The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-27 00:00:00

ROLL'S COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

His Honour the MASTEa of the ROLLS was occupied
the whole morning with the part-beard ease of Harvey r.
Harvey, the facts of which are of no importance except to
the parties.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.

JONES V. PEARSE.

This was an action for the infringement of a patent be
longing to the plaintiff.

Sir JAMES SCARLETI and Mr. GODSON app'eared for
the plaintiff; and Messrs. CAMPBELL, POLLOCK, and
ROTCH, fur the defendant.

It appeared, on the part of the plaintiff, who resided in
Coleman-street, in the city, and had a manufactory at
Vauxhall, that in October, 1826, he took out a patent for
an improved carriage-wheel, the advantages of which
were stated in the specification to be, that the weight of
the carriage would be suspended from the upper part of
the wheel by means of tension iron- ro,ls, instead of re-
ceiving its support from the lower part, under the axle-
tree. Those wheels had become very generally used, par-
ticularly for heavy carriages; but latterly the defendant,
who resided in Devonshire, hail manufactured a similar
wheel, and his defence was, that the plaintiff was not the
inventor of the wheel, for that, in point of fact, it had
been invented long before the plaintiff adopted it.
Mr. Brunel, Mr. Joshua Field, and other engineers,
were called to prove the plaintiff'. case.
The trial is expected to last nearly the whole day.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

DOUBLE V. GIBBS.

Mr. WILLIAMS stated, that the plaintiff was tke
keeper of the Duke's Head, Tower-hill ; the defendant
was commander of a ship called the Commerce. On a
voyage home, in 1831, he had the misfortune to have a
passenger who died when near England ; he brought the
body home, and applied to have the body put in his house.
It was accordingly put up in the club• room, and kept a
fortnight. It was buried from that place, the defendant
ordering that the men who were at the funeral should have
the ordinary refreshments, and that be wou!d see all paid.
The real question was as to the liability of the defendant,
for it appeared, that though the body had been advertised,
none of the deceased's friends came forward till after the
funeral, when the whole expense had been incurred. Now
as the plaintiff had no interest whatever in the matter it
should not be expected that he should pay the expense.
The case, as stated, was proved by the undertaker and
one of his men.

Mr. Sergeant BOMPASS, for the defendant, said the ar-
rangement was, that if the friends of the deceased did not
come forward the defendant, having the body, would pa)
the expenses, but if they did the plaintiff must look to
them. Now, after the funeral, and while the defendant and
the undertaker's men were taking dinner, two brothers of
the deceased came forward and showed a likeness ; being
told it was like their brother, they had the body taken up,
and they recognized him. They then went back to the
plaintiff's house, where a bill had been made out in the
name of Gibbs, but on their coming forward, it was al-
tered to the name of Shackleton, thereby showing that the
plaintiff had made the arrangement spoken of.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
41. ss. 2d thereby deducting one-half the charge made
for the room.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.-(THIS DAY.)