The Sun.
London, England, 1827-06-23 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Jaws 22.

The Court was occupied the whole day on the new trial
paper. None of the cases were of the least public interest.

BUSINESS OF THE COURT.

- -
The King's warrant was read, authorising two or more
of the Judges of this Court to sit in Banco during the en-
suing vacation, from the sth to the 11th July, inclusively,
and from the 29th October to the first day of Michaelmas
Term, inclusively.

GRAY v. JOHN WILKS, JUN., FSQ., bL. F.
This was an action against the defendant, as the acceptor
of a bill of exchange. lie pleaded in abatement that be
ought to have been sued as a Member of Parliament, and
not as an attorney. To this plea the plaintiff demurred,
and there , was a joinder in demurrer ; but the defendant
having neglected to deliver his paper books,
_

Mr: F. KELLY now prayed judgment for the plaintiff,'
urging that there was nothing in the defendant's plea.
Mr. Ciurry contended that the point was one of some
nicety, and was intended to be gravely argued.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY said, that possibly, if the defendant
bad been sued as an M.P., be would bave pleaded his pri-
vilege as an Attorney.
Mr. CHITTY answered in the negative, and said that the
privilege of a Parliament man was higher than that of an
Attorney. A Member of Parliament could not be taken
in execution, but an Attorney might.
Mr. Justice )3AYLEY said that the defendant might be
taken on a capiat ad salisfaspiqnden, on ceasing to he
Member of Parliament, . .

. „
The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE could see no disadvantage to,
the defendant in being sued as an Attorney, and, therefore,
he thought judgment ought to begiven for the plaintiff.
• Judgment for the plaintiff of Respondeat ouster.

I.NSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Jura,. 22.
Jacob Cohen, a r.prii 1.1
-,oti versuasion, who
lately carried on business at Cdcli4ster, was opposeq in his
application by three Counsel, viz. Mr. Cooxx, on behalf cif
creditors named Lazarus, Myers, and Moses ; by Mr.
co).10, the assignees of the estate of Henry Jacobs, a
bankrupt; 'and by 'Mr. lIARRY; for Mr. Finch and Mr.
Davey.—Remanded.
John May, late of Peldon, near Colchester, Essex, an
extensive farmer, was opposed by Mr. HEATH for all the
creditors in his voluminous schedule.
Mr. HEATII intimated that be bad an application to
make t? the Court, but he would first ask the insolvent a
question: '"
The'insolvent was first arrested in Essex, when he put ip
bail, and afterward Cattle td 'London,' to surrender. He
dinied that since an action had been brought ,against him be
had coigned property to the trustees of his wife.' He lately
ppctiPiP4.7Po acres of land:
Mr. HEATH then moved fqr leave to remove the insol,
vent down to Colchester, at and near which Place all the
creditors lived.
The application
the reient circuit ?
time for the insolvent to be heard during p
time
Commissioner LAW inquired if there was sufficient
The reply was in the affirmative.
gave rise to a Lon; discussicrn, owing to

its being a novelfibe. ; The commissioners at length sahl.
that they could not make an order to remove the insolveit
to:Colchester, as it was only' a borough gaol; but they
would send him to. Chelmsford, or the case might be re-
ferred in like manner with the last, if the creditors thought
it a more,preferable mode.
It Nvas.finally arFaugo;that the insolvent should be seat
to Chelmsford on or before Tuesday next.
Theinsolventwas then removed from the bar.
• Samuel Howell, an accountant, from Stepney, was op-
posed by Mr. PoLtocK, on behalf of Miss Sophia Nicklan,
to whom the insolvent was indebted for the eiucation of
his daughters.--Remanded.

MOTION FOR A RE-HEARING.

In the matter of .• Catherine Abbott, the wife of John
Abbott, Mr. ADOLPHUS moved for a rule for the dis-
charged female to show• cause why her discharge should not
be revoked, and why she should not be brought up for re-
hearing on her petition and schedule.
Mr. AnoLfitus said, that she had been trading as. a
widow, and transferring and selling out stock in the funds,
and it was a hard case upon creditors that they should be
thus defrauded. •
The Commissioner LAW thought there was little to be
said about her trade (the keeper of a brothel) ; at all events
it lay with the party applying to falsify her by proving that
her husband was not living. • The Court wished to know
whether the affidavit gave the name of the • clerk at the
Navy-office who made the search ?
Mr. ADOLPHUS answered in the negative.
After further discussion, the Court said that it had bet-
ter be ascertained, and put in ; at present, the Learned
Gentleman could take nothing by his motion.
Mr. AnoLemus intimated that this should be done, and
here the matter rests for the present. .