The Sun.
London, England, 1846-11-24 00:00:00

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

MEREDITH V. HOLMAN.
In this case Mr. CHAMBERS moved for a rule to show
cause why a nonsuit should not be entered for the plain-
tiff, or a new trial had, on the ground of misdirection.
The cause was tried a few days since before Mr. Baron
Platt, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff for two se-
parate sums, of 325. and 101.
It appeared that the defendant had delivered forty
sacks of coals to plaintiff, thirty-two of which were defi-
cient in weight. The plaintiff brought this action to
recover the penalties, which were assessed by the
jury at the rate of ls. per sack. The second count of the
declaration charged the defendant with sending out the
coals in question without a ticket properly signed with
the name of the seller of the coals. Upon this count a
penalty of 101. was imposed by the jury.
Mr. M. CHAMBERS now moved, pursuant to leave re-
served at the trial, to enter a nonsuit, upon the ground
that the coals were not weighed in the mode prescribed
by
.Act of Parliament, the mode in which they were
weighed baying been by placing upon one side of the
scale the weights and an empty sack, and upon the other
the coals and the full sack, the Act expressly stating
that the coals in the sacks should be first weighed, and
afterwards the empty sacks.
Upon the second count the Court ruled, that as the pe-
nalty imposed by the Act did not exceed 201. the Court
had no jurisdiction.
The Court granted a rule for a nonsuit upon the first
count, on the ground that the coals were not weighed
according to Act of Parliament.

COMMON PLEAS.--(THIS DAY.)
Their Lordships gave judgment this morning in the
following cases ;.--.
GIBBS AND ANOTHER V. FLIGHT AND ANOTHER.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN delivered the judgment of the
Court in this well-known case. This was an action in
trover brought against the defendants for the detention
of certain books alleged to belong to the plaintiffs as the
churchwardens of the parish of Walbrook. The de-
fendants were two of the rate-payers of the said parish,
who disputed the legality of the election of the plaintiffs.
The principal point raise& by the case, which now came
before the Court in the shape of demurrer, which had
been argued in a previous term, was, whether the
plaintiffs were the churchwardens of the said parish on
the 12th of April, 1844, or in other terms, whether the
re-election of Mr. Alderman Gibbs on that day was valid
or not, he having been junior churchwarden the year before.
By the custom of the parish, there were two church-
wardens elected every year from the body of the parish-
ioners, and the select vestry was made up of the past
and present churchwardens so elected. It was stated in
the records of the parish that from the year 1648 to
1734 one churchwarden was elected every year, in the
manner before described, and such churchwarden was
junior churChwarden for that year, and became senior
churchwarden for the next. This was so during the
above period, with the exception of from 1660 to 1672,
which was immaterial to the case, and this was the
period of the great fire of London. From 1734 to 1775,
and from thence to 1824, the order of proceed-
ings was the same, with but four exceptions.
The mode of election named must, therefore,
be pronounced to be the custom of the parish. The
succession of junior churchwarden to the office of senior
churchwarden would, therefore, be stopped, if that office
was allowed to remain in the possession of one person
for many years ; and the number of the select vestry
would also be reduced so as to be ineffectual for useful
purposes. The decision of the Court, therefore, was,
that the re-election of Mr. Alderman Gibbs to the office
of senior churchwarden, on the day in question was not
valid, and that a nonsuit must be entered. In giving
this judgment, his Lordship said his brethren, Mr.
Justice Maule, Mr. Justice Cresswell, and Mr. Justice
Erie, concurred. -
Mr. COWEN applied to have a special verdict entered,
instead of a nonsuit. The parties could agree as to
the facts to be entered.
Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD objected. Ho considered it
would be unreasonable to enter a sptcial verdict.
Mr. COWEN said it was reserved to either party to
enter a special verdict.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN—That must depend on the
facts found. There must be a nonsuit.
NOnsuit entered accord ingly.
WOOLEY V. SMITH.
Mr. Justice COLTBrieAcNdeerleivd againstjudgmenteredthedefendant
einthiasct fasoer,
which was on a rule obtained in last Trinity term.
Damages had been recovered
' 1 and
fitll
yobtained his judgment signed
August
bankruptcy a breach of contdraceteotnheth6ethl6etfhpoefeeNmohwveearms. bisesoru,heldBth4ae4gainst
certifi-
cate. On the 3d of February, after the plaintiff caused
of fi
him,
attyefollowing
e h the
obtained to set aside the proceedings on the ground that
the defendant to be arrested on a writ of ca sa, a rule was
the defendant was under the prohibition of the bank-
ruptcya22fidatooff
the defendants'plea '
good. Judg-
mentships did not consider
laws. In reviewing the whole case, their Lord-
-1 • t
the fiat ,
6th of December,the
defendantv‘to
hadasnot issued till the
had sufficient
in favour o whereas am iff had been signed on the
May following, rand .
im effect an arrange-
other way to meet the case. The rule
went, or in some
must therefore be disc a!, 1
Rule discharged accord ing y.
BANKRUPTCY.---(THIS DAY.)
time and opportunity in the inter'
(Before Mr. Commissioner SHEPHERD.)
ALIAS " JOHNNY WALKER."
Thi-
IN I*.
insolvent JOHN
B pMAN,
came up on his amended petition, to
apply for an interim order, and
Mr. DUNCAN appeared to support the insolvent, and
il
Mr. Buchanan to oppose. _
opposed on the ground that the in-
solvent's 3001., and also that he had
name to that in which he peta-
gone under a different .
opposition Mr. Buchanan pro-
tioned. To support this opp
Scotland, andalso bill
duced two bills from a firm in
the defendant, under the name of
solMveriltPsucdliebAtNsAeNxceede .
of the play, in which .
Johnny Walker, appeared in a piece called the Sculptor's
that the Act did not apply to
Mr. DUNCAN objected that no debts nun to Scottish
Scotland,' and, therefore, .
o this Court,
creditors could be adduced !
.11
111
Ph
d no locus standi.
Study,.and the Grecian and Venetian Statues.
The Learned C
and therefore that Mr. Bunliatian
.a
and be would therefore reserve
considerable importance,
the point- oxstiss said the question was of