The Express.
London, England, 1863-04-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—Aran, 18.
00101LITTRE FOR PRIVILEGES.

Their Lordships eat as a committee for privileges, sad pee-
eeeded with the claim of Thomas Benten-Eari of lltindosald
in the peerage of Scotland, to the earldom and to vote for
representative peers for Soothed. It may be remembered
that the ease, which has bean before the hoer for the het
two stashes, iavolves the right of the eldest woe
of the late Earl of Dundonald to succeed to the
the ground that a marriage alleged
MI% ce taken place in Scotland between has permits
wee net so regular ea to render him legitimate, and whether
a subsequent marriage io England solemnised in due form in
1818, but subsequent to the birth of the claimant, was such
a marriage in the case of • domiciled &Marra as to bring.
It within that provision al the law of Scotland whiah rea-
ders all raider bora before • legal marriage legitimate after
the seerriege has takes place. A great deal of evidence was
given, and amongst the winners Lady Dundonald, the
mother of the claimant, was examined.
The case now came on for further consideration.
Sir Hugh Cairns, who, with Mr. Archibald, appeared for
the Hon. Captain Arthur Cochrane. R.N., the younger
brother of the claimer, and who was been subsequent to
the marriage of 1818, Dow stated on the part of
rCochrane, the course which he proposed to take,
seiel:es being had to the present stage of the proceedings,
and the eitimmetenose seder which he appeared in the maim.
It would be recollected that in 1861 the claimant permuted
a petition paying to be coasidered se Earl of DWl-
doitald, and to have the right to vote in the elec-
tion of representative peers for Scotland. At that
time there was no claim made against the right of the
petitioner, but his claim was made under an apprehension
that some opposition to his right would be brought forward.
It would be remembered that it appeared that in the year
1812 • marriage of a private character took place in Scot-
land between the parents of the claimant, and afterwards,
in 1818, a new marriage was solemnized in England, it being
supposed that, Lord Dosdooald being • domiciled Scotch-
man, such marriage would legitimize children born after
the marriage of, 1812, if that marriage should be questioned.
Captain Arthur Cochrane was born after the marriage of
1818. When these hate appeared before the house their lord-
ships held that notice ought to be given to Captain Cochrane
of the claim which was made. That gentleman was ignorant
of the interred such a claim, and haviog been at sea all
his.; life, heard for the first time of the marriage of 1818
when the notice was served upon him. He placed the Dries
in the hands of his legal advisers and directed them to
watch the proceedings, with a condition that if Lady
Dundonald was examined as • witness she should not be
cromazarained on Ibis part' so that no driver should
seem to be shown by him towards a passer whom he
revered. The case went on, and Lady Dundonald was =-
✓eined. The case of C.O. Cochrane was • formal ose ; he
made no claim to the title, but only appeared to
watch the proceedings. Certain evidence was rhea at his
instance, and the Solicitor.Ceneral having made observations
on the evidence last session, theme stood adjourned. It sow
became neoewq for Capt. Cochrane to decide what steps he
would Woe; and as he felt that he could not proceed with
(other evidence, or place himself in a position of hostility to
the claimant, without doing violence to his feelings, he
having discharged the duty cast upon him desired to termi-
nate his intervention, and to leave the decision of the are
to the wisdom of the house; but be should prefer that
there should be no decision and that the matter
should rest where it stool. At the same time Captain
Cochrane reserved to himself the right, if the matter was
revived at any future time, or in any other tribunal, of
taking such a course as he might be advised.
Sir F Kelly, with whom was Mr. Fleming, and Mr. E. R
Rays, expressed he satisfaction at the withdrawal of the
oppositionoe the portal Capt.Cochrane, and asked the house
to fix an early date for the further consideration of the
claim.
The further consideration of the ore was then adjourned
sine die.

EQUITY COURT.—APRIL 16.
Ware Viet-ChaDeallor Sir J. Stuart.)

Woman v. ma GILT wmtait ZAILWAT CONTINT.
Mr. Bacon, Q.C., Mr. Molina, Q.C., and Mr. T. Stevens,
spin appeared in this as. in which, as it will be remem.
bared, a moths was yesterday opened, on behalf of the de-
readmits, for an order to discharge the chief clerk's certifi-
cate. It appeared that the plaintiff claimed front the com-
pany for work don* for them by him under • contract a sum
amousting to about 248,0001. ; but the chief clerk
had found by his certificate, made in pursuance of
a decree directiog inquiries as to the plaintiff's
claim, that he was entitled to the sum of 147,538/.
Is. 4d. only, being 78,5421. its. Rd. for principal,
and 68,9951. 4s. Bd. for intercept thereon. In calculating
that allowance the chief clerk had not included spinet the
plaintiff certain large sums which the defendants chimed
from him, by way of penalties for the non-fulfilment of
part of his contract with them, sod bad cot ',notified each
item of the charges which be had allowed and disallowed ;
bat had arrived at his conclusion by stating lump sums
generally. It was contended, in support of the motion,
that inasmuch se the plaintiff bad claimed too large • sum
in the first instance, and the chief clerk bad certified big
claim to be in fact little more than one-fourth of what be
originally asked, be could not be illoared interest on the
Leiser sum. It was also urged that the form of the certifi-
cate was otherwise improper.
It appeared that the plaintiff had given notice of a ems.
malice on his part, having in view the rectificatian of the
eertificate iu his favour.
The Solicitor-General, Mr. Iteralgette, Q.C., and Mr. F.
C. J. Millar, appeared for the plaintiff.
At the conclusion of Mr. Stevens argument, the Vice-
Chancellor, without calling upon the plaintiff's counsel,
said that the bearing of the cause had occupied the court is
1855 for sixteen days, when the extraordinary nature of
the plaintiff's claim, and the equally extraordinary frame of '
the pletclicp in support of it, raised in his Hoooer's mind
• vary important question as to the jurisdiction of the court
to eutertain the suit. It was said that the plaintiff had
come here to enforce a demand which he ought to have
submitted to the opinion of a jury ; bat hia ROOM, Inti-
mated thee, aad was still of opinion, that the ver-
dict of • jury would not hove been so seitisfae.
tory as the course which he had adopted at the
bearing, of directing the chief clerk to inquire
into the nature and character of the plaintiff's claim. His
Flatcar was not sure that his views would be acerieseed la
by the Court of Appal • hot be wee convinced a his ewe
mind that, ander the pc4nliar ciratnetanoce of this an,
they were correct. The chief complaint against the ear-
tilkate was that the items in it were set y ext.
plsined by it. No doubt it wan the duty of this scent, as
it would have boa that of a court of law, to
arrive at a correct result, and that result a
boat can The decree directed the Inquiries sad
the Aid clerk, proceedieg ors the principles which reguWed

[TWOPENCE

osrtificatea, end which were not identical with those that
governed the inester'a report in former tiara, bed focal,
En'ly, what he thought the plaintiff was entitled to.
oam thought the certificate was right ; and. in
trete, if error there were, it was in the decree
direotieg the inquiries, not in the certificate. But
the deem was not now complained of. Hi Honour thought
that the certificate was is other respects also formally
regular. sod he refused the defendant's motion. The crow
motion at the plaintiff he also thought should be refused ;
but both the motions must be so treated without preju-
dice to any question as to the interest payable to the plain-
tiff, which might be decided when the cause came on for
further considerstioc.

In the course of the day the Vice-Chancellor, addressing
Mr. Bacon, (ix., said :—There are very extraordinary
frauds in the course of perpetration now, of a kind unheard
of, so far as lam aware. There is a man who signs himself
" Ashley Cooper," who goes about serving notices upon poor
people in the country, purporting to be made under decrees
of this court; and he charges lie. Bd., and threatens the
people with lose of their property if they do not appear. I
hold owe of the papers in my hand at Mlle moment. It is
heaelse Chancery. Bee Moore. delsedant. No. 43. 1863.
In of Francis AutbonyMooris,whodied in London
on or about the 3lst day of January, 1846. Let the hairet-law
or next.of-kin, or any one claiming Manmade with the raid
Mr. Moore,deossaed. file his, her, or their claim forthwith
at the chambers of the Master of the Rolls at the Rolle-
yard, Chancery-lane, Middlesex ; or in default thereat they
will be peremptorily excluded from the beonat of the said
decree. Thursday, the 16th day of April, 1863, at 12o'cleek
at am" kap cited for hearing and adledieating upon the
dabs.— the 90th March, 1963. as Joan 8111A214
. 9,000 f." That paper Is spelsossi as fel-
lows :—" This polies of claim now serail by on Mr. John
Moore, is person, this eleventh day of Aprli, in the year et
oar 1863. —Asacas Coors Corse 6s. Bd.
Received, Antsy Coosa 11th April, 1853."
The address gives by the person Nevin that paper WINS
Kew-grime, Surrey. There are a smaller et letters which
came addressed some to my chief clerk sad others to
myself, making inquiries in purrussee of this sake. I have
no power about it. Ido sot know what Imado to prevent
it. To a person who is Dot illiterate the thing seems to be
nonsense upon the face of it; because it purports to speak
of my ordering somebody to impart before the Meets: of the
Rolls. However, it seems to have been sufileient to extract
61. Bd. from a number of people. I have no means of pre-
venting it, bud it is right that people should be put upon
their guard.

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH—Arse. 16.
Sittings in Banco.—(Betas Lord Chief Justice Goekburo,
and Jerboa Crompton, Black burs, and Mellor.)
• LINDSAY, M.P., V. LIATULOT.
The fattier reading of the evidence taken in this use
was nummod tido moraiag, and occupied up to max middle-
day. At its cosoluolos the Lord Chief Jetties, who tried
the cams, said that, without goyim/ the verdict use wrong,
he thought it was doubtful, sad was a question that ought
to be discussed, so that the court might come to a deliberate
opinion whether the verdict ought to stasd. As the alga-
mots in support of and satinet the rule fora sew trial must
occupy several days, it was considered desisable to pont-
pate them till later in the term, rather than take them by
piecemeal during the first four motion days.
The further hear* el the am was adjourned to a day to
be axed.

TIII_CAIIR or I. WHITZBETBST.

It I. madosatirod at prement that the indictment in this
twee will sea be triad at time sittings, but will stand over
WI next ten; trim it will be Win at the alter-term
Min&

§EOOND-HAND PIANOFORTES.
GRAMM BEALL and WOOD law a lame amortment
sseand-band Pianofortes, by tin mg eallsonerl makers, as
wow Tolland prow—SM. ltesenbaniet.