The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-21 00:00:00

THE ORIENTAL STEAMER.

FALMOUTH, JAN. 17.—The Montrose steamer, with
the Indian, Alexandrian, and Levant mails, and forty
passengers, arrived to-day, her dates being from Alex-
andria the 24th, Malta the 30th of December, Gibraltar
the Bth, and Lisbon the 12th of January, having put
into the latter to replenish coals. She has brought no
mails from that city. The Oriental steamer, which left
this on the 2d instant with the outward Eastern mails,
had arrived at Gibraltar, and left again for Alexandria,
but had not been at sea more than an hour or so when she
came into collision with some vessel, which so deranged
the machinery, besides other injury to the hull, that they
could not get the engines to work for some time, but
which being effected, the steamer returned to Gibraltar
to refit, where she remained when the Montrose quitted,
but was expected to leave again on the evening of the
9th. The Margaret and Dee steamers have left this
to-day, the former with the Peninsular mails, and the
latter with the West Indian and Mexican, and several
passengers, among whom are Sir Charles Fitzroy, lady,
and suite ; Sir Charles being on his way to Antigua to
assume the Governorship of that island, to which he has
been recently appointed.
Extract of a letter dated Gibraltar, Jan. 8 :—" I write
to inform you of an accident that has happened to us,
and very nearly of a serious nature. We left here yes-
terday afternoon at five o'clock, and had got about 17
miles to the eastward, when a large ship, of about 600
or 700 tons, was seen on our larboard bow, running to
the S.W., and before we had time to put our helm to port
she struck us on the larboard sponson, sprung the fore
and aft beam that supports the main shaft, tore the whole
side of the paddle-box away, stove in the waist boat,
carried away the gig and maintopmast, and tore the quar-
ter galley to pieces. We are in hopes to be able to pro-
ceed with the mail to-morrow. The ship we have nei-
ther seen nor heard anything of. We lowered our boat
to look for her, as she fired two guns, and burnt a blue
light. It is to be hoped that she is safe. We have half
of her anchor stock and some 'rigging on board now.
Had we put our helm up she would have gone down like
a stone. We have the carpenters from the men-of-war
on board now at work. Thank God it is no worse." I

STRANRAER.—Some weeks since a call having
been given to the Rev. Mr. Cochrane, of Edinburgh, to
become helper and successor to the Rev. David Wilson,
in the parish church here, a petition was forthwith sent
off to Sir James Graham, (the presentation belonging to
the Crown), for his approval- of the call. A few days
ago a letter was received by Mr. Wilson from Sir James,
wishing to know his age, and if he was still able to per-
form the duties of the "parish. To these queriep Mr.
Wilson returned suckh-answers as brought back from Sir
James a decided -refusal to:sanction Mr. Cochrane's
settlement in Stranraer.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY. Jan. 20.
NEW QUEEN'S COUNSEL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, shortly after taking his seat,
called within the bar Mr. Roupell, Mr. Anderdon, and
Mr. Loftus Wigram, those gentlemen having been ap-
pointed Queen's Counsel.
The Court was occupied the whole day with appeal
motions, none or which possessed any points of interest
except to the parties concerned.

ROLLS' COURT, Jan. 20.
WILSON V. TUNSTALL.

In this case the plaintiffs were the patentees of a cer-
tain manufacture of candles, which candles were pro-
duced from oil extracted from the cocoa nut. The de-
fendant was a candle manufacturer from the same
material, and the plaintiff had obtained an injunction
upon the defendant to prevent him manufacturing such
candles from such materials. Since that injunction had
been obtained, the defendant had recommenced manu-
facturing the same kind of candles, in consequence of
which this, the second suit, was instituted. It was al-
leged, on the part of the defendant, that although the
candles manufactured by him were, produced from
matter extracted from the cocoa-nut, yet the
-matter was not the substance from which the plaintiffs
manufactured their candles, and for which they obtained
their patent. He further alleged, that the process by
which the plaintiffs obtained their material was not
new, being obtained by means of the hydraulic pressure,
a method known for years to those connected with the
trade. The defendant also put in an affidavit, in which
he deposed that he had not violated the injunction
granted by his Lordship against him for the purpose of
restraining him in the manufacture of cocoa nut oil
candles, inasmuch as he had discovered a new and ori-
.ginal process, by which he could produce, by one opera-
tion, the solid and fluid oil from_ the cocoa nut, and which
the plaintiffs knew not of. It was contended, on the
part of the plaintiffs, that this was but a quibble on
the words in the injunction, and which could not
affect the injunction in its operation against the defend-
ant, as he admitted that which the injunction alleged,
viz., that he had made candles from .the said oil, and
which injunction never referred at all to the means of
obtaining that oil, but merely referred to the process to
which that oil was to be applied ; and therefore the de-
fendant clearly had violated that injunction in contempt
of the Court, and also violated the patented right of the
plaintiffs obtained by them for the exclusive manufacture
of the said cocoa nut oil candles, and by which the value of
that patent right was in danger of being rendered a nul-
lity as far as the interest of the plaintiffs was concerned.
A great number of affidavits were put in to prove
that the oil extracted from the cocoa nut was identical
with that used by the plaintiffs, although called by
another name by defendant. Although the processes for
extracting it were different as used by the defendant and
plaintiffs, yet, when extracted, the oil was the same in
all its points as that used by the plaintiffs in the manu-
facture of their patented cocoa tut oil candles.
Mr. Pemberton was heard on the part of the plaintiffs,
and the Attorney-Gerieral for the defendant.
The arguments were not concluded when the Court rose