The Sun.
London, England, 1826-02-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, FEB. 18.
IN THE MATTER OF FIR G. P. TURNER.
The Loitt CHANCELLOR,. upon the application of AIL
Treslove, ranted an order for allowing Dr. Burrows to visit
Sir Cl. P. Turner, with a view to ascertaining his present state
of mind ; upon the understanding that he (the Doctor) should
be examined upon the trial of the traverse.
111 r. ilEweri stated that it was the wish of the parties that the
trial should take place at the next Bedford Assizes.
The Lostp CHANCELLOR directed that the trial should
take place in Bedfordshire; and observed, that it would be a
waste of time and expence to subpceni witnesses to prove 'the
state of the lunatic's mind at present, the question being not
what it was now, but what it had been at the time of the inqui-
sition. With respect to Dr. Burrows, he had no objection to his
having access to the lunatic, because he might !tette known
something of the state of his mind at the time of the inquisi-
ion. Instead of traversing the inquisition, it appeared to his
Lordship that an application to supersede the commission
would have been a more advisable proceeding. In reply to
an observation from .31r. Treslove, as to the uncertainty of he-
ing able to have the traverse tried at the next Bedford Assiies,
his Lordship said, he had no doubt that the Learned Judge
butwh itow' the
entitriiiaelcdiridcuzot
iltwtaoukledp
laanother application might endeavourhe to take it it' he could ;
made to have it tried at a future time; although it was kin the
power of the Court to make an order to that effect, with or with-
out a [notion.

upon the application of Mr.
IN 'rue MATTER OF sMITII.
The LORD CDANCELLOR,
Phillimore, who stated that the lunatic had been kept for a long
time by his brother and sister in an old sack, without raiment,
and almost od without foi.direeted that the commission granted
in this case should issue on Friday next.
TOWNIMEND v. TOWN9IIEND.
This was a motion on the part of Lord Charles rowrishentl,
Praying for un injunction to restrain the defendant, Lord John
l't.iwnstientl, from committing waste by the destruction of the
timber on an estate devised by the late II turquim Townshend
trees Upon the estate
to the defendant, in trust for the payment of
(which were not intended for ornament)
debts and other
P4rl'oges and after the term of 21 yearii to the plain,tifr for
file ; with power to the trustees, in the mean tittle, to cut such
as they should tlecip expedient. The idiithivits, of whielt ,a
considerable number were read on both sides, were conflicting
in their statements.
The Lo
RD CItA-.4CELLOR, after hearing Counsel on both
skies, .said he would take home the iitfidaVit put r„.,,,i those
which were most material; for' ,
like the saplings id,,,; whi c
so muelehatt been Itaia, many ofthem, he had no t!,,l;t)t, were
Merely intended for embellishment. His Lordship thought

This was an action against the secretary and pri-riter of a so.
eiety, styling themselves " The Society for the Protectift of
Trade against Sharpers and Swindlers," for inserting the plain.
tiff's name in a list published by the defendants, atici cifi;u-
lated amongst the members of' the society.
The facts detailed in evidence were shortly' those ;—The
plaintiff early in life had been unsuccessful iu trade, had be-
come a bankrupt, and had been in the King's !lentil. lly the
assistance of his friends in 1823, he had been enabled to ,-esuine
business, and shortly after entered into partnership r)ith a
young man (a minor) named Castles, 1,5(501. being paid dotvn
by the uncle of Castles, for his nephew being admitted into the
business, which was carried on under the dm of Goldstein
Castles, and Co. Castles had been abroad ever since the part-
nership commenced, and the libel complained of occurred in
April last, and was published in a circular addressed to the
members of the Society in the following terms
Sir---! am directed to inform you, that tin: •persons named in
the enclosed list arc reported to the committae as improper to be
ballotted for as members of this society.
(Signed) E. S. Foss and Sof, Secretaries.
Tire list enclosed contained the names of " Goldstein and
Co., 81, Mark-lane," thereby imputing „that they were swin-
dlers and sharpers, and unfit to be trusted as merchants or
traders. On learning that his name had been tints stigmatized,
the plaintiff published an advertisement in a Morning Paper,
declaring his intention of seeking immediate redress, and ad-
dressed a letter to the defendant Foss, demanditig the source
of the Spciety's information, the strictest itiVestiganon into their
character, and defying any one to prove an acceptance of theirs
overdue, or that in any single instance they had defrauded any
one of a sixpence or acted in any other way disreputably." To
this letter no answer having been returned, the present action
was immediately commenced, to which the defendants had
pleaded the general issue.

Evidence iv-as produced, sufficiently connecting Messrs. Foss
and Rains with the printing and publication of the alleged
libel.

Mr. Pilled, the banker and treasurer of the Society, and Mr.
John Palliser, a member, considered the insertion or the plain.
tiff' 's name in the lists alluded to, to mean that he was not
Worthy to be trusted, and had been guilty of some sharping
transaction.

Mr. Alderman Bridges, one of the Vice Presidents of the
Society, proved Edward Smith Foss to have acted as secretary
to the Society.
Mr. GuItNEY addressed the Jury on behalf of Mr. Foss and
this most useful Society, which Thal existed within a few
months of half a century, and as a proof of the correepess of
their proceedings, this was .the first action that had der been
brought against. them. It had been rentarjted that the defen..
dant had not pleaded any justification, and he (Mr. Gurney)
expressed his regret that he had not been consulted sooner, or
he should certainly have advised that proceeding. And as itdid
not appear that the plaintiff had sustained any injury, or been
refused credit to the amount of a single shilling, he submitted
that the smalletit amount of damages would be sufficient.
The Louts CutEr JusTr6z having summed up the evi-
denceand expressed his opinion that the action was maintain-
able,if the circulars and lists were meant to cpnvey the meaning
attributed to them by Mr. limed and Mr. Palliser.
The Jury, after deliberating for a few minutes, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 15W.

CONSISTORY COURT, FEn. 18.
cox v. cox.

' Alderman Crix presented himself before Sir Christopher Ra.
binson, the Judge, for the purpose of complaining of his pro.
ceedings being unnecessarily delayed. The Court, he sold,
well knew that he had been a suitor for a very considerable
time. He had instituted proceedings against Airs. Cox fur a
separation, by reason of adultery committed by Mr. Kean ; but
before those proceedings were brought to issue, Mrs. Cox com-
menced a suit against him for the restitution of conjugal rights,
and by a monition of that Court, which had been issued at the
instance of Mrs. Cox, he had been compelled to allow her
three hundred pounds per annum for alimony. This sum he
understood he would be obliged to pay whilst Mrs. Cox's suit
was pending, and as the proceeCiongs, in his opinion, seemed to
be delayed to enable .Mrs. Cox to receive her alimony he en.
treated the Court would take the case into its favourableconsi-
deiation, and pronounce an immediate decision.
After some consideration between the Proctors, it was decided
that the matter should be heard next Court-day.

THE WESTMEATH EAU
The arguments of Counsel in this case were concluded yes-
terday. The suit was originally commenced by the Marquis
of liTestmeath against the Marchioness, thr a restitution of eon.
jogai rights. he Marchioness then commenced a suit against
the Marquis for a divorce, by reason of adultery and cruelty.—
She also alleged, that when the deeds of separation were exc.
cuted, the Marquis allowed her a certain annuity ; that he was
desirous of being possessed of those deeds, and for that puTpose
he had commenced the suit for the restitution of conjugal
rights, and which, if decided in his favour, would deprive her
of the annuity.
_

- - -
The Learned JunOr having paid very great attention to the
arguments of Counsel, and the evidence, which was read, said
he had received great assistance frow the able manner in which
the proceedings had been conducte ; and, as an arrangement
between the parties had been talked of, he sincerely hoped that
such a circumstance would occur. However if that arrange-
uncut did not take place, he .shouldi oil the first day of next
Term, give his judgment.