The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-22 00:00:00

VIOE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.

His Howoun rose to-day at twelve o'clock. The bank-
rupt petitions in the matter of Acton were directed to stand
over.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
PHILLIPS V. STONEHOUSR.
Mr. BROUGHAM stated the case. This action was
brought for defamatory words spoken of the plaintiff's elm-
eeting
ractsr at a meeting of Trustees far lighting, watching, and
Paving the district of Wandsworth and Newington Bg'utts.
The m • was held at the Elephant and Castle, and
both the plaintiff and defendant being Trustees were pre-
sent.sing some A colannvrin ation ensued about the propriety of asses-
sing
other the possession of Mr. Phillips, and
some very angry words passed between the parties.
things, Mr. Stonehouse said to Mr.
Phillips,
staiue d n
You are a scoundrel, a rogue, and a thief.
Thesekind co were the
b words s
complained of, for an action of this
unless the defendant had ap-
plied some words to the plaintiff, uld not
crime,
would be equal
with aanl
dega this I;e
had applied to
' htoiinclitahreglivnograhlm
"thief,"expression to use towards a man whose integrityavweruy gross
never
before questioned, and who was as respectable as any man
in the city of London. He understood he would be üblea
to prove the defamatory expressions alluded to, by persons
of respectability who were present, and it would then be
for the Jury to say what damages they considered the plain-
tiff entitled to. The Learned Counsel then called
Wm. Gretton, who said I was one of the Trustees of
the W elswor t,h..roa d. The plaintiff and defendant are
both an
Trustees also. On the 25th of June last I attended
a meeting of the Trustees at the Elephant and Castle, at
which the plaintiff and defendant were also present. Mr.
Stonehouse made some proposition about assessing an
orchard. This was proposed by Mr. Stonehouse, and ob-
jected to by Mr. Phillips. A quarrel took place between
the parties, and words ran very high, but I do not remem-
ber the language that was used.
Cross-examined—Mr. Stonehouse asserted that Mr.
Phillips had occupied and derived some benefit from the
land in question, and Mr. Phillips denied this.
Another witness was called, who was present at the
quarrel, but he was not able to recollect the expressions
used by the parties.
The Clerk of the Trust stated, that lie was engaged
making minutes of the proceedings of the trustees, and did
not attend to the angry language which passed between
the parties. 'The words " scoundrel, rogue, and thief,"
however, were uttered and applied by Mr. Stonehouse to
Mr. Phillips.
Cross - examined.--Mr. Phillips is a testy old gen-
tlemen, and I do not believe that Mr. Stonehouse in-
tended when he called hint a thief, to charge hint with a
felony. The word was merely applied in anger.
Lord TatuaßDlN.—Do you sail anyother witness ?
Mr. BROUOIIAM.-.4 believe we must next call Leo-
nard Phillips (the plaintiff ), ray Lord.
Lord TENTERDEN.—GentIemen, the action cannot be
I sustained. The plaintiff must be called.
The plaintiff wr.s accordingly nonsuited.

COURT OF COMMON PLEASa
ROLPH V. WRIGHT.
This was an action brought by the assigness of the plain-
tiff, who is a bankrupt, against the executors of the late
Earl of Shrewsbury, for the recovery of the sum of 5001. for
medical attendance upon the Earl.—The plaintiff was non-
suited.

Prince LEOPOLD left his residence, IVlarl-
barough-house, ll m n
Pa
- - a- on Thursday, for his seat at
Claremont.