The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-13 00:00:00

to tht WATTS V. COLEURN.
i°j. case Mr. KNIGHT, on Saturday last, obtained an
41,1ta-hteiect`iir'enatts,ztoParte
fretn proprietor and on behalf of the plaintiff, Mr.
restr'ain the defendant, Mr. Colburn, who
publisher of the Court Journal,
het, tlubl'hing a weekly newspaper, of which notice hadd
which Za_dy Rir-n by advertisements and otherwise, and
title nf 4r4 to have appeared on Saturday last, under the
C4ro ,the Naval and Military Gazette, or Weekly
the (-I",icie °f the United Service, upon the ground that
pron,"ndant had pirated the title of a weekly paper, the
Nis,„thtY, of Mr, Watts, which was to be devoted to the
tio,:leets, and which was also announced for publica-
tie, "Cl' Saturday last, under the title of the United Ser-
TeAzette, and Nava/ and Military Chronicle.
burn) toyo Mr. PEPYS appeared on the part of
r. Col.
kr. \ Move to dissolve the injunction.
boar of KNIovIT Objected to their appearing at that late
Air the day to dissolve the inj•
nction.
very
e,,l4_a,P.l's said that his client. h.ad already sustained
tritzt,,du° iderahle damage by this injunction having been
lie fel, upon the assumed similarity of the two papers.
o'4 ';'ute that, if the Court had been made fully aware
sot b tae circumstances of the case, the injunction would
lat4ve been granted on Saturday, just an hour before its
"d'd Publ' • '-
The v Ication.
the& ICE'CIiANCELLOR said that he knew nothing of
-C"tho 1 • before him on Saturday
-to the only question was
tiott ntailarity of the titles, and upon the represents-
"' • •n.
1.;1 made he granted the injunction.
cotiatider °l4°llw, after bearing Counsel and affidavits at
of the t able length, said he thought, looking at the titles
that PaPers and the mode in which they were printed
or
e eiuld of four years old, who was sent to purchase
Iltnerilt could not
mistake the one for the other.
ii,tit-cloght the best plan to pursue, under all the mourn
Kt „,
itnpet4'. would be to let the defendant publish his present without any prejudice to the generalinjunction.
he
tatod?uld allow the plaintiff to file such affidavits as
bear l° answer to those of the defendant, and he would
tl4 e Parties fully to-morrow, when h would decide
4541.44,1 question upon a close examinatione of the
T 6,1 Court rose at a quarter after five.
TUESDAY.

Th. WATTS V. COLBURN.
th:* °gni:Rents of Counsel were resumed again to-day,
4441118 caaci Mr. KNIGHT and Mr. WARWICK having
Elie eN'i support of the continuance of the injunction.
"tkih—O.ltoun said, that it was not necessary for himb to
vet), la other side, as the case appeared to him to eha
41Ritie 'tar °fle• It was proved beyond all doubt, that t. e
villt4' title, the United Service Journal, was first
b,ll the defendant, Mr. Colburn, as applicable to his
Orki for it was spoken of in two advertisements
pore °a held in his hand, and which had been printed
4Pi't t!'i,°_tlvn years ago. Now it appeared to his Ha
.e clear, that the conception of using the tern;
tiy Service Journal by the plaintiff, was borrowed
IPl'elttledfr°in the preconception of the defendant. It
;:- clearly from the affidavits, that the plaintiff
iqrai as l;te back as the 30th of January, that the
Nii44-,4" intended to bring out his paper on the 9th :of
t14,/,'Y; this app eared from the two advertisements in
nws aper. It could not, therefore, e
14►4tY purpeosepthat the plaintiff had delayed up to
Pti:t ri Morning of the publication of the defendant's..
*Lip ~4 cowing to this Court to obtain an in unction,
, ,-Le Other part could not be heard in opposition to
't[l:4" conduct on ythe part of the plaintiff was neither
that "Qr fair towards the defendant. His Honour thought
i,t4l 4P:4 inspecting the two papers, both as to their titles
11 :tin- tn°deinwhiclt they were printed ; no man. in
tthly;* could take one for the other, in his opinion
Lere as totally distinct as any two things could pos-
-4(1 Ile vias;finally, of opinion that as the plaintiff
b° 404:t acted fairly or justly by the defendant, either
in
'°4l,:i4g his title, or in the delay which he created
trepit, to this Court for the injunction, that the injunction
Itirin this case should be dissolved with costs.
noßoun rose at four o'clock.