The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-05 00:00:00

Jett It4T.EET,idENCE.-(THIS DAY.) •

COURT OF CHANCERY.
SMVENS V. GUPPY. - •
Was an appeal froth an order made by Sir
slohn'Leach, when Vice-Chancellor.
Ills
Lord Lounsurr said, he understood this was in
Eld°ll's
paper for judgment, and he wished to
no ~r 1444' the parties should not take that .judgment
1101 V.

hefts
Mr' 81;‘1311N believed it had not been fully argued
e the late Lord' Chancellor. Several points
were raised, and one had not be-en discussed.
815 LoRDstiIP observed, that when he had some
eonversation
r' with Lord Eldon, before he left ton,
learnt from him that he was either disposed to
give Judg
ear ment as it had been left before him, or to
Counsel further upon it, and then give his
3"(l.ivigalent.
Lo—dr' SIJGDEN knew not how it was practicable for
Eldon to hear Counsel now, having entirely
retiLed from the Seals.
tlis Lonostisaid lie could hear them at his own
house, W
Mr. SUGDEN however, notwithstanding ' the high
respect he had for that, Learned Lord, could not
"ye the Court to go to his house to argue the case.
ver
His LORDSlilP.observed, that Mr. Sugden had a
y Learned Gentleman behind him (Mr. Preston.)
be iNfltai.r:eSn:jiGf DhiEeNcilVeanstscontent that this course should
into the hands of h. •
this. objected to
. apse to put their case entirely
is junior. His clients
iNir. HEALD was on the other side, and was now,
Igh_neile
heal n.
dr
as
he
had alwav3 been, willing to take Lord -Eldon's
v:sir. ,t.Tonr.:si
jftlurd he was willing that the case should be
before that learned individual.
wished to know whether Mr. Heald
Lord EIJI
..,.. on.
"NIG" t° have the case further argued before
Mr. UFA,.
m 8 ---u was. . • ,
be one oP,DEN thn asked if he would consent to
how* to tile Counsel that would go to lord Eldon's
argue it ?
- Mr. tie .
Ain t :Lb said no.
publie,s"!ltbsntP was only anxious to save the
a ion time, if possible, from being consumed by
Aid f discussion in going through a heavy case that
not eelt argued at length before ; but as this was
sane tlll to on all hands at the bar, it was the
therefore tilg to him--he could only be occupied, and
cordinglY
-
proeceeded.

IR if • HART V. HART.
yesterlis ease, in which the LORD CHANCELLOR
to be ordered the defendant,
ship '')totnitted for a breach of injunction, his Lord
Mr. Jacob
_Hart:
" Understand, Lord-
and aft had after he made the order,
'tar t Stile had left the Court, desired the Regis-
his ofi°•Y the issuing the order of committal from
Pan Icie for a day or two, until be gave judgment
ferid,t-litue 'notion that 11:d been made by the de-
beer: tto dissolve the ea-parte injunction that had
expetgranted against him, and which judgment is
led to beg iven tO-rnorrow.

.VICF..CITANCELLOR'S COURT.

—.-.
x1,,,,,zt 1 JUDGMENT.
At th IC*ICE IN RE BUTLER: AND C. O. RANRUPT9.
Vice. 00 sitting of the court this morning,
ptehtie..
tion, I,neellor gave his judgment uponthis
Ihe w'ich 'toad over from the middle of last, T
thell petition Prayed that certain Bills of Exchange
Term.
flight in tl, ,
1,--e 'lands of the Assignees of the Bankrupts,.tioeer.
11,0 --, ordered to be returned to the
petirehant,
resienetiti.oiler
, ,Etated, that Mr. Hoke, ameof Ex-
c°loangegtoith- ea"ali):rto, had transmitted Bills
him tome e
, who had, arit of 7004 to the Messrs. Butler andk
chases.Pur itegnently been employed by '
,ran
at
shoi ~l'he letter inel
,rty., at a -4ue applied to the " g the bills desired that
4eei certain price per ton. -
rnprruhrechMaseessrsof.Baiictalerrgaolsoof
in lii:ei (I at the same time bills for 2001. Mr. Hopke.
the -.'etters d
ti,e441.2 and to
bilis „ esire • d them "to do the needful with
place them to his credit. From
illiatei,:stances that occurred;. the Messrs. Butler were
. .
the 'to purchase the iron for the price stated in
Petitioner's letter, and accordingly wrote to him
/'that the bills still remained in their hands to
tit, 'd in such manner as-. he might -think
ler a, Crean answer was received the Mears: But-
le
voNd 0, became bankrupts, and their assignees
dispe:titt, g the bills as being "in the power and
thena- I% of the bankrupts," iefused to return
\vas ;., Against the claim made by
Ploy illtended, that as the bankrupts had been em.-
Mr. Hopke it
I,i a. ei
,4,8 general commercial agents by the pen-
-41:;„"neY must be considered to have received the
tight -", that character; and if so, that he had no
Plait to that
them returned—that the bills must be
'uthdtkol' ,as part of the bankrupt's estate, and as
, It -I.,4llflistered by his assignees.
'te(ll'i, `'°NOUR observed, that the various. cases
the nut counsel on both sides went to show that
I,4'ele -te 01' the lien must be determined by the
1".1 their Contract subsisting between the parties
ti°as -,7‘l,,eaeral Course of dealing, or by the dire -
r0k,,,,1 "cb Aecom anied the remittance. Upon
,4e 41t'le.t all the circumstancesP of the present case,
itioe 01, -es
,:1:..14't slie.oli bound
specialto concludepurpose,
ihereforePled at the bills had
and ought not
to any other whatever.
ought Hetowasbe
returned i; to
that the bills
other bills ',lr. liGpke, and that the
_prsoidouucde
4c:' be retur,vllieh had been discounted.
I thel
klaount of -- to I • after deducting_
hankr4te. the debt ',ingumfro,
Ana p from the petitioner to the
°l' an Pcillenben Was%nade in the course of the day
,olicitoor
, 7 to commit Charles Edward Reynolds, aa
:toler -3,,°1* conteMpt, in not having obeyed
``liver order of the Court, which required him to
tiffs- ~,,, certain papers.
4Pori °1:11t. refused to grant the application,
italb
tog°-bserviti. that the order referred to was not so
tver:4-as warrant the present motion. He, how-
pro,zreeted that the solicitor should deliver up the
o,Ptehte.and. documents referred to within. a month,
tef,,,i 9ie should 'be committed in the event of his
agar neglecting to do so.
• 1 •
..._

._,;
4"'.1;131-711•T OF KING'S BENCH.
(Sittings .after Term.) .
~,,.
this PIIRDEN V. HULL.
of _
Exchange for
So/. was an action for a Bill , • a for_
and a , d'et passed for the plaintiff on .
.ier ~.. ,
.1, er i
ili '3; With the understanding that the verdict
(411 d be taken its'of last term.
fl
r,:rbe .Co en
SERGEANT now applied to the
The for leave to move to set aside the. verdict, on
'tle Etronnd that the bill. was drayvn on a wrong
to
Stamp was for 3s. 6d., whilst it should
L've 7' 'X's- Gd• The Attornev-General stated
In • the 'trial, I-1
''
teat 3s, Gd.' was a sufficient
tamp, and relying on
the de-
indant's hisauthority
objec-
oti, but eth°4lBehladhad not made any
amp was insufficient.
of sin un-.
ertaking that judgment should siTille
edirisectionlvsetraeidicethat the
be taken, as if of.
term, made it
resent a necessary for biro to make the
pplication at this time.
Lord TENTERI)EN skid; the defendant did not ap-
ear to depend on the merits of his case_, but on the
provisions of a . penal statute. 'The Court, there-
I,
Zr‘e, was not disposed tog ve him any indulgence;
to allow him now to take advantage of an objec-
-11 which ought to have; been made on the trial.
JAexsOx V. noAtir.
which This was an.action on a bill of exchange for 201.,
ch the tared thai defendant was the acceptor. It
ap-
the defendant, wanting to raise money,
leepted the bill in question, and handed it t
'sc'n named Peckham, who. stated that lie w sores'`.te.d tu,a banker, and 'had a facility in discounting
;1,4. veckliam, upon getting possession of the
'l, Pledged it to the plaintiff for a pound, and sub-
quently reee4ed. 3/. 10s. from the defendant to
ke it uP' wllich he applied to his own use.
Witnesses were_
_._,_, A
prouticea with a view of proving
• t Jackson hadiold goods to Peckham, in consi-
ration-for which 'he received the bill, but it ap-
• red that Jackson offered the defendant to .let him
ve back.his acceptance for 31.105., which induced
endant to give that sum to Peckham It also