The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-08 00:00:00

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

The Lord Chancellor, having disposed of the unopposed
lunatic petitions that stood on the paper for hearing, pro-
ceeded with the part-heard bankrupt petition in re Chambers,
which occupied the Court the remainded of the morning.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Sir JAMES WIGRAM )
The Court was engaged during the morning in hearing and
disposing of a great number of short causes, unopposed peti-
tions, and motions presenting no feature worthy of notice. -
(Before Sir J. K. BRUCE.)
His Honour, having gone through the paper, which con-
sisted of cause and bankrupt petitions, rose at half-past 12.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
DOE DE3L ANGELL V. ANGELL.

This is the celebrated ejectment case, which relates to the
possession of the Angell estates. It was tried in Surrey at
the last autumn assizes, and a verdict was found for the plain-
ti The present Solicitor-General had obtained a rule nisi
for a new trial, and this morning Mr. Sergeant Shee and Mr.
Petersdorff sh.wed cause against the rule. The arguments,
which were purely of a technical character, were not finished
when we went to press.

BAIL COURT.--(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice WicarrmAx).
IN THE MATTER or HARRIS, MAYOR OF ABLNGDON.

Mr. V. LEE, in this case, applied for a rule to show cause
why a criminal information should not be filed against Mr.
Harris, Mayor of Abingdon. The application arose out of
alleged improper conduct on the part of the Mayor, in the
discharge of his magisterial duties. It appeared, from the
affidavits in the case, that the proceedings out of which the
present application originated, took place in the year 1842, in
consequence of a distraint for a borough rate made upon
James Westpool ; and that the Mayor bad privately .got an
appraisement made, which he kept concealed. In the middle
of April last these facts came to the knowledge of the
parties.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN asked why the application was not
made earlier in the term.

Mr. LEE said that the parties were trading in different
localities, and some time was lost in getting the affidavits
prepared.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN said that the applicant had al-
lowed the Easter Term to pass by, and he now applied so late
in the present term that it would be impossible for the de-
fendant to come in and answer. No sufficient cause for this
delay was shown, and he should, therefore, refuse the motion.

EXCHEQUER COURT-THIS DAY

(Sittings at Nisi Prius.)
COOKE V. MARKWET.L.

Mr. Sergeant Dow Luca (with whom was Mr. Marsh) ap-
peared for the plaintiff; Mr. Jervis and another conducted the
case for the defendant.
This was an action to recover 1501., money won by the de-
fendant from the plaintiff, at one sitting, at the well-known
game of " loo."
The facts of the case, as detailed by the counsel for the
plaintiff, and in evidence, were briefly these :
On the 29th of March last, the plaintiff, who is an attorney,
lost the above-mentioned sum, which W. R. Markwell
won. The defendant is the manager of Long's Hotel, Bond-
street, which is the property cf his father, the proprietor of
the North and South American Coffee-house, Threadneedle-
street. On three several occasions the plaintiff, the defend-
ant, and three other persons played at 100, in a private room,
at the Rainbow Tavern, Fleet-street. On each occasion Mr.
Cooke was a considerable loser, which he attributed to ill
luck; but on the third occasion he had his suspicions
aroused by the conduct of a person to whom he had not
long been introduced, and who, he subsequently ascertained,
was a professed " black leg," although of gentlemanly appear-
ance and manners, and living in some style at the west end of
the town. The plaintiff, on the occasion alluded to, having
lost all the ready cash which he had about him, the landlord
of the house, Mr. Isaac Argent, with whom all file parties
were acquainted, gave an I 0 U to the defendar.t, for so much
of the,money lost by the defendant, as he was unable then to
pay. ,Ile became answerable for 961. for the plaintiff, and a
small& sum for himself, both of which were paid on the fol-
lowing day, by Mr. Argent. The action was brought under
an Act passed in the reign of Queen Anne, which provides
that if a person, at one sitting at cards, lose more than 10/. to
another, he may receive the amount within threee months of
the day on which he lost it.
Mr. JERVIS having addressed the WIT for the defendant,
Mr. Baron PARKE summed up the evidence, and the jury,
after much deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff,
for 961.

UNION HALL.—(THIS DAY.)
Elizabeth. Davis and 211ary Croker, two women of the town,
were charged before Mr. Cottingham, with stealing a valuable
Chinese shawl and a piece of silk, the property of the steward
of the Marquis of Bute, East Indiaman.
It appeared the complainant had come ashore with the
above articles, with the intention of forwarding them to Bel-
fast. In passing along the borough, however, he was accosted
by the two prisoners, whom he accompanied to several public
houses, and ultimately was induced to go home with them.
He remained in the house for about two hours, being at the
time intoxicated; and when he came to his senses, he missed
the articles above mentioned, and, having called a policeman,
gave them into custody.
The complainant manifested a strong disinclination to pro-
ceed with the case, saying that he would rather be at the
loss of the property than be compelled to appear against the
prisoners, particularly as the ship he belonged to was out-
ward bound, and he would lose his situation if compelled to
attend the sessions.

Mr. COTTINGHAM said ho regretted the complainant could
not remain at home to presecute the prisoners, who were well
known as women of the most abandoned and profligate cha-
racter. Under these circumstances he (the Magistrate),
however unwillingly, must discharge them.
John Abraham, a man advanced in years, was charged with
committing an indecent assault on Charlotte Ann Butler, a
child under nine years of age.
The prisoner denied the charge, and said it was trumped
up by his wife and the child.
Mr. COITINGHAM said that the offence was one of a most
aggravated description, and that he should commit the pri-
soner for trial.