The Sun.
London, England, 1827-08-11 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(TIIIS DAY.)

_ • .
COURT OF CHANCERY. _
The Lord Chancellor sat at twenty minutes past
ten o'clock.

LORD CREW V. FROUD.

Mr. AGAR brought on this case, that had been de-
cided some time ago by his Lordship, modifying an
injunction that had been granted by Lord Eldon, on
behalf of the plaintiff against the defendant, restrain-
ing him from cutting timber, upon the subject of
costs. His client did not understand that the Court
had given costs against him.
His LORDSHIP remembered most distinctly having
given costs against Mr. Frolic?.

IN THE MATTER OF EURO, A LUNATIC.
In this matter the lunatic, formerly a Purser in
the Navy, is in a lunatic asylum, at Newcastle-upon-
Tyne; his brother was appointed the Committee of
his person, and he has been in prison for nearly 12
months,- the application now therefore was on the
part of Mrs. Thorn, a sister of the lunatic, that the
Committee might be removed, that he might pass
his accounts, and a new Committee appointed.
Mr. HEALD appeared for the petitioner, Mrs.
Thorn.
Mr. Twiss and TREE were for the Committee.
Their client had no objection whatever to be re-
moved from the office he held, provided he was re-
spectably so discharged, and that Mr. Linsey paid
the costs of this petition. Mr. Linsey had been for
a time the solicitor of all parties, lunatic, committee,
and petitioner ; he had got Mr. Warburton to arrest
the Committee for a charge Mr. W. had against him
for the maintenance and protection of the lunatic,
and, as was alleged, for the purpose of himself getting
into the receipt of the lunatic's half-pay of 701. a
year, till he had discharged his own bills of costs
amounting to between 5001. and 600/. Mr. Linsey
had been in receipt of the half-pay for several years,
and he ought to have paid Mr. `Warburton. It was
further contended, that the petition of Mrs. Thorn
was, in fact, the petition of Mr. Linsey, Mrs. Thorn
being a poor woman living in Scotland.
HORNE was counsel for Mr. Linsey. lie
disclaimed any interest, except a desire to have his
bills paid. They had been taxed under an order of
Lord Eldon, and he had no objection to go before
the Master to have them re-taxed.
His LORDSHIP desired it to be understood, that
he threw no imputations on the character of the
Committee in removing him, but being in prison he
was not to be any longer continued in the Committee,
therefore the Court now removed him. It further
ordered, that the half-pay should go to the mainte-
nance of the lunatic. That so far as the petitioner
prayed the removal of the Committee, he should
Pay the costs, but that of the other parts—
such as prayed that Mr. Linsey might be let
into the receipt of the lunatic's income, &c.
the Committee should have the costs ; and that
as Mr. Linsey might eventually be responsible for
the whole of the costs, if the Committee thought
Proper, he should be at liberty to bring forward his
charges against Mr. L. by a distinct petition.

I>l THE MATTER Or GRECIORY TAE TURNER, A

LUNATIC.

Mr. CHING presented a petition in this matter on
behalf of a person named Coburn, who stated him-
self to be the gardener of Sir Gregory, which prayed
to have the amount of his debt of 921. paid to him
for wages. It prayed other things, but which the
Learned Counsel did not insist upon.
Dr. PRILLIMORE begged to interpose on behalf of
the committees, with a petition which prayed for an
order to refer the petition which Mr. Ching had
risen to open to the Master, for scandal and imperti-
nence, and that the petitioner might be ordered to
Pay the costs of such parts as might come under that
denomination. He deemed it right to state the
Prayer of that petition a little more fully. It prayed
that the petitioner might have the opportunity of
trying whether Sir G. had been truly and honestly
found to be a lunatic; that the two keepers from the
madhouse, who had had the charge of the lunatic might
be restrained from giving evidence on that trial; that
the petitioner, either by himself, his attorney, or
counsel, might be at liberty to enable himself to
!earrk all the tricks and contrivances of Sir Gregory's
keepers, &c. (Laughter.) The petition brought
forward the most barefaced and scandalous charges
against a great , nuinber of most eminent and distin-
guished personages, amongst whom the Lord Chan-
cellor had the honour of having his name inserted.
It was impossible that the comnaittees could
permit this petition to be brought. forward
without having it referred, for scandal and imper-
tinence. Nobody could doubt that it in fact was
the petition of Sir Gregory himself, or of his attor-
ney, Mr. Corbett.
Mr. Cutts' admitted the petition had been im-
properly framed, and that he neither was instructed
'nor would he lend himself, to support the greater
part of the petition.
His LORDSHIP understood that there were no
funds yet of the lunatic, and that therefore the part
of the petition which prayed the 921. to be directed
to be paid to the gardener was premature, so that it
would have to be dismissed as to that part. It was
nest for Mr. Chine- to say whether he would consent
to have the whore of the petition dismissed with
costs, or whether he would rather go into the Mas-
ter's Office upon the reference prayed by Dr. Phil-
limore.

Mr. CHING consented to the petition being wholly
dismissed with cost".

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT•

EX-PARTE ;WELTON 1W THX MATTER or COLEMAN.
Arguments were resumed upon this petition to-
day. It appeared that a commission of bankruptcy
issued against Messrs. Coleman and Winans,
bankers at Ludlow, and that subsequently another
commission was issued against the four partners in
the Leominster bank, with which Coleman was also
connected. Coleman was, of course, included in
this latter commission. The object of the present
petition, which was presented by the assignees under
the Leominster commission, was that the first com-
mission might be superseded, so far as related to
Coleman.

Mr. Ross and Mr. MoNTAGUE appeared for the
petitioners, and stated, that their clients were placed
in circumstances of great difficulty. They had
already administered a large portion of the effects of
these four bankrupts, they had paid 6s. Bd. in the
pound, and had entered into the several contracts by
which they made themselves liable to actions at law,
and suits in Chancery, and yet it was clear that
they i
had no title whatever tinder their commission,
inasmuch as a second commission ssu:ld against a
person, already the object of a subsisting one,
invalid.was
It was lately that they made this
discovery, when a coTnhvoeyancer was employed to
t.tm,ad
draw up some deeds.
them that they bad no : conveyancer at once told
that it would not
be safe for any person to contra them.. Under
these circumstances they .claimedemtthee assistance of
the Court, offering at the same
siupersetdoeddefranytalefl
the expenses that might be incurred in' consequenceh
of the first commission being
manner prayed for. The
it
involved
considerable amount, as it appeared that the debtso
of the Leominster bank were 91,0001., whilst a claim
of not much less than 71,0001. was made under the
Ludlow commission.
Mr. HEALD and Mr. WAKEFIELD appeared' for
the respondents, and argued that it would be mani-
festly unjust to interfere with a commission which
had been properly issued, and thereby to disturb the
rights of creditors claiming under it. The assignees
under the Ludlow commission (the first one) had
commenced actions at law for the recovery o debts
due to the estate of Coleman and Winans; they had
also a suit in Chancery now pending; so that the
effect of superseding their commission would be to
put an end to all these proceedings, to the great da-
mage of the joint creditors of Coleman and Willans.
Mr. Russ was aware that some inconvenience of
that nature might be the result of the measure which
the petitioners prayed ; but then they were willing
to indemnify the respondents for any loss that might
be thus incurred.
The VICE CHANCELLOR said, that the [pat diffi-