The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-11 00:00:00

RILLWAY

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
The Court heard motions in the early part of the
morning. These motions were mere motions of course,
and did not occupy the Court half an hour.
The Court afterwards proceeded to take the cases in
the new trial paper.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
Nothing of the least public interest came before the
Court this day. The Court rose at an early hour.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY

FISHMONGERS COMPANY V. ROBERTSON AND OTHERS.
This was an action upon an argument brought by the
Fishmongers Company of London v. the seven defendants,
for breach of contract, in respect to the draining of cer-
tain lands belonging to the Company, and adjoining
Lough Foyle, in the North of Ireland. The damages
were laid at 1,0001., but the jury found for the de-
fendants.

Last term a conditional rule for a new trial, and to
enter the verdict for the. plaintiffs, was obtained upon
points reserved. _ _

On Saturday the Court was occupied the greater part
of the day in hearing Mr. Sergeant Taifourd, Mr. Ser-
geant Byles, and Mr. Hindwarsh, who showed cause
against the rule.

-This day Mr. Sergeant MURPHY followed on the same
side, and Mr. Charnock replied at great length in sup •
pot t of the rule.

Their Lord3hips took time to consider judgment.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN.)
IN RE WILLIAM CHIFNEY.
The insolvent, who is so well known to the sporting
world as a successful jockey, this day came up for his
interim order, but was opposed by an attorney's clerk,
on behalf of the detaining creditor, a Mr. Bradshaw.
His Hosoux objected that he could not hear any per-
son saving only counsel, the solicitor in person, or the
detaining creditors, and the insolvent was, therefore,
allowed to take his interim order.
(Before Mr. Commissioner PANE.)
IN THE MATTER Or THE REV. MR. NEWLAND.
In this case, which has already appeared in The Sun,
his HONOUR said, that as he had before observed this
was a most lamentable case, and he greatly wished that
the parties would settle the matter, by each paying 'salt
of the sum of 4731., the damages and costs of the action
against the insolvent for trespass. lie trusted that both
parties would meet in the spirit of conciliation, as too
much angry feeling had been already exhibited on both
sides, and he (the Learned Commissioner) should ad-
journ his decision until Thursday next, but he hoped
that in the meantime their measures would be of that
character which would render it unnecessary for them to
come again before him.

IN RE TRH REV.— Npumr,/,.
The insolvent applied for his interim order, and was
opposed by a Mr. Buchanan, a solicitor, and creditor.
Mr. STURGEON, who appeared for the insolvent, con-
tended that Mr. Buchanan was not a creditor, inasmuch
as his dk-bt had been settled by the Sheriff of Tipperary,
under the following circumstances :—Mr. Buchanan had
in 1840 commenced an action against the insolvent upon
three bills of exchange, for an amount of 1891. 12s. 9d.
It went to trial, and the plaintiff recovered for that
amount, and 341. 6s. of costs. The defendant was after-
wards taken in execution, but ultimately allowed out of
custody.
Mr. Buchanan stated similar facts, but added that the
defendant had escaped from the custody of the sheriff's
officer ; that a bill of indictment was afterwards pre-
ferred against him, and he was found guilty of a riot and
assault in escaping as he had done. He had been paid
the principal of his debt by the sheriff, but considered
himself there as trustee for that official.
Mr. STURGEON requested to see his authority.
Mr. Buchanan produced a copy of a letter.
His HONOUR'S impression was that Mr. Buchanan's
claim was discharged, but he would not deal finally
with the case, under the very extraordinary circum-
stances, until he had taken time It consider.
Mr. STURGEON applied for protection to the insolvent,
as Mr. Buchanan had introduced a policeman to that
Court, who was instructed t t take his client into cus-
tody as soon as he would have left the premises.
The required protection
i was granted, and to ques-
tions from his Honour the insolvent said that he was a
clergyman of the Church of England, and had property
in Tipperary to the annual rental of 6001., but that there
was a mortgage and other claims to the amount of 6,0001.
upon it.
The further hearing of the case was deferred to the
20th of _December.

NSOLVENT COURT--(THIS DAY.

IN RE THOMAS BRAND WHITLEY.
The insolvent in this matter had been the proprietor
of the Black Boy Hotel and Tavern, Sevenoaks, Kent, and
the amount of his debts and liabilities was about 2,0001.
His petition was opposed by Mr. Cooke, on behalf of
Messrs. Lemonheart and Sons, wine.merchants. He
was supported by Mr. Woodruffe.
He was examined at great length with respect to the
disposal of a sum of money of which he became pos-
sessed by a legacy from his aunt, when he stated that
he paid away a large portion of it to Earl Stanhope and
others, to whom he was indebted. He paid some of it to
the opposing creditors. A quantity of furniture belong.
ing to his father had been removed from his (the in-
solvent's) premises at Sevenoaks previous to an execu-
tion being put in.
Mr. Commissioner PoLLocx ordered the case to stand
adjourned to Thursday, the 21st instant, in order that
vouchers and other evidence might be produced with
respect to the alleged payments, and also concerning the
• disposal of the property.
IN RE JAMES CLIFFORD.
This insolvent's discharge was opposed by Mr. Nicholls,
on the ground of having fraudulently made away with a
large amount of property, consisting of furniture, horses,
carriages, &c.
It appeared from the evidence of one of the officers of
the Sheriff of Middlesex that, upon going to levy an ex-
ecution upon the insolvent's premises, in Great Maryle-
bone, all the rooms were locked, and a large and fero-
cious dog tied close to the stable door, so as to render it
impossible for any one to enter. He was told that all
the property was claimed under a bill of sale, executed
in favour of the insolvent's brother, and he was threatened
with personal violence if he did not immediately leave
the house.
A proposal was made, on the part of the insolvent, by
his brother, who consented to give up a certain portion of
the property, to which he was entitled under the bill of
sale, for the benefit of the creditors.
The COURT consented to lot the case stand over until
to-morrow, to try if such an arrangement could be ef-
fected.
During the sitting of the Court this morning petitions
of Robert Harris, James Law, William Gamma!' Clark,
Henry Richard Wells, Frederick Hopkins, and James
Nich.tlson, were heard, and the insolvents ordered to be
discharged forthwith.

The Queen and Prince Albert, attended by the
royal suite, arrived at the Paddington station of the
Great 'Western Railway, by a special train, at a
quarter before one o'clock this afternoon, and imme-
diately proceeded, in one of the royal carriages and
four, to Buckingham Palace.

It is stated that Earl de Grey has purchased the
Duke of Devonshire's Burton Moor estate, near Ripon.

Verstales,R.B .. 402 50 7.402 50 .. 402 50 .. 402 50
L.B ..•••• •• 287 50 28T 280 25 .. 287 50
Rouen, ex . 1013 75 —lOlO ..1013 75
Rouen to Han—
Orlelas .
Strasburg to 8ak.......... 277_50 .. 277 50 .. 276 25 . 277 00
Avignon to 3iarselllos • • 835 25 837 60 .. £36 25 .. 837 50

RAILWAYS FOR THE ACCOUNT, L,. ov. 15.
Versailles, 4,5 .. 405 .. 405 .. 4n5
•• •• •• 285 .• 287 50 .. 285 .• 287 50
nouer, ex di, ........••••••1011 25 ..1016 25 ..1011 25 ..1015
Rouen to Havre.• •• 780 782 50 . 780 •• 781 25
Orleans .........—••••••••1017 50 .•1018 75 ..1016 25 ..1017 50

Strasburg to 8a1e.... •• .• •• 277 50 .. 277 50 .. 277 50 .. 277 50
Avignon to Marseille3•• •• •• 837 5G .. 838 75 .. 835 .. 837 50

THIS DAY'S NEWS,

DIATTBEW V. BRISE.
The further arguments in this case occupied the Court
the whole morning. The case has already occupied
two days.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND.)
lIIIXTABLE V. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
The arguments in this part-heard case, which came
before the Court upon demurrer, occupied the Court the
whole morning. _

(Before Sir J. WlcriAm.)
JUDGMENT—IWO/IEOOR V. TOPHAN.
This case was argued at considerable length in the
months of June and July last, and his Honour gave
judgment in it this day. Mrs. Topham, one of the
parties, was the widow, and claimed to be the universal
devisee under the will of the late Richard Wrightson, of
Kockerten, in the county of Durham, and Mrs. M•Gregor
was the sister and heir-at-law of the testator. By order
of the Court an issue devisavit vel non had been directed
to be tried, relative to the alleged will under which Mrs.
Topham claimed. Under this order a trial took place at
the last spring assizes at Durham, the hearing of the
case lasting three days. The jury found their verdict
for the alleged devisee. In June last a motion was made
for a new trial, and an application was also made to have
the venue of such trial changed. It was on the motion
so made that the lengthened argument above mentioned
took place, and on it judgment was now given.
His HONOUR was of "pinion, that with respect to the
change of the venue there was no ground to establish its
necessity or expediency. He could not attach any
weight to the allegation by which this part of the rno-
tion was supported, viz , that an important witness in
the case (Mr. Newburn) had, from his character and
position, a great local influence in the vicinity of which
the trial was to take place. As to the other point, the
motion for a new trial, the point in dispute was this,
whether the docunint purporting to be the will of
Richard Wrightson was really his will or not. As to this
fact, the evidence of Mr. Newburn, the solicitor who drew
up the will, was positive, that it was the testament of Mr.
Wrightson, under which Mrs. Topham claimed. The
evidence of the two servants, George and Jane Hind,
and of the other witnesses on the trial, was not of such
a nature as to outweigh that of Mr. Newburn; and lie
could not think, therefore, the investigation of truth, or
the ends of justice, would be promoted by granting the
application for a new trial. His Honour went through
the evidence at great length, commenting upon it as he
proceeded, and said that, finding Mr. Newburn's eci
denee confirmed in every material particular, he must
refuse the motion. He would make no order with respect
to costs.