Star.
London, England, 1830-05-15 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICLCHANCRLLOR'S COURT—Fairoax.
TYLZR V. DRAYTON.

The evidence on the part of the defendant Drayton
having been gone through, Mr. KNIGHT was heard on
the same side with Mr. Horn. He divided the tran-
sactions detailed by the evidence into two parts; one of
which related to the proceedings anterior to 1801, and
the other to the facts included between the dates of 1815
and 1819, when Griffith Jenkins died. With respect to
the former part of the cue, he contended that it was sa-
tisfactorily made out that there was no ground for suspi-
cion of fraud or concealment. So far from any conceal-
ment having been used, the defendant Drayton anxiously
pressed Jenkins to give him a mortgage for the amount
due to him. The correspondence which passed between
Jenkins and Drayton, previous to the former sailing for
India, proved incontestibly that Drayton had no desire
but to repay himself for the moneys he would be out of
pocket by the advances made to Jenkins, and the result
of the transaction proved that Drayton himself would
have been over-reached, had not Jenkins come forward,
in 1816, and honourably executed the deeds which were
the foundation of the present suit. The learned counsel
alluded to the confinement of Jenkins within the walls of
the Fleet Prison, and to a letter which had been written
by this young man, during his confinement, in which he
requested that he might be set at liberty as soon as pos-
sible, and that his debts might be paid without delay.
The arrest of Jenkins had been with the kindest inten-
tions, and it was proved in the result that no course
could be pursued more calculated to insure his welfare.
It had been alleged on the other side that Jenkins was
an idiot, and utterly incapable of managing his own af-
fairs. This drunken, idiot private, was declared by the
plaintiff's bill to be incompetent to judge or think for
himself, and was the main point upon which the plaintiff's
case depended. The letters of this young man, which had
been read in Court, proved that he was, although addicted
to low society, capable of the highest and most honour-
able feelings. In a letter of the 29th of Nov. 1807, this
young man wrote to his grandfather, just previous to his
departure, in the most kind conciliating terms, and in
language which would do credit to the head and heart
of any man. In this letter he described in a feeling
manner the unkind treatment which he had received
from his grandfather, adverted to the difficulties which
he had suffered, and in a touching manner earnestly en-
treated his grandfather to take his mother under his pro-
tection during his absence in a foreign land. Previous
to his departure Jenkins also wrote to Mr. Wilde
(the present Serjeant), expressing his gratitude for
the kindness which had been shown to him, and urging
Mr. Wilde to write to him before he left England. These
letters were expressed with a degree of sense and feeling
which, while they on the one hand disproved the assertion
of the plaintiff, showed that he was neither destitute of
sense or gratitude. The Learned Counsel afterwards ad•
vetted to the transactions which took place after Mr.
Jenkins's return to this country, and regretted that the
name of Mr. Serjeant Wilde had been drawn into these
proceedings. He was sure it was most painful to
the Learned Solicitor-General to have made any obser-

rations which reflected upon the conduct of any man,
and more particularly upon that of Mr. Sergeant Wilde,
who stood so high in the profession. The learned counsel
next drew the attention of the court to the fact which had
transpired after the return of Jenkins to this country,
and contended that the defendant had acted most fairly
and honourably in the course he had pursued. So far
from wishing to compel Jenkins to execute the deeds, he
had urged him to give him a mortgage for the whole debt.
It was not until late in the year 1816 that these deeds were
executed, and thus the most respectable names were
introduced into the arrangement. Not only Mr. Ser-
jeant Wilde was one of these parties, but Mr. Alliston was
one of the commissioners by whom the fine was levied.
Could it be supposed that gentlemen of such high cha-
racter and respectability would have lent their names to
such a proceeding ? The learned counsel concluded a
speech of great length by calling upon the court to dis-
miss the bill with costs. Upon every ground of justice
and of honour the defendant had satisfactorily disproved
the case attempted to be made against him, and it was
hoped, without citing cases, of which many might be
given, the court would refuse to listen to the bill.
The further hearing of the case was postponed until to-
morrow ; Mr. Sidebottom will then address the court upon
the same side with Mr. Knight and Mr. Pepys. Mr.
Jacob and Mr. Flather will subsequently be heard. The
case will not be concluded to-morrow.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAT 11.
wiLsox T. WHITAKER.

This was an action brought by the assignees of a bank-
rupt, against a sheriff, for the value of goods of the alleged
bankrupt, taken in execution after an act of bankruptcy.
The act of bankruptcy and the trading were clearly proved,
and the plaintiffs had a verdict for the amount. But a rule
being applied for and obtained, to show why the verdict
should not be set aside, it appeared that the trading and
act of bankruptcy proved in the cue, were before the
puling of the Bankrupt Act of the 6th of Geo. IV. by
which Act no pre-existing trading or act of bankruptcy
could support a Commission. The verdict was, therefore,
set aside, and a non-suit ordered to be entered.

REX V. JEER.

This matter was again cursorily mentioned, it being
stated that the defendant sent letters of accusation to the
Secretary at War, but that he believed they were all
signed. The Court could do no more than to grant the
Rule to show cause why the defendant should not be al-
lowed to inspect the letters ; and Mr. Brougham said
'that they, on behalf of Col. Hanmer, would be ready to
show cause to-morrow.

EXPARTZ —.—The ATTOaNIT-GENERAL, 011
behalf of a gentleman whose name he concealed, ap-
plied for a writ of certiorari, to remove the record in an
indictment at the Quarter Sessions in this Court. The
gentleman was a very eminent person ; and he thought
it right, for the present, to refrain from mentioning his
name. An accusation had been preferred against him be-
fore a Magistrate by a female, and the Magistrate dis
missed the charge. The woman then went before the
Grand Jury, and they found a bill against the gentleman.
It was of great importance to him to have the record
removed, and to have the case tried by a Special Jury.
—Writ ordered.

IN THZ MATTZIi or JOHN WALICZIL.Mr. CAMP-
BELL moved for a rule to show cause why an information
In the nature of a quo warrant() should not be filed against
John Walker, calling on him to show by what authority he
claimed to act ai a freeman in Litchfield. There were eight
Guilds or Corporations in the Borough, of which the
Tailors' Company was one, and of that Company Walker
claimed to be a freeman. There were three ways by which
freemen could be made—lst, by being the eldest son of a
freeman ; 2d, by 'erring an apprenticeship of seven years
to a freeman of the trade ; 3d, by serving seven years in
the trade, though not with a freeman, and compounding.
Before 1801 some persons attempted to become freemen
by other means, but they were all ousted. Of late years.,
the attempt had been renewed, and this was one of them.
—Auk, granted.