The Sun.
London, England, 1828-12-10 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—(Tribi DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
BEVERIDOR V. IfAlr.

This was the second seal.
His LORDSHIP stated, that he'had again reed the
agreement, for the purpose of seeing if lie could
alter the impression he had entertained previously,
and be felt quite satisfied that that impression
was a right one. The affidavits in the case were at
variance with each other, and the Court had been
desirous of seeing whether Mr. Ballantyne would
make an affidavit in confirmation of what had been
stated by Mr. Hay. Mr. Ballantyne had declined
making any affidavit, and the statements he had
made were any thing but a confirmation of Ur. Hay's.
The Court, therefore, felt itself bound to grant the
injunction.

COLESIAN V. WITMER.
His LORDSHIP had read the papers with refer-
ence to what fell from Lord Elden in this case, and
the course which he thought best to adopt would
be to place it at the bottom of those Cases in which
Lord Eldon had not given judgment, and which now
stood for rehearing before his Lordship, but without
any present intention that the case should come on
till the cross bill was matured.
The Count then heard several motions, and rose
at a quarter before one o'clock, having nothing to go
on with, in consequence of the absence of Counsel.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
This was a continuation of the Seal day.
I NJUNCTION.--..GOODPOLE V. THOMPSON, OTHERIVISE

COUNTESS It UMPOU.D.

In this case an injunction bad been grunted to re-
strain the Countess Rumford from proceeding in an
action at law against the plaintiff for the recovery of a
promissory note for I,OOW.
Mr. ROLFE appeared to-day to show cause
against the injunction being made absolute. The
acquaintance of the parties commenced on their
way to Paris in a diligence.; the lady happened to be
short of money, and the plaintiff very gallantly accom-
modated her with the necessary supply for defraying
her expences on the road. . This naturally led to
an intimacy, and shortly after their arrival in Paris,
Countess Rumford, understanding from the plaintiff
that he was about to invest some money of his own
in the public funds, begged of him to dispose of
1,0001. for her in the same way, and to treat it
exactly as if it was for his. own benefit. This he
consented to do, and so great was the reliance of
the Countess upon the skill of the plaintiff in all
the mysteries of the mysteries, that she wrote him
only two months after he received the 1,0001. from
her, expressing a hope that he had already, by hie
judicious management, doubled that sum, and con-
fessing at the same time that, in anticipation of the
great profit likely to result from his agency, she had
" done nothing less than set up a coach." In other
letters she also treated the 1,000/. as if it were to
share the same fate as the money which the de-
fendant himself had in the funds, and so it did,
for he contrived to lose nll his own money, and her
10001. also went. Whilst the plaintiff was in the
progress towards the loss of his and his friend's mo-
ney by speculation in the stocks, it happened that
she was desirous of opening an account with a
Parisian bank, and in order to satisfy the bank of
her solvency, she procured the promissory note iu
question from the plaintiff, purporting to be for the
proceeds of stock sold out by him on her account.
The Countesz was now proceeding in an action
for the recovery of the amount of that note,
although, as the Learned Counsel contended, she
had placed the 1,000/. entirely at the disposal and
management of the plaintiff, and although he had ma-
naged it to the best of his ahilitiea and skill, The
Countess had admitted the letters to the plaintiff in
her answer ; but she certainly insisted that the note
had been given fora valuable consideration. It would,
however, be for his Honour to judge, from the let-
ters of the Countess, whether the plaintiff was not
justified in treating the money as it were his own ;
and, although he was unsuccessful in his speculations,
it would be a most harsh proceeding to compel him
to refund the 1,0001.

The VICE-CHANCELLOR, without calling on Mr.
Phillimore, who appeared for the defendant, said,
that as the promissory note was given subsequently
to the letters referred to by Mr. Rolfe, the plaintiff
must be bound by it. The injunction must there-
fore be dissolved.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

hONNEIL V. NAYLOR.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who
is a broker, to recover the sum of 1211. from the
defendant, which sum the plaintiff bad paid on his
account.

Mr. GURNEY arid Mr. CHITTY appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. PoLLOCK, with Mr. PLATT, for
the defendant.

The circumstances of the case, as they appeared
in evidence, were these., The defendant applied to
the plaintiff to sell for him four shares in the Se-
vern and Wye Railway Company, and upon being
advanced the sum of money in question, executed
an assignment of the shares, to which he signed
the name of Richard Naylor, his own name being
George Richard Naylor. The purchaser of the
shares sent this assignment to the office of the Com-
pany, to have the transfer registered in their books;
but he was there informed that there were no shares
standing in the name of the Richard Naylor whose
signature was affixed to the assignment; but that
twelve shares were standing in the name of his fa-
ther, Richard Naylor, deceased, to which his three
sons were entitled ; that four of these shares were
the property of the defendant, but yet they could
not be transferred, unless the assignment was exe-
cuted by his two brothers as well as himself, although
he was always called Richard Naylor, and even in his
father's will he was so called. His brothers were
out of England, and he had great difficulty in pro-
curing their signatures to the transfer; but at last
the signature of one of them, who was studying
medicine at Gottingen, was obtained. The other
brother was, however, not so easily met with, and
the plaintiff at length brought the present ac-
tion, to recover back the money, not wishing to
remain out of his capital until the defendant could
make good the transfer, when the time at which
that could be done was so very indefinite. On the
other hand, the defendant refused to refund the
money, telling the plaintiff that the transfer should
be executed as soon as his brother returned to
The defence waa that Mr. Bonner, at the time
he advanced the money, must have known that the
shares were the property of the father, for he inti-
mately knew the whole family, and he was therefore
bound to submit to any inconvenience which might
follow. He knew that at the date of the shares„
which was in 1810, the defendant was only seven
years of age, 414 that he conlel not possibly be
the Richard Naylor ;n whose name they stood.
Mr. Bonner was a broker, employed by the des
fendant, and he ought to have comlucted the husi.
neis in a proper manner for him, which he had not
done, and now he sought to recover back the money,
when all the inconvenience was the result of his
own negligence, for which negligence the defendant
had no right to be the sufferer.
The CHIEF that there was great
i;reguterity 90. all sides in the transaction, but he
thought under all the circumstances of the case
that the plaintiff was entitled in point of law as
as in equity to thpir veNicf,
The'j9ry accordingly, found a verdict for the
plaintiff to the full amount claimed, being 1141. 14s.
after deducting for the profit upon a subsequent re-
sale of the shares.

ASIATIC sociETy.—PliyswAL cpmmTT-
Tl 4. —4 i.leetina of this i2otiimittee tool: plats at the So-
ciety's apartments in chourmghee, on the ISth .dune, Sir
Edward Ryan, Biesident in the Chair.
A c2l-ItraiA has been concluded, and a new
road, about a mile in extent, will in consequence imme-
diately be commenced, from Ford Bridge to Shute Piers,
between Roniton and Axminster ; by which improvement
a very billy and dangerous part of the road in that neigh-
bourhood will be avuided.—k'xeter Alfred.

23,_ '

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS-MIS DAV

OLD COURT.
William Morley, aged 21, and Thomas Owl''
aged 22, were capitally indicted for breaking and ea'
tering the dwelling-house of Mr. George Carpenter
Smith, and stealing three silver spoons, and other
articles, his property.
The prosecutor, a type-founder, living iu Worstlir
street, Shoreditch, stated, about twelve o'clock st
night of the 27th of October, be was awoke 11
his sleep by a noise down stairs; he wont to the
window and called to the watch, when he *O7 three
men running from the house, the outside door f
hich had been broken open, and on eriunivati°'
the articles named iu the indictment were Inio".—,.
The prisoner Morley had formerly been in his erne;
Several watchmen deposed to taking the pricouctj
into custody. On the person of Morley was fed ,6
a key that would unlock the door of the proseclo.l.j,
house, a dark len t horn, and part of the property Yibi
had been stolen.
The prisoners strongly protested their innOeefCe:
and said they were complete strangers to each °Pe.'
The Jury consulted for a few minutes, and tlie°
found both prisoners Guilty, but strongly recoir
mended them to mercy.
Mr. Sergeant AISABIN said the recoamendati°
should be attended to, but the prisoners must
peet to be sent out of the country.

SHEAP STEALING.
Thonos Lovell, John Byres, and Ilarriet 04'
were indicted for stealing one sheep, value 21•
the property of Messrs. Thomas and Wm. Ililli4l
of Hempstead.
The prosecutors stated, that ou the 22d Nov.°
going to the field they perceived a skin, old 441
counting their sheep there w one missing.
Edwards, a police-officer, stated, that Oil I
morning after the robbery, between six and sav;,
o'clock, he saw the female prisoner coming do tA7
Edgeware-roud with a large bundle uuder her do"
which appeared very heavy. This excited his 0119:
picion, and he demanded to know what she had g°,l
when she gave him a basket in which were sevol7,
joints of mutton. They did not appear to 112
been cut by a butcher. He went to where 6m,%.
i
lodged, and found other joints, which, on being 13'1
together, formed a whole sheep ; and the skin bell);
placed over them, exactly fitted. Whilst there thcj
prisoner Ayres came in, his clothes were bloody 0,
had a quantity of wool upon them, and in his poke,
were found a cord and a knife. The other priso¢".
shortly afterwards came to the house, and they titel°
all taken into custody.
The prisoners called several witneseea, who Pir;°,
them a good character. They said nothing iu the'
defence.

The Jury found the two male prisoueo Guild''
bat acquitted the woman.
COMMITTAL OF A WITNRSB Volt PERJURY. LI
Richard Kenny and William Ayres were iota
for stealing four coats, and other articles of weotiwt
apparel, valise 101., the property of Wm. DavisoP•
The case was quite clear against the prisone`",
bat when the prosecutor was called to identify
poperty, on each article being shown to him be te;
fused to swear that it belonged to bid], although be
had sworn to them when before the Magistratto•
The prisoners, therefore, under the dire.gioll
the Recorder, were immediately acquitted, and ".
Court ordered the officers to take Davison into el'
tody. The Learned Judge said lie could see thrott
the motives of the prosecutor, but he would
care that the ends of justice should not be thus
trated. The property must remain in the hargOla
the Sheriff, and ut the next Sessions the man s3lo'
he indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury.
Davison was immediately takes into cAistody-
NEW COURT.
W. 111a.r.fleld, a young urchin, not more than lelj
years old, was charged by his father with ateali4 a
pair of hreeches, value Os.
The father stated that he was obliged to Sa..Yz
11
some step to save the child from rain, be w01?-.
steal every thing that be could lay his hands °Dhe'
although, when he took him before a MagistirLirs
thought that a summary punishment would
been inflicted, he never intended to place bins at CP
bar of that Court.

A pawnbroker said the boy pledged the 4(31,10
at his shop.
COON SEILGEANT—Yoa ought not to isiol9
pledges from such children.
The pawnbroker said ho had been many tiP'ef)
before, and always said ho was sent by his father,
rt
COMMON SERGIRANT---I consider your coil°
improper, and shall not allow your expellees. ,he
The father, who seethed much distressed, said
thought the child not naturally vicious, but 110
connected with a most daring gang of young thidV
On the boy being asked what he did with the P.'
ney, said, " Oh, I spent it in lollypop."
The Jury found him guilty.
The following prisoners wore convicted tlmiug tile
morning :
of
Mary Price, aged 32, stealing from the persou,,
John :Blackwell, 65., his monies; ThoulV
stealing two halters, value 10s., the property of
Roach ; Mary Ann Haswell, alias Lemon, 4e
24, and Mary Clifford, aged 25, stealing a box, thrib
gowns, the., value Si., the property of Elieslor,
Massey; Daniel Green Whaley, aged el, to .1
stealing of, a yard of woollen cloth, the proP6,,
of Isaac Israel, his master; and Jeremiah Sulliv7ei
J. Thompson, John and Sarah Smith, J. -11°,1a
Daniel Mullins, Andrew Ind, N. Nutt, AlexoP
Morgan, and J. King, for petty larcenies.
The Sessions will terminate this evening.