Star.
London, England, 1826-12-05 00:00:00

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Diem= 4.
ISSN JOSIS S. VALIT imp aromas.
Mr. SHADWILL moved that his Lordship would be
pleased to grant an injunction to restrain the defend-
ants, their servants, or any other persons from selling
or disposing of a work, entitled Schrevelis Greek Leib,
con," translated into English. The plaintiff grounds
his application, by stating, that previous to the year
1823, he compiled a Greek and English Lexicon, and
which was afterwards published in the year 1823, by
Mesirs. Longman and Co. and that in the year 1825,
all the copies were sold, and subsequently he published
a second edition, with considerable additions and altera.
tions, and in the year 1826 the defendant published a
work entitled Schrevelis' Greek Lexicon, translated into
English, a copy of which was sent to the plaintiff,
and on reading over the preface, the defendants admit-
ted they took extracts from the plaintiff's work. In the
month of August last, the plaintiff, on looking more
minutely into -the work, discovered many hundred
plagiarisms, and no doubt, if accurately numbered, it
would be discovered that upwards of 6,000 plagiarisms
had beers made use of. Plaintiff on these humbly
prayed his Lordship would grant an order to restrain
the defendants from selling the work.
The LORD CsAsczu.oa. —When did he first discover it ?
Mr. Smaowm..—ln the month of April last he first saw the
book, but it was not until the month of August he discovered the
number of plagiarisms.—lnjunction granted.
WILLZSLTY AND HIS CHILDIO6
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, on reading over
the list of causes for hearing this day, the case of Wel-
lesley and his children. His Lordship said, when he last
heard the cause it was proposed by Counsel to send him
copies of the affidavits during the recess last week, but
be had not as yet seen any.
Mr. HART said, it was a mistake of the officer of the
Court in entering the cause on the list, as there were
some of the affidavits not filed yet, and it was agreed by'
Counsel on both sides to defer the hearing for some days.
WAINWRIGHT V. WITH.
Mr. TRESLOVE moved, on the part of the defendant,,
for an order of this Court to set aside a bail-bond given
by his client to the Sheriff under the following short
circumstances :—The plaintiff is a Clerk in Court, the
defendant is an Attorney at Kidderminster; the plain-
tiff, as indorsee upon a promissory note, haying a de-
mand against the defendant, and not being able to pro-
cure the money, arrested him ; the defendant gave the
bail-bond in question, and now applied to have it set
aside on the ground that he was not liable to an arrest,
even by a Clerk in Court.
Mr. HART opposed the motion.
His LORDSHIP said, that ever since he, had come into
this Court, which, he was sorry to say, was now between
forty and fifty years ago, all authority had been against
the proposition now submitted en the part of this de-
fendant, and the Court was therefore now called upon
to beat down all preceding authority oa the subject—a
length of practice being authority—but which he Fel.-
tainly could dot do. He would, however, look back
into the history of a Solicitor entering this Court, and if
be found such a privilege extending to him as was now
contended for, he would hesitate before he took that
privilege away from the Solicitors of the Court.
HART supposed, if the Court should say nothing further upon
the case, the parties might nnderstand the motion to be dismissed
with costs.