The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-12 00:00:00

12 1845.

'Pickering Railway--Belfast and Ballymena Railway—Lan-
; caSter rnd earlislitie Railway—Kendal and Windermere
Railway—Chestef anci Rfrkeirtreati Fit:away Ettensioft:- --
And the following Bills.wefe pfiteliPitf bn February 10
Blackburn, Burnley, Accrington, and Cobile Klttetrsion
railwax—Manchester South Junction and Altrinchatti
way—EddLtStsfl4-1, arid Manchester Railway and Canal—
Great Grimsby add tidtiPaid Jirnotion Railway—Clydesdale
Junction Railway.
NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE' lift/ (MICE,
(f Ott Grimsby and Sheffield Junction Ritilwily.w-totaz,
tilittee oft Pet,itiot, Friday, Feb. 21.
Huddersfield afld Mtftteitester Railway and Canal—Com-
mittee on Petition, Friday, Feb. 21,
Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway—Com•
mitte , on Petition, Tuesday, Feb. 25. _

Glasgow Junction RailAY—Committee on Petition, Tues-
day, Feb. 913.
Manchester, South Junction, and Altrincham Railway—
Committee on Petition, Friday, Feb. 21.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY. Feb. 11.
The Lord Chancellor sat in Lincoln's-Inn Hall to-day
shortly after ten o'clock.
IN RE CLARK.--BANKRUPT PETITION.
trpcn this matter being called on, it was ordered to stand
over to the nest petition day, in consequence of the absence
of Mr. M. D. Hill, whit leas engaged in the Court et Queen's
Bench in the case of the Baron de Bode.
EXPARTE VAN SANDAU ItE MARTIN.—BANKRUPT PETITION.,
This case stood on the paper to-day for further directions,
the Court of Queen's Bench having decided in favour of the
demurrer put in by. Mr. Van Sandau to the plea sled by
Messrs. Turner and Henchman.
Mr. SWAXSTON, on the case being called on, asked that it
rtiight stand over for a few days, in consequence of the illness
of Mr. K. rather,
Mr. BsosnAWE and Mr. BOLT, for Mr. Van Sandau, sub-
mitted that the postponement of the case would be highly
injurious to their clients.
After same further discussion, the case was ordered peremp-
torily to stand for hearing on Friday next.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in the course of the discussion,
intimated to Mr. Swanston that one of the points he would
have to consider and argue was, the power of the Court of
Review to commit.

TRH MARQUIS OF HERTFORD V. LORD LOWTHER.

The Co in was occupied the remainder of the morning with
the further arguments in this part-heard case.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Feb. 11.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
WILSON V, WILEION.—A7DGIIENT.

His Hosouu gave judgment to-day in this case, which
was argued befbre him a short time since for seven days, and
upon which occasion we gave a statement of the facts. His
Honour, after going through the case at considerable length,
directed on the original bill a reference to the Master to
settle an agreement according to the articles of agree-
ment that had been drawn up between the parties,
giving the plaintiff his costs in the original suit
up to the hearing. The Court also ordered the cross-bill to
be dismissed with costs, on the ground that although it al-
leged fraud none had been proved. The relief prayed by the
original bill was granted, and cross-bill dismissed with costs.
The original bill was filed by Mrs. Wilson for the specific per-
formance of articles of separation which had been agreed to
between herself and her husband, the defendant. The de-
fendant filed a cross• bill, stating that the agreement was
obtained by fraud and misrepresentation. The hear
ing of the original bill was objected to on the ground
that the Court had no jurisdiction. His Honour, however,
decided that it had, and that it was not against public policy,
or the public weal, that it should have such jurisdiction. The
Court, therefore, decreed the specific performance of the arti-
cles, and made the orders we have already stated.
His Hosouu gave judgment in two or three other cases,
some of which involved points of practice, but none calling
for any particular report.

PEARCE V. BROOKS.

The Court then proceeded to hear the further arguments
in these part-heard, cases, which came before the Court pre-
vious to the recess, upon no less than five causes. The argu-
ments appear likely to occupy some days.
(Before Sir J. K. Buuct.)
WYNN V. HEAVENGIJAM.
The question in this case related to certain ink lines, which
were drawn by way of obliteration, or attempt at obliteration,
across the name of three parties mentioned in a will. The
dispute related to a freehold estate, and the question was,
whether these ink lines were made before the testatrix ex-
ecuted her will, or if they were drawn afterwards ; whether
they were made, in the language of the statute of frauds, by
the testatrix herself, in her presence, or by her direction and
consent. With regard to the personal estate, the Ecclesi-
astical Court had decided that the names were not erased or
obliterated.

His HONOUR, after going minutely into the evidence, said,
from all the evidence before him, he was bound to come to a
decision consentaneous to that given by the Ecclesiastical
Court.