The Sun.
London, England, 1829-07-29 00:00:00

LUNACY.

Mr. TEMPLE held in his hand the petition of the
committee of a gentleman against whom a commis-
sion of lunacy had issued. After the finding of the
lunacy, the lunatic, having been well in health and
conduct, was permitted for same time to go about
in the neighbourhood where he lived. During this
period individuals who had formerly been in the
habit of supplying him with corn, &c., for his horses
continued to do so. The Committee intended
to have paid off the debts that had been
thus contracted out of the amount allowed for his
maintenance; but unfortunately a change took place
in the lunatic's state of mind, which rendered it ne-
cessary to have him consigned to a lunatic asylum.
This occasioned a considerable additional expence,
and left the Committee unable to pay off the debts
that had been referred to. The amount of these
debts were not stated in the petition. The Com-
mittee and family of the lunatic were anxious that
they should be paid, and the petition prayed to
have it referred to the Master to enquire what debts
had been thus contracted, and whether they ought,
and if so, out of what fund they should be paid.—
Granted.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
PRACTICE OF THE COURT.

On the VICE• CHANCELLOR taking his seat,

Mr. COOPER said he was instructed to call his
Honour's attention to a decree made by the Court
a few days since for the sale of an estate, in which
estate his (Mr. Cooper's) client had an incurnbrance
of 6,0001., but yet had had no notice served on him
of any intention to apply to the Court for a decree
authorising a sale. Now he had no hesitation in
saying, that a decree thus obtained was a fraud upon
the Court; and the effect might be, a sale of the
estate and the proceeds divided without his know-
ledge.
VICE-CHANCELLOR—Your client must acquiesce
in the sale, or a good title could not be made. I
cannot see how he is likely to be injured.
Mr. COOPER—If this decree is allowed to stand,
it, at once upsets the long-established rule of the
Court, and one which has been invariably acted
upon, viz, the necessity of having every party in.
terested before the Com t before any decree is made.
I wish, therefore to ask, for my own information,
and for the information of the whole bar, whether
this ancient and wholesome rule, acted upon by all
your Honour's predecessors, is now to be abolished.
VICE-CHANCELLOR—Your client, Mr. Cooper,
was not made a party to the suit. All those who
were parties consented to the decree. He, there-
fore, not being a party, has no right to interfere;
and I again repeat, that as his concurrence must be
obtained before a valid sale of the estate can be
effected, his interests cannot be damnified.

Mr. COOPER said he mu 4 still contend that it
was a novel proceeding for the Court to make a
decree in the absence of parties, and one calculated
to open a wide field for fraud.

111 r. KNIGHT said he could not sit still and hear an
insinuation that this decree was obtained by fraud,
particularly after the claim of Mr. Cooper's client
had been rejected in the Master's Office.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR—I shall not vary the
decree. The charge of fraud has had no effect on
my mind. I consider it falls to the ground.
The Court was afterwards occupied in hearing a
case on exceptions to the Master's report, of no
public interest.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
REEVE V. STACY AND OTHERS.

This was a qui tam action on the 47th Geo. 111.,
to recover from a coal-merchant certain penalties
hich are fixed by the Act at 201. per chaldron, for
selling five chaldrons of " Eden Main" coals as
" Stel,vart's Walls End" coals.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (with whom Was Mr.
PATTIsON) stated the case, and called
R. A. Coward, who stated that the defendants
calling on him in last July for an order, he ordered
five chaldrons of the best " Walls End" coals, and
agreed to pay 455. per chaldron for them. They
were delivered when he was not at home, and he
afterwards discoed ed that they were not " Walls
End," but " Eden Main ;" and in a subsequent
conversation defendant said that the coals were
quite as good as " Walls End," as they had been
sifted.

Several other witnesses were called, who proved
that the coals in question were " Eden Main" coals,
which were then at 395. 9d. per chaldron at the
ship's side.
Mr. CAMPBELL, for the defendant, contended
that there was no proof of the defendants having
contemplated fraud, and he apprehended that Mr.
Coward had no reason to complain, as he had re-
ceived an article as good as " Walls End" at a
lower }Nice.
The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 1001.,
being 20/. on each chaldron.

MESSRS. FRY AND CHAPMAN'S FAILURE.-GWILT v.

SPURR AND ANOTRER.

Mr. GURNEY (with whom was Mr. PLATT,)
stated, that this was an action to recover the sum of
1,0241., which had been entrusted with the de-
fendants, who were respectable attorneys, to pay a
debt and costs, which purpose had not been com-
pleted by them. The defendants had been employed
by the plaintiff to conduct some law proceedings, in
which it had been arranged with Messrs. Clutton
and Co. (solicitors for the other side), that the debt
and costs should be paid on Saturday the 22d of
November last. On that day the plaint►ff called on
the defendants at their office, and paid to Mr. Leach,
one of the defendants, a cheque for the above
amount to meet the demand of Messrs Clutton and
Co. The defendants however received a letter on
that day from Messrs. Clutton and Co. extending
the period fixed for payment to the following Tues-
day. In consequence of which Mr. Leach did not
pay the money on that day, but deposited the
cheque with his bankers, Messrs. Fry and Chap-
man, who unfortunately stopped payment on the
following Monday. Mr. Gwilt then applied to the
defendants to pay the 1,0241. to Messrs. Clutton
and Co., but they refused, and he was put to the in-
convenience of ra►s►ng the money himself, and pay-
ing it over again. The Learned Counsel had no
doubt tl►at the Jury would think it extremely hard
that .the plaintiff should lose the amount of the
cheque, which he had paid to the defendants
in the order of business, and for the safety of
which they were clearly liable after it came into
their possession. Ile then called witnesses to the
payment, the refusal of Messrs. Spurr and Leach to
pay the demand, and the failure of Messrs. Fry and
Chapman.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, for the defendants,
observed, he would prove that Mr, Qwilt had waited

for some time on the Saturday, for Mesta. Cotton
to come and receive the money; that he had read
the letter which they had sent, and knew that the
cheque was not to be paid on that day ; and had
still, with that knowledge, left the cheque with the
defendants, who had made him acquainted with their
mode of placing it for security ; and that he had ad'
mitted having seen Mr. Leach indorse the cheque
with Messrs. Fry and Chapman's name. Thus it
was clear that it was placed there with his sanctioet
and that he himself chose to run the risk.
Lord TENTERDEN was of opinion, that if the
whole of the defence were to be taken as proved, it
would not relieve the defendants from the response'
lity, or the liability of paying the sum if the cheque
was lost. They bad even paid it to their own De'
count at the bankers.
The Jury then returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Damages 1,0241.

THE MARKETS.-(THIS DAY).

CORN EXCHANGE.

The arrivals this week consist chiefly of foreign Whit
and Oats. There has been some rain this morning, but It
has not affected the market. The Wheat trade continues
very dull at Monday's reduction in prices. There is verl
little doing in Barley. Beans maintain last quotation.
Pease are unaltered. The market is ovet stocked with atts
of middling and inferior quality, which meet a very dell
sale at Monday's prices. In the Flour trade there is 11°
alteration.