The Sun.
London, England, 1827-05-29 00:00:00

EXCEPTIONS TO THE MASTER'S REPORT.

His Horroue. stated, incidentally, in the course of the
business, that, in some luggestioui which he was prepariug,
under the eve of the Lord Chancellor, to submit to the
Court, proviJed he lived long enough for that purpose, he
should provide for the abolition of the practise with refn--
enee to exceptions to the Master's Report. The present
form was productive of unnecessary delay and expence;
and instead of tendering exceptions as now, it would he
much better that the parties should come at once into
Court from the Master's Office, and state their objections.
This was a Seal Day, and, being the last day of Term,
his Honour sat till five o'clock.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, M ?S.
STONE AND ANOTHER V. IfARSH AND OTHERS.

This was an issue, directed by the Lord Chancellor, to
try whether the plaintiffs could prove, ender a Commission
of Bankruptcy against the defendants, the sum of 16,0001.
Navy Fives, of which the plaintiffs were, with Henry
Fauntleroy, joint trustees ; but which money Mr. Fauntle-
roy sold out by means of a forged Power of Attorney, pur-
porting to be executed by himself and his co-trustees, and
paid the proceeds in his own name, into the defendants'
banking-houta, of which Mr. Fauntleroy was a partner. A
verdict was found for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion
of the Court. Upon a former day the case was argued, and
the Court took time to consider their judgment.
Lord TENTERDEN this day prome,nced the opinion of
the Court. His Lordship having detailed the facts of the
case, as they have already appeared before the public, ob-
served, that on the part of the defendant it had been con-
tended that the plaintiffs' right of action merged in the
felony of Mr. Fauntleroy, and that the transfer of the pro-
perty was a felonious transfer. Upon that point he should
observe that Mr. Fauntleroy was not executed for forging
the power of attorney under which a transfer of the sum of
16,0001. was made, and that the felony in this ease was
the forging of the names, by Mr. F. of his Co. trustees,
and not the transferring of the stock. There could be no
doubt that the proceeds of the stock were paid into the de-
fendants' house, and there could be no ground for saying
that they, in answer to the plaintiffs' demand, should he at
liberty to retain that money in their hands, upon the plea
that one of themselves had got possession of it by means of
a felony. As the defendants had received the proceeds of
the stock, and as the plaintiffs had never signed the in-
strument by virtue of which the stock was sold oat, the
plaintiffs had a clear right to preve the amount under the
Commission of Bankruptcy, against the defendants.
Postea to the plaintiffs.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
THE KIX V. THOMAS BRADLEY, EBC?.

This was a rule obtained by the ATTORNEY GENERAL,
calling upon the defendant, Lieut.-Col. Bradley, late of
the second West India Regiment, to show cause why a
criminal information should not be filed against him, for
having, in a letter inserted in the Morning Chronicle of
the sth of March last, and addressed to his Grace the
Duke of Wellington, published a false and scandalous libel,
imputing to Major-General Fuller, that he, in connexion
with Major-General Sir Henry Torrens, and other General
Officers, had, in the part taken by him, in the difference
between the defendant and Colonel Arthur, respecting the
command of the King's troops at Honduras, conducted
himself in a manner derogatory to his character as an of-
ficer and a gentleman.
Mr. Jolts SIDNEY TAYLOR, this day, in showing cause
against the rule, read the defendant's affidavit, detailing all
the facts of the difference between him and Colonel Arthur,
from 1919 up to the present period, and stating that the
letter in question was written solely for the purpose of in-
ducing his Grace the Commander-in-Chief to institute an
inquiry into the charges preferred by the defendant. The
Learned Counsel contended, that it was clear, from the
whole conduct of the defendant, that he was not actuated
by malice towards General Fuller.
The ATTORNEY-GENER AL, in support of the rule, was
stopped by
Lord TENTER DEN—WC are all of opinion that this rule
must he made absolute. This is almost the only course
which General Fuller could have adopteu.

Rule made absolute.
This being the last day of Easter Term, the Court did
not rise until half-past six. o'clock.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MAT 28.

NEWTON V. COWIE.

This case was tried at the sittings after last Term, at
Guildhall, before Mr. Justice Gaselee, when a verdict was
found for the plaintiff. It then appeared that the plain-
tiff was the proprietor of a periodical work called the
London Journal of the Arts and Sciences, in which he
had published certain plates, which had afterwards been
pirated by the defendant, and transferred into a work
published by him, called the Resister of the Arts: and
Sciences. The verdict, as above stated, was found for
the plaintiff upon several counts, with a shilling damages
on each. Several objections were taken at the trial : One
was, that the plates had not the name of the proprietor,
stating him to be the proprietor, printed on them, as re-
quired by the Act of Parliament, but merely his name,
without any explanation of who he was•; another objec.
tion was, that there was no date upon the plates, as
required by the Act ; a third was, that the plates were
taken from a drawing of a machine, taken from the spe-
cification of the patent, which was accessible to every
body. A nonsuit had since been moved for, a rule to
chew cause obtained, and the objections argued. The
case was now called on to receive the judgment of the
Court.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE delivered it at considerable
length, and concluded by over-ruling the whole of the
objections, discharging the rule for the nousuit, and
confirming the verdict for the plaintiff.