The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
CORSET V. CORSET.
The arguments upon this, appeal were resumed
this morning, and occupied the Court for more than
three hours, when, in consequence of the absence of
Mr. Sugden, who was then engaged in the other
Court, a further postponement took place.•

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
WATERIMITSK t'. '101.14.
This case came on for further directions upon the
MASTER'S Report. _ a a

The bill had been filed for the purpose of setting
aside a legacy of 4001. which the testatrix, a Mrs.
Ambler, left to discharge the amount of a debt
incurred in the erection of a Methodist chapel, at
Baildon, in Yorkshire. It appeared that 'twenty
persons had each subsezibed twenty-one pounds for
that purpose, and as a security for its repayment got
the title-deeds of the chapel into their hands. The pre- '
sent plaintiff,who is tenant for life, of all the property of
the testatrix, with the exception of this legacy of
4001., now sought to set aside the bequest, on the
grouids, that it 'came within the provisions of
the statute of mortmain. When the cause
came on to be heard before Sir John Leach,
he referred it to the Master, to ascertain if any,
and what sum, was clue to the 20 individuals is
question, at the death of the testatrix, on account
of advances made by them for the building of the
chapel. The Master reported that they were
equitable mortgagees, to the amount of 4391.
Mr. COOPER for the plaintiff, now contended that
the bequest was void for the reason above stated.
The Learned Gentleman, in support of his position,
cited a case decided by Lord Alvanley, in which a
legacy left to discharge a mortgage debt due on
Essex-street Chapel, was declared to be void.
Mr. BICKERSTETH for the defendants, the trustees
of the chapel, contended that the case alluded to
did not apply here, as the defendants were equitable
and not legal mortgagees. The present legacy was
to discharge the lien which the defendants had on
the title deeds of the chapel merely, and not On:the
land.

The VICE-CHANCELLOR was of opinion, that the
statute of mortmain was applicable to the present
case, whether the mortgage was a legal one or not,
and that the bequest must therefore be declared
void. His Honour directed that the costs of the
suit should come out of the property of the testatrix.

COURT OF ICING'S RENCK.
CONSPIRACY.
THE KING V. TAYLOR AND OTHERS.

The public curiosity appeared to have increased
rather than diminished, by the disappointment felt
yesterday in consequence of the postponement d
this trial, and when the doors were opened this morn-
ing the rush was tremendous, and in a few minutes
every seat was filled except those appropriated to
the Counsel and Jury.
Mr. Taylor, in his clerical habiliments, and his co-
defendants, appeared in Court soon after the opening
of the doors, and were accommodated with seats on
the Bench directly under that occupied by the King's
Counsel.
Lord Tenterden entered the Court at a quaiter
before ten o'clock, when the Officer proceeded im-
mediately to call the Special Jurors, but only the
following seven of whom answered to their names,
viz. John Grahame, Josh. Martineau, Patrick
Holme, James Greaves, Henry Kolle, Robert Goiet
and Henry Lavers. The Officer next inquired, if
the Counsel for the prosecution would pray a tales.
Mr. Attorney-General, Mr. Solicitor-General, the
Recorder, Mr. Denman, and Mr. Parke, for .the
prosecution, consulted together for about five minutes,
and then
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL said—My Lord,l really
tnloiit do rightnk,fromto
the
pressimp itorta on in the absence of the
Gentlemen se,thatl should
e
Gentlemen who have been summoned as Special
jurors.
The COURT—Then it must stand over...
Mr. Taylor (with much 'apparent surprise)—MY
Lord, I object to its standing over.
The COURT—It must stand over, Sir.
Mr. Taylor (with warmth)—l beg leave to de-
mand my right to be tried.
The CouRT—I have no power to go on, unless
you have a King's warrant. Have you aivarrant ?
Mr. Taylor—There is such an atrocious system
The CouRT—I can't hear any thing from, you
about atrocious system. I have no power to proceed.
Mr. Hanger, a co-defendant of Taylor's, now rose
in a great heat, and blustered out—The special jury
is contrary to the Constitution.
The COURT, (indignantly)—Pray, Sir, hold your
tongue, and don't talk to me about special juries be-
ing contrary to the Constitution. They are esta-
blished by Act of Parliament. The jury must with-
draw.

The Jurors that had been called into the box
then withdrew; Mr. Taylor -ouid his followers also
retired, evidently much chagrined, and the greater
number of spectators likewise left the Court, laugh-,
ing one at the other, at the disappointment they ex-
perienced.
Messrs. Brougham, Broderick, and Bushey, were
Counsel for the defendants, Thomas Brushfieldf
Wm. Freeman, and John Brooks • the other
at the repeated post' his gestures and manner
to feel the de-
fendants
with Taylor, were John Roome, Wm. De'
vonshire Senile, and John Hanger.
Mr. Taylor
gyloreraatpepst indignationearedb
ponement of the trial, and soon after he 'withdrew
from Court, a note from him was handed into the
students' box, addressed to the Reporters. It ran
thus—

Gentlemen--I am this instant going to the
Mansion-house to take out warrants against Alder•
Men Brown and Atkins, and the'City Solicitor.
ROBERT TAYLOR."
Mr. Taylor did Not state his object in endeavour-
ing to obtain warrants against Aldermen Brows and
Atkins, and the City Solicitor, but we understand
his intention in making such an application was to
prosecute the parties for a conspiracy to oppress and
injure hire in his character of a citizen.

MANTON V. MILLS.

plaintiff's
of Hanover-square, against Mr.
Mills, ciotenELL stated this case, which was an
action brought by Mr. Joseph Manton, the cele-
brated
is also a gun-maker, for an infringement
hisles
with
the ;
patent, and for fraudulently manufacturing
d,
p.a.tit;.'s name marked on them, but
ofgoodsilt
n•ith the manufacture of which the plaintiff had nothing
to do. The Learned Counsel stated, that the man-
ner in which Mr. Manton discovered the fraud of
which he complained, was as follows :—Thirty pair
of pistols and 70 fowling-pieces were shipped onboard
the Pyramus, to be exported to India, and according
to the regulations of the East India Company and of
the Revenue, it became necessary for the party ex-
porting to set a value on his property. The value
set on the fowling-pieces and pistols by Mr. Mills, was
such, that the officer of the Customs suspected that
the articles could not have been manufactured by
Manton, though bearing his name This suspicion
was communicated to Mr. Manton, who, upon in-
specting the firearms shipped on board the Pyrarnris
discovered that none of them were of his make.
If those circumstances were proved, the only ques-
tion for the Jury was, the amount of damages, On
a former occasion, when an action was brought for
''artinfringement of the rights of the patentee
of that excellent article Reading Sauce, the
Attorney-General, who was for the plaintiffs
observed, that such an action should be pe-
culiarly favoured in the City of Lokdon, as the
patentee contributed greatly to the gratification of
the inhabitants of a Metropolis so remarkable for
attachment to good living. The same argument
might be applied with equal propriety to the present
case ; for when the Jury saw a pheasant or a wood-
cock smoking before them, they were perhaps 13'
dcbted for it to the plaintiff.
Mr. C. Manton, the plaintiff's son, stated, that his
father lived in Hanover-square, and was in the habit of
marking his guns and pistols with his name and
place of abode. The sale of his father's manufav