The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-21 00:00:00

laile StiN, LON D

LAW IN TELLIGENC E.

HOUSE OF LORDS.--(THIS DAY.)
Their Lotdsitips sat to-day at ten o'clock to hear Scotch
appeals. The Peers in attendance were Lord Brougham, Lord
Cottenharn, Lord Campbell, and Lord Dutterin.

LORD DUNGLAS D. THE DOKE OF ARGYLL.
This ease catne before their Lordships upon an appeal from
the deci4on of the Court of Session: in Scotland, declaring a
Commission, granted by George the Fourth, appointing the
appellant, Lord Dunglas, to the office of Chamberlain of
Et►rick Forest, to be void, The ground on which the dom-
fission was declared to be invalid by the Court below was, that
his Majesty Cie rge the'FOurth, having surrendered his here-
ditary revenues to the disposal of Parliament, had no power to
;rant the Commission he had done,"
Mr. Pemberton and Mr. Hope were Counsel for the appel-
lant, Lord Dunglas, and the Attorney-General and Mr. An-
drrson supported the judgment of the Court of Session, on
behilf of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. _

The arguments had not concluded when our Evening Edi-
ion went to press.

CHANCERY COURT-(THS DAY.)

The toltb CliANtEttoß sat in Linccln's Inn Hall to-day,
and took appeal motions, this being the Second Seal after Hi-
lary Term.

THo➢iFSON V. 1i tliAlt.

This case came before his Lbrdship upon an appeal motion
from the JudgtiMnt of Vice-Chancellor Wigram, refusing to
grant an injunction to restrain the defendants, the assignees of
three bankrupts, from parting with the funds in their posses-
sion, and making a dividend among the creditors of the bank-
rupts, until the decision of the Court in the suit. It appeared
that in the tt.t. 1829, Mr. William Hinde, the testator in the
(must, entered into partnership with three other gentlemen as
worsted spinners and wool-staplers. Mr. Hinde was to find
capital, and the other three persons were to be the acting men.
The business was eirried on up to Mr. Hiride's death,
it which tith it was ascertained that upwards of
40,000 i. was his share of the capital. Subsequent to
the death of the testator, the other three partners
carried on the business, rend two of those partners were exeeu-
,ors under the Will of Mr. Hinde. In December 1839, the
parties bit me bankrupt, and the defendants were appointed
their assignees. In May 1840, tine present bill was filed by
the parties beneficially interested under the will of Mr. Hinde,
.nsisting that a breach of trust had been committed by the ex-
ecutors permitting the testator's property to remain in the busi-
ness, and insisting also that they had the equitable mortgage
by the articles of partnership upon all the real property belong-
ing to it, and that they ought to be allowed to prove for the
deficiency against the estate of the bankrupts. Vice-Chancellor
Wigram refused the application for the injunction on the
ground that lie had no jurisdiction in bankruptcy, and for that
decision the preseut appeal was brought.
The arguments were not concluded when our Evening Edition
went to press.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

GORDON e. THE CHELTENHAM AND GREAT WESTERN UNION

RAILWAY COMPANY,

Lord LANGDALE pronounced his final judgment to-day in
this cause; which had stood over from last week for further in-
vestigation and consideration on some reserved points.
The facts have already appeared in The Sun.
His Loansittr' at the last hearing of the cause, was not satii-
fied with the evidence adduced at either side respecti, g the in-
convenience which might arise to either the plaintiff or the
defendant, by the refusal or granting of the injunction sought
to be obtained by the former. His Lordship had also reserved
the point, whether, if an injunction were granted, there ought
to be any condition attached to it. In giving judgment
this morning, his Lordship said he had had two affidavits
made by the defendants, and one by the plaintiff. Looking at
:he former he feared that an injury; ion could not be put on
+hose parties now without occasioning considerable iticonve-
nience—he would not say danger—to all sho made use of that
tine of railway. In the affidavits he saw no limitation men-
tioned of the time during which the inconvenience complained
of by the plaintiff should continue. That formed the strongest
case against the defendants. In that matter their own option
ought not to be alone consulted. The only difficulty his Lord-
ship felt in the matter was, the apprehersion which any Judge
must haye in granting an injunction, lest inconvenience should
arise therefrom to a great many persons. He should, therefore,
direct an order for an injunction absolutely. The defendants
not to consider themselves held by the order till after the last
seal-day following Trinity term next; and undertaking not to
make any additions to the buildings mt ntioned in the plead-
ings; as also to bring their petition in the meantime for re-
hearing before the Lord Chancellor or the House of Lords.
The Court then proceeded to dispose of motions involving
nothing of interest.