Here is another article that I don't understand. What was the Stannaries Court, what does "rule nisi" mean, and what could the case have been about? Would this have been a court in Redruth or Truro? My interest is with Hugh Phillips mentioned in the second case. Was the second item also referring to the Winn & Others v. Spargoe and Others? If so, was Mr. Simmons the lawyer for John Smith and William Richards...and would they have been affiliated with Spargoe and others? And then would a different lawyer, Mr. Roberts have been representing Charles Fox and Hugh Phillips in the same case? west briton advertiser cornwall 1843 NEWS ARTICLE 5 MAY 1843, Friday THE STANNARIES COURT. WINN & OTHERS v. SPARGOE & OTHERS. Mr. G. N. SIMMONS said that this was a case which was heard the sittings before last, when his Honour gave the plaintiffs till the next sittings to amend their petition. That not having been done, Mr. Simmons now moved, on behalf of the defendants, John SMITH and William RICHARDS, for an order to dismiss the petition with costs. Rule nisi granted. SAME v. SAME. Mr. ROBERTS, on behalf of the defendants, Charles FOX and Hugh PHILLIPS, made a similar application. Rule nisi granted. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ This is all very confusing to me and I do appreciate any insight a list member might be able to contribute. Blessings...Meli in Texas