The Sun.
London, England, 1829-12-11 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DASD

COURT OF CHANCERY.
IN RE JERTIS, • LUNATIC. bider
The application in this matter, which stood par' the
at the head of the paper, Mr. KNIGHT said was that
mother of the lunatic, and next friend of his natant,
should be at liberty to attend before the Master,,,aion P
enquiry as to who is the next of kin, and go'aPPginS:l
Committee of the person of the lunatic. The Masteeb
refused to permit them to attend uuder the order of refe-
rence sent to hint.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that as the order of
re'
ference here had been drawn up and filed, to make the,
directionirregtl w p
irregularity
yoin
the t:ayperdocuepon
edingzotionne wwoouulldd inuotrtohdueiceitarteeir
to
make the order, upon a short petition being presence'

the purpose.
Mr. HORNS opposed the prayer, unless the partoo., °deka;
ing to go in, agreed to go before the Master at OW
expense. et
After some discussion, it was arranged, that the 9 .„11
should be made as of course, upon a short petition b7O,
presented, and that the lunatic's estate should ouirfLol
thing in point of costs by it ; that was, that no ado"-
expense should he incurred thereby.
MISUNDERSTANDINa AT THE BAR. pojof
Some time after the above ,matter had been dig
as stated,
Sir C. WETHERELL took his place at the bar, and. bellejto
he might not be interrupted in what he was gongior
state; he was Counsel for the Hon. Maria Jervi'l ;400
to the Hon. William Jervis Jervis ; and he had bee° Se
by surprise. The matter stood in the paper yesterdoPt o
n.
(Sir Charles) was present at the sitting of the, C°ll relit
pared to go into it ; but in consequence of sornetblitrd,
having come on, the bearing of this matter %rasa% ibt
nostTibi:
ee
CHARLESS bL
gT
ho
tßwo- GnE
TE7IN
REI Ri b egi gbe de g toth state
it°
and
t
it on this morning in his absence. that it had
may not be
The Sor.lciron-GENERAL—I only
interrupted.
that there has been no want of courtesy on my ,
Sir '
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL-1 shall be hear.,
insist on being heard. h tie
The SoLICITOR-GENERAL—Mr." Knight oroug-t tte
case on, and very properly so ; I was not in Court 5e
time ; I came in afterwards ; Mr. Horne folloview-ip
wished to have the case opened; I said I had net t
slightest objection, but on the contrary, that -1. di"
mean to take any advantage of what had passed.
be
Sir C. WETHERELL—I say again, that I l'"
heard, Sir, and I beg not to be interrupted.
The Soucrroa-GENERAL—You shall not be inte",;-01
again by me, Sir.—(Sitting down. )—I shall no&b0 °l—joy
to in such a manner by Sir Charles Wetherell, °I.,
, •
man living.
Sir C. WETIIE tbe Se
RELL-(Turning round to have
General, and rather in a lower tone.)---Ibenvj; kW:
your remedy—then you have your remedy. ''l,-av yetar
we cannot settle that here ; but you know you
"- e -
wish to owe you
remedy. to "
think I am _ ,

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—If you
to
tmill fin
taken.r eearteeda
d,
If ni nu shuacyli aa
nmy a
thing
enrg,
tyno u
say w fiEnned, yyonunr swe B'3
y.
Sir C. WETHE RELL. —Sir, you have your minedris
v
He then contended, that the parties who sought to ,aor,
before the Master ought, if at all, to be allowed to go '
agreeing to pay their own expenses.
The LORD CHANCELLOR considered the order that
been made tantamount to this. cr
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL After reading the tet.'l,4o,
it, which the Court directed the Registrar to band W, the
did not feel at all satisfied that the terms would 105,5; 00
intention of the Court. The usual terms of an tlr,ue.o 01
such an occas7on were, that such parties should go 101, la
their own expense." There was certainly a looP'ho,ald
the order, and if he had been in Court he certainly ,°'"
have objected to it. Who
The Loan CHANCELLOR observed that Mr. 1-I°s-4.ote'
appeared for Lord St. Vincent, and was in the carne I
rest, did not object to it.
Mr. HOItNE would rather have had the order abort
Charles Wetherell sought to have it, but finding the t sir
was against him, he gave way. He did not know thA
Charles Wetherell was in the matter. ld el'
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL hoped the Court 015uboe
low him to explain how he could nut be considered t°t,tioo
done wrong, nor have subjected himself to any ilret; Sot
of having been wanting in courtesy, although he ke„e eito;
why he should show more courtesy than was ehilvcoliev
The Loan CHANCELLOR wished to relieve the otste
tor-General from any such task, because he rf.'ro do
that the Solicitor-General had in fact had nothc.rjjoPese"
with bad passed. Mr. Knight (with the Solicit°:denere,'
the matter, and in the absence of the Solicitor'
ter re'
Mr. Horne subsequently desired to have the rot
opened ; the Solicitor-General acquiesced in the" other'
at once, and rather wished every opportunity the;
wise to be afforded to the other side of being hear;,, part.,-
Sir C. WETHERELL had not blamed any one "--„;t
cular ; all he had said, which he was ready to rel3' bet°
times over was, that the matter ought not to h°l
brought on in his absence. der
grill
The Lona) CHANCELLOR—WeII, I think the of-e re-
do as it is; and I beg leave, in conclusioo, tetfera
quest, with respect to what has passed be, t that
Sir Charles Wetherell and the Solicitor-Genera's etre,
both these gentlemen will consider that the whole ha
a misrepresentation entirely. The Solicitor-Ge°er4 o
nothing whatever to do in bringing the matter el tee
your absence, Sir Charles; and your complaint °Test
Solicitor-General was founded on misrepresentatioo',3oos
you must be aware of, the Solicitor-General not
g tbi/
been in Court.
Mr. HONE expressed his satisfaction on hearts 0:
statement from the Bench, for he felt bound to saY' tb'
Solicitor-General had been in no respect to blame; eptieg
contrary, that he had acted in the most accool°l° •
manner. , °e;
Sir C. WETHERELL cared not who had brought .
it ought not to have been brought on in his abseace;oolll
still he should not have complained, had he not Pe leader
told the Solicitor-General yesterday that be WA 6 0.
in the matter, and wished to be heard when it ea°.4 °o„itlef
The LORD CHANCELLOR again hoped all would certiohif
that there had been a misrepresentation, and that 1,0
notice would be taken of what had transpired.

ROLLS COURT.
t'
BAILT V. TAYLOR. q-
The Court proceeded with this case, involving gforwe
tion of piracy, the facts of which we gave 00
day. The case had not concluded when we left.

VICE, CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
ToML E INS V. PALE. . Or"
This case stood over for the purpose of enabilloolJ
Pepys to consult with his clients as to the decree be;.,
take, the judgment of the Court having left hiol orli coed'
alternatives, either to have the rule dismissed or reue
At the sitting of the Court, red
Mr. Pares stated that his clients had elected to re bot'
and a decree was therefore to be made accordinglli aili}
upon the understanding that that decree was pret..,ter;eit °
the opinion entertained by the Court as to the tote
Lady Young.

h Jr
IN RE A BANKRUPT.
This petition praying forJONES,
the superseding' of
,it"
minion, was hoard by the Court some I°Y ')

when it was ordered that a strikrxedeas should issue, the
solicitor personally paying the costs.
Mr. Iloans stated, that he thought there had been some
Misunderstanding, the Registrar having drawn up tl.e
order as if the solicitor had been ordered to pay the
costs personally. That order he (the Learned Counsel)
never understood the Court to have pronounced. The
grounds of the application for the supe-sedeas were most
singular, the bankrupt stating upon his affidavit that lie
teas perfectly solvent ; but at the same time being obliged
to admit that he was confined in prison for not paying one
of his creditors. The trading, too, was equally singular,
tho•bankrupt, being incarcerated in the walls of a prison,
had carried on a most flourishing trade, by selling to his
fellow prisoners meat and drink. At the time of the dis-
cussion of the petition, he (Mr. Horne) felt bound to say,
the petitioning creditor's debt was so constituted, that it
could not support the comtnission ; but he could see no-
thing whatever in the conduct of the solicitor, calling upon
the Court to make him personally pay the costs. He felt
quite Sure that this was a mistake of the Registrar's, and trusted the Court would direct the minutes of the erder to
be corrected.
Mr. Rost contra had no doubt the order drawn up by
the Registrar was the one pronounced by the Court. The
solicitor had not only been the solicitor of the petitioning
creditor, but he also, on a former occasion, appeared as at-
torney fur the bankrupt.
Mr. HORNE—Surely that can be no ground for his per-
sonally paying the costs. You are Counsel for one per-
.;:.soone day, and perhaps the next you appear for another
Person as Counsel, against the very party whose case the
'IF)/ "ef°re you pleaded. It was true there was not the
be ghtest impropriety in this, and if so, how could there
lel nay impropriety in a solicitor acting in the same man-
leris ? As to the trailing of which in much had been said,
'poor man had merely taken in beer for his fellow-
Pthoners, upon which he got a halfpenny a pint.
AThe VICE-CHANCELLOR did not recollect the order lie
P' he would see Mr. Barber, the Deputy Secretary in
4krOptco, and have the matter put as right as it could be.
FRY V. LORD SHERBORXE.
case stood in the paper to be spoken to-day.
t?The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated there were several
laterial papers which had been called to the attention of
the Court before it pronounced its judgment. These
zpe
isiondisel,osed facts which would materially alter the
°`r his Honour. He (the Solicitor-General) there-
fore asked permission either to be allowed to call these
1:14.pe", to the Court's attention now, or that some early
natght be appointed for that purpose.
b"lore the
RORNx contended that all the material facts were
Court when its judgment was announced.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL had never seen a copy of the
settlement made at the marriage of Mrs. Fry till that
rn
av--":tuing• He had no doubt the moment that settlement
further frotn himread to the Court, it would not require one word
After a sharp discussion between the Solicitor-General
Cr.ri
''ll.• Horne, the Court ordered the case to stand in the
'11" on Wednesday next.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
O pia
T ENTERDEN sat again this morning, but his
Ppled
ashy appeared very weak in voice and much indis-

LACK V. SEWARD.
BRODERICK (with whom was Mr. TommaisoN),
r'led to the Jury that this was an action to recover corn-
Enßaation in damages for injury done to a barge belonging
dthsetinPitiatintiff, on the river Thames by being run foul of
The a barge belonging to the'defenda.nt, owing to
by I;sllBen'e of the defendant's servants, in the mode
halien\eva-'e,," the vessel was navigated. The accident hap-
b.,,,,enth, 10th of April, when the plaintiff's barge
6elarY. It h ;t0 Chamberlain's-wharf for a cargo of
-e'Rg ebb-tide, the men having the care of the
lyipg moored her to the stern of the lkfagnet, a vessel
°l3Posite Chamberlain's-wharf, below bridge,and called
ham
Pier, till the tide turned and enabled him to
11'ce'Pl the river. This was early in the morning, and
defendant's barge was seen coming down the river with
e tide by a lighterman, who observed, that they were
b, eY"gdidno ating h g
ter badly, and who called out to them th if
get help they would foul the starlings ofat the
ieirige• The men onp board, however, returned an ineo-
nt ewer, and continued in spite of his advice to do ex-
41y the contrary of what they ought to have done. The
consequence was, that they run foul of the starlings, un-
shipped the tiller, and seemed to have lost their senses, as
they even then did not all they might have done to repair
tat mistake, and their barge met the plaintiff's barge with
eath violence that she was much injured and sunk. He
114. Broderick) believed that the defence intended to be
et up was, that the plaintiff's barge had no business there,
01'Y an order of the Harbour-master, only a certain number
pr:,:aaela were allowed to remain at that spot. He should
tegui;thiZever, that no publication had been made of such
het w until after the accident. Even if it were so, that
than i7l(l"tjustify the defendant in destroying her any more
*hi h would justify a coal-waggon in destroying- a coach
spot.
,rhight happen to stand longer. than allowed on one
Learned Counsel called witnesses to prove this
nageent• This was the plaintiff's ease.
that GURNEY (with whcm was Mr. PLATT) contended
don,the barge was properly navigated by a man, who had
tip, ,ee "fely for twenty-five years, and that if the plain-
eaulduarge had not been in an improper place the accident
den n
oto have happened. He could well explain the evi-
theate the plaintiff's witnesses who were belonging to
llatd ,aet Party, who were always jealous of the West men,
out I.4PPesed that no barge could be well navigated with-
be et'aeY had a hand in it, more especially as they would
it ntitled to *at re uirea. fee of half-a-guinea for their assistance, if
toutn '' videnqce having been adduced of these facts, the Jury
of in, for the aintiff—amages 45/., being the amount
Pry proved to have b Deen sustained.