1001.;
but as he alleged without any value having been
received by him for them, but purely for the aceom.
modation of Miller. On those notes becoming due,
and being presented by the Union Bank of Seotland
for payment, and the amount of them not being
forthcoming, the respondent declining to pay them;
although, as he alleged, able to do so, the notes
were protested by the bank in the usual way,
and in consequence of this, the name of the
respondent appeared on the list published by
the appellants, and he was thereby declared
to the Scottish world as a defaulter in his
payments. For the purpose of preventing the appel-
lants from continuing the publication of the respond•
dent's name as a defaulter, he instituted proceedings
in the Scottish Courts, and obtained the interdict or
injunction which it was sought by the appeal to sit
aside.

Mr. Stuart Wortley and Mr. Gordon appeared u
Counsel for the appellants, and Mr. Bethell and Mr.
Anderson were in support of the judgment of the
Court below.

The case appears likely to occupy two or throe
days.
The House will sit to-morrow upon appeals.

PRIVY COUNCIL.—(THIS DAY..)
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council iat
to-day in the Council-chamber, Whitehall. The
Lords present were, the Master of the Rolls, Lord
Campbell, the Judge of the Admiralty Court, Ltd
the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall. Their
Lordships were occupied the whole morning with the
further arguments on the part-hears petition of Mr.
Pinkus for an extension of his patent with respect to
atmospheric railways.

VICE-CHANCERY.—(THIS DAN.)
(Before the Vzcz CHANCILLOR or ENGLAND. )
STEWART V. TOADIES.

The further arguments on this part-heard case
occupied the Court the whole day.
(Before the Vice. Chancellor KNIGHT Baucx.)
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. MUNRO.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. BANNERMAN.
♦TTORNEY-GENERAL V. MkbANT.
The arguments in these cases occupied his Horrour
the whole morning.

(Before the Vice• Chancellor WIGRAIs.)
His lioNorat, after disposing of the case of Maken-
rot v. Bailey, which came before him upon further
dinction,, proceeded to hear the further arguments
in the case of Sayer v. Sayer, which occupied the
Court the remainder of the morning.

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Justice Ertl. S.)
THE DUKE OF BRUNSWICK'S ♦CTIONS.
During the hearing of the case briefly reported be-
low, Mr. Cockburn (who appeared extremely unw ell),
adverting to the case of the Duke of Brunswick v.
Crowl, said he found himself so unwell that he teutst
begthe Court to postpone the hearing of this case until
to-morrow or next day. He was quite ready to pay
the costs of the day out of his pocket.
The Duke of Brunswick, who had occupied s
seat in the Queen's Counsel box during the whole of
the morning, rose, and said that he was not desiro us
to continue litigation ; his only object in tho actio as
he had brought was to clear his character from ti to
grass and unfounded imputations that had lset
heaped upon it. He would not press the case if
the defendant would consent to pay all the costs th at
had been incurred.

Mr. Cocxnu said he had no instructions to that
effect.

Mr. Justiee EELS consented to postpone the trisil
of the cause until Saturday.
The Duke of Brunswick said he had another cal
against a person named Geslen, which had been set
down for trial on the 12th, and trusted that both cas es
would not be fixed for the same day, as he should 1 is
totally unable to undergo the fatigue ; he was qui 14
willing to adopt any course which his Lordship
might point out.
Mr. Justice ERLU appointed Saturday for th
hearing of the first cause, and Monday for the secomit,
and suggested that the legal advisers of both partit
should meet in the meantime, in order to come t so
some arrangement.
TUB BLACKBALL RAILWAY V. SCOTT AND YOUNG.
This was an action brought by the Blackwell
Railway Company against the defendants, the soU•.
citors to the West India Docks and Birminghs
Junction Railway, to recover 5001. on a covenai at,
which was to the effect, that the Blackwell Railw, ty
should withdraw all opposition to the Bill. The d
fence was that the Blackwell did not keep the it
contract, but the jury, however, found a verdict fo r
the plaintiffs.—Damages, 500/.

SHERIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY. 7)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BU&CHILL.)
CRICKET STEAM-BOAT ACCIDENT.-200 K.
DAMAGES.
IiNDGRAVN V. SMITH.
This was an inquiry to assess damages for injurif
sustained by the plaintiff (who sued by his nes at
friend, his father), occasioned by the bursting of th, I
boiler and blowing-up of the Cricket steam-boat era
the river Thames, on the 27th of August last.
The defendant suffered judgment to go by default
Mr. EDWIN JAMES (with whom was Mr. Taprill `,/
stated the case. The plaintiff is a boy, thirtee
years of age, the son of a tailor, and defendant is
gentleman, and sole owner of the above vessel. I IL
this case, the defendant having suffered judgment t "
go by default, admits his liability for the want ( tt
proper care, skill, and caution charged &gains ix
him in the declaration, and by the evidenc e•
the jury would be convinced that th. &shay