The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-12 00:00:00

MAR, SCHOOL.

The further arguments in this part-heard case were
ordered to be resumed on Monday next, upon the appli-
cation of Mr. Bethel!.

THE ATT )RNEY-GENERAL V. KINGSTON.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL wished to make an appli-
cation to the Court in this case, which had been trans-
ferred from the Court of Exchequer to the Court of
Chancery ; and, since that transfer had taken place, had
been put on the paper of Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce.
The case, however, coming from the revenue side of the
Court of Exchequer, the law officers of the Crown, upon
consideration, had thought it would be more conveniently
argued in the Court of Exchequer, where the whole
question could be more fully opened, and the precedents
more easily obtained. His application, therefore, w as, that
the case might be sent back to the Court of Exchequer.
The Loup CHANCELLOR thought that course should be
pursued which Counsel thought most expedient.
The case was then ordered to be transferred to the
Court of Exchequer.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. TEE CORPORATION OF

PLYMOUTH.

This case came before the Court, upon motion, .in the
nature of an appeal from the decision of the Master of
the Rolls. The object of the motion was to give liberty
to the informant to amend his information, which the
Master of the Rolls had refused to grant. The informa-
tion was filed for the purpose of dete.rmining the right on
the one hand, of the Corporation of Plymouth, and, on
the other, those of the trustees of the hospital called the
Orphans' Aid. The latter asserted that they had the
exclusive right to a water-course which runs through
the town of Plymouth, while the former -insisted that
they were only entitled to the water which was not re-
quired for the purpose of the town. As neither party
could agree upon their rights, the Attorney-General had
filed the present information to determine them. Since
the information had been filed, and after the defendants
had put in their answer, it had been found to be neces-
sary to insert in the information some old maps, show-
ing what the state of the water-course was at the time
of the foundation of the charity in 1665, and, for the
purpose of doing so, leave was now sought to amend the-
information.

Mr. Richards and Mr. Blunt appeared in support of
the application ; and Mr. Chondless opposed it, on the
ground that it was against the practice of the Court.
The LORD CUANCELLOR thought it was to the interest
of all parties that their rights should be properly settled,
and as it appeared that that could not be done without
the proposed amendment, he should order it to be made.
Motioil granted.
The Court will proceed with petitions to-morrow (this
day), and afterwards with motions.

VICE CHANCELLORS' COURT, Jan. 11.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
SALISBURY V. MORRIS.
In this case, which turned upon certain claims of the
plaintiff, offering no subject of general interest, his
Honour granted a decree, allowing certain accounts to be
taken, and making allowances for expenses of agency.
MORRIS V. VIVIAN AND WILLIAMS.
Mr. STEWART made an application in this case for
an injunction to restrain the defendants, who represented
the Swansea Coal Company, from draining off the water
in a coal mine in their posse! lion, into detain mines the
property of the plaintiff. The case had been brought
before the Court last term, but had been postponed
for the purpose of enabling the defendants to prepare
their reply to the affidavits filedson the other side.
The arguments in the case were not closed at the rising
of the Court at four o'clock.
(Before Vice-Chancellor BRUCE.)
His HONOUR entered the Court at half-past one
o'clock, and proceeded to deliver judgment in the fol-
lowing causes, which stood over from the last sittings
atter term.