The Sun.
London, England, 1828-01-28 00:00:00

LAW INTELLiGENCE.-(TIIIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
The LORD CHANCELT.OR took his Seal to-day al
eleven o!clock.

IN RE FRANKS, A LUNATIC.
,Mr. WAKEFIELD obtained leave for a petition i
this matter to stand in the paper for Wednesday.

wINTYR Loan ANSON.

This case, upon a question .respecting incum-
brances, occupied the whole of the morning. In
the course of the discussion, his Lordship was called
4.)ut into his private room twice, where he remained
m consultation each time for a considerable period.
It Was E aid that on one of the occasions Lord Chief
Justice Best and Sir Nicholas Tyndal were with him.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
• His HONOUR heard further arguments this morn-
ing in a case which stood over since Saturday. The
case wss quite destitute of interest.
s:.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
This Court sat for a few minutes, during which
tome motions of course were disposed of.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
BULLETT V. irtyreirissoy.
This was an action on two bills of exchange, tried
(It Guildhall, at the sittings before Term. The ver-
dict was for the plaintiff, with liberty to move to
enter a nonsuit, on the ground that a written docu-
ment given in evidence should have been on a
stamp. The document in question was an acknow-
ledgment for two bills of exchange, for which an un-
dertaking was givell, that if they were not dis-
, counted they should be returned.
Mr. KELLY now moved to set aside the verdict,
on the ground that the document in question required
a receipt stamp.
The Courrr held, that as tho bills were not given
in payment of any demand, and as the receiver of
the bills only acted as an agent receiving the property
in question for a specific purpose, no stamp was ne-
cessary. The Court observed the case was strictly
analogous to that of an attorney giving au acknow-
ledgment for a deed.
PRACTICE OF THE COURT.
The Gentlemen of the Bar having sent in a list
to the Judges of no less than eight motions for new
trials, and it being the rule of practice in this Court
~,.att no new trials should be moved for after the
4' day of the term, except in Easter and Michael-
mas Term,
Lord TENTERDEN intimated to the bar, that in
future no motions would be heard for new trials after
tiehe fourth day of term in Ililary and Trinity Terms.
-tlis Lordship added, that he knew that the Gentle-
me" of the Bar were not to blame for the irregularity
which occurred this day ; it was the fault of the at-
tcwilies, who must in future deliver their instructions
in Proper time.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.—The new Attorney-
General has not yet been formally introduced, but
It w°uld appear that Sir James Scarlett has actually
resigned, as he took his seat this day, not in the Ar-
thrileY-General's place, but below Mr. RaMe, the
aenior King's Counsel, and was addressed by the
Court and Bar as Sir James Scarlett, and not as
the Attorney-General. Sir Nicholas Tyndal is still
addressed by the title of Solicitor-General.
CRIMINAL INFORMATION AGAINST A MAGIS-
TRATE OF SUSSEX.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT moved the Court fora cri-
minal information against Mr. Peachy, a Magistrate
nf the county of Sussex for refusing to grant a
license to a Mr. Clark, the proprietor of the Royal
Clarence Hotel, at Bognor. It appeared that Mr.
Clark was the proprietor of an hotel at Bognor,
from t 8241, to 1826, which was principally resorted
to, during the bathing season, by strangers of dis-
tinction, but in 1826 it accidentally caught fire and
was entirely destroyed. Mr. Clark then erected
aunther hotel, at a small distance from the site of
the former, at an expense of 14,0001., but upon his
applying for a license, to his infinite surprise it was
refused. A memorial was then drawn up, signed by
forty of the most respectable inhabitants of Bognor,
aqrthdamongst others by the Earl of Arran, setting
the injury that would be done to the town if
the Magistrates persisted in refusing Clark a license.
Their Clark. presented this memorial at the meeting
t the Magistrates, Mr. Peachy, who is Chairman
°f the division in which Bognor is situated,• replied
to Clark, 4, I will grant you no license," and when
Clark asked what objection the Magistrates had to
tim,Nlr.Peachy said," Sir, you have got your answer."
uhsequently Clark presented another memorial,
t"gned by all the respectable inhabitants of Bognor,
'Thd Mr. Peachy's reply was, that he wondered
Clark had so much impudence. Under those cir-
tumstauces Clark could come to no other conclusion
than that Mr. Peachy was influenced by feelings
0f personal hostility. The hotel was frequented by
that class of persons, which made it impossible that
the
Magistrates could have any suspicion that the
"use was likely to be conducted in a disorderly
linnwer, and there was no imputation whatever
13a the character of Mr. Clark. The only circumstance
bY, which lie could account for the ill feeling dis-
PiaYed towards him, was, that he had been mainly
instrumental in procuring an Act of Parlia-
ment for the improvement of Bognor, which
was opposed by Mr. Peachy, who was t
" for some estate, part of which wes
taken away under the Act of Parliament, for the
Pelak tir°ses of
iMprovement. Since this period Mr.
had reason to suppose that Mr. Peachy enter-
tained vindictive feelings towards him.
Their Lordships, after consulting a moment, con-
sented to
grant a rule to show cause.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
"REACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.

PHILLIPS V. CRUTCHLEY.
In this case Mr. Sergeant WILDE moved for a
rule to show cause why the verdict should not be
set aside and a new trial had, 011 the ground that
the former verdict was not justified by the evidence.
The action was tried before Mr. Justice Burrough,
and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, with 2001.
damages. There were four counts in the declara-
tion, the first was, " that the defendant undertook to
marry the plaintiff whenever she should reuest."
The second count stated—
q
The LoHD CHIEF JUSTICE,—That he should
marry on demand?
Mr. Sergeant WILDE--No, my Lord, to marry as
in the first count " when requested." The third
count however stated that he was to marry her
within a reasonable. time, and the foutth count that
be should marry her generally. By the evidence of
the Plaintiff's mother it appeared that he had said
that he wished to be married immediately, but that
Ile could not then turn out a sister who had kept his
house for some years, without making a provision
for her, which he was unable to do before July fol-
lowing.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—Why July is co--
t'iolY a reasonable time to he married in.
de Mr
• Sergeant ;TILDE—Yes, my Lord, but the
iimfeudant has
not trusted to any one to judge for
re
Whether it was so, for in these cases
!he
, are matters in which a man can best
Judge for himself. The Learned Sergeant then
_"fttended, that the promise was indefinite, in-
Zi,mu.ch as it depended on his ability to provide for
7'ster, whether lie married her " at request,"
Oil demand," " generally," or " within a reason-
able time." He however admitted, that all men
behaved very ill in not performing their contracts in
es •
e matters. In which it was very hard for a
lady to
Make such a request.
xi.
it --Ll** 3uitiee BURROUGH—But the defendant was
'itried to another before July.
te_'‘,lr. Sergeant WILDE admitted this fact, but con-
th"qed that he had not, by putting himself out of
t,_e Power of performing a contract, made that con-
definite as to time.
The LORD CIIIEF JUSTICE decided that there was
evidence of a genernl promise, and as the defendant