The Sun.
London, England, 1826-08-08 00:00:00

NOVEL APPLICATION.

11.1 THE MATTER OY JAMES RAT.
Mr. Hart stated, that he was instructed in this matter
to make an application on the part of the senior Commis-
sioner, praying that his Lordship would be pleased to sus-
pend the insertion of the adjudication of Mr. Ray, as a
bankrupt, in to-night's Gazette. The application was
made on a letter written by that gentleman, which stated,
that after the adjudication had been made, he began to
doubt whether the petitioning creditor's debt was a debt
that could support the commission, and therefore he
wished the advertisement to be suspended until he had
given the subject a better consideration.
His Lordship—Where does this come from ?
Mr. HART..It came from Lancashire. The senior Commis-
sioner's name was Thomas James Hall, the second a Mr. Barclay,
and the third an attorney, called Antrobus. The petitioning cre-
ditor was an attorney at Manchester, and the doubt arose upon
the nature of his debt, under circumstances that the Learned
Counsel did not think at present discreet to state, because then
he should be discussing the merits of the debt behind the back of
the creditor.
His LORDSHIP inquired if this statement was verified in any
way.
Mr. HART said no, but he was quite sure of the authenticity
of the letter, from the hands out of whom it had come to him...-.
Messrs. Adlington, Gregory, and Falconer, had this morning
received it from a gentleman at Liverpool.
His LORDSHIP-..-It was a very singular application. The Court
never knew such an application being made to it before ; and yet
there was a great deal of consideration due to not having a man
published as a bankrupt, if the Commisaioners who had adjudicated
him to be a bankrupt thought they could not abide by their find-
ing. It appeared to be right that the publication should be sus-
pended,and yet the Court hardly knew how to do it. Certainly
was no precedent for it.
here

Mr. HART hoped the Court would suspend it. Most unjust
and injurious consequences might be the result of publication to-day.
His LORDSHIP wished to know how long the suspension was
asked for ?
Mr. Haar had no doubt that there would be a further commu-
nication hexe by to-morrow.
His Loansuir theu thought as it would only be till Friday, he
might venture to stay the advertisement.
DE BEAUVOIR V. RHODES.

the bar to have an opportunity to speak
it was desired at, .
ht.
His LORDSHIP understood, that when this case was last men-
tioned,Mr. riIiALD WAS
to the. question of allegeningig
Counsel for the defendant; but he
nes judgment. What had been called
Ipoint to have been finally discussed, and
that certainly
i t only understood
was a mere excavation for a wall.
on the other side a gravel pit,
Mr. Hoaxes, contra, had no instructions.
it for granted then, that it only
yildewairstetocoldththele:Co Court's
His Loansnir would now take
stood for judgment, and ha would dispose of it to-morrow.
MECHANICS' MAGAZINE.
Mr. HAALD stated that he bad to make an application to the
Court, to restrain the publication of a weekly
Was in the shape of an appeal motion, bad dismissed.--
made to the Viee-Chancellor, which his Honour
term t the bearing of the
The Learoed Counsel was sorry to in— - - think his Too-
the applicationy having been
cause, and lunatic petitions, but he really didnot
l'tion was a weekly
tion would bike a very long time.
one, and tlaerefore not so injurious ASWTohUeidpbBbVieellbee
ter with the
daily one ; but it being a publication running centin--cliente that
appellants', it was of considerable importance tfii-1.1111 printers/
n if it had been a
that damage should not be allowed to go on ; publishers, printers,
for
and other persona Interested, bad been in attendance in Court0 .
my
several days, in expectation of 'hearing the motion made
;'nder
one Counsel on a aide Were to address the court in it, and n
these circumstances,
to hear it. Mr. Heald felt it his duty to ask the Court
His LORDSHIP considered it a motion for an injunction to stay
waste, with respect to publications, and therefore he would bear
it now, or whenever the Learned Gentleman phased to addresi
him upon it.
Mr. }lra Lb then got it to be understood, that lie should make
the motion at the sitting of the Court to-nuirro

POWELL V. AWO typinnic
Mr. Haar appeared forSONNETT the defendants in this case, and Mr.
Roux' for the plaintiff. The defendants brought an action at
lavr against the plaintiff, upon which they recovered a verdict for

g4,000t.; the plaintiff then filed his bill, stating his readiness to
pay the money, upon the Court's indemnifying him from the de-
mands of any other person than those to whom he might be ordered
to pay the money in respect of it. He was willing to pay the money
in to Court, until it was clearly decided to whom the stun should
lie paid, upon this Court's restraining proceedings upon the ver-
dict. His Honour the Vice-Chancellor took hint at his word, and
granted the injunction upon the money being brought into Court,
which was accordingly done. The parties had been before the
Master, upon an inquiry to whom the money was due ? Mr.
Hart stated, that three defendants had entered an appearance, and
that he appeared for the whole five, consenting that the money
should be paid to those three, and therefore he hoped the Court
would now order the money to be unlocked, and paid to those
three Spanish gentlemen.
Mr. Honsut resisted the payment of the money out of Court.
Two of the defendants had not entered an appearance on the record,
and yet they asked to have all the benefit of having entered
it, which they- refused to do, and thereby would not give the
plaintiff the benefit to which he was entitled, namely, the benefit
of the rule, that every defendant should enter an appearance be-
fore he could be heard in this Court. They had gone into the
Master's office and made statements as if they had appeared, upon
which statements the Master had made his report, and to which,
upon the ground stated, exceptions were taken.
His LORDSUIP desired to see the bill and papers, which he
would read, and dispose of to-morrow, if possible.

OPERA HOUSE
sauna v. TATLOL
This case underwent some discussion again this morning, as it
did yesterday, and
His Loansurr expressed some dissatisfaction at the manner in
which it had been brought on. The intention of the Court
had been stated at the bar, in making orders on former occa-
sions, to have been just directly opposed to what another
side of the bar had stated it to hare been ; and again,
that a dozen orders had been made in the cause which
would themselves show at once what the mind of the. Court
was, when those orders were made, bnt that not one of those do-
cuments were in Court. The Court would not hear a word more
in the cause, until the papers necessary to be seen,
were produced.
Whatever others might do, he should let slip every thing that
passed at the bar, without documents to support it, just as if
nothing had been said.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT—(Titts Dia.)
FARQUHAR V. STARICEIA.
This was a petition on behalf of the plaintiffs, who are bankers,
praying that the Court might order, that legal and equitable mort-
gages which they had on premises belonging to the defendants,who
are now bankrupts, should have a preference to all other debts.—
The defendants were brewers, who carried on business in Pulte-
ney-street, and borrowed money at various times from 1823 until
February 1826, from the plaintiffs. At the latter period the sum
due amounted to 15,0001., as security for the payment of which, the
defendants gave a mortgage on their brewery, and also deposited se-
curities for leases of the White Lion and Duke of Argyle public-
houses ; the prayer of the petition was opposed on the grounds that the
assignment of the premises was made by way of a fraudulent pre-
ference, the defendants having been for some time previously in a
state of insolvency, to the knowledge of the petitioner who had
latterly bolstered them up by lending them money, in order to get
the securities in question, for what they had previously lent, made
available.

The Vicz-CHANCELLOR said, that this case had been repre-
sented in two ways by Counsel for the defendant, which was in-
consistent with each other,—one asserted that the petitioners were
aware of the insolvency of the brewers a long time before the bank-
ruptcy, and that they lent money in order to bold them up and
obtain securities for their debts; if such had been established it
would no doubt be a fraud, which the bankers could not avail
themselves of.

Another statement made by Counsel was, that their securities
were given by way of fraudulent preference by the bankrupts;
this was entirely inconsistent with the former statement, for
the latter implied a collusion between the parties, and the
former a repugnancy ; but it did not appear to him
that either was supported by the affidavits, or that any
facts had been established which called upon him to order
an inquiry elsewhere; he would take the affidavits home
to read, and if any difficulty should present itself to him
afterwards, he would call on Counsel for an explanation,
otherwise he would decide the case on the facts before him.
It was his opinion that the bankers had acted fairly all along,
had lent the money honestly, expecting that the brewers might
recover from their embarrassed state by reasonable relief. He
would decide on the petition after reading the affidavits.