The Sun.
London, England, 1833-11-08 00:00:00

KING'S BENCH -(THIS DAY.)

The Lord CHIEF JUSTICE this morning gave judp...
ment in the following cases, re.pcctiug MACH motions bad
been made previone the present term.

DOS ON THE DEMISE OF SHELTON V. SHELTON.

This case had been tried at Oxford, and a motion had
been made for a new trial.

The Couar were of opinion that the verdict should nol
be disturbed.—Rule refused.

MORRISON V. BUCHANAN.

In this case, which was an action tried at the sitting*
in London, the Court granted a rule for a new trial.

CAMPBELL V. RICKARDS.

The plaintiff in this case was a merchant in New South
Wales, and he brought the action against his agent in
London, for having concealed certain circumstances from
the underwriters when insuring the plaintiff's ship,
whereby the plaintiff bad been damnified.
The Courcr granted a rule for a new trial.
RICKMAN V. CARSTAIRS.

In this case also the COURT granted a rule for a new
trial.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.'

V. THE EARL OF STIRLING.

Mr. Sergeant TADDY applied for a rule to show cause
why the proceedings of outlawry taken against the
defendant should not be set aside. The defendant had
been sued in the name of Alexander Humphreys, calling
himself Earl of Stirling. He now made affidavit that he
was not aware of the proceedings to outlawry till Saturday
last ; that he was the Premier Peer of Scotland, and had
voted as such at the election of a Representative Peer for
Scotland in 1825 in the room of the late Earl Balcarra,
and ag iin in 1831, and also at a subsequent election ;
that he was examined as to the fact in the Court of
Chancery before Lord Lyndhurst, when Chancellor,
who signed a certificate of the fact; aed that the
House of Lords had required to have the roll of
the Scottish Peerage produced before them, in which he
was returned as the Premier Eid of that country. He
had also been several times before the Courts of King's
Bench and Common Pleas, who had both relieved him
from bail bends, thereby recognizing him as a Peer. In
his affidavit be also spoke as to the merits of the action.
It appeared that though he was the first Peer of Scotland,
still he was not a good judge of pictures. He had bought
them to the amount of 3,0001., which were all warranted
to be by old masters, when, in fact, they turned out to be
by no masters at all, and were not worth 501.
Mr. Baron BAYLEY said the question of the merits was
one not at present at all material. They would grant the
rule on the question of the Peerage.

lEVANS V. BULKELY.

Mr. FoLLErr moved for a rule to show cause why the
verdict, which was for the plaintiff, in this action should
not be set aside, on the ground of the verdict
being against evidence. The action was for trespas.
and was tried before Mr. Justice Gaselee at the late assizes
for the county of Anglesea. he evidence for the plaintiff
was merely that his witnesses had not seen the road, which
was over his close, used within the last twenty years
The defendant called evidence to show that it had been
used for ,attle during the whole of that time, that there
was a regular road with fences en each side, and that the
plaintiff had made applications to the defendant respecting
those fences.
Mr. Baron BAYLEY said that the Court would consult
with the Learned Judge who tried the cause, and if be was
dissatisfied with the verdict they would grant a rule.

Carlile, the infidel, who is making a tour
through the manufacturing digricts, has been defeated at
Biros*, by a weaver.—Manchestsr Chronicle.