The Sun.
London, England, 1826-05-11 00:00:00

CORONERS' INQUESTS.

Qn Tuesday evening a Jury were assembled before J. 11. GeLL,
thi Coroner. foe. Westminster, ,at the house of Mr. Toohey,
it Illack Horse 'favern, in the Haymarket, on the body of Mr.
James dimity, the eminent sculptor, who was unfortunately killed
..,3,ong to the furious driving of a butcher's cart.
The deceased was riding on horseback up Ilegent-street,proceed-
ing CA-4MS the Ctiunty Fire Office ; a little a-head was a butcher's
@art,Alri,at en furious a rate, that he was obliged either to
pit his horse on the pavement, or go to the other side. The
shaft of •the.eart struck the deceased's shin-bone with such vio-
lence, that it nearly knocked the horse down on which he was
riding, and by the concussion the deceased was thrown. There
were no carriages near the spot, and the road was quite clear.
Air. Cutely used his utmost endeavours to avoid the butcher and
cart, but could not.
The Coroner (Mr. Geri.) now briefly addressed the Jury. He
said it was evident that the injury which the deceased received
occasioned his death, and that in one of the widest streets of Lon-
don, through the wilful neglect and carelessness of the butcher
driving his cart, and at a time when 'there was no carriage near
the spot, and where the. width of the street is eighty feet. If
occurrences of this kind,are to be considered merely as accidents
in midi streets; We shall' have them constantly in narrower ones;
for it is well known that these persons drive generally very rapid,
and the manstioa it was his usual pares a ',federate one of eight
miles 'an lMii,;• ‘lnigysopinien, ;I consider this case a fit one to
go before anotlifr tr,ibunall it may possibly be the means of pre-
venting mimilar occurrences.'
The Jury
were decidedly of the same opinion, and unanimously
returned a verdict of 211anstaughter against John Curtis,the driver
of the cart. 4 -
The Coroner.thonissucid his warrant for the apprehension of the
prisoner, whom he ordered to be lodged in Newgate, and bound
over the, witnesses to appear at the, Sessions.
yesterday evening An
Inquisition was taken at the Turf Tap,
in Tattersall's-yard, Grosvenor-place, before Mr. Grit, the Co-
roue**. for Westminstero on view of the body of William Jackson,
who was killed by being run over
by a carriage. The Jury re-
fitted a Verdict OL-Aceitlental Death. Deodand 61. on the
inrriage and horses, - .

LAW INTELLIGIiCE,

COURT OF CHANCERIrrs DAY.)

BACK V. ST ACKY...--E Xe.P.LiVrt, ZNJUIieVOIf.

Mrs. HORNE said, he had an application to make for an P•l7-
parte injunction, which pressed eiceeedilgrly under, the following
circumstance. The plaintiff Iris the. owner of .ttiro houses, arid
the defendant one, in the city of Norwich ;' the defendant had

pulled down his house, and was in the act of rebuilding it.with great
rapidity, making it higher than ifwas •befofe,! and constructing
it in such a way as to obstruct ancieurlights .and,air passages to
the plaintiff's houses, thereby committing irreparable mischief.—
Besides, the defendant intended to make windows overlooking the
plaintiff's yard, which had not been overlooked before, and by
which his property would be Very much deteriorated in ',value.—
The motion, therefore, was, to restrain the defendant' from re-
building his house in a way to affect the ancient-conviniences and
value of the plaintiff's property.
the LORDSHIP granted the injunction against obstructing the
plaintiff's ancient light and air passages, at the same time direct-
ing the suliperna and notice' to be served ferthWith but the
Court could not grant an injunction to restrain 'windows being
made which would look into another person's yard or premises, as
his Lordship knew from experience upon a question affecting pro-
perty of his owes.

COLIMAN-STREET CHURCH

BISHOP OF LONDON V. EDENDOROCICH, AND mutts..

His LOiDSIILP said; in this case, which cnme before the Court
upon two -anon—the one calling upon the Court to Eximpel true-
tees who had executed the presentation to Mr. Pratt, to execute

it; and the other having quite the contrary object ; he had to
ask for some further information. The first question was as'to
the validity_ of the Election by ballot; and, With respect to this
point, the deed under which the parish claimed was as old as
the year one thousand five hundred and eighty-six, or older, and the
Court's opinion upon that, deed clearly was, that it required the
interference of the one in appointing a clerk, except the feolTees in
trust of the property,; hut, whether front necessity, or from any
other cause, this had been deviated from, and the parish had in-
terfered in 'the elections for nearly- two
,years past, and therefore
it was now too late to pay any attention to the original true con-.
struction of the clued. At the last election, an alphabetical list
had been made of the tuniies of the voterS, and the Court wished
to know if it appeared from that list wboihe voters,.after they
bad voted, had
,voted for.
Counsel informed, the Court that it was impossible to say who
the voters bad voted for.
Mr. Scaaterr next observed, that sonic of the General Meet-
ings had been called " General Vestry Meetings," and others
" General Meetings of the ComMittees ;" and he wished to know
why the Meetings had been called "Meetings of the Committees."
The Court was told• that it was impossible for any person -to
explain the terra.
His LORDSHIP said, the result was, whether this had been or
bad not been a-good election ? And to enchre the Court to decide
this question, he wished to know whether there were any passages
in the answers of the trustees who bad refused to execute the pre-
sentation important to he pointed out.
A great deal of discussion on both sides took plaCe at the bar,
which ended in

His Loansure's calling for the bills and answers, which he
said he would look carefully into, and finally dispose of. Thus
fir lie was prepared to .declare his opinion to be, that if there had
not been a distinct agreement entered into by all parties, before
the election was made, binding all parties to the result of the
election, conducted as it had been, the Court could not declare
the trustees bound by what had taken place, and therefore order
them to execute the presentation.
Counsel stated. that there was unwritten agreement to this effect ;
the utmost to which this could be carried was, to infer that all
parties had agreed to the election, conducted as it was, from the
circumstance of their not having objected to it at the time of the
election.

Mr. ll.s.ux appeared for the parish, and only hoped the Court
would not leave his clients exposed to all the feuds to which they
had been exposed before the election was made, and which would
be the result of a declaration that the late election VMS void.
Mr. Suonzw contended the Court could do no otherwise than
declare the election void. _ _

His Loot:mum was quite ready to say, that if the parish would
take his advice, they neverwould elect a clerk again by ballot, or
in any way in which the trustees could not say for whom the
voters voted, because if this Court were to execute a trust, it was
utterly impossible for it to do so, unle►s it knew for whom the
different persons voted.