The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-27 00:00:00

MINING INTELLIGENCE.

COPPER ORES SOLD AT TRURO, JULY 25.—Total,
3,314 tons ; average produce, 7 ; quantity of fine copper,
262 tons 13cwt ; amount of sale, 17,2371 15s 6d ; average
standard, 10016 s Od. Last Sale - Standard, 96/ 7s Od ; pro-
duce, BA. Average price per 21 cwt, 513 s 6d.
COPPER ORES FOR SALE AT CAMBORNE, AUG.
Tincroft 620 - Wh. Seton and Pendarves 610—North Pool 574

—EastWh.vCrofty, Dudnance, and Longclose 555 Caroborne
Vean and Wh. Frances 547—Wh. Basset 421—Condurrow
no l Fowey Consols 243—East Pool '2l7 South Wheal
Frances 174—North Roskear 126—Dolcoath 125 —Tryphena 5
—Total, 4,518 tons 21 cwt.

COAL MARKET..--YESTERDAY.
Buddle's W. Hartley.. 14s *Belmont l4s 9d
Chester Main l3s Odlfietton
Clavering's New Tan- Haswell l6s Od
field
Holy well
North Percy Hartley.. 14s Ud Scarborough l4s 3d
South Peareth l2s Od Stewart's
{':infield Moor ......... 13s 6d Denison l4s 0.1
Wylam
Wall's End, &c Seymour Hartlepool... 15s Od
Acorn Close
Hewicke and Co.
Elm Park
Gosforth ...
Barton
Hedley
Northumberland
Eden Main l4s 9d Nixon's Merthyr and
Lambton Primrose
Ships at market. 86.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, July 26.
IN RE DIMES-WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

In compliance with a writ issued by his Lordship on
Wednesday last, Mr. Dimes was brought into court, and
the return read by the registrar.
Mr. DANIEL, in moving that Mr. Dimes be discharged,
directed his Lordship's attention to the return, which
set forth the grounds on which he was detained in cus-
tody.. One of these was the order made by the Vice-
Chancellor of England for a breach of the injunction re-
straining any impediment to the navigation of the Grand
Junction Canal; the other was an order of attachment
for not putting in an answer to the bill filed by the same
company. The answer had been put in, and therefore
the cause of detainer on that ground was at an end,
and the point to be considered was an order of com-
mitment for breach of the injunction. That order was
signed C.C., meaning Cottenham, Chancellor; and as it
thereby became the order of the; Lord Chancellor, the
object of Mr. Dimes was to show that as such it became
a void order, and the commitment founded on it of no

effect.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, referring to the Act of the
53d Geo. 111., c. 24, which constituted a Vice-Chancel-
lor of Englad, said it appeared by the second section
that the Vice-Chancellor had, jurisdiction to make de-
crees and orders, and an order of committal for contempt,
made by a court having competent jurisdiction, was not
reviewable by any other court.
Mr. DANIEL, in reference to this observation, read
the section, which enacts " that such Vice-Chancellor
shall have full power to hear and determine all causes,
matters, &c.; and all decrees, orders, and acts of such
Vice- Chancellors shall be deemed and-taken to be de-
crees, orders, and acts of the said High Court of Chan-
cery, &c., and shall have force and validity, and be
executed accordingly." Now it was submitted on the
part of Mr. Dimes, that the words " executed accord-
ingly" meant executed according to the practice of the
court, and if the commitment rested on the decretal
order made by Lord Cottenham in 1838, he was prepared
to contend that such commitment was not according to
the practice of the court, because it was made on an
order in a cause in which the presiding judge had a di-
rect personal interest.
His LORDSHIP declined to take into his consideration
the question of the commitment being based on the or-
der of 1838 made by Lord Cottenham. All he had to
look at was the fact that an order of commitment had
been made by a court of competent jurisdiction. When
such an order was made it could not be brought under
the review of any other court. If the Vice-Chancellor
had authority to make the crder, that, in his Lordship's
opinion, was sufficient, if it had also been duly executed.
His Lordship thought that, under these circumstances, it
would be most advisable that Mr. Dimes and his friends
should take into consideration the recommendation be
had given on Wednesday, and endeavour to come to such
terms of compromise with the other side as would relieve
him from his present unpleasant situation, and at the
same time enable him to appeal to the House of Lords
if he found it expedient to do so.
The motion for discharge on the habeas being thus
disposed of, the matter stood over, and at the rising of
the court Mr. Daniel asked his Lordship's sanction to
an arrangement which he was glad to announce as now
concluded. That arrangement was, that Mr. Dimes is
to be discharged from custody, on an undertaking that
he is not to attempt any infringement of the injunction
which restrains him from meddling with the canal until
the rights of the parties are finally decided at law; such
discharge to be also without prejudice to the disputed
issues, and not to be taken as an admission of the legality
or illegality of any of the proceeding!.
His LORDSHIP thought this a satisfactory arrange-
ment, and ordered Mr. Dimes to be discharged from
custody.

ROLLS' COURT, July 26.
CREAK V. IRVINE.

This case, which was reported in this paper yesterday,
again occupied the whole of this day.
Mr. TURNER concluded with his reply.
Lord LANGDALE delivered his judgment at length, and
directed that an issue be tried at common law to deter-
mine whether the premises at Church-street, Bermond-
sey, came into the possession of the defendant in trust
for the plaintiff, and as a security, for money advanced
by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff, as alleged by
the plaintiff's bill.

POLICEivEIsNTLE2vLiEiaI?:. Wild,E
a handsome
NCE.
Elizabeth Lipscombe,alitts Fordij , a
and fashionably-attired woman, whose appearance was
rendered somewhat remarkable by a black speck below the
f oleftre eker
.r
Be are
omd
ob rl np g
wa
tghu. n-
an.
ssathrtoti tee
attendance to
extensive
ee t wao
givey e aergviedde n robberies.be-
ce,
Several parties were
but as the cases were incomplete, sufficient only was
talon ertihtsot remandjtuhsetipfyrisaoner
had
beenand teoarcrl)in
clearly establish
ex-
tensive i
system of plunder.
Mrs. Holies, of Elizabeth-street, Pimlico, stated that
on the 29th of June the prisoner came to her house and
represented that she had just arrived in London from
Exmouth, and took a sleeping apartment for the nigh'
From her dress and her appearance the witness had no
suspicion. On the following morning after leaving home
for a short time the prisoner returned, and said she had
seen her solicitor, who was conducting some urgent
business which had brought her to London, and he in-
formed her that her stay must be prolonged a day or
two. Ultimately she remained a fortnight, and pre-
tended to send for her father, as also her luggage. At
last witness began to suspect, from the tact of no lug-
gage arriving, that she had been imposed on, and this
was confirmed by the prisoner absconding on the 11th
inst. with a valuable broach, some clothes, and books.
Mrs. Eliza Gray, the wife of Nathaniel Gray, of 16.
C,ll, ge-street, proved that on the 11th inst the pri-
soner came to her house and agreed to board and
lodge with her. She stated that she was about to ac-