Star.
London, England, 1829-11-16 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 14.
111 as JIM= AND 0.11111116
On the SULICITOSPGIMISAL tiling to move in this nutter, Mr.
Rom, cm the part of the Earl St. Vincent, said he wished that
tints might be granted in order that a Petition presented by Mise
Jervis might be heard ; she was sister to Mr. Jervis of the whole
blood, and wished to have the bringing up of his Infant children.
The Soutrroa-Guanat said that be would oppose any fuither
time being given; the deplorable situations of the cbildeen required
the immediate interterenca of the Court. Miss Jervis had only
yesterday presented her Petition, and it was not a Hide extraordi-
nary that that Laay bad actually filed an affidavit declaring her
total inability to undertake what she was now petitioning for.
A strung discussiun took place between the Counsel u to whether
Lord S. Vincent bad bad notice of the motion, when it appeared
that seven days bad been given.
The Lout Quer-stun—That Is suflident.
The Soucnon-Gasseu.—l appear for the children by their seat
friends. The Learned Gentleman then read the referenci to sod
the report made by the Muter, and concluded by praying that the
report might be confirmed, and that Lord &. Vincent sad Maria
Gattie. might be ordered to deliver up the infant children to the
persons appointed by the Master.
The Loan Cusscaualt--You apply for the confirmation of the
Master's Report; does any one appear for Lord St. Vincent?
Mr. Hocus—l have no instructions; I ant taken quite by

surprise.
Theta* Cuanewxos--Wbat, after seven days soder! I can
do no otherwise then confirm the Report, and shell grant the peayea
of the Petition.
A strong attempt was afterwards made to open the subject agaln,
but the lase CIMMICE4OIII, said, "This matter his barn num fully
discussed by all parties before the blaster, and the whale circum-
stances have been thoroughly investigated ; I shall adhere to what
I have before said ; let the Report he confirmed."
wranve aoutouto. is yea warns or &mete
bk. Biesearrent appeared on the one side, sad a Gentle-
man behind the Bar, on the other, to urge a question of great
mercantile importance in this matter; which, in tbe result, his
Lordship promised to consider privately before he gave his judg-
ment. The partner of a dun owed a private debt ; the creditor
knew It to be a separate debt; he drew for the amount a bill of
exchange upon the Graham'. left it at their usual place of badness.
at eight o'clock A.W. for acceptance, and received it back on ow
evening of the ante day at svven.ACespted by the firm. The qua-
don then was, *tether the Arm could be held to be liable foe this
peyment of it, unless it was shewn that they were aware at the
insinent that they were accepting it, -with the view of making
themselves liable, though the debt, to their knowledge, was a se.
game debt?

anelatlnia N.T.
The liotscreon4toraset mowed, oa behalf of the plaintiff. for
the commitment of die Alefendant. for a wilful breach of the in.
juncdon of the Court. The plsintiff was a surgeon, practisiss in
Newiste..nreet. aed.the defendant, who was his nephew, sad also
a surgeon, had entered into as agreement not to practise within
a certain distance of the plaintiff's residence. The defendant
bad broken this agreement by setting up in CkespAde. and
the, injunction had. been obtained. restraining him from .farther
waiting in that usighbourhood. In contempt of this bijou.
bon. the defendant bad again odablithed himself is Cheapside,
and instead (as be bad formerly door) of proceeding quietly•and
unosteutatioesiy. he bad had his name written above the door,
James Hay, Surgeon. &c." in large characters. A great number
'ofasdaelts bad been filed in support of the Motion. and it appeared
that some time shies the defendant had married a ward of the
Court, sad had .uffered a protracted imprisonment inconsequence.
The plaintiff had recently gone to France and during his themes.
in breach of the agreement as well as :be injoisakm, defendant.
bad an up business ma his own account in Cheapaide.
however, to the plaintiff's quitting Ragland, be bad written a letter,
to a Mr. Masduif, respecting some contract which the difsadent
had suggested of paying certain Mite in Chancery. upon the pay ,
meat of which the deleodaut was to be at liberty to practise where.
be chow This agreement had not. however. been adopted. sad
bad, In fact. no Medea to the present question. . •
Mr. Rouse and Ur. Cue. for the Defaidaet. spoke at some
length. They contended that the Defendant, haring aceepsed the
Plainurs idler to pay the Cu•te.,lnie entitled to practise in Cheap. •
side, and had out committed a breach of any injenctihn. .The Settee,
Written to Ur. blacduff was in.tbereserms U the Defendant
agrees to accept the t. east. be nosy practiw as near as he pleasee.,
and the sooner the letter;' or words to that effect. The Defend..
ant bad actually accepted the efferood it waa got, competent fee
the Plaintiff now to taro naurd opue the. Defendant and say.:
I will. in spite of ail agreement. commit you to the Frees."
The Defendant was a very young man. mid It this IDIOM wet.
successful he would he totally ruined.
• Tlie Loan Cosancathoa oinerval, that ft was the fault of the'
Defendant for entering into the original agreement.. Me did so'
with his eyes oven. and be issu.t abide by the conalispeecou
• The fieuaton-Gmm.st.. its ieply, again stleinted..to the differeet.
amdaaiia. Defendant bad *hefty witcontuntheiguilj breise !
the injuuctioa, and the. Court could net do otherwise than Medi. •
vita its owe dignity comitutting the guilty.p.rty bathe f lee&
The Loan Curdscactue asked if the Defendant were will'
Prepared toodhem to the agreement contained in the letter us Mr:
a.ateleff l , •
Mr. Hosea replied. that it had ahrays bees sad still lees the
Decedent's strong diairelo do id.' • ' - •
The Lino Chitscauns asked if the Sulichee..eguarat waste
• agree to chat arrangement? ' • ; . ,
The SuPaithi,ikaiebe!-.W. folskjiy.on mow tomtit to it.
• mec avow further
,discusekni the Lose Cranes:Aria satire
Would take bonne lA* affiatallkiand Arid dared:" "Inlooilnidelas& a=
case be waslitieriliblieU NeldikAll, eensidegatihn:
• ". COURT 1:1,11CINCIS-MENC1110.-N•C 14, ,
sewage*. seam. ' 1. •
This action was tried at the lest Sittings in bllddisethood was
brought by ao atte•rney to recover his cum for proseoutliNgit slit In

baurt of Chancery. The defendant appeared personally at the
telds old set up ace defence that the plaintiff had not benefited the
cause by his professional assistance and tberefembe could out re-
cover his costs. Lord Tarmastaeft that point to the Jury, and.
*loff.
returned a verdict for the plainti •
defendant now appeared again in Court, and applied for a
Me to show mist why a new trial should not be granted, on the
ground that Lord nuances had improperly rejected evidence at
the trial. This evidence consisted of the andavits that bad been in
the suit in Chancery, which be considered important to read at the
trial to show to the Court that his case bad been neglected by the

Saintie
Lord Tumulus said he rejected this evidence. as it appeared
that the Defendant himself bad made est:optima, to the Master's
report. which his Counsel refried to argue; be therefore could
nut receive the affidavits to show that the Attorney bad nut pto•
'muted ridiculous objections made by his client to the report of
the Master in Chancery.
Mr Jostles Barmy meowed in this opinion, and the rule was
accordingly refused.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 14.

TOCR IP. 17$0S.

This was an action spinet the Defendant, veto bed bemuse surety
for rent moire a lease of nine years foe thwleasee, vett. how=
bankrupt before the ezpiration'of the term, and delivered or die
lease to the lessor, according to theyrwelittoes of dos blink:optima.
The case came before the Court Oft demurrer,mid the
was, whetbet the surety foe the lessee *sheet Charged his
NabNity u well as the lessee, by the 19th sec. et the Act of the
49th of Geo. 111. and the 75th see. at the 6th of Geo. IV. the first
of which provided that a lessee should be discharged from the co-
venants of his lease no becoming bankrupt. If his assignees accepted
she lease; and the second, that be should 'hob* released from the
date of the commission, if his assignees refused to accept, oa deli-
'verlogup the lens to the lessor.
Mr. Sergeant Was. argued that the term of the lease was ex-
tinguished from the date et the Commission of Bankruptcy, and
that therefore the assay was no longer noble.
Mr. Sergeant Swims, ea the other side, maintained that the
two Acts only provided for the protection of the lease. and that
the rights of other persona were not siliwted.by them. Dleilkee of
them said that the debt was extinguished. He rellardibily ems
the principles contained in the case of Inglis,. ha let
Moore, 196. •••• .41: • •
Mr. Sergeant Was. replied, that the ease el Ws wad
141Dowall applying only to the 49th Geo. 111. there was a mete.
Mal distinction in the situation of the ponies. Ise that the home
was deprived of the benefit of the lease wa aiming it up, mid
therefore the ceotract was at an end. -- .A
•
The Comte took time to consider its jellgosate7 It esim.
portant point, and the first time that it bad come beams awl Olen
on the last Act.