The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-19 00:00:00

Mr. KNIGHT and Mr. LEWIS moved for an injunction to
restrain the defendants, who are upholsterers, from infrina-
ing a patent obtained by the plaintiff for the invention of a
Peculiar kind of easy armchair. The specification in the
plaintiff's patent described his invention as consisting in the
application of a self-adjusting leverage to the back and seat
of the chair, whereby a weight upon the seat acts as a coun-
ter balance to a pressure on the back. The solid frame of
the legs and sides is distinct from that of the seat and back.
The frame of the seat is attached by hinges to the front of
the solid frame, and it rests behind upon two iron pins pro-
jecting from the frame of the back. This latter piece is at-
tached by pivots to the solid framework, so that by bear-
ing on the back the scat plays upon the pivots and is raised
as the back inclines, so as to form a sloping frame at the
option of the sitter. A variety of huge chairs of the
plaintiff's and defendant's manufacture were exhibited in

Court.
Mr. KINDERSLEY went into the history of easy chairs,
from the Indian bamboo chair to the latest improvement,
and contended that this was no new invention of the plain-
tiff's. _ _ .

The VICE-CHANCELLOL refused the injunction at pre-
sent, directing the plaintiff, if he pleased, to bring an action
at law for the infringement, the motion to abide the result.

PREROGATIVE COURT.

This was an extra Court day. After some motions had
been disposed of—

DISMISSAL OF A PROCTOR.
The REGISTRAR had received a memorial addressed to
the Judge from Colonel Boner Bruce, complaining of the
conduct of one of the proctors of the Court. He also had
received a letter from Mr., George M. Box, the party com-
plained of, excusing himself from attending the Court under
the circumstances, but without wishing to be considered as
acting disrespectfully to the Court, and expressed himself
desirous of submitting himself to the Court.
Sir H. JENNER directed the memorial to be read.
Tho REGISTRAR read the memorial signed by Colonel
Bruce. It stated that, as sole executor of the late Mr.
Edward Stookey, he had applied to Mr. Box to take out
probates to the will of the deceased, and paid into the
proctor's hands 1,720/. for the probate duty. He (Colonel
Bruce) could not, however, obtain the probate ; and he
applied through his solicitor for an explanation, when it
appeared that Mr. Box had appropriated the money to his
own use. The memorialist prayed the Judge to take the
matter into consideration, and to make such order as the
Court might think fit. Colonel Bruce had made an affida-
vit before the Lord Mayor, of the accuracy of the state-
ment contained in the memorial.
Sir Herbert Jenner, under strong emotion, said the Court
was called upon to perform a most unpleasing duty, but it
was one which in justice to the public it must perform.
The task was the more unpleasant as it related to a Proc-
tor of long standing and great experience,, of whose zeal
and ability in conducting cases submitted to his charge, the
Court had had ample proofs in the course of a practice of
thirty years. The Court, under the circumstance, was
bound to prohibit the Proctor from again practicing in that
Court. The Court could not, as in other Courts, strike
the name of the party off the Rolls—no precedent existing
for that course—but it would direct the circumstances of
the case, and the order of the Court, to be communicated
to the protest:ion. The Court, therefore, prohibited Mr.
George Mott Box, from again practising in the Court, and
directed measures to be taken to prevent his carrying on
business in another's name.