The Sun.
London, England, 1827-11-14 00:00:00

and who looks for the penalty of the infraction.
As to the alarm lest-Austria should be offendeci,
because in the mele'e some of her transporti-suf}
fered, it deserves no thought. If the Allies'haa
no right to oppose Turkey, how came Austria
to have a right to assist it ? Was the gift of free
agency limited only to the enemies of Cliris-
tianity ? • But, we ought to have declared war
with Turkey! We are not at war with Turkeyr
We have said to Turkey—" You must make
peace with Greece ; humanity is -not to-be any
longer outraged by your quarrels." When we
said this, we added our determination•to act up
to our declaration. If, in consequence of our
doing so, Turkey see fit to go to war with uS,
we must meet her. If not, all we intend is.,
merely to keep her from Attacking Greece, while
we equally keep Greece from attacking her.
This is not war, and therefore needs no declara-
tion.—New •

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. IS.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE MAYOR OF EXETER

This matter, in which the judgment of the Court
was delivered a few days since, came on for argu-
ment relative to the necessity for inquiry before the
Master, as to the application of certain fines by the
Trustees of the Charity The discussion was ex-
tended to a considerable length, Sir C.' Wetherell,
Mr. Sugden, and Mr. MeriVall were heard against
the inquiry ; and Mr. Agar and Mr. Girdlestone,
jun.: in support of it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought it highly fit that
an investigation should be instituted, with a view of
ascertaining whether any slims now remained in the
hands of the Trustees ; and he should, therefore,
direct the inquiry accordingly. The costs should
be reserved until these proceedings had terminated.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nor. 13.
GILMAN' V. JONES, PARRY, ANIS OTHERS..

In this cause the plaintiff, Mrs. Grimani, the wife
of Francis Grimani, prayed that a certain sum of
money, the produce of dividends to which she was
entitled under the will of her grandfather, and now_
standing in the name of the Accountant-General,
should be paid over to her for her separate use and
maintenance.

The plaintiff being entitled in her own right to
the one-sixth part of the dividends of' certain sums
settled by will upon herfamily, and held by the.de-
fendants as her trustees, on her marriage with Mr.
Grimani this sum was Secured to her use: shortly

after the marriage, however, sbe eloped with a Mr.
Jghn Lancaster Lane. Her father, one of the de-
fendants, discovering the place of her -residence,
after an interval of about six months, brought her
back to his own house; but she eloped a second time
with Mr. Lane, when an opportunity offered. The
father again prevailed upon her to return to his
house, but she eloped a third time, and now conti-
nued to live in adultery with him. In order to de-
prive Lane of the advantages resulting from his se-
duction of the plaintiff, and in the hope of reclaim-
ing her, the father and the trustees, with the con-
sent of the husband, withheld the payment of her
dividends, and the plaintiff now prayed the Court
to order them to be paid over with 811 arrears.
Mr. SUGDEN consented, upon the part of the
trustees, to pay the money, subject to such expenses
as may have been incurred upon account of the
After a short conversation, in which it was al-
lowed that the costs of the trustees should be paid
out of the funds, the decree was taken by consent.

COURT OF 'KING'S BENCH, Nov. 13.
(Sittings in Banco.)
XNIGIIT V. WARTMN.
Mr. POLLOCK moved for a rule to show cause
why the verdict given for the plaintiff in this case
should not be set aside, and a new trial granted, or
the amount of the damages reduced.
The action (trove') bad been tried at the Lancas-
ter Assizes, arid had been brought by the assignees
of a bankrupt, who had delivered over to the defend-
ant's hauliers in Liverpool a great quantity of oil,
and other articles is which he dealt, some days prior
to his committing an act -of bankruptcy. In the be-
ginning of February, 1826, during the prevalence of
the late panic, the bankrupt began to experience
great difficulties in carrying on his concerns, and on
the lth of that month applied to the defendants for
an advance of cash on bills of exchange, to the
amount of about 1,0001. At that time the bankrupt
was indebted to the hankers about 3,3004, and they
refused to make the required advances without se-
:-.urity. For this purpose, the bankrupt delivered to
them the goods in question, and the security being
perfected on the 6th February, the 1,000/. was ad-
vanced to the bankrupt. On the 16th February the
act of bankruptcy was committed, and on the 18th
the commission issued; and afterwards the assignees
brought the action to recover back from the bankers
the goods converted by them; or their value, upon
the ground that they were delivered to the defend-
ants, in order to give them an undue preference
against the rest of the creditors. The Learned Judge
who tried the cause put it to the Jury whether the
bankrupt, at the time he delivered the goods to the
defendants, knew the state of his affairs, and-that it
was probable he would soon be compelled to stop
• payment ? and the Jury found that he did, and
therefore gave a verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount of the whole goods.
Mr. POLLOCK now contended, that whatever
might he the case with respect to the previous debt,
the defendants were entitled to retain the amount
of their recent advances, made on the condition that
they should have security, for there was no evi-
dence that they had any reason to doubt the bank-,
rupt's solvency on the 6th of February, nor was
there sufficient evidence to show that the bankrupt
himself knew that he must soon stop payment.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY.—Supposing the goods to
have been delivered to the baokers by the bankrupt
with a view to give them an undue preference, that
would have been itself an act of bankruptcy on
the 6th, although the defendants might be entirely
I innocent. •

A rule was ultimately granted t(ishew cause why
the arbiter to whom it, been referred, to assess the
amount of damages, should not be directed to al-
low the
.secur►ty to stand for the amount of the re-
cent advances,