Star.
London, England, 1830-07-01 00:00:00

LAW REPORTS.

• . • • A -AN • •

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Juwc_3o.

The Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas took the
oaths, as one of the members of his Majesty's Privy Council.
SEAGOOD T. FOLLETT, on a former day,
obtained a rule to show cause to set aside the judgment on a warrant
of attorney, on the ground that it was originally given for a gambling
debt. The bond was for 2.0001. and was purchased a short time
since by the present plaintiff from the party to whom it haul been
granted, for the sum of 1,5001. but, prior to completing the pur-
chase, he sent his attorney to the defendant, who said that the
bond was a good one, and should be paid on becoming due.—
Mr. Wricwr xis,: this day 'hewed cause, and insisted that
the misrepresentation of the defendant made hint liable...—
Mr. FOLLCTT, in support of the rule, contended that the Act
of Parliament for the prevention of gambling, was an Act for the
public benefit; and was imperative in making securities on a gam.
bling transaction to all intents and purposes null and void.—After
some consultation between the Judges, the matter was referred to
the Master. to inquire whether, at the time of his purchase of the
bond, the plaintiff was aware of its having been given for a gambling
transaction ? If the plaintiff did not know of that fact, the blaster
would then say what he had given for the bond, anti that sum to be
paid by the defendant, with interest, at the rute of W. per cent.
otherwise the rule must be discharged, with coats.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Jtutz

Fon v. Ct-trrow Awn ownzas.—The Court gave judgment
in this case this morning. The facts of the case were shortly as
follow:—The plaintiff; who is an engineer, performed certain work
for the Imperial Distillery Company, which was one of those
bubble • concerns, concocted in the year 1825, but which
never came to proper maturity. The work was performed
at the desire of the Directors of the Company. The defend-
ants were merely shareholders, and paid but one instalment;
when an application was made for a second, it was not at.
tended to. The Jury. however, found a verdict for the plaintiff.
The judgment of the Court reversed the decision of the Jury, upon
the ground that the defendants had forfeited all claims to any be-
nefit that might have accrued from the profits of the company had
it been perfected and succeeded, by their having declined to pay up
their instalments ; nor did they sign any deed ; they could not,
under all the circumstances of the case, be considered partners.
Thole who ordered the work to be done were the protons liable
to pay.
CONSISTORY COURT, Just 30.
TIJITON v. Tuzzox.--Dr. Tantwatoitz appeared as counsel
in this case for Mrs. Turton, who prayed for a divorce from her
husband, on the ground of adultery, committed by Mr. Turton with
Miss Adelaide Brown, the sister of Airs. Turton. The learned
counsel went into a few of the facts, as pleaded. Mr. Turton
resolved, in 1827. to go to Calcutta to practise at the bar ;
and, at Portsmouth. he informed his wife that he had had an
improper intercourse with Adelaide Brown. Mrs. Turton
was horrorstruck, and refused to proceed to India; but Mr.
Tenon fen on his knees, anti implored Mrs. Turton to allow
Adelaide Brown to proceed to India, as she was enciente. and that
great disgrace would naturally follow if she was delivered in this
country. Ire solemnly promised not to renew the connection, and
to. send Miss Brown back to England as soon as she was delivered.
To save.tbe disgrace Mrs. Turton consented, but as4llr. Turton did
not fulfil the promise, she returned to England and soon afterwards
Re inttecourse was renewed between Mr. Turton and Adelaide Brown.

Mis.
Mrs. Turton had therefore commenced the suit, and he considered
fibei
that site should be allowed to answer certain insinuations throan
out against her. The Court decided that the ease might he argita,ll-•
and if any thing did occur to prejudice 3irs. Turton, she should be loal
allowed to reply. The Kixo's ADVOCATE, on the part of Mr. .;
Turton, could not deny the fact of adultery, but at a bar to the
divorce, was prepared to prove a connivance in the adultery on the .
part of Mrs. Turton, she having for a long time being acquainted .s
with the fact. The Court. wished to be informed whether it had
ever been decided upon a case like this, where an incestuous adul.
tery bad existed, and had compelled a restitution of conjugal
rights? The Kum's ADVOCATE replied, that in the Cate of
Denis v. Denis, where connivance had been proved, the husband
had been compelled to return to an incestuous bed. Dr. Phillimore
then went on to argue in favour of the divorce.

• DIED.
On Sunday. the 20th ult. at Queen-street, Edinburgh. Nap!
Thompson. Royal Engiucerw—On Thursday. the 17th ult. at Aso.
in the aouth of France, lllary Ann, youngest daughter of the late
Dr. Hawes, of Sphal-square.

LOPIDON : Printed and Published by Joan' .11arus. at the Sias•

Orrice No.l. Picket-Place,Temple B.ar.