Star.
London, England, 1827-11-05 00:00:00

IN Si HAMILTON.

Mr. Coc applied, under the provision of t':e Aet of
he 53d of Ge0..111, c. 127, " for the regulating of Ec-
lelesiastical Courts in England," that a writ de mita-
'ace capleado might be issued under-the seal of the
Court of Chancery, in aid of the process of a spiritual
'court. It was stated that a-suit had been Mat:Mud be-
tween Major Hamilton, by whoa the present applies
boas was made, and his wife, in the Consistorial Court
of the diocess of Gloucester, for a separation. In the
course of the proceeding, Mrs: Hamilton applied to the
Court for alimony, stitch was decreed to her. Her,
husband, however, insisted that he was entitled to-de-
duct from the allowance made by the Court. certain
'ums which be had paid to his wife pending the suit.
The Consistosiol Court decreed ageism him. whet ',spool
Nigod so appeal to the Court of Arches. An inhi-n
, %inn was then issued by the latter Court, restraining
the further proceedings of the Cam t below; but before
;hat process could Le served, Major Hamilton had been
brde~edby a monition from the Court if the Consistory
'to pay the whole amount of the alimony. The writ
de ecodumace cdpiendo was now, therefore, applied for,
tube directed to the Sheriff, for taking the person of
hlis. Hamilton, in resrect of her contumacy to the or-
der of the Coutt of Arches.
• The CORD CHANCILLOR asked if notice had been
given of this application?
Mr. Coa said, the Lady against whom the writ was
aiiPliedfor was now residing at Tours.
The LORD CHANCILLOR then decided that notice
should be served upbn her Solicitor, and be deemed
good service.

•
VICE CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 5.
XS RE WENTWORTH, CHALON'S, AND RISHWORTIL
Mt; SPURRIER begged that the bankrupt petition in
this ease might be advanced, and an early day appointed'
for its hewing. Mr. Rishworth's agents had travelled
40,000 miles to procure signatures to the etttificate.—
Tbe anenber of signatures obtained was 1,700--they
Irepresented property to the amount of 400,00 W. and the
eipenses of obtaining them had been little less than
1.0001. The certificate was now stayed by the assignees,
and it4►is hoped that his Honour, by appointing some
'only day for the hearing of the cause,wmild not suffer
Mr. Nishwoi•th to remain long in the uncertainty
whether all the expense and tiouhle which had been
'angled to this' business should be. rendered perfectly
userest._

•The %Ws Cukxcal.t.ott Etta Foiday se'unight far
hearing the petition. •

• 40IJIT OF KING'S BRNCH, Wornainnon Nov. 3.
';lleisere Lord TILIIIIMDCII and Special Juries.
2 u THE ILINO4GAissr DAVISON.
Irl+ an indictment for a nuisance.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL. who 'tam! the case, said
that the delendant was •indicted for erecting a manu-
factory for varnish at Crouch•end, near Hornsey. This
Manuf actor y was very inconvenient and offensive
cbe.whole neighbourhood. It was situate near the bigh-
way, Cud was continually vomiting forth large v lumes
of thick smoke. It had basin on fire no less thus five
times since Anna. 1826. The health of the infabi-
tants had been so much injured, and they had bean so
Much annoyed by it, that they bad instituted the .pro-
secution.

Mi. James Watt, the surveyor of the by-soads, and
several Other-witesses, drpused to the offensiveness or,
the smell. which they represented to be as if very' bad
oil were thrown upon them. It could be smelt a mile
off when the wind set that way. Some of the witnesses-
proved a convetsation with the defendant, whO partlY
achnowledged the nuisance, and acted in remove it if
compensation were made him tor his buildingi.
1, These witnesses were cross-egansineJ by the Commort

StIOBANT, who endeavoured by his questions to strew
that the bricks Made by Mr. Hampson, in the neigh-
bourhood, were the real nuisance. and that moat of the
houses in which the inhabitants who complained of the
nuisance lived were built after the m.inufactory Was
'established ; but Lord Turranban held that the defen-
dant must be convicted after the acknowledgment he
had himself made, and the Jury accordingly foiandisim
Guilty: -

C )128PIRACTrAIX V. CROCC MID OTHER&

This was an iatnansent preferred against the defen-
dant Crook, two persons.id thi name of Langdon, and
Messrs. Weston and Miliarvfor a coaspiracy to defeat