The Statesman. — London, England, 1814-04-30 00:00:00

I TTIE STAI , s take that conrse which would serve to avert any of just and lawful debts, It would do more harm by pr..inature discussion upon the subject. For he opening a door to fraudulent, clandestine, and etre felt nit difficulty in getting, that his Majesty's Go- culative claims. Upon the same principles they verunwnt had, in concert with Sweden and our other I might go on to pass a Bill to make the whole of plies, isseed an order for blockading the ports of ; Gentlemen's landed estates or money in the funds, Nei way. 1 liable for theil debts. This might be proper in The Corruption of Blood Bill was reported and fore conscientia, but the policy of our law bad ale agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third ways been to protect landed property against &she. time en Monday. ' ful and surreptitious claims, and to require the high. The further considerationiof the Clergy Penalties est roomers and the strongest formalities of evidence Bill was postponed until Moodily. before it could he affected. CONTRACT DEBTS. Mr. STEPHEN argued that the same plea of the On the motion of Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY long -continuagee of the evil, which his Hon. and for the committal of the Bill for rendering Free- Learned Friend (Mr. Wetherell) made use of against hold Estates subject to the payment of simple contract i the present amendment of the law, ought to have debts, • I prevented him from assenting to the Bill, by which Mr. Serjeant BEST argued against the measure as the property of tradesmen was made liable for their inexpedient and unnecemiary, because it was owing debts after their death. There was no comparison rather to the neglect of creditors-themselves that, to between the inconveniences resulting from the este. the deficiency of the existing law, that their claims blished law, and the benefits which would accrue were not put into a proper shape to enforce their from it.. It meet practically to exclude the most payment, namely, by rendering their claims what meritorious class of creditors, honest and industrious the law called " special." lie would not, therefore, tradesmen, from enforcing their just claims, often to consent to alter a law of long establishment, in the their utter ruin, and was no protection whatever existence of which the landed proprietors and the against gambling and usurious debts. The money aristocracy were so much interested, and the charac. fender always took care to have the best security the ter of which was sustained by so many high legal ; law could' give hint; and what eztravagaet young heir authorities. Besides, if the law were altered, by would hesitate-to set his hand to a bend to raise an rendering freehold estates liable to simple contract immediate sum of Money ? The precaullikens taken by debts, facilities would be afforded to young heirs to the law in other cases which had been alluded to by contract Improvident debts, and to fraudulent claim. the last Speaker, were merely to prevent fraudulent ants also to press demands after the death of land- ! and surreptitious claims ; not to annul (hoe of sub owners, for the payment of services which might be stantial and real justice. He concluded with repro probably gratuitous, but which, at all events, the bating the p ractice of the law, as it now stood, as party being dead, it might be impossible for the intolerable in a commercial country, where the heir to rebut by any satisfactory explanation.--On penalties Of the law were strict and severe to the last these grounds, the Learned Gentleman concluded degree against that very class of persons, who were with moving, that the Bill be committed this day six • often condemned to end their lives in a gaol, in mi months. sequence of the refusal of the herr to pay the debts Mr. PRESTON supported the Bill, and asked # contracted by his predecessor. abet was to become of the claims of creditors on Mr. LOCK HART said he had asked several of siruple cantract'debts, where the debtor died prema- ; the most experienced and best-informed persons, turely, before the debts could be made special ? lin' whether, in the case of persons devising their debts to considered this measure as likely to produce great be paid out of their estates, there was any &neer of benefit, and liable to no just objectio n . the setting up of fraudulent claims ? and he had ' been Sir A. PIGGOT'I s professed himself unable to coin- answered in the negative. lie had also made the prehend the proposition, that any man should con- same enquiry with respect to debts proved upon tract debts, and that his property should not be 1 oath ; and he had received the same answer. N ow liable for the payment of them. Yet that was the it appeared to him that the inference was precisely proposition which these Gentlemen must maintain , the same, whether the testator charged his debts on who opposed this Bill. Some Gentlemen affected to :4 his estate himself, or whether tha law ordered them be surprised by the introduction of this Bill, but he ito be paid out of it. lie was therefore for the Mo .. . coafebsed that his surprise was, Oat law,ehould have been- so long allowed to remain sis defective; The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objeCted to the and that a measure of this nature had not been measure, as likely to remove owe of the landmarks brought forward before. Great defects hail, how.. :by which landed property descended from the an ever, been in ether cases allowed long to 4isotce cestor 'to the heir. The same objection did not OUT law. By the statute of Wins, in 1540,a•tqtas apply to the alteration introduced into the law for had Lein his power to will away his properly to prevent fraudulent devises, because that was not from his eon relation to any stranger, and entirely in feet an innovation, but a restoration of . the an to do away the claims of his creditors ; !and . this' dent law of the land, before the Statute of Wills in ;Mute continued in force until- the enactment of the - the time of Henry VIII. by which the personal pro- Matute against Fraudulent Decline. But stilt, if a perty of the deceased was shared among the creditors. testator did not charge his freehold estate with the lie thought, on t.:io contrary, that the present meas. payment of simple contractdebts, the creditor could inin was an innovation (he did not use the word In tot enforce his claims, and to cure this iajostice was , any invidious sense) which was not called for by the the *eject of the present berWevori 'jointing state of the law., urgedtherira creditor truly - cam to attend to t • Mr. D. GIDDY spoke against the Bit, as o 4 certain solemnities' of the • by' rendering his . likely to augment the facilities of ob ta in in g cre dit ; claims " special," he could suffer. But.was it and to excite, in tradesmen an increased avidity to be endured,' that Creditors should be defrauded to grant it, when they knew that real property was because they bad not the dexterity and diligence of rendered liable for debts. lawyers—that they could not make their debtor's Sir S. ROMILLY replied, and quoted the Ituthe property liable for their just demands—because they cities of Lord Rossiya and Mr. Justice Blackstone, had not all their transactions recorded in parchment , in favour of a measure similar to what he now pro .—because in all their dealings they had not an at- . posed. lie ridiculed the idea, that it the Bill passed torney at their elbow ?--[Near, hear!)—The fact into a law, any increased facility to credit-would be was, that the injustice of the existing law 'fell prin. created ; as it was not very probable that a staid, elpally, if not-wholly, on industrious, probably ig- sober tradesinan, between fifty and sixty, a prudent soviet tradesmen and artificers, who could ill en. time of life, would be inclined to graut large credit dare it, and not upon large capitalists or money. to a young man of one-and-twenty, because,- at the lenders, who always had their claims " special,' ; death of his debtor, his real property would become by having bonds for their loans. Thus the evil be.. liable for the payment of his debts, supposing that came more oppressive, often operating to ruin the in the interim that estate was in no manner liapaired families of tradesmen, and to commit themselves to a or dilapidated. The anomaly of the law, asit now JO. It was a libel upon the character of the ari- stood, also deserved to be considered, and would stocracy that they could be solicitous for the exist- strike us as monstrous, if eletailed in a fictitious once of such an ictirritous law ;. that any Gentle. book of travels, relating to e this or any other coon man could desire his property to be shielded from try. While it was declared On law, in one case the payment of his honest debts, still less that any (that of a bankrupt), that /4. concealment of any Nobleman could think it necessary to the sustenance part of his property subjected him•to the penalty of of his high rank and order in society, that he should an ignominious death, io another case it secured the be enabled to defraud those with whom he dealt. In property of a debtor, even to the of in of a creditor. feet, the existing law had always been deemed so un. The moral obligation was the same upon both indi. jest in a Court of Equity, that to his knowledge, it viduals; but the bankrupt might be 14 out ;to exe had uniformly been the utmost endeavour of the cution,. while-the heir of the deceased debtor was Lord Chancellor and Master of Rolls, so to allowed to live in splendour and dignity oflon the construe wills as to remedy the grievances of the law, value of those estates which ought to be disposed by rendering Freehold Estates liable for simple con. of for the satisfaction of the' creditors.—Vicar, tract debts, generally feeling regret where a will hear! • 'would bear no such construction. The Learned On a division there appeared— Gentleman stongly deprecated such notions, and • Fir the Atitendment 37 concluded with an impressive exhortation to the Against it House to redeem the caracter of the law, Majority 24 the'preposition of his Hon. Friend, and thus render. stag that p,-eperty for the payment of honed The Bill then went through a Committee , the debts, which, under the existing law, a testator who Re art of which was ordered to be received on Mon debts, land lived in splendour by contracting debts, might de- i da y* vise to his bastard and mistresses, and laugh at his The Irish Foundling Hospital Bill went through a Committee the report of which was ordered to be creditors. Mr. WETIIERELL began by complimenting the; received on Monday. • • learning, the judgment, and probity of the last COPYRIGHTS. speaker, from-whom, however, he was compelled to I Sir EGERTON BRYDGES begged leave to dissent. Whatever evils or inconveniences resulted withdraw his notice of a motion respecting CM' from the present law on the subject, they had existed 1 rights, in order that the subject might be taken up for three hundred years, and their not having been by abler hands. remedied in that time was at least a presumption that Mr. D. GIDDY then gave notice, that on Thurs• there were some strong reasons against the i nflow' . day he would move for leave to bring in a Bill, em lion. 'He conceived that if this alteration in the law bodying the Reportmade by the Select Committee were sti uctioned, it would be necessary not to stop here, I of last Session, on the subject of Copyrights. but to introduce other essential alterations in the The Innkeeper's Allowance Bill was brought in, law of property. Much stress had been laid on the read a first time, and ordered to be read a second immorality of the present law • but he conceived that time o n Monda y . morality alone, if not coupled with the principles of Adjourned to Monday. civil policy, was not a sufficient test of the propriety of a law. It was not the sole test resorted to in., other eases. For instance, if a debt were not proved by some written document, the law did not enforce: the payment of it, though in point of morality a written and a verbal contract were equally binding. There was an order observed in the payment of par ticular debts, as they were thought to be more on less legally binding, though the masa' obligation was the same. lie contended that though this ma-, sun night do some good ) by enforcing the -payment Is.4;t:KPOCKSlls.—These constant attendants on 1111 fashionable assemblies have hitherto contented them selves with being outside ; but at Mrs. Beau mont's late assembly, one of them introduced him :elf into the irfside of the house ; and•on being stop ped by a servantiaaother of , the gang rushed inotad offered to take the offender into his ,austedy, ;as a constabk : in 41► e scuffle that .envied, .the *Won ' constable contrived to carry off a watch ) and get off unmolested. fendant, 'With force and arms,• debauched the tinideaghter, per quasi - seer:ilium aullstt. hoed Etteeeqeennues-It Appal!, from. the rif t wring in the registersbreok, noel (rpm the w ks of entries,. that this. ection,exed to be ben ',isarespass, although it kir litierlY been . triihiii &Unction upon the case, which for many purpose, lis - ' 1 The Court, therefore, reslerethe old law; SIC the last decision. klog r.. Justice &taw referred „te,a moist , ' Jae. MIL - 40 vwflofPfi• • Mr. LtuTtarrow moied for, a Reit rtia,i. ieses s le / the Churchwardeoe, lac.. of the parish of Brae 1 Yorkshire, from levying certain rates which 'hail determined were necessary for the accomi ;sent of certain objects. They had fixed on to l dettay the expeuces of repair* to the chergis Bradford, and to enable them tort:chase& field. the purpose of enlarging the•burying s greund ba ing to the said church. Now the Learned. mail apprehended, that they had Ito right whattrieivi to levy any rate for any such purpose, merely they had determined that such a purchase w expedient.—Rule granted. HOWE V. Itkr.TYR. Mr. Serjeant SELLos applied for a Rule cause, why the verdict which hall been obtak this case should not be set aside, and a new - - - COURT OF KING'S BLNCII, Aram 29. granted. It was a qui tam action for tinnier logs, and was tried at the last Bedford , "DIREY o. MARQUIS Of 111 ""°". . There were many counts in the proceedings, Mr. PARE moved to set aside the verdict for the general verdict was obtained - for ,iii amount . ' Pleintiff, which had been obtained at the last York : dealings, ; which was 17731.; but as the proof Assizes, before Mr. Justice LE BLAwc, against the' went to some of the counts, when the presi Defentlant,`who claimed a right •of - common on Hat- , ; Judge said, that the Plaintiff had the law in field-chase , in the West Riding df the county or, your, for the construction which he put on York, in respect of. 119 acres, of which the Do- _s, dealin g the Plaintiff was, thereafter, to en( fendant Was seized, in right of his Lady,, part of a his verdict on some one.of the counts.' Hitherto farM called Bradholm, the farm-house not being a ' had not been done as he contended it eagle ' *cotninon.right house; but the Defendant had one ! b e e n; but that might not a ff ect his motion, within the manor of Hatfield, which was : this manor : moved respectin g the whole of the transactlo of Hatfield was, by letters patent of sth Feb. 4 Car. I. • grounds on which he made this *polled to granted to Sir Cornelius Vermuden, Kit. who had dealings. 'undertaken to drain the wastes of the manor, in con- : Mr. Serjeant &tassel., Counsel for the !iteration of a grant of one-third of the lands from ,21., having been called on by the Court, stet • the Crown in severalty; and by a decree in the Court the usury was committed hi the course - of a of Exchequer, in 163 t, made *between Sir C. Ver- , lending and borrowing on bills of exchange, maiden farmer of his Majesty's manor of Hatfield, ! wer e discounted by the Defendant ; that some Plaintiff, and I'ortington and others, Defendaut!, bills were produced on the trial ; that as the , it wasdecreed, that a conveyance should be made to - then said, that in point of law they had made ' the tenants, it - ,c. of the manor of certain waste lands, , their case, they did not go further into it, and, &c. (being the waste or common in qiestion), in as the rain of the Defendant - roust have been lieu of their right of common over the rest of the, sequence, had they determined to proceed I manor wastes, as mentioned in a deed of feoffment, penalties on the whole amount (the penalty fop dated 15th July, 1633, between the said Sir C. Ver. being three times the amount of the dealing : muden, and J. Gibbon, Esq., who had become ie. had wily resolved to proceed on one of the terested under him of the one part ; and Henry As yet he had not heard that any count had 1 I Lee, and fifteen other persons, of the *nee" solved on. of Hatfield of the other part. Tr he deed re- ; JAM I ,•r , A II LENBOROUG said , that this was tiled, that king Charles had before appointed car- ' improper use of the indulgence extended fain Commissioners to treat with the tenants and in. Plaintiff at the trial, that he must determl , habitants of an 'hie townships, P recincts ) 6 '; ° ' i n el'd to-morrow , and that for the sake of Riese adjoiiiiiig• . o the wastes, cisme% right of com a o n . regularity of their proceedings, Mr. Serjes there, touching what part of the commons to be WI ha d ti o tel , o c „, poib , hi s To st oli till r o - nl erso, proved they would accept in foil satisfaction of their tiott deferred. right nod title to the residue of : the same; and fur. : • - . —.sp., ____,,_• - • thor, 'that disputes leads (trims - between ,the 544 Sir i occkgsstotty col* T: tiotreorts' COM: C. Velinuden, and thellenants and inhibitaiits of the i Arai& 941. said manor, tee. which were referred to th e arbitra. : nOttatesr.• #. IROKAPZEI... Thi s ', was a cause of divorce, instituted-by - tires of certain Commissioners appointed by the Crown ; and it was by them awarded, that the te- R . amanel, the husband, against Ann Romanel, hit wife, by . reason of cruelty and adultery. The . mints of the manor of Hatfield, and the members husbond pleaded in forma pauperis, and the case thereof, should have unto them and their heirs, or such persons and their heirs as they should app'bint, came before the Court on th e e admission of the libel, their former allotments for their common con firm e d which stated that the marriage betweee the parties th solemnized on the 10th of February, 1811, unto them, according as they were set out by former " w as . Commissioners therein named, on the 14th of Mirth, 1 parish c hurch of St. Leonard, Shoreditch • ne the firs tactof vio lence committed by tbi; and that 1627, .with certain additions therein stated.. The wife towards her husband, took place at a very Defendant in the present action +claimed his right • ef common under the 31 Geo. 3. c. 30, sec. 39, which early period, namely, on the evening of the day of excepted only such lands and hereditaments as marriage. The libel also stated several other acts of Win not legally entitled to any right of common, h u sbandobliged to quit violence; .. and that the was and - also except such landi and hereditaments which, • his wife in consequence . of ill-treatment, after the on the Ist day of January, 1808, were not the pro- .. abort cohab i tation with her o . f . five . weeks. Th e li be l party of any person or persons, who was the owner eery charged the wife with various acts of and. of any messuage or hereditament within the parishes . committed by her with divers pekoes in the or townships of Hatfield, Thorn, and Fishlake. Mr. o . r o • Reig . hb 0 h od of Shoreditch. 'I he libel was opposed by Counsel on the part of Park contended for this right in the Defendant l .l wife, the ground of delay in th e husband in because he was the owner of a commies-00f the ,on bowie annexed to his land, although the fa r m-hous e . not bringing the suit sooner. of his land was not a common-right house; and cited' The objection was over-ruled by the Learned Benson v. Chester, S Term, Rep. 396. : Judge (Sir W. Sewer), who, under all the. circum t Lord Eramastortoneu held, that the house mu st ' b. mug first re-formed.. stances' of the case , admitted the libel to proof, after ' belong to the land ; otherwise common ers would acquire unequal rights, according to their capacity of ' annexing land to houses. There • was no principle of law, which a house annexed at random could confer a right of common. Mr. Justice BAILEY.—One-half of this common was given to the owners of houses, without consider. ling whether they had laud or not, and the other half to the owners of land, if legally entitled, and also having bosses in the. parishes or districts. Is this landiegally entitled ?—%ou go and get a cettignin• oozed to it aliunde. If it appeared, that the Cottage had been invariably annexed to it, you might tome within the words of the Act. Mr. Justice DAMPIF.R.—YOU are excluded by the word legally in the Act, which means that you shall not have a house in one place and land in another. — To support your colour of right, you have always thought it necessary to have a house in another place. —Rule refused. BOVAPAIITE told General CAMPBELL, that the plan of sir TMOMAS GRAHAM at Bergen.op-Zoons ws 4ilfully laid ; but that his General had been apprised of his design, made acquainted with the whole plan of his attecl44 tilt. number of his troops, and that the goides were instructed to lead the first who entered . astray. ,01 Wednesday se'nnight Captain ntotancaroN, on the Impress service at Lynn, received orders to pay off and dismiss the pressgang, which, for se many years had excited a terrm , to the sea-faring part of the inhabitants. It is impossible to expresk the demonstrations of joy which took place on the occasion ; even the British flag, which had been con= s:antly displayed at the rendezvous, was torn piece.. meal, and the staff burnt by the wives and families of the sailors who were thus liberated from the fear of being impressed. The Ligidning sloop of war, having under COUP voy a fleet of transports, sailed on Tuesday from Plymouth, with about 2000 Spanish troops on board, for Corunna. These men were broeght from Rol• land, where they were either detained as prisoners by the French, or employed•in, the French service, till they were liberated by the restoration, or by the Allied arms. • OLD ilamtir...-.-Yesterday 34 phony., were tried, 20 of whoM were convicted of &talky, Mid . 14.aere acquitted.- 7 -Berrgeger, indicted with others for a conspiracy, .epPiered in Court., bet tlist:tevisg spAi cient bid:, wits `committed to Newgate. DITCHAII 74. BOND. Mr. CAMPBELL moved the,Court in arrest of juag. etent upon this Terdici for the Plaintiff, Wien action of trespass, in which a count for heating ,a servant per quad servitium umisit as joined, whereas that form of action, he contended, under the authorities of 2 Wilson b 5,. Bul. N. P. 128, COoke v. Sayer, 6 Fat, 388, Parker v. Ironfield r lb. 391; and 2 Term. Rep. 167, ought to be citse, and not tress- Pao. tint tin' Court referreti to the last case on this questiqu in the Common Pleat, viz. that of Wepd.. ward ,tt. Walton, . A New s .147 : 6, is which it 'ulisi itir r ~.., tlefi( Rtnity. to the.ppinions of Mr. Ai: dee Buller C 1 ,1 r., 14. AO, a), asul ‘ of J4ord C. J. Holt 4Lprd I, yet..W.l2),.that theacgon for .e4c . , tiott,wo trespalgr Ati4 o.qt tiefPa4, o n•tbe W s ; 404, consegoeptly, Altet Aiessint : fur brell*.ita ond ,entsse 'kg tie , 'Plaintiff". .Iwelintg.hourl, aqd aebaAching his daugh - 'r, whereby lie lost her ,ietviee, stay be joined with a count, .omilting the trespass to the . dwelling-house; and merely stating that the De- M /AMIE& • 'Monday. at Stepney Cksoch, Mr. J.' C. -4.11402, GINO% .4 1 Hew Joon, of Blackikal. DI4P. ' . C 4. Ctlotoit - - CO WedneidV , in Shßife. - oltert. 11‘ . . Irietait Wyoyard, of the ONlitrenot filial*, ewe olikkgilthel.. °col' shoted by . repented .ottodo of Waleborshilltver ~0,41)0N Primed and iNaillitihed by D. inym,L., ai the STatEsdAll 01/111c11. Ni, Vlertwdregt. iar I Plain. rpm* ftnOtlitt • brmight. rated as po!es it lisf, and ist Cr°. . litstrairt , radford, ich they omplisha a • red eld t for •`' I liAiig.: 4 Gettilt4 AWN*? besaiwo. ✓abid IN, • • to shove' tained in ew trial., DIU deal. Assises. and a of of the - oof only" presiding• in his fa. on those enter up herto this it to hits n, for he lons, the 2 all the m Plain- ited, the series of le, which me of the the Judo made oat and, that a the cow- - d for the for usury ng), they e counts. I been re. as A very ed to the 1:;e before ;ening the - - Int ow.—Ma. JAIONS, : • mane!, his - ery. 'fbe the caw' f the libel, the parties LAW INO.44P4NCE. ovaT of •cHANctoy. Arlin .sts eitomewirerew; Vp ..ILAII4II WIj.% QK. • Mr. Moose MoTed Cotrgt, for a Writ of Ha beas Coypu on the peek of ;Sir Thomas, to be di rects& to Lady Weise r his *ire,, commanding her to produce , the bodies ► their Abler: children, the yoeagest being five years old, which she had secreted, and keeps concealed at some pisce.in Hp t ( pedskire. the parents basing separated owing to a. disagree.. went in tempers , The Learned. Counsel submitted that this was a clear case, even widiont any. Bill peudiny between the partici, as the . father had an undoubted right to' the personal possession of his children, and ground ed his motion on an affidavit, stating the circum. I stances of the casein detail, which his Honour de 'sired to peruse. On reading the affidavit, his Ilioneur asked, whether notice of this motion had been given, which,, if practicable, he thought pro- I par to be done, although it appeared from the atf davit, that a negociation on the subject had been ; pending. • His Hooper also directed a. title in. the matter of IWilson, to be prefixed to the affidavit, and the mo ; tion to be renewed. - Zi.inr II