The Sun.
London, England, 1829-01-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAT.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
HARRIS C. IKEDIBLI3.
Immediately upon his Lordsh]p taking his 1100
this Riorning, Mr. StIGDIN resumed his argurnatts
in this part heard appeal, Itilich the Learned Cana'
sal had not concluded when we left.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
PERJURY.—TFIR KING V.lerr.

Phis was an indictment against the defendant fof
wilful and corrupt perjury, to which he pleaded Or
guilty.
Sir J. SCAR LETT stated the case. The present
was an indict tnent against a Mr. White, a merchant t
residing in the eit7, for having made an affidavit
the Court of Chancery, in which Were stated 6
number of things which at the time he made th 3
affidavit he must hare known to he false. The
defendant had some transactions with Messrs. Fri'
sled Leieg, else merchants city. In March,
1827, Messete Fraser and Laing were owners of the
ehipAlfred, which had been hired for a 'roma to Coy
eon by the East India Company. Previous to the voy- -
age White had euppliedtthancher and cale"e to the shir,
The ship itself was mortgaged to a Mr. Samuehl
another merchant in the City, for /5,000/., which
stun was to he paid out of the proceeds of the ,
voyage to Canton. The defendant, however, apel
plied to the Court of Chancery for an injunction td
restrain the East India Company from paying fat'
the lairs of the ship to Messrs. Fraser and Laing, at I
to Mr. Samuel, and in support of his applic3nen
made the affidavit which was the subject of the
present indictment. In this affidavit he swore, that
he we; induced to trust Messrs. Fraser and Co., and
to induce his friends to trust them, in consequened
of the represeetations el Mr. Samuel, with whorl'
he bad had repeated conversations on the sub.
ject. lie also swore that he believed that the
ship was mortgaged to Mr. Simnel previous t 0
his supplying the enchor and cable, and that these
things were fey Mr. Samuel's advantage. So fat,
however, from this being the truth, he (Sir Jamee
Scarlett) would prove, that previous to the voyer
Samuel and White were not even acquainted.
Tlte etlida;‘, its from the Court of Chancery wee
then put ie.
Mr. Fraser examined by Mr. CAMPBELL.—fIe
was in 1827 part orrnier of the A?fred, which
was hired for a voyage to Canton by the East
Company. The ship was then partly mortgaged tot
Messrs. Fry and Chapman; he applied to Mr. Samuel
advance money on the ship and freight, and he
consented to buy up the mortgage of Messrs. Fr}'
and Chapman. The mortgage was executed on the
Gth of April, and wus not given for an old debt. Ile
rpplied to the defendant, White, in March, 1827, for
an anchor and cable. Never heard any conversetioe •
between White and Samuel on the subject of the
ship Alfred. Ne‘er heard Samuel tell White not
to be alarmed, as ho was sure of being paid at the
end of the voyage. He believed that Samuel ad"
vauced in the whole 17,0001., hut it never exceeded
12,0001. at a time.
Cross-examined—Witness was a bankrupt in Joins
last, and had compromised with his creditors ill
1828, on which occasion his debts amounted to
about 80,000/. lie paid a dividend of 3a. in the
pound on the occasion.
Mr. Laing, the partner of Mr. Fraser, was theil
examined, and confirmed the evidence which 113
gave.
Mr. Samuel never bad any communication with
the defendant White upon the subject of the Alfred,
until after she had sailed. 'Witness did not know
until long after the Alfred had sailed, that White
had supplied an anchor and cable.
The assigment of the Alfred to Mr. Samuel wag
then put in,
This closed the ewe for the prosecution.
Mr. therneev then addressed the Jury at some
length on the part of the defendant.
After which, several merchants, ship-owners, net.
derwritere, and other persons of great respectabilion
were called, and gave an excellent character to the
defendant for integrity and scrupulous conscientious'
tress for a period of 3.5 years.
Lord TENTERDEN then summed up, and the Jul
found a verdict of Not Guilty.