The Sun.
London, England, 1827-07-27 00:00:00

. SUMMER ASSIZES.

WESTERN CIRCUIT, WINCHESTER, JULY 26.
Tim KINa V. ANN DAARY, 114031 AS DARBY, AND RICHARD

'SVAVELL.
This was an indictment for having in their possession
copper marked with the broad arrow, being his Majesty's
property. By mutual agreement Ann Darby, a very old
woman, the mother of Thomas, was acquitted ; but the
Jury returned a verdict of Guilty against the other two.
John Sullivan and Elizabeth Hickson were capitally
indicted foi the murder of Alexander Stroud, at the town
of Gosport, on Sunday morning last.
The parti.culars of this case, together with the witnesses,
who were tue same as those produced on the inquest, were
given at full in oar as
of Wednesday The prisoners, on being called upo-r:
declined saying anything. for their defence,
Mr. Justice BiTRROUQH did not think the evidence suffi-
cient to bring home the charge of
murder to the prisoners.
The Jury, after some deliberation, acquitted the female,
and found the prisoner Sullivan Guilty of Manslau hter, upon whic'h the Learned Judge eentenced him to be impgrison-
ed for twelve calendar months in the House .of Correction.

SCARBOROUGH CLIFF BRIDGE,. This
magnificent Iron Bridge and Promenade was opened on
Thursday last, by a procession over the same, on the return
of which an exhibition, of considerable importance, took
place at the bridge. The York Mail, drawn by four horses,
tried its strength most effectually, by passing oyer
it and
returning at full speed, amidst the deafening plaudits of
astonished and almost trembling thousands. At five
o'clock,abcnit eighty gentlemen sat down to a sumptilous
entertainment, served in Downer's Long Room.-- yorh
chronicle.

ERRATUM.---11l the paragraph which we in-
serted yesterday respecting the Talbot Steam-vessel plying
between Brighton and Hastings, the word eight o'clock
was printed by mistake for three o'clock. The sentence
should stand thus—." The Talbot left this port (HASTINGS)
at three o'clock, on her return to Brighton, where she will
arrive before eight o'clock in the evening."
The Company's ships Dunira and Lady
Melville arrived off the Wight the 15th of July. They
left Macao the sth of Marsh, and St. Helena the 6th of
j-4,41*. The Thames was at Macao, and expected to sail
4bout three days afterwards ; likewise the Boyne (from
el? South Wales) on the 16th. The Asia, from Ben-
Abe' Was at St. Helena, and expected to sail for England
gt tilt Bth of June.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.--(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
WESTMEATH 11. WESTMEATH.

His LORDSHIP stated, that hi thought in this
case, in which Lady Westmeath moved to have a
new Trustee appointed in the place of Lord Talbot,
and to have the arrear of her pin-money ordered to
be paid to her, that. the costs of the suit ought to
come out of the fund in Court. This seemed, indeed,
to have been contemplated by 'all the parties.

ABSENTEES.
For a considerable time his Lordship found a
great difficulty in procuring Counsel to move any
thing. The excuse was, that the Master of the Rolls
was sitting hearing consent matters, where the greater
number of Counsel were engaged. ' •

GIBBON V. COWLING.

Air. HEALD appeared to oppose the motion for a
new trial that was made yesterday by the Solicitot-
General. It will be recollected that the issue di-
rected by this Court was, to try whether one
Matthew Gibbon was the heir-at-law of a Matthew
Gibbon deceased, at the York Assizes. The estate
was at Appleby. The issue had been tried four
times, and the Juries found two verdicts one way,
and two the other ; and the present application was
for a fifth time: The estate amounts to about 1201:
a year, andfVlr. Heald felt perfectly assured, that if
the Court granted the trial that was now asked for,
the whole fee simple of the estate would be
swallowed up in costs. The two last trials
were in favour of the plaintiff, and the de-
fendant now moved. The principal ground on
which the defendant relied, was the affidavit of a
Mr. Lodge, which Mr. H. considered, if it even could
be looked upon as true, could not in the eye'of the
Court make any difference in the case, but he viewed
that affidavit as altogether undeserving of credit. It
was in contradiction to all that Lodge had himself
previously sworn to, and directly opposed to the evi-
dence of half a dozen of other witnesses.
His LORDSHIP intimated, that he felt an extreme
reluctance to think of granting another trial. The
case was proceeding when we left, but the particulars
have all been more than once before the public.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COITRA'.

PREECE AND OTHERS V. WIGILITAL-ND ANOTHER.

Thfrwßrart-apPication by Mr. TRESLOYE for a
special injunction, to restrain the -defendant from
'compelling the plaintiff to proceed in a certain action
at law, and also to restrain the defendant from pro,
ceeding in it himself. The facts of the case as set
forth in the affidavit of the plaintiff are shortly these:
a Mr. Eastwicke, in the year 1823, conveyed by
lease, certain lands to the defendant, in trust for
the plaintiff. The defendant having lately dis-
trained the preinises, as, for rent due to him, the
plaintiff replevied the goods taken in dis-
tress, and entered into the usual bond to
prosecute the action of replevin, for the
purpose of determining the rights of the parties.
The plaintiff now conceiving that at law his case
might not be sufficiently strong, sought to stay the
proceedings, in the replevin sent, until a Court of
Equity should have the opportunity of deciding upon
the merits of the question.
Mr. WRIGHT opposed the motion, and said that
the plaintiff, who had lately become an insolvent,
had not the slightest grounds for calling on the as-
sistance of the Court.

The VICE-CIIANCEiLOR said that he never knew
the Court to grant an application 'of •this sort
unless upon merits confessed in the defendant's
answer. In this case the defendant had not yet put
in his answer, and the only facts before the Court
were those contained in the affidavit filed by the
plaintiff. His Honour did not mean to express an
opinion one way ol the other as to the truth or false-
hood of the allegations in that affidavit, but he
thought it would be a monstrously unjust measure
against a landlord, who should distrain a dishonest
tenant, if, upon the mere affidavit of that tenant, a
Court of .Equity should hang up his claim for rent
actually due, until the termination of a Chancery
suit. His Honour would, however, look into the
authorities upon the subject, if any existed, and
after examining the
.affidavit minutely, would say
whether he ought to interfere. If he felt himself
bound to attend to the application, he would most
certainly afford the defendant the opportunity of
making an affidavit in answer to the one filed by the
plaintiff.

COICTRT OF KING'S BENCH.
TAYLOR V. BARER AND OTHERS.

This wit.; an action brought by the plaintiff, who
is a ship owner in London, against the defendants
who are directors of the South Devon Insurance
Company, to recover the sum of 2,0001. secured by
insurance with the defendants, on a vessel called
the Peggy, belonging to the plaintiffs.

Mr. GURNEY, Mr. BROUGHAM, and Mr. PARK,
Were for the plaintiff, and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
and Mr. PoLLocK, for the defendants.

Mr. GURNEY stated the case. The vessel in
question, after being insured, sailed on the 15th
September, 1826, from Bristol for Quebec, to bring
home a cargo of timber. About a week or ten days
aftei her departure, she met with heavy gales; which
lasted till the 27th October, when she arrived off
Cape Breton. Here tne sea was so boisterous, that
the ship became leaky, and at ten o'clock in the
morning when the water was six feet deep in the
hold, the Captain and crew were obliged to betake
themselves to their boats, in which they arrived at
Cape Breton at 11 o'clock at night. They saw the
ship founder two hours after they left her. The
plaintiff, upon receiving information of her loss,
applied to the defendants.for the sum insured on her;
but they refused to pay, on pretence that she was
not sea-worthy when she sailed. He was, therefore,
obliged to bring the preFent action, and as he should
prove that the ship was in a good state of repair
when she left, he would be entitled to a verdict.
The master of the vessel and several of the crew
were then called, and deposed that she was sea-
worthy•when she set sail.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL addressed the Jury for
the defendant, and said he would prove that the
vessel was old—that she was not sea-worthy—and
that she required a more thorough repair than she
uoderwent, before her departure, to erttitle the
plaintiff to recover.

The defendant's witnesses were examining when
our reporter left. There being a great number of
them to be examined, it is likely► the cause will
occupy the Court till a late hour.