Star.
London, England, 1824-11-25 00:00:00

SOUTII A MEIIICA.

Letters have been received from Panama, dated the
14th of September, but they communicate nothing of
the progress of Bolivar subsequent to the action with
Canterac's cavalry. Intelligence had arrived from
Callao of a joint attack having been made on that for-
tress by the troops under General Miller, and the
blockading squadron under the command of Admiral
Guise. Some ships had been captured in the harbour
of Callao, though under the protection of the batteries.
It is supposed that Lima was open to the troops of
General Miller. The New York papers to the 2d inst.
received yesterday by the Florida packet ship, contain
reports of a sect-nd action having occurred between
Bolivar and Canterac, in which the latter was defeated,
and lost his life; but these appear to deserve little credit.
Letters from Carthagena of the 27th of September, also
received yesterday, mention the arrival there of the
official account of the battle of Junin, which event had
been celebrated by public rejoicings ; but they commu-
nicate no additional intelligence. By the Ann, Mor
daunt, arrived at Liverpool from Buenos Apes,whence
she sailed on the 10th of September, advices of the 4th
of July from Lima, and from Valparaiso of the Ist of
August, have been obtained. No news is communicated
through this channel ; but at Valparaiso, up to the date
f the letters, there were no tidings of- the arrival of
the /Va a, or of her convoy, in any port of the Pacific. It
appears. therefore, notwithstanding the arrival of so
many letters yesterday from different parts of South
America, that we have little addition to our-previous
information.

From .Trusillo the letters are to the 19:11 of August.
They inclose the Gazette account of the battle of the
6th of that month, and they add, liiat General Canterac'
will be compelled to tisk another battle, for that his
army could not other' ise be held together. It is well
known to be composed, in a great degree, of Peruvians,
whose allegiance ,is commanded by the bayonets of a
few European Spaniards, and who will take the first,
opportuhity to abandAt the ranks of the absolute Go.l

f

COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 24.
MR. FAUNTLEROY.-..-1N THE MATTER OF MARSH, STRA
,CEY, GRAHAM, AND FAUNTLEROY.
Mr. MONTAGU stated, that a commi,,iori of bankrupt
had been takers out against Marsh, Stracey, and
Gi aham ; another had been taken out against those three
Gentlemen, together with Henry Faontlei oy ; a third
had issued separately against Henry Fauntleroy, and by
an Act of Parliament passed a few years ago, it fol-
lowed that the last commission would attach to the other
three; therefore a petition was presented, praying the
Court to supersede the commission against the four
Gentlemen, and which the Learned Counsel begged
might stand in the paper to be heard on Friday.—
Motion granted.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOV. 24.
After the reply in Fauntleroy's case, Mr. Justice Bay-
ley came into Court and heard several mutiorh.
Mr. Curcry moved for a writ of Habeas to bring up
a Lady named Barber, to be dtscharged. The applica-
tion was made on an affidavit, stating that she had been
three years and a half a prisoner, under sentence p: o-
nounced against her, in the Ecclesiastical Court.—
She was sentenced to return home to her husband, who
did not appear to have any house or home to which she
could return.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY asked whether the amdavit of Mr. Chitty
stated a want of domicile?
Mr. enirrr.— It does, my Lord.
Mr. Justice 13ATLEr.—Take a rule to chew cause.

PRIVY COUNCIL.
The Louts CHIEF JUSTICE and the rest of the Judges
came into Court soon after one o'clock, and after hearing
tv‘o motions for new trials, the Chief Justice intimated
that he was required elsewhere. His Lordship ac-
cordingly !eft the Bench, at two o'clock, to attend the
Privy Council.

THE EARL OF ESSEX V. HARVEY COOMBE.
This was an action for a trespass on the estate of the
noble plaintiff. It appeared from the notes of Mr. Jus-
tice. Littledale, that the defendant and others pursued a
fox through Brickett Wood and over the plantations
of Lord Essex, at Cashiobury. Letters were produced
at the trial, written by the Noble Earl, which gave Mr.
Coombe, who was at the head of the Berkeley Hunt,
permission to follow game on the estate, hut he was pro-
hibited from drawing game in the noble plaintiff's
woods. The question at the trial turned on the con-
struction to be put on the letters. Before the Jury de-
livered their verdict, the Learned Judge who tried the
cause, put into their hands the letters, and they-found
for the defendant ; stating, at the same time, that they
were of opinion Mr. Coombe had not exceeded the per-
mission given by Lord Essex. Mr. Adolphus, on a
former day, obtained a rule for a new trial, on the
ground that the verdict was against evidence, and the
direction of the Judge.
Mr. Dos LAND and Mr. LAW, this day, sheaved cause
against the rule; and the Court were of opinion that the
verdict ought not to be disturbed.—Rule discharged.

PREROGATIVE COURT, NOV. 24.

THE WILL OF THE LATE ABRAHAM Mt)NTEFIORE, ESQ
The arguments in this case having already appeared
before the public, it is only necessary to inform our
Readers, that the question at issue between the widow
and executors is, whether administration shall issue tin-
der a will regularly executed in London, by Mr. Monte-
fibre, or under an unexecuted and unfinished paper
made in Lyons? The former, it will be remembered,
provided for the deceased's children ; and the latter left
the bulk of the property to the wife, allowing her
to make, at her death, what disposition she thought
proper of it.
Sir JOHN Morena. gave his judgment, and observed,
that the testamentary paper made in Lyons, appeared
to him to be imperfect; it was unexecuted—in fact,
abruptly broken off, and the legal presumption was,
therefore, agaii•st it. From the care that had been taken
in the drawing of the wills in London, the testator's inten-
tion was fully expressed, and it was not reasonable to
suppose that he would have made a will without pro-
viding for the children. He therefore pronounced the
last rt ill, which was made in Lyons, invalid, and directed
administration to issue on those made in London.
Dr. JENNER begged to inform the Court, that Mrs.
Montefiore never wished to propound the rejected will
for her benefit. It was necessary that it should be dis-
posed of, and her advisers had directed her to bring it
before the Court.
HOWELL V. METCALF AND SAUNDERS.

The deceased Mr. Nletcalt died in 1822. One of the
executors had died, and the ether was rendered inca-
pable of taking probate of the will. Mr. Howell was
appointed guardian to the deceased's daughter by the
Court of Chancery, and various sums had been paid on