Star.
London, England, 1827-11-26 00:00:00

LA* INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY. Nov.
TQ PARTZ DANIRL rK RR SOLARI'S..
theLonD CHANCELLOR gave judgment IR this cause,
which was argued before him a few days ago. The ques-
tion was, whether an agreement to pay 6 per cent. upon
cent in discounts, 1 pls. cent. being in di.charge Of an
old debt for which the party was not legally liable, and
the other 5 per cent being the regular rate of interest,
was such a transaction as came between the usury
laws? The dealings took place between a bill broker
of the name of Bramley, and Alcedo, a Spanish
merchant. The Court of Chancery directed an issue
Ito try the question of usury, which came on to be tried
before the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Plra,,'
who was of opinion that there was usury, and so charged,
the Jury. The Jury thought otherwise, and returned
a verdict according to their opinion. An application'
was made for a new trial, which having been argued at
great length, his Lordship promised to decide in a few
days. He now stated his conviction to be, that the
verdict of the Jury was perfectly warranted by the evi-
dence and by the law of the case, and said it was pre-
cisely such a verdict as he should have given if he had
'been a Juror. He thought there was no ground what-
ever for the view which the Lord Chief Justice of the
Common Plea. had entertained of it, and therefore re-
fused the application for a new trial.

X•PARTE DE REDD'S IN as CHAMBERS.
Mr. Holism appeared on behalf of the petitioner,
Signor De Begois, of the Italian Opera House. The
'petition. set forth, that the petitioner was a creditor,
under the commission of Chambers's bankruptcy, to the
amount of .1,7001. He had been a performer at the
.King's Theatre also, and his present application was,
that the assignees of the bankrupt. should be prbvented
from taking upon themselves the contronl and manage-
ment of the Opera House, without either the sanction
of the Great Seal or the concurrente of the creditors.
The petition further stated, that the. petitioner (De Bee
nis) had caved 8,0001. a year to rent the Theatre. An-
other offer had been made by Mr. Ayrton, a Gentleman
who had been Director for many years of the King's
Theatre; yet both of their proposals had been rejected by
the assignees, although it must be admitted their experi-
ence and knowledge of the concern would have rendered
them more competent to conduct it advantageously
than the assignees, who now wanted to take upon them-
selves the management of it. The gentlemen who now
sought to become the committee of management were
a Mr. Bransconi, a plaisterer ; Mr. Mayhew, a solicitor;
another member of the committee was a tailor. Now
he was ready to admit that each of these gentlemen was
respectable in his particular calling; but the very cir-
cumstances which made Mr. Mayhew a good solicitor,
Mr. Bransconi a prosperous plaisterer, and the other
members of this committee successful in their respective
pursuits, prevented them from devoting that attention
to the interests of the Italian Opera House which RI
required. The petition set forth further, a prayer'
that the Court should adopt one of the five follow-
ng modes of disposing of this question; first, that a
sale of the property should take place for the benefit
~1 the creditors ; secondly, that it should be leased
either to the petitioner, or to an application approved, of
by his Lordship ; thirdly, that an Injunction should be
granted ; fourthly, that in the event of the property
being managed 6y the assignees, an approved security
should be given to the creditors for the rent; and fifthly,
that the costs of the application should be granted out
of the. funds of the estate. It was really with a view of
promoting the interests of the creditors that this appli-
cation had been instituted. Several meetings of the
.creditors 01

linbers hid taken place, but the assig-
nees had, on no occasion intimated to them their inten-
tion of superintending the management of the concern.
He was at a lots to account for their taking such re-
sponsibility upon themselves, without either the 5 anctioo
of the Great Seal, or of the creditors. The present
petit•oner had no other obj-et than the placing of the
property in the hands of persons who were competent
to manage it to the advantage of the creditors. These
Gentlemen had entered into engagements for dancers
and singera without any authority, save their own good
will and pleasure. Now this was a power which he
himself submitted that the Court of Chancery would not
sanction any assignees to exercise over the propexty
entrusted to them.

Mr. Ross followed on the same side:. He particu-
larly dwelt upon the incompetency of the present com.
mittee of management to regulate so vast and import-
ant a•tenctin:, as the King's Theatre. The Italia()
Opera. Ifiesa•was a fashionable theatre; and he sub-
mitted,- that even if the establishment were to be en-
trusted to its •creditors—a Roman cement maker and
the other person's composing the present committee of
management, were not the fitter& creditors to whom
such a trust should be delegated. He apprehended
that the consideration of patron rge had some influence
upon the minds of those gentlemen in inducing them
to undertake the management. The privilege of sa-
-1 perintending so fashionable a concern was not without
its inducements. The distribution of free admissions
—the dsucesir of giving boxes was also a privilege of
which gentlemen were desirous. The Learned Counsel
concluded a very humorous speech,by suggesting, that
the anxiety of obtaining the patronage of engagements,
boxes, admissions, &c. was the motive which prompted
these gentlemen to be so desirous of exercising a con-
treul over the management of the Opera House.
• Mr. SUODFN observed, that of the many creditors
claiming under. the bankruptcy of, Chambers, to the
extent of 300,0004 there was but one creditor who
•
offered opposition to the course which had been taken
by the assignees. There was no property so welt'
watched, or which so many had an interest in watching,
as the King's Theatre. If the. assignees bad attempted
to do any tbing injutious to their interests, the complaint
against them would not be confined to one petition. Al.
though Signer de Begnis appeared before the Court as
a creditor, his real character was different from his as-
sumed one. His object was to become manager of
this concern himself. He had a visionary plan of his'
own for this purpose, but Ibis plan was not approved
of by the assignees; and he therefore turned round
upon the assignees, and wanted to force them into his
own terms. It was an . important fact, however, to
consider that Signor De Begnis had himself offered thej
services of his wife, Madame Ronan to this very Coos-'
mittee, against which be now so vehemently protested.'
The gentlemen who undertook the management. were
men of substance, and not likely to enter into any rash
and hazardous Speculation. They bad no motive of
acquiring patronage in the conduct which they had
pursued.
The Loan Csamcntr.oa said, he did not think there
was any evidence in any of the affidavits to chew that
they were actuated by such a motive.
Mr. &anew revemed-r:.There was a meeting of cre-
ditors representing, to &considerable amount, the debts
due under the bankruptcy, and they expressed their
confidence in the assignees. This expression of confi-
dence was not to be impugned by a solitary petitioner.
(The assignees certainly rejected the offer of Signor De

Begais ; they did not approve of his terms; one objec-
tion was, that be was an alien. They might, also, not
be satisfied with the security which he proposed. Thetis
was another proposal to drum at present under consi-
deration, and if they were satisfied with it, I.e was con-
gimped that it would- be entertained by the A‘signees,
whose conduct throughout was regulated solely by g
desire of advancing and securing the ?entire interest*

of the creditors.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that this was a subject
which could not be dealt with according to the ordinary
rules of property, as the propetty was of an estraoedi.
nary and peculiar character. The ordinyy tonna
would be to send the case to the Master's oak i but if
he did so, he was at a loss to know when it Would coos*
out of it. Meanwhile, the interests of the cteditora
required that the Theatre shnulJ be shortly opened..-it
it was not, inevitable ruin would befsl the property.
The con•ideration of time, therefore, became a most

important one in this case. Seeing, therefore, that One
was but one creditor who petitioned against the course
punned by the assignees—seeing nothing in any of the
affidavits which would warrant him to seppose that
these was any thing in the conduct of the assignees
hostile or injurious to the interests of the creditors, and
apprehensive that a reference to the Master would be
attended with an injurious delay in opening the Theatre,
he would order the petition to be dismissed.
Mr. HORNS hoped that his Lordship would allow the
costs of the petition to be defrayed out of the estate of
the bankrupt.
Mr. §,UODEN opposed the application. He relied on
the circumstance of Signor De Begnis' offering the
services of his wife to the Committee, whose conduct
and authority he now most unwarrautAbly impeached.
The LORD CDANCALLOR would not say that the appli-
cation of Signor De Begnis was an improper one to be
made to the Court by him, as a creditor: He would,
therefore, allow him his costs out of the estate.

VICE CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Noy. 24.
THE EXECUTORS Or RUNDELL W. MHO.

At the sitting of the Court the Vica-Cmasinitunit
delivered his judgment in this case, which was reported
in our paper of Thursdly last. His Honour, after
stating the point in dispute between theparties, observed,
that after a careful perusal of all the papers that had
been handed up to him, he was of opinion that the in-
, jonction ought not to be granted. It was not denied
that the late Mr. Rundell had gianted•an annuity to Mr.
Bigg and his mother, which Mr. Rondell seemed by a
bond ; and when he (the Vice• Chancellor) considered
who Mr. Rundell sias, and how well that Gentleman
must have been acquainted with all matters of bisiness,
he found it difficult to•believe that Mr. Rundell would
not have demanded that bond to be delivered up to
him, if be had intended that it should be cancelled
by his subsequent favours to Mr. Bigg. Mr. Rundell
must have known very well that Mr. Bigg
,could
claim under that bond ; and if he bad intended
to cancel the bond, the obvious mode of carrying his
intention into effect was to have ordered it to be deli-
veted up to him. This he had not done: the bond was
still in the possession of Mr. Bigg, and in his mind
there was no doubt that it would be improper for the
Court to interfere, and, presuming the intention of the
testator to have been that the bond should be cancelled,
to refuse to allow Mr. Bigg to claim under the security
he possessed. The case was a very extraordinary one
on both sides. It was extraordinary that the :wears of
the annuity bad not been demanded for so many years ;
but then this was in some measure accounted fur by the
peculiarities of Mr. Randell's character. On the other
hand, it was very extraordinary that Mr. R. slionid not
have paid these arrears without being applied to ; or, if he
had intended the aanuity to cease, that he %hould not
have demanded the bond, by which the payment of it
was secured, to have been delivered up to him. • This
had not been accounted for in any way. A solution of
.he mystery had indeed been presumed, but the Court
would not be warranted in acting upon that presumirw
lion. Under all the circumstances I f the ca.e, he thought
that the application ought to be dismissed with costs.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 24.
Tug KING. V. RICHARDS.

This was a prosecution at the instance of the Earl of
Glengall, for a libel published in the Age newspaper,
of which the defendant was proprietor, reflecting on his
Lordship's character. The case was tried in the Easter
Sittings before the Lord Chief Justice of this Court, and
the defendant being convicted, was given in custody.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL now moved that he be
broogheup for judgment.
Lord TENTERDEN having read his report of the trial,
Mr. BROUGHAM, in mitigation, begged leave to read
an affidavit of the defendant's, in which he stared, that
he had been confined, on account of this charge, in the
King's Bench' Prison from the time of his conviction, in
June last, up to the preient period, between five and
six months, and that having ceased to be a proprietor
of the paper, he was reduced nearly to a state of stare-
tion—that he had Written a letter to Earl Glengall,
declarifig that he, was not himself the author of the
libel, nor did he know by whom it was written, it hay.
idg been sent to the paper by an anonymous contribu-
tor. The defendant, in that letter, had also expressed
the -nfost humble contrition at having been made the
means of wounding the noble Ewes feelings, admitting
likewise, that the assertions were grossly false and
scandalously libellous, and he concluded by earnestly
intreating that his Lordship would permit him to be
brought up for judgment wi:hout any limiter attempts
at aggravation being made which might prejudice his
discharge. _Mr. Brougham then observed that there
was another affidavit, which he trusted the Court would
give him the benefit of, though his (Mr. Ws) clerk had
neglected to put it up with his other papers, an it
went to prove that the defentlint had no longer any
interest'with the paper.. ' r,
The ATTORNEY Genartai. said, that the defeMinak
confinement was only a colourable pretence why the
Court should not pass on him a Sentence proportionate
to the offence of which he had been convicted.
Lord TENTERDEN.—There is another information
againsr the defendant for a libel.
MI. BROUGHAM.-1 do not appear for the defendant
'en that one, my Lord.
The affidavits on each side viere then read bj the
Officer of the Court. Oue of these contained a let-
ter from the defendant to Mr. Alfred Bunn, in:
which the system by which the managers of the
so Age' designed to have raised it into notice was •
pretty fully developed. The swifter first described
the talent engaged—they were all said to be 4g very
clever fellows"—one was a pathetic poet; another
deeply versed is the science of political economy, the
mysteries of the Stock Exchange, Joint Stock
vies, &c.; and a third was represented to be
the first water. Skids were the wri:era in
their object was to render, the paper a powerful
engine, but how was that to be effected ?
not by serious writing, for if they po.sessed ,
and the elegance of Juvenal, it would not ha'
read. The only means of attracting public a
was to attack private character in a playful and

J ,

11
.
'..
i
. i
. f
...
• I
1'
1
1t
. I '
t e
• I,
i
S
, 11
It
i
r
'i
%
I
to 1
, . 1
M,' -
! 1i
11 •

k Cont pa.
ea wit of
the Age I
I political
Ces tainly
the force
have been
attention •
id pointed

style of satire, and in adopting this course they only
!Wowed the example of their great leader, &c.
• 'Mr. BROUGHAM admitted that Lord Glen 'all had a
just *tight ,o complain of the inuendos expressed in the
iodictenenr, hu' the defendant entertained some faint
hope that the circumstance rd his having already suf-
*led a long confiner ent, would not be forgotten when
he was called up for judgment. This case was very dif-
antra to others which had been tried in the same place;
is other cases, where crimes of a more specific nature had
twee imputed to individuals—crinies too horrible to
*minion ; the de endants hod beeh allowed to compro-
Mite the offence by the payment of a fine. In the present
instance the offence did not exceed a vague i mputation of
falsehood against the noble prosecutor ; and the Learned
Counsel thought that the very humble and contrite letter
sent by the defendant, together with the imprisonment he
had suffered, might be accepted as ample satisfaction.
With relent to his having retired from the Paper,
there could be no doubt of that fact, it being admitted
by the present proprietor, who was his most inveterate
enemy. It might be urged, on the part of the prose-
cution, that it was a common trick with Editors of
Newspapers to set up a man of straw as 'heat representa-
tive with the Stamp-offi,e, but it was never known that
a person holding an ostensible interest in such concern,
would distinctly swear that he had relinquished such
interest ; for in the event of any future action it would
meet him in Chancery, and that affidavit would prove
fatal to his claim.—The Nimble Lord, in his affidavit,
had set 1,1111 that there *ere fifty other labels inserted
ih the defendant's paper, directed against him ; bet his
Lordship had been ad•ised not to specify what they
were. Had he done so, it would become a question
for a Jury to say whether they were libels or not? it
*as possible that the paragraphs which the Earl called
libels were painful to his feelings, though not at all
punishable by law. The defendant, however, having
made all the reparation in his poser, the Learned
Counsel trusted that he might now be permitted to
escape without further punishment.
The ATTORNEY Listaaant, for the prosecution, trusted
that their Lordships, before they gave judgement,
would endeavour to ascertain whether the imprisonment
which was set forth by the defendant was not for debts,
or some other cause not 'elating to the present charge.
The Noble Earl had the strongest grounds fer pressing
this prosecution; the most atrocious charges had been
promulgated against his character—one insinuated.
';bat be was a liar—another accused him of cowardice,
'lid a third spoke in scandalous terms of his transac- ,
turns with the other sex. What credit then was due to,
#4 disseminator of such atrocious calumnies? was he to
escape punishment because his offence was not so heirs-
etas as that commited by another—because he had not
charged a person with committing an unnatural offence?
It would be laying down a dangerous precedent indeed,
.in the present rage for libel-making, the. Editor of a
newspaper were permitted to take credit to himself
because he had nor imputed to aaother the most odious
apd. revolting of crimes. The Learned Counsel con-
tended that the public were deeply indebted t 3 the
Carl of Glengall for having disclosed a system of the
most scandalous attack on the character-of private in•
dividuals, got up as it was by a halt doxen persons, who
c:,hom to select some one who was willing to submit to
imprisonment, and thus enable them to vend their
malicious ribaldry against individuals. Imprisonment'
would not have the effect of deter ring such men
Crams pursuing their mischievous course. In no less
than SO Papers out of 108, his Lordship's character had
been attacked, the defendant disclaiming all knowledge
of the writer•. The defendant was therefore not entitled
tp a,ny mitigation of punishment,having made himselfre-
spousible for every thing they thought proper to publish.
Mr. ADOLPHUS followed on the SAO,C side. He thought
tbat.he would best discharge his duty to his client, by
no; diverting their Lordships' attention from what the
4ttpta9, General had said.
two TENTERDEN—Let the defendant be remanded
nosh end. appear again on Monday. The Court will
inquire in the interim whether he has been imptiso-ed
on accontst of this charge.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 44.
Pa PARTE BUCKLEY.
Mr. Sergeant Mattawrruria stag,. chat in this case
he was instructed to make an application to the Court
oil rather a novel kind. It was Intifada on a statute of
the 53.1 Gen. 111. cap. 71, illicit was passed for the
vippse of regulating` the recovery of costs incurred by
persons who had attended as witnesses on an Election
Committee. It enacted, that upon a certificate signed
(katleAct required) by the Speaker of the House of Com-
sPotis, a witness might recover costs. The present appli.
c'ant had attended and given evidence before the Corn-
s—
eputee appointed by the House to inquire into the.validity
oT the late election for the county of Dublin, and had
obtairied a certificate in 'the proper form from the
Bpeaker ; and the object of his present application was,
that judgment might be entered op upon it as upon a
warrant of attorney. The Learned Counsel then read
the certificate, which stated that J. Rickman, Esq.
Clerk to the House of Commons, and S. C. Cox, Ecq.
one of the Masters of the High Court of Chancery,
were appointed by the Speaker, according to the Act
of the .53c1 of the late King, to ermine and tax the
costs incurred by Messrs. Hamilton, Bingham, and
Buckley, who had attended as witnesses before the
Dublin election Committee. It then went on to
state, that having made the necessary examination,
the two Gentlemen before named had fixed the costs
payable by Colonel Henry White to the three wit-
nesses (therein named) at 144 t. 18..; .541.125. of which
was decided as due to the applicant, Mr. Buckley. The
Learned Sergeant insisted that the Court were autho-
rised to grant this application by the 12th and 13th
clauses of the Statute in question, the last of whichen-
acted, " that in any action or .suit at law commenced
for the recovery of costs incurred by witnesses on ac-
count of attendance on Election Committees, the
Speaker's certificate. signed as therein directed, should
have the force and effect of a: warrant of actor ney."—
The Learned Seigeant was proceeding with lusther ar-
gument, but was prevepredlspc
The Consul-, who said thai trom the terns' of the Act,
it appeared to.them they catitil.,have no jurisdic-
tion, Theywinild, not iefttrthowever,. to &rant the
but would Heat it mean. on Monday, if .the
Learned Sergeant should,tbint 'inopei in .11.pireit.,-4,
Rule suspended.

w1077p,. mu*. •
The plaintiff its this aittion..iought to.Tecom
which the alleged the defendant w.sa
It: aPktied that Was a., Matried woman, .and had
rritt4dhat htstband for,the porpOse of residing with the'
m 00444 14 Ihnits ithe iiied for. some 'time. flit at
nth separaliniftons him, she set nit the present imr
Seigeiti(E, Limos, tinfltde on 04,pfitoCthc
h9L,144, that wig Pfflic#olPß! stf*Y.4
, Mr. %/Malt; KAU WA Wick IlltrifOltd tbais 11,4 qq.
application Would be made to Ahip."CO'oit .11i such a
person. It certainly.cirld'not be anseA., . •
In the coarse of die ;let the Earl. of ate,,with.tka,
Marchioness, and the' tichei Ncirth, apPeared in Court

for the purpose of passing a recovery. 'file ladies
took ieats on the Bench, the noble. Nlorquikaprearinp
at the bar. The usual form was. then gone through
for the recovery of several estates in different pariA...i
England ; and when concluded, the noble party with.
drew.
• COURT OF EXCHEQUER,Novioraza et
WATINI p. snoirmax, tuna.
In this case a rule bed beetrobtained calling omen-the
plaintiffs and their attornej to chew cause wjaygthe exe-
cution which bad issued igainst the defendant should
not be set aside, why they should not pay the costs of
the proceedings, and why an attachment should not issue
against them for a contempt of this Court in isitriug such
execution after this Cam t had granted a new trial.
Mr. Sergeant RMAULL now chewed cause'against the
rule, and .contended that the defendant had forfeited
his right to a new trial in consequence of not having
entered into the necessary lecognizanCes for payment
of the costs, as required by the Welch Judicature Act r.
and, moreover, he had biouVit a writ of error, manna-
ing the cause into the Kings Bench, at the very time
hp was moving this Court for a new tri.s:, of which
proceeding he had kept their Lordships in ignorance
down to the present moment. Under these circum-
stances, the Learned Sergeant argued that the defen-
dant's rule ought to be discharged.
The Coma, after hearing Mr. CAMPBELL and Sir
W. OW ax, in support of the rule, directed the case to
'stand over until next term, and stigge.ted, that in the
Meantime the, parties had better come to some arrange.
ment to have it tried again; the Loan Coin Bartow
adding, that whether or not it would turn out that tire
plaintiffs 11.44.1 been gnaty of a legal contempt, it was
quite clear that they had treated this' Court very:eon-
temptuously. J
A peisoa named Smith justified as bail for a Mr.
Placket, in an action of 4001. and stated that he had a
fifth share a small patent inkstand, which he valued
at 1,01:01. he arid Iris partner having purchased tire patent
right fur .5,0001.