The Statesman.
London, England, 1809-07-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHINCEItY. LINCOLN'S INN HALL,
;Vane:Jay, has 5.

lIIINKRUPTCY.

EX.PASITE STEELE IN TUB MATTE& OT 041111111.
This v* an applicados by petition to set aside
a Commission of Bankruptcy, on the ground of
collusion between the Bankrupt and the Petition.
ing Creditor.
Mr. BART stated, from the petition of his
client, Mr. Steele, that the Bankrupt wu an at-
torney, residing near Manchester, that an execu-
tion had been seat into his house, upon which he
immediately rode to Chester, a distance of about
40 miles. to the house of his brother, another at-
torney. The brother, it was said, was a creditor
to a considerable amount, and immediately upon
learning the bankrupt's situation, he took the ne.
cessary musette for striking a docket, the bank-
rupt himself having iugrossed the affidavit and
bond. The petition also stated, that the Chester
Commissioners had refused the proof of Steele's
debt, unless he would relr...as the action at kw,
while they admitted some doubtful claims of the
bankrupt's brother, Thomas Dykes; that Thomas
Dykes was the petitioning creditor—that he was
Solicitor to the Commission, and had chosen him-
self one of the assignees. There was also a com-
plaint, that the Commissioners had refused to•the
petitioner the liberty of clamming the bankrupt.
Sir S. RoMILLY replied on the part of T. Dy-
kus, and contended that there was no complete
evidence of collusion. _ _

The LORD CIIANCELLOR, though he thought
the conduct of the bankrupt and his brother sus.
picious, did not think there was judicial evidence
of improper collusion ; one did he think there was
any imps:Winn aping the Commissioners. lie
could not, therefore, supersede the commission;
but he ordered another meeting to appoint new as.
slimes, and correct some errors in other respects
which had occurred in the course of the pro-
ceeding.

COURT OF KIVO'I BENCH,
Wednesday, July 5.

SITTINGS MUMS LORD £LLIIII3OIIOI7OIII IN
GI/ILI:MALL.

IA It MIR b. SAO SDIII4O

The ATTORNIT.GtSZILAL stated this to be an
action for the infringement of the Plaintiff's pa.
tent for making wove and knotted stocking works
with double loops, which was done by means of a
machine, of which a model was presented in
Court, and the manner of wOrking it was des.
crihed by a rut variety of witnesses for tire Plain:

Several offers wore made, sometimes by the De-
fendant, and the Plaintiff would not consent ;
sometimes by tho Plaintiff, knd the . Defendant
would not cotant,-to refer the cans°. The. De-,
tenth's' proved a licence of the Plaintiff to work
six of these machines; but the Plaintiff preyed
he exceeded that licence by working eight.
Mr. Pane then went upon a general defence,
which was, that this machins wee not. of the
Plaintiff's invention, bet founded on atwitter ma..
chine. A .vast amebae of witnesses, were exa-
mined. The trial continued until past 'lx o'clock,
when the Jury gave a verdict for the Plaintiff—
Damages, One Shafts.

COURT OF COMMON PCEMI. UUILDUALL.
Wednesday. J ulj 5.

HERTZ V. BURGESS.

The Defendant in this adieu is the Captain of
the Airl9 Castle East ludiaman, aud Abe Plaintiff
a* Captain In the Compaoy's teed .service, and
the action was brought fur 24S guineas, being the
price of a box, containing necklaces, bracelets,
ear-tings, tec. which the Plaintiff lost On board
the Defendant's ship, wherein he came home a
passenger.
Colonel Lys, Captains Leyetdster, and Clarke,
gave evidence that the Plaintiff had the box wlum
he came on board, and that he continued *dewing
the contents occasionally to the other passengers
till they arrived in the Channel, when they were
sealed, sill put Into the bread-room, until they
should be examined by the Custotn-hotts*Ofieem
They were entered iu the Defendant'i manifest at
Saint Helene, but never put under his car.. It
was necessary to enter them, because no erticle
could be landed *Wilma it, except the Captain
paid a fine of 1001.
Col. Lys stated, that the article: were lot of
mach value, as he hid brooglsClistae Snow of a
superior quality, which he In cheaper at
Bombay than IM Ptiaintifflrsd,:, ) • several let-
ten which the Defendant had*. Alnithe Plain..
tiff, it appeared that the WIN , • Cap_
tain's-kuowledge, permitted • the men to
* conceal thermal, in the liread:itiOnt):ll.*roid
being impressed, and that they bridatile box. and
stole the articles.

Some juwellers were called to.prove their value
I 1 England ; but the Judge would not allow them,
as the Plaintiff could only recovertheir prime cost,
and because they never saw them, nor heard them
accurately described. On the part of the Dufen.
dant it WAS contended, thst as they were not put
under his care, nor that of the Piercer, which was
flu usual practice, he could not be answerable for
their safety or value.
Sir JAMS. MAssrtame natal, that as the Ts.
ine of the articles had out beta proved, not that
they were under the We, sad that as
there was no evidence to show tbot the Plaintiff
himself had not carried the *hole or any part
away, the Jory•-:nuatt accertare to kw, find for
the Defendant. If he was wrong In his opinion.
the Maud( night again hate the cause tried, and
cone prepared with better proof.
The Jury retired, and deliberated about as
hour, when they returned into Court, sod found
a verdict for the Pbintit—Damages 601.

O►►e tier or the new TheAtre-Itoyal, Covent.
Garden, it is said, is to contain 32 private Wrap,
which arc to be fitied op ins most elegant stylo;
them, It is calculated, will product between 13
nd )4;01:01, per Lenin.