The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-04 00:00:00

'had submitted a scheme, and which was now before
the Master, for the purpose of carrying into execu-
tion the will of the testator, according to the man-
nor she evidently intended, viz. the manumission
of poor negro slaves, which the Corporation who
ask for these funds would be unable to do.
Mr. SUGDEN was about to reply, when
The VICE-CHANCELLOR said it was unnecessary,
ns he had made up his mind to order a reference to
the Master, and when the Master made his report
the case might then be argued. ,i,

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
ALLEGED PErtiORT—TIIE KING V. BIGNOLD.
This• was tul indictment for perjury against an
attorney, tntt the allegations could not be supported,
and tbn defendant was acquitted.

SMITH V. TREHERNE.
This was an action for compensation in damages
Tor an assault and false imprisonment ; to Ivhich the
defendant pleaded, first, that he had at the time rea-
son to believe that the plaintiff had committed a
• felony; and secondly, that he had been first assaulted.
Mr. F. Pou.ocx. (with whom was Mr. BRODE-
RICK) stated to the Jury that the plaintiff ivas a
gentleman who had occupied a first floor in the house
of the defendant, No. 22, Dean-street, Soho. The
plaintiff had been visited by his nephew, a scholar of
Charter-house school, who borrowed a book and a
pamphlet) the latter entitled " the Nation's Tears,"
an published at Is. The book had been returned,
but the pamphlet had been by some accident
Elicited up in Mr. Smith's luggage, on a journey to
dinburgh, where he left it. n his rern to the
same lodgings he enquired of Mrse. Trehernetu where the
above pamphlet had been bought, in order that he
Might purchase another copy. She replied, on being
informed of the loss, that he need not give himself
any trouble about it. Some disagreement after-
wards trdok place on another subject, and Mr. and
I.l'o,jl:.both accused him of having stolen the pamphlet.
tin. T. declaring that she would g
AdvoCate of Scotland to indict Mr.et th
Se Lord High
mit's sister
(to Whom he had given it) as a receiverh of stolen
goods. Mr. Smith gave notice that he would quit
on the following Monday, but in order to escape a
system of insolence, he determined to leave on the
Saturday. The defendant and his wife, however,
Stated that they had discovered other losses (such as
4oes, boots, &c.), and insisted on searching his
trunks, unless he paid the week's rent, which
was done on the following Monday. This, Mr.
Smith declined, and was starting in a hackney-coach
when Mrs. Treherne ordered the street-keeper to
talce him on a charge of felony. This was done
with some trouble, and Mr. Smith taken to the
FBch-house, arid from thence to Marlborough-street
olice-office, where he was discharged. Mr. Tre-
‘'tern e'
' however, previously went to Manchester-
buildings
, withanofficer, and searched the plaintiff's
_
trunks. The learned counsel stated that Mr. Smith
merely wanted an • apology in order to clear his cha-
racter. He did not want to recover large damages.
his Learned
.1- SCARLETT, for the defendant, said that if
nis Learned Friend meant, by an apology, that his
client should admit that he had done wrong, and re-
gretted what had passed, as he now found that he
had no ground of suspicion of felony • against Mr.
Smith, he would willingly give it. His Learned
Friend, however, should have stated the whole of
his proposition for an apology, which he (Sir James
Scarlett) would most
willingly make, because he had
no defence; but he might couple with that apology
an award for damages that might ruin a poor de-
fendant.
• Lord TENTERDEN summed up, and the Jury re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 20/.

ARCHES COURT.
• This being the srst day of Easter Term in the
Ecclesiastical Courts, they were opened with the
—usual formalities.
• • In the absence of Sir John Nichol, the Judge of
the Court, Dr. DAUBENT, presided.
• Dr. Jenner, the King's Advocate, was also ab-
sent, owing, as we understood, to the death of his
brother.
• • • George Stuart Nicholson, Esq., Samuel Farquhar,
• Esq.. And Henry Scope Waddilove, Esq. took the
oath, and were admitted, with the usual ceremonies,
...Proctors of the Arches Court of Canterbury.
• After a few motions of course the Court, at half-
past ten o'clock, adjourned.