The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-11-05 00:00:00

Case; and the passage in the mikes pointed out by hie
Lordship, clearly abewed that she had gine tharoeh 1
to the Plaintiff. She had no right to say that the
Plaintiff should not continue to publish It because the
first fourteen years bad expired ; as welliaight it have
been said ;bat he c Id not have poblised a second'edi-
don because the ti ad been sold. What she con-
tended for now w at because she had giien her
work to every one, she bad given it to no one. He
submitted the injunction ought pot to have been
granted.
Mr. SURDWRLL as the same side, detailed the pro-
ceediage of this suit. spa in a cross cause, to restrain
Mrs. Ronde% from publishing her receipt with the-
plaintiff's additions and embellishments. In that suit
the Lord Chaacellor bad greeted as injunction against
Mrs. Rundell, which injunction, the Viee-Chancellor,
when the matter was before him, bad not disturbed,
but be had granted an injunction against Mr. Murray.
The LORD CIi•NDRI.LOR observed, that if both were
to be restrained we should get no dinner at all.
Mr. Suowsu. said, the Vice-Chancellor ba.sked
whether Mr. Murree had not repaid all his expenses.
It was due to the taunts of the lady in the iit of
cookery, and the embellishment of the work by Mr.
Murray, to shat both had been so excellent, that
the publication had met with its reward, and had es-
perieneed a most extraordinary sals during a coarse of
several years, but there was no validity in that argu-
ment. It was no reason why a court of equity should
not protect Mr. Murray in the enjoyment of a work
which be had a right to consider as his exclusive pro-
perty, inasmuch as be had originally been induced to
lay out a considerable sum of his own money upon the
expiring assurance, that if his speculation succeeded, it
was for his own benefit. The Learned Counsel pro-
ceeded to argue, that though there had been no legal
assignment of the original copy-right, there was an
equitable assignment equally binding. He oas in the
.course of referring to cases upon the subject, when his
Lordship desired that the further hearing be deferred
till Monday.
His Lordship rose at half past 12, for the purpose of
receiving the Lord Mayor.
COURT OF KENO'S BENCH, Nov. 3.

MURNAJF V. BLLIf4TON.

In this case which was struck out of the paper yester-
day, in consequence of the absence of the Cqunsel, the
Plaintiff's Solicitor applied this morning to have the
cause restored to the paper. on a suggestion that the
Learned Counsel was out of town. The case involved
the right of the Defendant to represent one of Lord
Byron's tragedies on the boards of Drury-lauo Theatre.
The Court said that the cause having been called on
in its turn, and no person appearing in behalf of the
Plaintiff, it bad been struck out of the paper. If the
Plaintiff wished it to be restored, it must be the subject
of a special application in term.
SEVILLE S. 110BINSON.

This was a case from the Sessions for the West Rid-
ing of Yorkshire, to take the opinion of the Court
upon the construction of the 18 Oeo. 111. c. 19. s. 4.,
which respects allowances paid to constables, for busi-
ness done in their respective parishes. townships, Ike.
The facts were shortly these :—On a Sunday, in the
month of December, 1819, a person named White-
head, being in a state of intoxication, met a young
woman on the road, in the township of Qnick. and on
his attempting to take liberties with her, she made her
escape from him, and took refuge in a Chapel where
divine service was just beginning. lie followed her,
and behaved in an unbecoming and rude manner. In
consequence of which he was taken into custody by
the respondent, Robinson, the constable of the town-
ship, who was then in the chapel, and next day was by
bim and the chapel warden oaken before a Magistrate,
and they were both bound over by recognizance to
prosecute him at the next Wakefield Sessions, where he
was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to six months
imprisonment. The expense of this proceeding, which
was paid by the constable, amounted to 181. It did
not appear that the parish officers had'ever sanctioned
the prosecution. When the constable presented an
account of his expenses during the execution of his
office, in pursuance of the 18th Geo. 111. they were all
allowed, except this item of 181., which was negatived
by a large majority of the inhabitants assembled to
audit his accounts, on the ground that it was not a
charge which by law a constable could make on the
township. Upon application to the Magistrates, how-
ever, they made an order upon the Overseers to pay the
money. The Overseers appealed, and the Sessions by
a majority confirmed the order. The question now
for the opinion of this Court was, whether this was
a charge which a constable could make, as expenses
incurred for and ou behalf of the parish in his office
of constable.
Mr. ALDERSON and Mr. BLACIRERNE for the Re-
spondent, contended that their client bad done no more
than his duty in taking the offender into custody, hav-
ing been guilty of a breach of the peace in his own
presence, and in the face of a large portion of the in-
habitants. The prosecution must be considevEd as
carried on for and on account of the parish, and there-
fore the expense ought to be borne by them, the con-
stable being only a ministerial officer, to preeerve,peace
and good order in the parish.
Mr. LITTLIDSLE on the whet. side was stopped by
The CouaT, who were clearly of opinion that this
Was Dot a charge which the township was bound to pay.
It was no par, of the constable's duty to prosecute the
offender, and he had not received the sanction► of the
inhabitants to institute proceedings. Ilia duty ended
in taking the culprit before the Magistrate, to be dealt
with according to law. and be might have ,piotested
against being hound over to prosecute at his own ex-
pense. Looking at the words of the statute, it was
clear that this was not a charge which the mutable
was justified in making without the soncarreuce of the
township. Order qdaslied.
Several other cases were called on, but the gen-
tlemen of the bar engaged in them ■ot being in at-
tendance,

The Coeur intimated that they shoUld expect the
gentlemen to be ready ou Monday. or **cases should
be struck oat of the paper.

Mr. °AIMEE asked the Clout whether they meant
to .ost kitomiay (llaappwder Treas..), which. if sot
a holiday hy Act of Paillasses% bad Inca se asoddered
said kept by immemovial prescriptiotwastittsage.
The Comm mid abet the Ast d'aelimarepaittlee
'which they atm sat, was imperative upon floe" teAt
'ttatil the first day of term. if they had business to do.