The Sun.
London, England, 1828-02-05 00:00:00

VICE CHANCELLOR'S COURT.

At the sitting of the Court to-day Mr. SUGDEN
asked that eight bankrupt petitions which were in
the paper might be allowed to stand over until the
first day of bankrupt petitions after term, in cense.
pence of the absence of Mr. Horne. Among these
petitions there were two in the matter of " Howard
and Gibbs."
His HoNoutt granted the application.

EXPARTE CHARLTON IN THE DIATTER OF CHARLTON.

Mr. SuctrEx then proceeded to address the
Court in support of this part-heard petition, which
prayed that the commission might be superseded. The
facts of the case are quite devoid of interest, and the
principal question, namely, whether or not an act of
bankruptcy had been committed, depending entirely
on the degree of credit to which the conflicting affi-
davits are entitled.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
HABEAS CORPUS.

Mr. CLARKSON moved for a writ of habeas cor-
pus, to bring up the body of Ann Myers, who was
in custody on a charge of uttering a forged bill of
exchange for 397!., knowing it to be forged. The
application was founded on the affidavit of the pri-
soner, who stated, that she was a rag-merchant, and
had resided in Cutler-street for above twenty years :
but that she could neither read nor write, and that
her accounts and all her pecuniary transactions were
managed by her son, Daniel Myers. The bill in
question was taken by the son, and on his applica-
tion discounted by a person named Parker, and the
charge against the prisoner was, that the party who
had discounted the bill, brought it to Ann Myers,
and asked her whether the transaction was all fair,
and she replied in the affirmative. In reply, -how-
ever, she had sworn that she had never seen the bill
nor was never asked whether it was fair, and thather
name, which appeared on the back, was writteriby
her son, who had since absconded. There welt
also affidavits containing testimonials of the prisoner's
character.

Lord TENTERDEN said, the Court would consider
the propriety of granting this rule.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

In consequence of severe indisposition, the Lord
Chief Justice did not take his seat on the Bench
to-day.

DITCHMAN V. CHIVIS.

This was an action by a widow, aged above 70,
against a Greenwich coach proprietor, to re-
cover compensation for injuries received by the
negligence of the defendant's coachman. The
plaintiff was getting into defendant's coach',
assisted by a cad: Before, however, she had en-
tered the coach, or the cad had, as usual, called out
" all right," the coachman whipped his horses on,
and the defendant, a heavy woman, was injured so
severely by the fall as to preclude the hopes of her
ever recovering her previous health. The case was
tried at Guildhall, and a verdict obtained, with 704
damages. - -
Mr. Sergeant TARDY, this day, moved for a
rule to show cause why the verdict should not
be set aside and a nonsuit entered on several
grounds : first, that the declaration was in-
formal, as it stated that the defendant was
the owner of a coach, licensed to carry passen-
gers from London to Blackheath, whereas it ap-
peared by the license, that he was licensed to
carry passengers from Charing Cross to Black-
heath : secondly, that it was not supported by
the evidence offered. The declaration stated,
that he had engaged to "safely carry" the plaintiff
from Charing Cross to Blackheath, when it
had not appeared by the evidence that any
special contract was made between her and the de-
fendant; but that she was ascending when the acci-
dent happened. It had not been proved either, that
the coachman knew that she was mounting the steps
of his coach when he drove on; or that the cad,
who was assisting her, was employed by the defen-
dant.

The Court granted a rule to show cause, but
Mr. Justice PARK observed that coach proprietors
must not be allowed to oppress poor people when
they were deriving such enormous sums from the
public.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
The Barons sat to-day in the Exchequer Cham-
ber, and heard arguments in Day v. Mead.

CONSISTORY COURT.
CROKER V. CROKER.

This was a proceeding by Mrs. Crofter for the
purpose of enforcing restitution of conjugal rights
against her husband, who attended this morning and
presented a petition to be permitted to plead in
forma paupers. The Court refused his application,
as he was is possession of a sufficient income, and
as his conduct in every respect exhibited prima facie
evidence of harshness and severity towards his wife.

Mr. FONBLANQUE thereafter addressed the Court.
She wished to sue a divorce against her husband by
reason of adultery, but as he had left her in a state
of utter destitution she was unable to proceed. The
Court declined pronouncing any order until an affi-
davit of the facts should be given in.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had
a conference yesterday with Mr. Secretary PEEL.
Viscount MELVILLE and Viscount PALMER-
sroy transacted- business yesterday at the Foreign Office.

The Right Hon. C. WYNN visited Viscount
GODERICH yesterday, at his residence in Downing-street.
It is now certain that Mr. BASIL MONTAGU
has been appointed a Welch Judge.—Morning Chronicle.
FASHIONABLE ARRIVALS.--Lord and
Lady Byron, from a tour ; Lord Althorpe, from the Duke
of Bedford's, Woburn Abbey ; Lord and Lady G. H.
Cavendish, and family, in Piccadilly, from their seat,
Holker, Lancashire ; Mrs. and Miss Pepys, in Gloucester-
place, from Bath ; Captain and Mrs. Howard, in South
Audley-street, from Paris; Mrs. and Miss Cowley, in
Park-street, from Brighton ; Mr. and Mrs. Walton, in
Portland-place, from Nottinghamshire; Captain Sheriff, in
Piccadilly, from Northumberland,; Mrs. and Miss War=
berton, in Albemarle-street, from Bath ; Mrs. and Miss
Courtenay, in Pall-znall,from Sidmouth, in Devonshire; Mrs.
and Miss Diikes, in Brook-street, from Brighton ; Mr. and
Mrs. Wallingford, in George-street, Hanover-square, from
the South of France; the Hon. Charles Murray, in Chapel-
street, May-fair, from a tour ; Sir Richard Vivian, Bart.
M.P. at Warren's Hotel, Regent-street, from Cornwall ;
Sir Thomas Dyke Ackland, Bart., M.P. at ditto, from his
seat in Devonshire ; Daniel Sykes, Esq., M.P. Mrs Sykes,
and family, at.ditto, from Hull ; C. N. Palluter, Esq., ALP,
at Ellis's Hotel,. St. James's-street, from his seat in Surrey ;
Thomas, Yard,,Esq. and son, at ditto; .from Brighton ; J.
Waddington,
.Esq.,,at Fenton's hotel,.. St. James's-street,
from Wor&stershire ; Mr. and Mrs. Goidburne, at ditto,
from Cumberland ; Colonel Frederick Fitzclarence, at the
Royal Hotel, St. James'i-street, from a tour; J. Coffin,
Esq., at ditto, from Brighton; W. J. Le Gros, Esq., at
ditto, from Dorsetshire ; Sir John Teollope, Bart., at ditto,
from his seat in Lincolnshire ; the Ear! and Countess and
Lady Augusta Onslow, at the St. George's Hotel, Albe-
marle-street, front their seat, Clandon ; Earl and Countess
Somers, at Thomas's Hotel, Berkeley-square, from their
seat in Surrey; Sir Edward and Lady Poore and family,
at ditto, from- Brighton ; the Bishop of Chichester, at
ditto, from Hastings ; the Hon. T. W. Coventry, at ditto,
from Brighton ; the Eat l of Minto, at ditto, from Scotland ;
Lady Gore Booth and family, at ditto, from llants ; Mrs.
Trelawny Brereton, at the London Hotel, Albemarle-street,
from Pa • rls.

DEPARTITRES.—Lord Lynedock, from War-
ren's Hotel, for the Hoo, Herts ; Lord and Lady Aber-
croroby and family, from ditto, for their seat in Scotland;
General Cronl?y, from Fenton's Hotel, for Brighton;
Robert Taylor, Esq. NI. p. from Ellis's Hotel, for his seat
in Hants; J. Crofton, Esq., from the Royal Hotel'for Ire-
land; Sir Henry Pane, Bart. from the St. George's Hotel,
on a tour; ,Colonel and Mrs. Gore Ltmgton and family,
from their home in Groeyeuer-square, for Smiths:opm