The Sun.
London, England, 1826-07-12 00:00:00

PRACTICE IN LUNACY.

Mr. KOE begged to mention a matter in lunacy, in
which proceedings in the Master's Office were stayed,
for the want of the Court's opinion upon this point.
His LORDSHIP said, he had lately heard a vast
number of lunatic petitions in arrear, for the very pur-
pose of putting an end to a most inconvenient prac-
tice ; namely, one gentleman after. another rising up,
two or three times every week, to mention lunatic mat-
ters, which, from the pressure of other business, the
Court could not, at the moment, give sufficient atten-
tion to, and which also interrupted the regular busi-
ness of the day.
Mr. Kota: said, if the application could not now be
heard, all proceedings in the Master's Office mould be
stayed.

HiS LORDSHIP observed, that the procredinAs were
stayed in many other cases in consequence of these
interruptions.
_ _

Mr. KOE considered the difficulty merely to he,
whether the Master should he at liberty or not to
read certain affidavits that had been before the Court,
Mi. HART contra said, that that only could be de-
cided upon a petition, and he hoped the Court would
refuse the present application with costs.

His LORDSHIP desired the petition to be presented
on the next lunatic day. He would hot give the costs
of to-day. He was willing at any time to take any
thing to read, because then he could apply his own
time to what he did read, but lie certainly would not
allow those interruptions to go on as they bad done.
The Court proceeded on Appeals.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT....(Tujk DAy).
CHADDOCk 11. QIXZNObaUU.

His Honour, in giving judgment in this case, said th,t
it was a bill filed to enforce a contract entered into, re-
specting the sale of a house and premises, for which the
defendant had agreed to pay 100/.'a year for 10 or 16
years, and at the end of either of these periods he was to
pay 2;0004 and the rent of 1001. a year should cease.—
Some time after the parties came to a second agreement,
whereby it was stipulated that the defendant should
pay 20001., and have the premises assigned over to
him. The defendant accordingly took possession of the
premises which he has held ever since, but has not paid
the 2000/. The question now was, whether the.latter
c on-
tract was a continuation of the former; if so, the defend-
ant should pay 100/. a year ►until the paymentof the 2000/.
but if the second contract was a substitute for the former,
he should pay only the interest of the 2000/. us allowed
by this Court, which was 80/. a-year (being 4. per cent.).
Looking at all the circumstances of thecase, he thought the
second contract a new one, and the defendant was
not bound to pay more than 80/. a year since the 10th of
March, 1824.

TUE ATTORNEY GENERAL V. MARTZ.
The Vice-Chancellor, in alluding to this ease said, that
he thought yesterday with the Solicitor-General, that
a modus of 2d. a fleece for wool, could not be good, as he
did not imagine that a fleece of wool was worth ed. before
the time of legal memory ; but he had since fiaird a case
where a modus of 3d. a fleece was leld good. With re-
spect to the cider, he would direct an issue to try the le-
gality of the modus there set up.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

HATTON-GARDEN.--(rnis DAY.)

Charles Haycroji, a reputed thief, was charged
with stealing a bundle of linen from the house of
Edward Hicks Finch, Esq. No. 2, Upper Toling-
ton Terrace.

From the evidence of Mary Houghton, the house-
maid, it appeared, that about eight o'clock this morn-
ing the bundle, the property of her master, was safe in
the parlour, the window of which was open. She left
the room for a few moments, and on her return mimed
the bundle ; and at the same time observed throu,gh
prisoner., " stop thief 1" and the
the window a Man making his escape over the garden
the bundle, was secured.
laiefterarttihorouwt,ingandavicalrmi,ed
The prisoner denied the charge, and was fully com-
mitted.

Tuts DAY.) QUEEN-SQUARE•—(
A respectably dressed, but curious looking man, was
brought to this office, charged by James Warren, one
of the Bow-street patrole,
who deposed as follows i—
, th e . prisoner, who
" I was going off duty this morning, at four o'clock,
from Lambeth-walk when I met
asked me if I knew Sir Richard Birme ? I replied
that I did. lie rejoined, that he knew him to be an
infernal vagabond, and continued abusing Sii Richard.
After pushing me, lie shook his fist in my face, and I
took him into custody."
At the office the prisoner refused to give his name,
and behaved in the most strange manner.
The Magistrate expressed his conviction that he was
in a deranged state, and ordered him to be detained
till some enquiries were made.