The Sun.
London, England, 1833-06-06 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY COURT._(THISI4

CLEOBURT V. HERRING.
Mr. KNIGHT showed cause this morning
solving an injunction which had byen granter
since, restraining the defendant from proceedu
action of ejectment, for the purpose of turning,
tiff out of the possession of certain property 51
the parish of Latnerton, in Devonshire. From
ments of the Le irned Counsel, it appeared that
tiff and defendant stood in the near relation of
mother; that in the year 1826, for the purpose
ing a family arrangement, the defendant by
veyed the whole of her property, real and
to the plaintiff, her son, in consideration
paym-nt of her d3bts, reserving to herself, I
the right to a bed room in Langston House, and
St,nt-r-bridge cottage, part of her property.
quently, however, by a deed in 1829, she con,
property also to her son, the defendant, but
refused to give up possession to the plaintiff, all
the deeds by which she had conveyed her
been obtained from her either by the plaintiff or
adviser, by fraud. On that ground she had
ejectment in a Court of Law for the purpose
hog the plaintiff to give up the whole of the prol
Mr. KNIGHT, with whom was Mr. WRIGHT,
for the plaintiff, contending that such was the
(reline that existed between the plaintiff and
that it was utterly impossible, consistent with
peace, that the defendant should retain any apart
Langston House, and that the whole proceedings k
the defendant were founded in ill-will ratbir than

The ATTORNEY GENERAL, on behalf of the de►
submitted that the whole transaction was a gro
upon his client, for tt'e purpose,ot shutting out ti.
of the daughter of her second son, in order to let ►0
of the plaintiff's eldest sister, and that, even ►f the
action was not founded in fraud, it could not be
inasmuch as the consideration for which the prof
given up had never been performed, he never WO;
his mother's creditors.
Mr. Tew followed on the Paine side.

The VICE CHANCELLOR ordered the injunction,
as it referred to the property actually conveyed, to
solved ; but with respect to Stenter-bridge Cot‘
the apartment in Langston House, judgment WO
given in the ejectment, to be draft with as the
should think fit, and the injunction continued.

COURT OF KING'SBENCH.-(THISDA'

THE KING V. LORD TETNHA3I AND ANOTHER•O
Sir J. SCAItLETT (with whom was Mr. litactla.
showed cause against the rule Nisi, obtained in Ib°
by Mr. P.,llock.
The ground upon which the Rule was granted,
that the defendants were taken by surprise on the
the prosecutor refusing to admit his handwriting in'
letters which they said would have shown them I°
been innocent.

Sir J. SCAALETT contended, that the letters in -
would not have altered the case though they ha'
read, and there were very auspicious circumstances
fact of a Peer of the realm, who, it was proved, had
fr, quent applications for places to the Prime
and had always been refused, stating in his letter 1""
prosecutor, that he had no doubt of the early
his application on his behalf. Then it was to be
. . _ _

mind that the Noble Lord had never made any

on behalf of any one but himself or his fai
Learned Counsel was proceeding to go through an'
ment upon the letters seriatim, when he so'
rupted by
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, who said that the
had been granted without arguments, and froto
line which Sir James was then pursuing, be
admit the handwriting—would it not be better to
his arguments to the fact of whether it was not the
of the Court to submit the case to further cor

on the simple ground of surprise.
Sir JAMES SCA ALETT said, if that was the
of the Court, he of course would not further Pnr°
line of argument, but would confine himself to 010
of the question stated by the Court. Then it 'ell'
fact, that neither Lord Teynhaan nor Donlan
been prepared with a single witness, and
Lordships were wed aware that it was a case
most serious nature, affecting the honour of a
of high station. It was also well known that if the
h„
was supported upon false testimony, it ineetu-r-ed ,
Langford, whom they stated to have been Per' •
sides, was it likely that he, the prosecutor,
Would aL
ledge his handwriting to any papers which be knew
to be used for the purpose of impeaching the testate'
had just given ? The facts were these t in a case °I
importance to the defendants, they did not come '

with a single witness, but relied upon the admit

person whom they said, and were going to pros,
perjured himself; that he submitted was one of the
cases of surprise that had ever come before the Coo'
he believed their Lordships would not admit such $
gerous principle of practice. He, on those grouodst
witted to the Court that the rule should be di
Mr. HUTCHINSON followed on the same side.

Mr. POLLOCK rose to reply, but
The LORD CHIEN JUSTICE said that without t
down any rule, the Court were of opinion 1116?
rule aught to be made absolute. They were of OPI
that under the circumstances the letters in questi°4lll
the case generally, ought to go before another jurPole#
rule must, therefore, b.t made absolute, upon the Pi,
of costs.
h
Sir JAMES SCARLET then said, be hoped,
was a very poor man, the trial would be set (I°.
trial at the sittings after the present Term. e V
Mr. POLLOCK trusted the Court would ab"
Learned Friend to apply in the usual manner. role:'
After some recrimination between the penis*, 6 JO'
show cause was granted, on the application of Sir.
ScAett.

itsplf) IPPIN(
led 07,a10, r, for ;
g ra hat
ding "0:1,
ing the Pion,
sit , ,rtsi,ou
.ont the I Seam,
hat the Young
nn °f' iajetr:
. s
pOse tfor
by deed t Town
and ' '
e
fi
e of t;'"
eturppwhaodoilarlvtafbreironn,lion,rdr
oe
gp
etvdtviesbibietoeulfipti:::?eo fro
it
1:b147::,
.41 8
0,1
41
lbe
ea
144,14.45:0p 0
o:s:twitch: Joi_iot,l,7lo.xliun
a
nd
ngs teY°: 41211L1N
than Pi, st.t
be deice oie
grog! %.kt,
,ut the
3 let
if the ri sr,
t be triadifil kitAth"
properl tti
haying r 1v ran
'cu 'off
11 k Sapert
it tae dt
T,AY) `4! erec

jaTEcta:o,• 000)
in tbo NZ,
A 4k; •
mote.'
the viol;
. .f,Td
aibet
ng i° cebs
be" t° of
a ,6 444 0
in . • emiclnt
,eY half; of pt
anceesd t.
b • 41Nta
ne 1:14)14,
Ater :0 4 wir.
ly sac pek hid
i:114
,be Wrote hid
r apPli`4ls4 Itiltute et c
amity ';4 t
and ~ti ie he
ioetabi
wasvts
mi
01/ Btaroi
at a pr,_
.31Pell 4t 14tit
e fr° k
fib:
rto 001 4of
lot the oft fof
tL
Insider` Iv"!
10 6,14 atni
the °PZ
e Attlttoott
Puri° pi di
3, that of
ac
is w" boi
),,,lan Ming
and tlwo t g
01 %tent
f a Pe
c .4°ll-Cog"
0 t
be t the td.gill
;lured d
id ackno (trztndxl
knew 6-Enoerro
estio3oo:oi oolsack
:ase °fa iction
tnnbeigesP:ire;r:so4,if • °d
a-
prove: b 0 %Ithuuttgbi
C°llth 44r1 Le
such a
puodh: tl '
disci's" 18
vithei
ow.
t rkhiPui
rout tirned
018! ido ,
of OPIPoi
eetio,
jury.J 04 tirl 2
or
he FAY „7401,11
is his fet tti
terda
dow° tticiii
oblige ,
le' • ftor
° Pa 4