The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-09 00:00:00

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

A. Wheatcroft, D. Wheatcroft, and A. Wheatcroft, stone
quarriers, Heage, Derbyshire —A. and D. Wheatcroft,
wharfingers, Buckland Hollow, Derbyshire—R. Brown and T.
Wilson, ship brokers, Monk Wearmouth Shore, Durham—D.
Holsgrove and J. Thompson, anchor manufacturers, Bishop
Wearmouth, Durham—J. and H. Lainson, linen drapers,
Deptford, Kent—J. Lainson, H. Lainson, and D. Aldred,
linen drapers, Rotherhithe—J. and W. K. Shaw, manufac-
turers, Dale, Yorkshire—W. M'Crecken and B. Broadbent,
builders, Leicester—J. W. Nuttall and H. Holden, manufac-
turers of patent straps, Belper, Derbyshire—J. Wills and E.
Stait, butchers, South-street, Manchester-square—R. and G.
Whiteley, hat manufacturers, Halifax, Yorkshire—W. Jackson,
S. S. Jackson, J. Jackson, and E. Jackson, tobacco manufac-
turers, Leeds (so far as regards J. Jackson)—J. Phillips and
J. Harries, drapers, Shrewsbury—W. Holden and J. Hobday,
muslin manufacturers, Chorley, Lancashire—C. E. and J. M.
Frames, grocers, Gosport—W. R. Waghorn and R. Brown,
brick makers, Ewell, Surrey—A. and A. Kerslake, milliners,
Leamington Priors, Warwickshire—T. Walters and S. W.
Moseley, cabinet makers, Neath, Glamorganshire—J. Turner
and Co., drapers, Oakham, Rutlandshire—J. Morgan and W.
Savage, lacemen, Oxford-street—M. H. M'Laine and G.
Louth, frame makers, Tottenham-court-road—R. Davies and
C. Cotgreave, law stationers., Chester—J. Dixon, W. F.
Dixon, J. W. Dixon, W. Fawcett, and H. I. Dixon, mer-
chants, Sheffield (so far as regards J. Dixon).
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS.

DANIEL CAMPBELL, spirit dealer, Glasgow, Feb. 11
and March 11, at two, at the Oak Tavern, Glasgow.
WILLIAM THOMSON, baker, Edinburgh, Feb. 11 and
March 4, at one, at the Old Signet Hall. Edinburgh.
JAMES MURDO, grain merchant, Coylton, Feb. 11,
and March 4, at one, at the Black Bull Inn, Ayr.
DUGALD SINCLAIR, hotel keeper, Glasgow, Feb. 11
and March 4, at twelve, at the Argyle Hotel, Glasgow.
ROBERT LIZ ARS and CO., glass manufacturers, Lin-
lithgow, Feb. 14 and March 7, at twelve, at the Red Lion Inn,

WILLIAM WYLIE, North Leckaway, Forfarshire, Feb.
14 and March 14, at twelve, at the Chambers of Shield and
Forrest, Kirriemuir.

JOHN YOUNG, bootmaker, Edinburgh, Feb. 15 and
March 8, at twelve, at Ferguson's Ship Tavern, Edinburgh.
LLOYD and DOUGLAS, merchants, Leith, Feb. 16 and
March 9, at two, at the Old Signet Hall, Edinburgh.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, Feb. 8.

His LORDSHIP took kis seat at ten o'clock, and was engaged
nearly the whole day in hearing a part heard cause of Calvert v.
Godfrey.

ROLLS' COURT, Feb. 8.
GARDNLA V. M'CUICHEN.

This case was opened by Mr. Pemberton on the last day of
Ililary Jena. The bill alleged that the defendant had been em-
ployed by the plaintiffs as captain of a vessel trading to China and
the East Indies; that as such it was dis duty to trade solely on
the partnership account, but that he had used the ship to trade
on his own account, and had applied the profits of such trading to
his own use. The bill prayed an account against the defendant.
The defendant, in his answer, stated that the ship was always in
ballast when he had traded for himself, that he had never traded
to the injury of his employers, and that he had only done what
was the constant practice of captains of vessels who were placed in
similar circumstances.

Mr. SPENCE addressed the Court to-day at great length for the
defendant. The Learned Counsel had not concluded when we
went to press.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, Feb. 8
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)

His HONOUR was engaged during the day in hearing motions,
none of which possessed any general interest.

(Before Vice-iThancellor WIGRAX.)
SALHELD V. JOHNSON.

His HONOUR pronounced judgmen tin this cause. The plaintiff
was the Vicar of a parish in the county of Cumberland, of which
parish the Bishop of Carlisle was the Rector. The defendants;
excepting the Bishop of Carlisle, were the occupiers of land within
the parish, and the bill prayed an account of turnips, rye.grass, clover_
grass, and all other grasses not included in great tithes. A great
part of the plaintiff's case rested upon Lord Tenterden's Act, and
his Honour decided that in that respect the Vicar had failed to esta-
blish his claim. The Rector had put in a disclaimer, and the tithes
being due to some one, he felt himself at liberty to use that dis.
claimer, so far as to give the plaintiff the particular tithes which
were claimed by the bill; but he could not give effect to the dis.
claimer as proving the plaintiff's title to other tithes, for that
would be to read the answer of one defendant as against a co-
defendant. 'Whatever private opinion he might entertain as
to the Vicar's right in this case, he thought he should be
going further than the Court had hitherto gone, it on the face of
the terriers, and under the circumstances of the case, he were to
hold the Vicar's title established upon the evidence before him,
unless he were to give effect to the Rector's declaimer in aid of
the occupier. The plaintiff, therefore, might in this case take a
decree for the particular tithes, without costs; unless, for the pur-
pose of establishing his right, he thought fit to take an issue.
After some discussion at the Bar with respect to the issue, it
was arranged by Counsel that the case should be mentioned at a
future day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 8.