Star.
London, England, 1822-11-29 00:00:00

for Wednesday alai o'cloek;TbeffgekWfikilnk to bell
seen only by ticket. Was that like a fair public aut.
tion ? They were advertised to be soM at prieie•cose
Braganza shawls, stuffs,
.ttc. were al} advertised to
be sold by auction at lerrtne cost. Hoy/ could they
know that they wera.tibe sold at prism colt? Yet
this was she way in which £.5000 worth of goods wee
to be diskosed of. He had to state, too, that the Sonde
had been removed, in collusion, to a'considerable
amount. There were, too, four partners no* disco.:
vered. The usual mode in sach a case was, to super
sede the commission against three, end to issue a
new commission:
Mr. HORNS was very glad that hisLeatned Friend
had now got hit brief. But his Lordship would see
that the Petition was here against the three Russells,
not against Todd. As to the ticket, did his Learned
Friend contend that all the rabble of London were to
be admitted to see his Braganza shawls? Under the
former commission, k had been thought that the
mode now proposed was the most beneficial mode of
sale. The sale was made well known ; and though
the advertisements had not beenlong published, there
had been bills in the windows long before.
The LORD CHANCELLOR..--I cannot, it would be
rash in me to direct how the sale should be made,
therefore, the assignees will sell as they think proper!
and at their own peril. If it be the property of four,
and not of three, notice can easily be given.
Mr. HORNS.—Your Lordship will allow costs in
this case.
The LORD CHANCELLOR....-I believe I must. If it
be the property of four, you can (to Mr. Bligh) want
no assistance from me, for you have only to give no-
tice to that effect at the sale.
The Injunction was discharged with costs.

COURT OF KINGS BENCH, NOVEMBER 28.

GARD V. FORREST.
The defendant in this case, a yenman of the King's
Body Guard, was arrested in the Palace Court. He
applied to the Judge of that Court for his discharge,
on the ground that the Court had no power to hold
him to hail; but his application did not succeed. He
then put in bail, and removed the case into the Court
of King's Bench, and was obliged, in order to bring
the case before the Court, to put in and perfect bail.
In the meantime a writ of inquiry was executed in
the cause, and the damages estimated at 401. On a
former day Mr. Marryat obtained a Rule to skew
cause why an exoneretur should not be entered on the
bail-piece on the ground that the defendant was pri-
.
vileged from arrest.
Mr. EARLE now shelved cause against the Rule on
three grounds :—First, that the defendant being at
large on bail was able to perform all his duties, and,
consequently, there was no ground of inconvenience
to the Crown or the Public, on which alone the Court
would interfere; secondly,-that as the defendant had
voluntarily put in bail for the purpose of bringing
the case before a higher tribunal, he could not now
be permitted to treat the proceedings as invalid ; and,
lastly, that having unnecessarily delayed the plaintiff
by removing the cause, he presented himself t• the
Court under c►rcemstances which would induce them
to refuse him summary relief on motion, and leave
him to his writ of privilege.
Mr. MARRYAT, in support of the Rule, urged, that
though the defendant was now at large, his bail
might at any time render him, and thus prevent him
from discharging his duties; and wherever a party
on surrender would be entitled to his immediate dis-
charge, the Court would not compel him to render
for the mere purpose of discharge. The defendant
was compelled to put in bail, in order to bring his
case before the Court; and therefore he ought not
to be concluded.
The Cover said, that their opinion was formed on
the peculiar circumstances of the case. They must
presume that the Judge of the Palace Court had de-
cided according to law, and therefore there was no'
sufficient reason for the removal of the cause. The
putting in bail was therefore the voluntary act of the
defendant, and the Court would not discharge them.
They might ask the consent of the Chamberlain to
render him, and if the consent was granted, the render
would be legal.—Rule discharged with costs.
THE KING V. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF THE UNM•

VERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE.
Mr. SOLICITOR-GENZRAL produced the affidavit
of Mr. Jephson, stating, that he was a candidate for,
the office of Professor of Mineralogy, and that .he.
now was desirous of being adinitted to the office, and
of performing its duties.
The LORD CHIME JUSTICR observed, that the affi-
davit did not state that Mr. Jephson had always been
desirous of executing the duties of the office; nor how
long, if admitted, he would continue to perform them.
The SOLICITOR.GIGIRRA L and Mr. STARK'S urged,
that even if a party were elected without his consent,
and afterwards chose to fill the office, he might claim
to be admitted with as much propriety as if he had
originally sought to fill it.
The Loan Owns Joanna, after some further con.
versation on the subject, said, I have a strong opinion
that this asendaisises ss applied for in order to obtain
the judgment of the Court on the mode of electing
persons to fill this-and otberProfeseorships, and not
from a desire on the part of this individual-to receive
the emoluments Of the &fide, and to discharge- its
duties; and, therefore, if I were sitting here b/ my-
self, I should decline to .bear it; but some of my
Isarned Brothers think that we ought to bear it, and
therefore the argument may nceed.
The Boucyroa-Clinsaan, Mr. TINDAL, STA It•
ete, and Mr. Awes, argued at cossiderable length in
reply to the prelinsinar7 objections taken on a farmer
day to the proieeding by esandaerui—first, that the
Professorship of Mineralogy was not an office of that
permanent character and profit necessary to render it
the subject of such interposition; and secondly, that
the proper 'remedy. was not In this Cow*, but by ap-
peal to the King in Council. And first, they con-
tended that theeisce. though not eo confine of an-
cient date, was created by virtue of ancient laws, and
pursuant to ancient practice. The first Professorship
established by the University was created by grace in
the year 1702, and was the Professorship of Che—
mistry. The Professorship of Anatomy was estab-
ruhed in 1707 ; that of Botany in 17%; that of Music
Stan after; and that of Mineralogy inlBoB, precisely
in the form adopted on all previous occasions. These
Professors were officers holding a high rank in the
University ; ;hair had seats assigned them in church,
they had a dymngdished place in all Proemial& of