The Sun.
London, England, 1829-12-23 00:00:00

CERTIFICATES-JAL 12.

C. Robinson, een. New Brentford-wharf, Middlesex,
wharfinger —W. Hamilton, Peckham, Surrey, master-
mariner—L. Gardie, Regent-street, Westminster, jeweller
- Whicher, Emsvrorth, Hampshire, butcher—J. Al-
derton, Norwich, carpenter—T. Harrison, Long-acre,
Latnesley, Durham, smith—J. Robinson, Manchester,
publican—G. W. Harris, Southampton, linen-draper—
C. Smith, Old City Chambers, Bishopsgate-street, wine-
id Cornwall, tallow-
merchant—J. and W. Smith, jun., South Shields, Durham,
rope-makers—W. Bainbridge, Erenwood, Durham. horse-
doetalnedr—ier.tw.J..B.sn
Frans,
Horsley, Gloucestershire, clothier
—A. Mackintosh, Conduit-street, merchant.
Smith, Walebrge,
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

J. Davy, J. Gilbert, and W. Sowton, DevUnport,brew-
ers—D., H., and E. Fogden, Donningron, Chichester,
farmers—J. and H. Lloyd, Shrewsbury, Shropshire,
plumbers and glaziers—J. Ireland, T. Cookson, and J.
Gaskarth, Kirkby-Kendal,Westmorland, coal-merchants—
T. North, T. Sergent, J. Smedley, J. Bonser, W. Parkin,
P. Burton, G. New, J. Garner, J. Pollard, and C. Smith,

Nottingham, lace-manufacturers—T. and F. Broderick,
Spalding and Ho!beach, Lincolnshire, watch-makers—T.
and R. Roberts, High-street, Newington, Surrey, tobac-
conist—J. and C. Percival, Whitechap,l, oil and colour-
men—J. A. Cheshire, jun. and J. Ridgway, jun. Camber-
well-Green, Surrey, plumbers—A. Spears, A. I'. Muir,
and W. Morrison, Glasgow, Liverpool, and Buenos Ayres
merchants.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, DEC. 22.
BEESTON V. FORD.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment in this
case, which arose upon an application for an injunc-
tion, which had been dissolved by the Lord Chan-
cellor, on cause being shewn against it, by the
plaintiff. In 1802, the plaintiff was the assignee
of a patent for improvement in ships' cabooses, and
it appeared that the patentee and his assignees had
enjoyed the exclusive use of the invention for about
seven years. It appeared that then an alteration
was made, by which, instead of the fire-place being
open, and capable of being closed by an iron plate
with hinges, a fixed iron plate was sastituted, and
the fire-place was fed by means of a furnace. In
other respects the machines corresponded. His
Lordship thought, that notwithstanding these altera-
tions, the plaintiff ought to be considered as having
enjoyed the patent up to the present time. The
rule of law iu these cases had been laid down by
Lord Eldoncto be, that where a patentee had for a
number of years enjoyed the exclusive possession of
a patent, the Court would not allow that possession
to be disturbed, and would grant an injunction until
the trial at law, whatever doubt there might be as
to the validity of the patent. On the other hand,
if such possession could not be proved, the Court
would not grant its protection, but would send the
parties to a Court of Law to decide the question.
After reading the specification, he could not but
entertain great doubt whether it could be supported.
It included a new and an old machine, and he
thought that the improvement ought to have been
much more minutely and accurately pointed out.
' He doubted, too, whether that part of the inven-
tion which was claimed as a novelty, as to con-
structing the covers of the boilers, was a new in-
vention. Its application to ships' cabooses might
be novel; but it was very questionable whether that
alone entitled it to protection. The infringement
being, as his Lordship thought, well established,
supposing the patent could be supported, the machine
appeared to be accurately enough described. It was
not, however, his province to decide the validity of
the patent on the ground he had alluded to, and lie
mast therefore order the injunction to be revived.
Some arrangement should be made for the speedy
trial at law of the patent-right, and he therefore
ordered the declaration to be delivered before the
assoign-day of the next Term, and the trial should
be in the Court of Common Pleas.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 22.
FRENCH V. BROOKE AND OTHERS.

This action was brought by the plaintiff against
the defendants as directors of " The Famatina
Mining Company," one of the ephemerals of 1E25,
to recover a balance of salary due to the plaintiff as
superintendent of the company's mining concerns
in South America, and also for monies laid out and
expenses incurred on account of the defendants.
The plaintiff was employed by the defendants in the
summer of 1825, and a contract was entered into,
whereby they engaged to pay him a salary at the
rate of 6001. a year for the first year, commencing
from his embarkation, and 501. additional each sue-
ceding year until he completed the period of three
years from the date of his arrival at the mines. If
at that period no fresh cmtract were entered into,
the plaintiff's expenses home to England, and those
of his family, were to be defrayed by the company.
And if before the expiration of the three years the
defendants should think proper to dismiss the plain-
tiff from their service, they were only to do so on
giving a twelvemonth's notice, or a twelvemonth's
salary, and were also to defray his expenses home.
The defendants contended that they were not liable,
because they had contracted merely on behalf of the
company, and not on their own responsibility; and
because the agreement was not under seal. Both
these grounds of objection were overruled by the
Learned Judge, and the items of account were
therefore gone into, the defendant's Counsel hav-
ing declined to refer this part of the case.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff,
damages 1,0251.; together with the further sum of
320/., as the expenses of his family's journey home
to England, and also seven months' additional salary,
at the rate of 700/. a year, in case the Court above
shall be of opinion, upon the legal construction of
the contract, that the plaintiff is entitled to remune-
ration upon these two points.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, DEC. 22.

Allersall, a coachmaker, late of No. 18,
Bartholomew-square, was opposed by Mr. Cooke,
on behalf of Messrs. Curl and Upstone.
The insolvent, who appears to be verging on 70
years of age, was married to his present wife in
1826. Shortly before which he executed a marriage
settlement in favour of his wife, for 501. a-year,
chargeable on a house of his in Theobald's-road, the
rent of which was 841. a-year. lie also had two
houses, Nos. 18 and 19, Bartholomew-square,
worth 30/. a-year each. All his furniture he sold in
May, a few days before he went to prison, to a
broker, for about 10/.

William Hackwood, a carman, in May was em-
ployed by the insolvent's wife to remove a van load
of furniture from his house to the house of his son,
in St. George's market, Southwark, and at the
same time another van was loaded also with the fur-
niture, and taken to the same place, making two
loads of good furniture. There were also 14 stoves,
which the witness had now in his possession, be-
cause the insolvent's wife had not paid him his
charge for removing the goods.
Mr. Edward Savage Bayly, solicitor for the op-
posing creditors, deposed that if the insolvent had
given up this furniture, they would have relieved
him from prison.
Mr. COOKE here intimated to the insolvent, that
the creditors were still disposed to release him, if he
would give up the furniture.
The insolvent said that lie had nothing to give up.
Mr. WOODROOFE begged that the case might be
adjourned for the present, in order to endeavour to
bring the insolvent to his senses.
The case was then adjourned.

MR. 'MADDEN'S TRAVELS IN TURKEY,
EGYrT, NUBIA, AND PALESTINE.—When we hear so
much of the barbarism of the Turks, and are desired to
give so much credit to Russia for civilization, whatever
relates to the Customs, Manners, Pursuits, and Amuse-
ments, which prevail in the principal of the Mahoznedan
States, cannot fail to prove eminently attractive to the
English reader. Mr. MADDENS narrative possesses the
advantage of showing to us what is the state of society,
and what are the manners prevailing in the East, down,
as we may say, to the present time. His travels and ob-
servations extend over a very considerable space of country,
and embrace a period of four years, during which he
visited and made a sojourn at Constantinople, in Candia,
at Alexandria, &c. lle also visited the ruins of Troy,
of Memphis, of Thebes, and of Jerusalem, his vivid de-
scriptions of which memorable places would alone confer
the highest value on hie labours.