The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-12 00:00:00

LAW INTELLTGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
TIIE :IIATTP.R or WM. CAMPBELL, AN INFANT.
Mr. T 4
--(INE stated, that William Campbell, the
great grandson of a Mr. John Blythe, whose estate
was "der the administration of this Court, had
the bsotely entiled to a part of th property ;
Pracaeedilu ncs in thet cause were beforee the Master
to
ascertain the apportionments of the different par-
r; the petitioner was an infant who had got
c, oiler of a situation in the. Civil. Service of the
ast he ;Oda Company, and being in need of an outfit,
titlerayed, as he had become clearly absolutely en-
Loraa portion of the funds in Court, that his
i•
would refer it to the Master, to enquire
anti state, havir, regard to his situation and interest
lea the what ought to be advanced to him for
Utfit,--Order ause,
made.
HAYARD p.
appall Mr' Rottisn and Mr. TROLLOP appeared for the
~ ints. This bill was filed by Samuel Hayard,
' ccreditor of an intestate, named Robert Crump-
orn, on behalf of himself and all other creditors,
:igainst the intestate's widow, who had taken out
letters of administration to her husband, to have
a
4 account of the assets, and against Mr. Henry
Anthony Long, to
have a bill of sale set
aside on the ground of fraud, that he had
aNb.,tfiined from the intestate before his death, under
fosarnitueiling.lsiteocilci,aB,:d
tic,
possession of the •intestate's
The question was, whether the bill
bill of was The
as against the creditors ? The
of sale was dated on the 11th of May 18'22, and
staibolical possession delivered to Mr. Long, by the
absolute of a silver spoon. The bill of sale was not
money hut conditional, •inasmuch as that, if the
afosnuo‘,t;3lT.) was paid to Mr. Long, who had been
Mr. Crumphorn, by the 29th of Sept.
allevdnigAthe instrument was to be void. Mr. Long
29th ','l4t he had actually paid the money. The
otellttahte odieepdtember was on a Sunday. The
_fil-
et eiht o'clock in the evening
before3oth of September; but, about half an hour
• e death,
%lon to hedelivered the absolute posses-
by bm. :Jur. Long, who took that absolute possession
Call„,Ving the bill of sale into the hands of a person
patirrieholt, a servant of Mr. Crumphorn, accom-
to aheu' by an order not to part with the possession
Septaelle of any of the property. The '29th of
soul mhos' happening on a Sunday, possession
tate dying at he taken on that day, and the intes-
f Yla°' on the following day, no greater change
Possessiontiofl could take place prior to his dissolu-
hild,'au had taken place. The Master of the Rolls
sat decreed the inweinent to be void, and as a neces-i
anYa,nsequenee of following such a decree, directed
and-ceant to be taken as against Long, of all the assets
eertl'loduce he had received. The Learned G
e
sobinltt!l cited the ease of Edwards v. Harding, and
it the
that the order below was wrong.
de te4rs• HEALD and CITING were for the reae of
spon-
it .11-ft. • The bill of sate was fraudulent on the fa
ce
Mated the consideration to have been for so
in th awful money
t paid, whereas it did not appear
L evidence that one shilling had ever been paid.
had stated himself to have been a surety, but
Pay_reti,W43 no evidence that he had been called on to
fr,:+te alone in respect of his suretyship. So far
absolute possession having been taken. by
t
the Inthb 30th of Sept. he put the deed
desiring
that of a servant of Mr. Crumphorn,
entire want to lock it up in his box, and
he did till
the ch 4teret from every person, whichr dp"iit an
to th rlltnlas following, and then
fde lvaesrtsedpiatpirp
Ever: athainistratrix as a piece o
fa ~,Possible exertion had been used to keep the
Oct: Such an instrument having been executed
vraf* Had the other side not cited Edwards v.
so as the respondent's Counsel would have done
-3 a direct authority in favour of them. That
brought to the view of Lord Gifford when
ease Was before him, and he considered clearly
Ita its doctrine that the bill of sale was void.
„„. Justice Buller in that case was clearly of
~a~on,
that as absolute possession had not
taken by the party who had got
void lostrument executed, the bill of sale was
app' 'Under these circumstances, and as it did not
ins that Long had given any directions respect-
death part of the property before the intestate's
riotu, they submitted that the decree below was
41n1 that the appeal ought to be diimissed.
r• HORNP replied.
Th
for 0,.a LORD CHANCELLOR saw no reason whatever
1101j`tring the decision of the late Master of the
prop 'r was the case of a transfer of personal
tssZerrtY ; by the deed under which it had been
it)a-:etred) Mr. Long had not taken posses-
beta ,;141' the contrary, from the time of its haying
liatilrea the intestate had remained in possession
1,4 death, as if no such deed had been exe-
to so by him, and by that course induce creditors
Pertv"ill '°3o that he was the actual owner of the pro-
the therefore the Court was bound to consider
The of
, sale fraudulent as against creditors.
1rMii17,..4 fell precisely within the principle of
decree ulismissed the appeal, and confirmed the
Lord Gifford.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
t i'rhe Ilarrr v. FISHER Alin OTHERS.
I°llB tnrittiff in this case was lessee of certain
uofench,:et the Corporation of Cambridge. The_
tow '"tB were bankers and brick-makers in the
of Ulu' tr; tl the action was brought to try the rightrts
a" e 4„nailltiff to levy tolls on the defendants' ca
leatsWab6ns• The ca se came on for trial about two
ants, tg°3 when a verdict was taken for the defend-
aside antdTer much argument the verdict was set
The ev.- net' trial granted.
Potation aenee in support of the claim of the Cor-
-13,0111111c Plier:1111-u character not likely to interest the
and the case is not expected to
e ude until a late hour in the evening.

%opt \TICE-CHACELLOS COURT.
1"14414 OOT'S V. CR'
OLLYTT-....NrADB V. 'MY.

---
Itm.
These three
NI,
tonne uof the same trau:, ! ' action th main question in issue,
ertses though heard separately, arose
d upon the right Which a surety has, upon pay-
to troent of the entire debt for Which helms bound himselfe
Byer
the creditor, to call on the creditor to Ih-
',l'," up to him any additional securities
,I‘..e creditor) may have received from the principal
might fo,
i_ li)vr11119pal
the same debt, in order that the surety
tll t.be.able to proceed upon such security
which e.
against
debtor. The alleged additional security
icoyain e ! In the present instance was a mortgage. The
send mortgagee
_t_clo
_given made the sureties was opposed by a
of the same property,
gnrootonds that the
.principle above alluded to, did
upon the
4PPIy to the circumstances of the present case.
11.11°11°13R did not give his judgment.
......._

Ihe LORD 14
HIGH ADMIRAL VlsltB the
aoknal. at Woolwich this day, and also inspects the new
work* and improvements in the Dock-yard at that place.
The Duke of WELLINGTON has left town on
a shooting excursion for a few days.
USAANOER DEATH BY THE INCAUTIOUS
from the
" RuktE ARMS.-._A fatal accident, arising
above cause, occurred qt Sutton Wash , 1 Tuesday morning
las. Two men in the employ of Mr. L;RAiLtv, miller, of
that l h •
it P ace, aving to attend the mill the whole of the
ufoeday night, were furnished by Mr. C. with a per-
t pistol, for the defence of the premises. About Si'
' clock on Tuesday morning they left the mill, and went to
'lt!' Ql4 Vessel which lied been occupied for a considerable
'nine a residence by a person named WILLIAM
ifowb,
, better known by the appellation of ,4 Old
D o w 42
• having the pistol with them. Downrwc; re-
marking tut
the miller he had never seen those pistols made use of,
they actednadertook to explain the principle upoa which
, when unfortunately while the deadly weapon
was preiented 4t bon, ING, it went off, and the cont.: its
eatered his b0dy.......b0n IN
immediately exclaimed, ") on
have shot me;' and vral-ltDiinNo•Gto the other side of his cabin,
he pulled off his clothe'. extract the ball, h I
when he expired...—
, -: "anguithed until the following morning,
An l
Inquestbeing found impracticable to
Thursday, before ED‘ AaB Dhesl:l Gent. Coroner,
on the body on
o eel 'mai
when a verdict f SAMUELA 'cl wl'
Death"
Boston Gazette,was returned.—.

OLD BAILEY.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)

Twenty-two male and fourteen female prisoners were
discharged by proclamation. Before any other business
could be proceeded in, the Court was lit with lamps and
,candles, the fog being so extremely dense, as to resemble
night more than morning.
Thomas Chapman and IV. Johnson were indicted for
stealing a mare.—" Guilty."
William Kcevier, aged 18, was indicted for stealing
from the person of Frederick Avis Dowling, a gold chain,
seals, and key, value 5/. ISs.
Frederick Avis Dowling, of Sidbury, was in London on
the 2d of November; was passing up Goswell-street with
three ladies, in the direction of Islington, at about six
o'clock ; the gas was alight. At the entrance of Bell-alley
prisoner was alone, leaning against a post ; when witness
had arrived opposite the end of the alley, prisoner made a
spring et his wet :1, and broke the chain from it with the seals
and key. Win-ate pursued him, but several persons in the
alley tried to stop his progress, and the prisoner had gained
come yards before witness could come up to him. Prisoner
turned to the right in the alley, and then to the left into
Groat Arthur-street. Had never lost sight of him but in
turning the corner, and could not be mistaken in the
person. The prisoner fell down in Great Arthur-street,
and witness himself fell just as he came up to bins. Both
rose, and the prisoner got into another court, and ran into
a house, into which witness went in company with a black-
smith. A woman, as they were going up stairs, called out
" there is nobody here but those who belong to the house.
I will not let any person search my house without a was.-
rant." Witness stopped, and a man went up stairs and shortly
came downwith the prisoner. Witness seized him directly
he saw him, and said, " This is the villain who has robbed
me." Several persons had then surrounded witness, and
hustled him till he lost his hold of the prisoner.
By Mr. Bannv—The three ladies were friends of wit-
ness's. Had not brought them to-day ; knew where they
lived ; it was in St. Martin's-le-Grand. Has a brother,
who hae not interfered, por called his attention to the iden-
tity of any person. ettention was not directed to the
prisoner at ClerLenweli n, but he identified him from
among 30 or 40 other pr.:soma-a.
By a Juror—The alley was not lit with lamps.
Robert Lock, constable of St. Lake's, apprehended the
prisoner at his lodgings. Prisoner ash 1 what he wanted
him for, saying that he knew be was wanted for a robbery
in Goswell-street, but he knew nothing about :t.
A little boy, living in Arthur-street, heard the cry of
" Stop thief," and saw the prisoner running away and the
prosecutor pursuing him. Both fell, and the prisoner then
ran into a house and shortly after came out again. Mr.
Dowling seized him, and said he had robbed him when he
came out. Knew the prisoner both by name and sight,
and was sure it was the same. When Air. Dowling had
hold of the prisoner, two or three men rushed in between
them and he got away. Toll the officers who the pri-
soner was, and saw him afterwards in the watchhouse.
By Mr. BARRT-Had known the prisoner for five
years before that by sight, but not to speak to him. liad
never been examined in a court before.
James Sherman, another hoy living in Great Arthur-
street, saw Mr. Dowling on the night of the robbery, and
also saw the prisoner whom he had not known before; saw
the former runt-4-g after the prisoner in Great Arthur-
street ; the latter was coming towards witness, and he was
certain as to his identity. A great many persons were be-
hind him. Told Mr. Dowling that he had gone into that
house. Mr. Dowling waited at the door, and seized the
prisoner, who was rescued, as described by last wituess,
Saw the prisoner at Worship-street,
days after the robbery, and knew him again
about
utgeoletvaen way.
directly.

Catherine Baxter, of No. 7, Pump-court, saw the priso-
ner run into her father's house. Heard "a row" in the
Passage, and went to see. Had never seen him in the
house before. Shortly afterwards another man, whom
witness thought was an officer, came up stairs, and taking
the prisoner by the collar, said to him, " you are the man I
want." They went down stairs together, and Mr. D.
seized the prisoner as before stated. Knew the prisoner by
sight, had seen him often about Golden-lane, but did not
know his name. He wanted to go into the first floor, but
the occupier would not allow him. Prisoner was very
muddy at that time, and seemed as if he had been down.
The prisoner in defence said that lie was innocent, and
that they (the witnesses) had all perjured themselves.
He called several witnesses to character, but none ap-
peared.
The RECORDER, therefore, told him that, if they presented
themselves, they should be received afterwards. He then
charged the Jury, wl)a immediately returned a verdict of
Guilty of st..llr.g from tue person, but not with force and
violence.
The Learned JUDGE then sentenced him to transporta-
tion for life, telling him that, if he had been guilty of any
violence to the prosecutor to prevent his being taken, he
would have certainly been left for execution.