The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-17 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.

LEIGH V. .
The VICE-CHANCELLOR in theLEIGH course of the morning
mentioned this case. It had given him, he said, a great
deal of uneasiness, and the more he considered his former
opinion, and the importance of the principle in-
volved in it, the more he became , alarmed, lest his
decision should have been erroneous. The case was
a moat perplexing one, and he felt that the best
course he could adopt was to call on the bar for their
assistance in setting him right, if he had acted in ignorance
of the law or of the practice of the Court. He had not
slept on the question since yesterday, and was still, perhaps
Obstinately, of the same way of thinking upon the question.
He still felt that he had no right to go into the considera-
tion of the legal validity of the plea.
Mr. HORNE said, that the plaintiff sought to establish.a
legal title, and had been met with what was termed an ab-
solute legal bar. The Court, in refusing to take cogni-
zance of that legal obstacle said, in effect, that what was
an obstacle at one Side of Westminster Hall, was to have
no weight at the other.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR-It may' be that the plaintiff
Cul show in a Court of law, that the fine has been im-
properly levied, and thus remove the obstacle which the plea
relies on, namely the fine and non-claim within five
years; and in overruling the plea, I merely give him an
opportunity of doing so if he can.
Mr. Suonrx said that as the fine was a legal bar, if
anything it ought to be determined in a Court of Law.
Mr. HORNE thought that the plaintiff might to-morrow
ask for further relief, such as an injunction to restrain the
defendant from committing waste on the estate.
The VICE- CHA NCELLOR. he should come' to-mor-
row and ask for a scintilla of assistance more than I have
already granted, I shall then consider it my duty to go into
the substance of the whole plea. His Honour again ex-
pre4sed his earnest wish that the Bar would assist him in
getting out of this difficulty, which puzzled him very
much indeed.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.,
John Poole, an excise officer, who was convicted on an
la.dctrnent containing two counts,_ the one charging him
with taking on one.occasion lls, Bd. more than the re-
gular duty on bricks belonging to one William Wells, and
the other count charging him with taking from the same
Pers°o, on another occasion, 61. 13s. 4d. more than the
rweLublat .duth and appropriating both sums to his own use,
brought up this morning for judgment.
Mr. Justice BAYLZY, in passing judgment, observed
that the prisoner had been guilty of a very great offence
he had, by his conduct, ruined his character, and betrayed
oot on!-
, y the interest of Wells, but also those of his own
yd
hi children, and violated the confidence reposed in
11 by his employers. The Court therefore adjudged
alat 1;5 should be imprisoned for twelve months in the
No he
of Correction, and kept to hard labour.
Zitvarc/ Beauchamp, John Beauchamp, John San-. s;erB) Edward Ellis, Thomas Brown, and Richard Tay..
vrere also brought up for judgment. They were con-
ex" of of assaulting George Bowley and John Thomas,
ttofficers, and of wresting from them a quantity of
Powder, which they had regularly seized.
for .1r• GURNEY appeared for the prosecution, and prayed
Judgment,
Affidavits were then put in on behalf of both the prose-
"tors and the prisoners, and read.
ti It aPpeared that on the Bth of February, 1C26, the two
whaeerarr:eishalliPs were driving two waggons, containing 25
of powder each, towards Islesworth, where they
ZAct to deposit it, without the protection required by the
, of Parliament, against those explosions which prove,
near uangerous to the public. They were, however, met
-champsnounslow by the prosecutors. After the Bean-
the had deposited eighteen barrels of the powder,
Prosecutor* seized the remaining thirty-two bar-
°lt, and carried it to a cottage near Hotaslow.
~5' thereafter the prisoner Sanders, who was clerk to
takeY'or.and Alcock, from whose premises the powder was
by ti:, and to whom it belonged, came up, accompaniedn
drys ;ellrisoner Ellis, who was also in their service. .
the 'llkated that the cottage was not a place of safety for
wder, and under this. pretence, notwithstanding
thrr'osecutors' zernoiastrances, succeeded, with the assist-
°f Ellis and the two Beauchamps, in
,removing the
for:rtr2'.two barrels of .powder back to Taylor and Aicock's
t-Oel• Next morning, when the prosecutors applied
e vder, the prisoner Taylor, one of the partners,
:iPs"(te,aered, and with the other prisoner Brown, who was a con-,
4 refused to deliver it up.
punish BRODRRIP addressed the 'Court in mitigation of
said that the prisoners acted entirely in
Alr Prehension of the law.
i u NEI,. having replied,
a
ted; JUSTICE BAYLEY said that the prisoners, had clearly
to .'n direct violation of the law. They had no right
a‘et,
re direct
the powder against the prosecutors' con-
for, Wove
it was regularly seized, and their reason
took taking it away was a mere pretence, for they
Roocare not to carry it to his Majesty's magazine, or
„e'utoo retain it in their own custody for behoof of the pro-
-I°' rNi till the law should decide respeeting•its disposal.
sentence of the Court, therefore, was that the two
Cradb 'Ps Should be confined in his Majesty's prison, at
five
4 4th-fields, for 28 days, Ellis four months, Sanders
kinl"ths ; that Brown should pay a fine of 201. to the
4101Ri and that Taylor should be imprisoned for three
ith; and also pay a fine to the King of 500/.

The COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. , put Court sat in Banco this morning, but nothing of
inter • '
Court rest transpired. The Barons also sat in the
dew,. °I. Exchequer but the proceedings were equally
41 of interest