The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-06 00:00:00

ell ANCER,Y..-(TH18 DAY.)
ROBERTS V. MADDOX.-JUDGMENT.
The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in this
teise, which was heard before this Lordship some considerable
vline since, upo an appeal motion from the decisio of the
Cu-Chancellorn of England refusing to dissolve ann injunc-
iam
• His Lordship was of opinion that the Court below had
Ea correct conclusion, and ordered the judgment to be

14. MILLER v. CRAIG.
fluthet arguments in this part-heard case were re-
ted to. day, and occupied Lis Lordship until the rising of
4.4 e Court, shortly before two o'clock.
....I% Lordship rose at this early hour for the purpose of at-
'ding a Cabinet Council.

VICE-CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
gls Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England took pleas
td demurrers to-day.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir KNIGHT BRUCE.)
IN TIIR MATTER OF PHILLIPS' CHARITY.
eaSe epie before the Court upon a petition under Sir
"Zuel Romilly's Act, presented by. James Newman. the
h2tinlaster of a charity school, founded by a gentleman
ition was,
red Phillips, for the education of the poor at Sutton St.
arY, Long Sutton, in Lincolnshire, and the object of the
that the petitioner might be restored to his
pee, and that the trustees, who had, as he contended,
ngfullv ejected him, might be removed.
rAIL J. Russell and Mr. G. L. Russell appeared on behalf
i the Petitioner ; and Mr. Cooper, Mr. Swainston, and Mr.
.4no yu were Counsel for the trustees and the other partihs
Opposed the petition.
'4 the affidavits on both sides contain serious charges, and
!!the case appears likely to occupy several days, we. decline
iteriug into the facts and "t charges at greater length until
e Court shall have given its judgment.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
HARDCASTLE V. WALKER.
/pi; aPPeared by the statement of Counsel, that this was an
et,."°oticeo replevin, tried at the last York Assizes before .
;Creswell, and verdict had for the plaintiff. ApMpli
di,ll was now made fora rule to show cause why the ver-
e4 should not be set aside and a new trial granted, on the
air°, un.ds of rejection of admissible evidence, and also of mis-
rtjection to the jury. The defendants were trustees under a
ararriage settlement for the plaintiff. The question that
Aft
was one of non-tenure. Some houses had been built
h certain property belonging to plaintiff's wife and son.
'o'f';!r her marriage the husband and wife went to live in one
,:ttiose houses, but they separated soon after, and defendant
Pat distress on the house for the rent. The question was,
Pcl a document which had been signed by the wife, autho-
j_4fig the defendant to demand the rent, be deemed st.ffi-
int authority—Rule refused.
1)43E ON THE DEMISE OF RENTON, V. INNOCENT.
btro, 3,,Ckie had been tried at the last Nottingham assizes,
`e defends air. Justice Manic, when a verdict was had for the
nt. An application was made for a new trial, on the
Lilnd that one of the defendants was the foreman of the
alld two others of the defendants were in the jury-
...lt' u le
t " remai ed there n alter they had been ordered to leave.
d o show cause granted.
COMMON PLEAS-(THIS DAY.)

(Sittings in Banco.)

TINS BARROW V. JUPP.
was a motion for a rule to show cause why there
that t
°44111 t be a new trial of the above cause, on the ground
i °
the the
verdict, which was for the defendant, was against
Mr ice.
the ,„,.• Sergeant BYLES stated the nature of the evidence in
diesZe, which was tried before the Under-Sheriff of Mid-
It.appeared that the plaintiff was a coal owner at
and the defendant a coal dealer, owning a wharf at
.the Luagton, and keeping a canal barge, which he used for
sa el?,urPosesof his.trade, employing a man named Marlowe
Ivh,"Ptain- The agent of the plaintiff, a man named
tokm Was the principal witness on the part of the plaintiff;
to the course of May last, a boat load of coals to Mar-
x."4o, th
e Captain of the defendant's boat, it being agreed that
tike
"we, on the part of his employer, should pay the plain-
agant in London. -
ote,," Lonn CHIEF JUSTICE asked what proof had been
toitiZl that the defendant authorised the purchase of the
Mr,
.Ritt su, trgeallt BYLES read a part of the evidence of the
13
the
Bailey, from which it appeared that the defendant
'for4 uttn, "I have given Marlowe the money to pay you
which e°al; and I wish it to be settled immediately,' to
, he replied that " according to the agreement it must
IPII:41 to Mr. Barrow's agent in London."
e
inin,,,,fagent, a person of the name of Moore, had been ex-
Psyn,-2,and had proved that he made several applications for
that—"‘ to Marlowe and to Jupp, :the latter always saying
Tikott° would settle it as soon as he got the money from
The
Mr. °RD CHIEF JUSTICE—Is that Marlowe ?
b Sergeant BYLES—It is not very clear who Timothy
4,4.4, I should 'not think it was Marlowe, seeing that his
Itow` is Anthony:--(A laugh.) It might be a contraction,
ki.e.ver•---(A laugh from Mr. Justice Erle.) Mr. Sergeant
tit:- Proceeded to say, that on the part of the defendant the
kearitner esa was Marlowe, who said that he did not re-
fo writing the agreement. Upon this case the jury
ziii„ a verdict for the defendant, which he (Mr. Byln) sub-
°d Was clearly against the evidence.
grirer a consultation of less than a minute, the Court
ated the rule.
.13A,

NKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.) .
, Cos .
alone l's• '--411 application was made to the Learned Commis-
-11 In the case of Jones, who was a farmer in Bucking-
e.
4'llo official said that the fiat was issued on the
_Petiton of the bankruptassignee,and there were not sufficient assets
Meet the expenses of working the fiat. In other cases,
Wider he
circumstances, the costs of the official assignee
ere rot
litoffixetrbheitt.hasecared, then the messenger, and then the solicitor
o
e hat
In the present instance the trade assignee had
In
a little more than, half the amount of
. The messenger said that his bill amounted to 7/. 19s.
The
his actual costs out of pocket Zl. 95., and he had. been
offered 4/
he . -, and unless he got paid out of the money in hand.
1. LIMBO remedy unless the bankrupt would be enabled after
rgot hie certificate.
id he ought to be made
lietllle. Learned CommissioNan
tourepy-
t„ and no doubt, when an angtendme.
af,llelle the conflicting clauses, these c -.,4e.....0
.„"Li n. asnteawawsoumldadeocc
0,44 messenger said they
.had their authority direct from
Nu,.and a
-e Coe& d red not disobey; they had no party to
Ti 7 a demand on. .
''') COMMISSIONER said—Till tho law is altered the officers
kivit '
be ' heprotected as far as possible, and the messenger must
?aid ill full.
8044 another case, before Mr. Commissioner Shepherd, an in-
lie,..ent came up for his adjourned final order. The. case had
A question
10.0,"!• adjourned with an order to pay
.t
ki,ii as to which party was to pay the costs of. taxation,tor
aticl,,.ti?e costs had not been paid, and the opposing creditor
which 41.13 solicitor lad had notice of the present application,
. costes.' they now opposed on the ground that the previous
poth"— not been paid.
he bi,,,th. e insolvent it was urged that the tender ought to
1'h,4113g.
Th., "Posing creditor said there were no assets.
the " idearned COMMISSIONER said the insolvent. must pay
tett.e4sts under the order, the casts of taxation, and the
' Of the day to the opposing creditor.
1•1-c,
''' • -4.ItIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCBELL).
lii BRADLEY V. ASHFORD.
tet!ePaelatiinonti:asin this action is a widow, and until lately kept
k:811°P in Warwick-street, Golden-square.
brought to recover the sum of 41.45. Bdt.hfoart
14 Il'r lt" 53. for mo:,ez lent. The defendant pleaded
was
ill the not indebted. .it, was proved that the defendanto an
Lein: habit of frequenting' the house for three months, and
)47, st,erved with beer, and it r7as put down to him in
11.8 '1143°01-1 having addressed the jury for the defendant,
Vent. JurY consulted for nearly ten minutes, andthen gave a
ict for the full amount.
l.
,Kagi it
1441181ti:itia
_ .............„ _ ..1'
EN WELL.—(THIS DAY.)
' ' number of well• dressedyouths were brought before the
llilielt fireworks ler*. wled faeßoman candles, crackers, blue
Oiss4'4ice, and were of coursee discharged in honour of the
kr ery of
tcln tile Gun owaer Plot.
t .lee-rtll_,,Eec.ensurePd the practice, and fined those who bad
-""„ilitrgedc" a up all night 55., and those who had were
„ ..,e, .1) •
l'ue GE.,,,,, limeda Crowther, was charged with holding up
il 'lli4ei°f y Fawk at bonfire.
ier:lre; tlive.t4Zethoef polipe-constables G 100 and 110 went to
u night the vagabonds of Clerken-
'00,4t, uP a bonderevlethse middle of Turnmill•street, com-f
i7o ringleader seval trusses in
of straw. The prisoner was onee
e;:' Wa, anclh held up a Guy in the midst of the flames.
'Ffq 4 taken int e d net when arrested k4Ol and
vic,,Qll
ere
omeer
vro
heUiito a
had him in charge, 110 G, with great
the b:e'. Welsh 100 G, after much difficulty, extinguished
II lThre• '
b,'„..prisoner
rau,(14,1,)g the „„Whasi,
the midst StreetB (1
infdefantltdoaf fine, committed for five days.
y cm' wds of vagabonds pa-
wn those't of n !
whole
yesterday
werell and Islington, with Guys in
ahem. Ther policeen seize upon poor basket-women
I,l,velil
,„„, haiserables (who are striving to eke out a scanty
r-,istru".`i in the streets by honest means) on the charge of
,e,,tinr 4,
(i , '.• the
streets whilst such idlers as the above, whose
fete es toe- Cher' a
le ran' corms and sectarian feeling, are suf-
Pa3l unmosted.
~,tO/`-'7,13R0.-STREET—(THIS DAY).
-°voatit '."l-80a
..Al , a fashionably-dressed, very powerfully
91111 man was charged with assaulting police-con•
~,yhe e„°. 39 of theC division, in the execution of his,duty.
ihAs 4,01 q, Plainaut stated, that about half-past three o clock
11(41 ru'ng the defendant along Regent-street, " play-
,,siti 110 M"
itii., (118tItrk,, i
slV.illeSS.teoamperevent,ithe inhabitants from
\ti7iettct
~,, m,u, clewed him to pass on quietly, but herc- buretsit made use of abusive language of a very gross sort.
told him he WWI no gentleman, on which he struck
Afte
441,'Istse, r Sorae further angry words, witness, with the
Alt iiet°La brother constable, took him into custody.
4°c "fc—Was the defendant drunk?
r.
It ble--lie appeared to be rather fresh.
''otisr, Annwick—Did the blow hurt you?
111
,ahle---Crtainly o
i4ttliterfendant said henlitad. previously been annoyed and
ill.4,l.:etye.lY:';:irilinbgt:eicaxl:n°lllg ppllinyaingt, atnad tohnisa
kreonstable insulted a byn ay' ngeh was no gentleman.
Incoorrnnoipneganirwlh'easn
te,, I°R a horn
It himwas asaielrni unseasonablee hour for
~,,.3t4bie ? along the streets. Why did you strike the
asduefeod a f
- k u---Because he used insulting language to me,
'at''uleflrtrilig his name was Byron (such is the fact) he
ket, / 415 such a queer-looking chap for a descendant of
IvAtr.
„Aelooldn't help striking him.
t k"--joi twteX-1 shall impose a fine on you of 40s. or
il`:fillle days' imprisonment.
le was immediately paid.
A —"N AINT7I'..--,------c---f3 --------- BRIGHTON RAIL-
A WAy n
k - aPecial COMPANY.—(THIS DAY.)
for h was general meeting of the Proprietors of this Corn-
iie itiir'._esl_cl hi_s inoi.ming at the London
.Bridge terminus,
tareuslio3, P'ss of consulenng and determg upon the ex-
-941h e' arnalgtmating the London and Croydon Railway'
s ku)' witl
14, 4 in, refer this Company, and of adopting such rnea-
t:orble ;ence thereto as 'the meeting should deem ad-
theysise olinad also for the purpose of anthorising the Directors
are 111°rtgage or bond such sum or sums of money as
the 8r; to borrow under and by virtue of
.ilztief,;3 bol.l. and Chichester, and Brighton, Lewes, and
NZ. of Zil,vay Acts in respect of the consolidated eighty:
Nr, 1,41 meeti"mPany, authorised to be issued at a special
14 tc'tadeir, N'• helot on the 9th day of August in 1844.
q,,,,!e cita,..q tiill, Chairman of the Board of Directors, was
RA,sit 41,j,, and in opening the business of the meeting, he
ott'atioiC In importance and expediency of an amal-
kettlita.treul t a the early part of the present year
4e tl°ll P the early
to bring about an amal-
))l,o4(.22,etween the two Companies, but the
wvuiPanY were too eaorbitant in their demands, and