The Express.
London, England, 1852-01-26 00:00:00

labi InttUtgence.

EQUITY COURTS.—SATURDAY.
Bnonnie u LIPOOLICS-11111.—Birsosa yea Gem, rneaCICLOI.
PIIRCIVAL e. CANST.—TILUST.—ANSWSIL ST LUNATIC'S
COMNITTES.—SPOLIATION.--EVIDENCS.
Ibis was an appeal from a decree of the then Vice-Chan-
cellor (Sir J. Knight Bruce) declaring that the emit of 4,3001.
in Three per Cent. Consolidated Bank Annuities wee, at
her death in ISI9, held by the defendant, Sarah Caney and
wen Mending in her name in trust for the plaiutiff, 'Mrs.
Percival, and that the dividends thereon had been paid up
to July, 1811, and decreeing payment to the plaintiff in the
common form. Against this decree the defendants, the re-
presentatives of Sarah Caney, appealed. The case contains
several points of importance, and presents some extraordi-
nary features. The facts are shortly these :
The bill, which was filed in October, 1847, and eftowsr la
amended, prayed that the defendant, Sarah Caney, ingot
be declared to he a trustee for the plaintiff of t.ll, auto of
4,3001., Three per Ceut. Consolidated Bonk Anuunews, and
of the dividends due in respect then el. ?dim Caney had
been found a lunatic ley commission in the year 1843, and
therefore the committees of her eetete, Stephen James
Bridger. Stanton, George Verret', and Robert Page, were
made de Evident'. The bill alleged that in the year DMA
Sarah Cent y, au unmarried lady, resided with the plaintiff.
now Mrs. Pemeival, but then the widow of Iticherd
Wither*. The two ladies were on intimate term', and the
plaintiff front time to time deposited money in the Inutile
of Sarah Ce.nev for the purpose of havinee the sante invested
in the fund*, for her ('he plaintiff's) benefit. In 11416 the
ninnies Mt deposited were by the bill alleged to exceed
1,500/. Early in that year the plaintiff intermarried with
her late huehaud, Janus Percival, end on the 16th of
February in tl.e IMO year, being shortly preview, to her
marriage, transtee-red into the name of Sarah Canny the
sum of tekli. Consols. In the year 1837 the pleintiff sepa-
rated from her husband. At that time a Mn. Dryden, a
sister of Sarah Caney, under a power of attoremey, received
her taster's dividend,, and continued to tin on until her
(Mrs. Dryden's) death in October, 1834. The bill alleged
that Smile Caney was in the habit of accompanying
Mrs. Dreden to the bank when she went to receive the
dividends, and that previous to their going to the bank
Sarah Caney, who had for some time pre 'Moly etched to
reside with the plaintiff, and had lived in a Aimee of her
own, use-1 to send Mrs. Elizabeth Ilanimmied, a charwoman,
to the plaintiff, to request her to a and take care
of Mine Caney'' house while she went to the bank. On the
return of Mn. Dryd.n and Miss Caney !runt the bank,
the plaintiff wee from time to time paid by Mrs. Dryden
her (the plaintiff's) share of the dividends. Mrs. Dryd,
died in October, 1818; and after her death her son, the
defendant Stanton, who was also the nephew of Sarah
Caney, accompanied Lis aunt to the Bank whoa she received
the dividend... In January, le3e, on the return of Miss
Caney and Stanton from the Bank, the plaintiff sod Miss
Cant y bad a depute as to the amount of money belonging
to the former in the hands of the latter. On that empanel
the only pecans premed, Mettles the plaintiff...lel Mill
Caney, were Stentou and the charwoman, Elizmelsetb Damn-
mond, and, after come discuasion, Stanton drew up a MY
randum as follewee—" It is mutually agreed that there is
new standing in the name of Sarah lenity the hull, of
4,300/. Censulimlatel Beek Annuities, belonging to Mrs.
Percival." Theo memorandum was signed by both Mier
Caney and Mrs. Percival, and was attested by Mom.
in nd, and remained in the hand. of Stanton. l'regn that
time until 1814 Mrs. Percival was paid 11 Stanton ever'
helGyear 821. 12s. 6m1., being the amount of the leelf-yiers
dividend on the 4,3001. stock, ISIS the income-tax ; but, after
July, 1814, no further sums were paid her. On the let of'
November, 1843, Stanton caused a commission of lunacy to
be issued against Miss Caney, under which she was declared
a lunatic from the Ist of October, 1842, and the defendants
Stanton, Verrall, and Page Were appointed the committees
of her estate. Mr. Percival, the plaintiff's bushel-el, died
on the 6th of November, 1811. Its January, 1816, two
letters were sent by the solicitor of the plaintiff to the de-
fendants' solicitors, requesting a copy of the memorandum,
which elicited the following reedy:
" The next of kin of the lunatic have met together on
M rq. Pervival'e claim, and, alter making every inquire to
misty themselves whether the statement made by Mrs.
Percival wan correct, they have determined to tenet any
claim which she may think fit to set up. Under these cir-
cumstances, unit considering the state of mind the lunatic
was is at the time the memorandum alluded to was ghee,
Mr. Stanton does not feel justitied in giving any copy
thereof."
Lu September, 1817, the defendant Stanton burned the me-
' moraudum, sail, immediately alto rwards, the present suit
was instituted. Answers were put in to the bill, and the
cause was at issue, when, on the 27th of June, 1819, Sarah
Caney died. Letters of administration were graiom dto her
next of kin, Menton, and the de (cadent' S.trnti Veered
and Mary Ann Pace, the resm ctivo wives of the defend-
ants Verall and Page, and they were brought before the
court by bill of reviver and supplement. The principal
defence which the defendants endeavoured to eateblish was,
that Sarah Caney was of unseund mind before the year
1842, and eapeeediy at the period in 1839 when the me-
morandum wee signed, and they examined many witnesses
with a view to prose that feet, the principal of whom was
a baker, of the name of Nloxey, who spoke to various ec-
centricities, and the: she was very strange and dirty in her
attire. Oa the other hand, a number if witnesses
Were examined tnihow that Mk< no onsounctreeea
of mind prior to October, 1812, and the plaintiff relied
upon the fact that at the time of tme commission against her
in 1815 there had been no suggeetion made by Stanton that
she wan insane at the time she 'Motel the memorandum, nor
did lie attempt to carry the lunacy further back than 1842.
Stanton's explanation of the memorandum was, that at the
time of the alteration between Mrs. Percival and Miss
Caney he was alarmed at the chain put forth by the plain-
tiff, and, Peeing nothing to prevent her laying claim to the
whole of Mies Caney'. property, he thought it best on the
spur of the moment to sketch, out a memorandum, with a
view of limiting the plaintiff% claim to the sum then .acted
which he accordingly did, although he did not far one
moment believe that Miss Caney owed the 4,300/. lie did
this the more willingly as he considered that Miss Caney was
not at the time of her signing the memorandum of sound
mind, or capable of undemanding, what she was about, and
therefore that the same could not be biading upon her,
and that he allerwatds destroyed the memorandum, think-
ing it to be of no further use. With respect to the sum
of 8191. Three per Cent. Console, the defendants ad-
mitted that sioce the filing of time original bill they had
discovered from the Bank books that in the year 1816
Mrs. Percival did transfer that amount into the name of
Miss Caney, but they were unable to my whether the
tame was so transferred to be held in trust fur the
plaintiff; at any rate, however, that was a question to be
determined by a court of law, and did not warrant the tiling
of a bill in equity. 'r ho eeidence in support el the plaintiff's
use was very voluminous, the mot important of which, RI
relating to the signing of the memorandum, was that of
Elizabeth Hammond, who was present at the time, and de-
posed that Sarah Coney was then calm and rational, and in
her wand miud and tilllsts; that she appeared capable of
comprehending and understanding the entente, uud wu
not at all deranged or diem& red in her intellect or under-
standing, and that Stanton did not treat her as a person of
disordered intellect, nor express any doubt that she was
iu full posseetion of her senses, but, on the contrary, he
remained to dine with her, and treated her, as be always
had done, as a rational reset.. On behalf ef the defendants
a great number of witnesees were examined, and the depo-
sitions en both sides ran to an enormous length. The Vice-
Chancellor, on the 4th of June, WO, a:ter commentieg in
severe terms on tho desti uctien of the memorandum. by
Stanton, and stating it to be his opinion that Mies Caney
was perfectly sane when she signed it, decreed in favour of
the plaintiff's claim to the whole of the 4,3001., with custs.
From this decision the defendants appealed.
No attempt was made before the Master in Lunacy to
carry back the lunacy to an earlier date than October,
1842. It was in evidence that other papers had beta burnt
besides the memorandum.

The appeal being front the whole decree of the mitt be-
low, the case was opened by Mr. J. Russell on behalf of the
respondent■ on Saturday week. The arguments having
been re timed on Saturday hut,
Mr. W. W. Cooper followed on the same aide, and in the
comae of a very able addres,.., in which be took an elaborate
review of the whole evidence, submitted that Miss Caney
was periectly aaue at the time the memorandum was
executed in 1839.

Mr. Moline, ftr the appellants, in the course of his argu-
ment, adverted to the destruction of the memorandum by
Stanton. The destruction was admitted. but then Stanton
had given every information as to its content., and had in
his answer satisfactorily explained the reason why that
document was drawn up by him anal signed by
the parties. IL submitted that the appellants wero
entitled to further inquiry, and that the evid, nee did not
juitify a decree ahsolute for the teamster of the 4,:itlt. The
learned counsel went at great length into criticism of the
evidence, contending, that Miss Cusey's singular and ec-
centric habits, her seclusion flout human society, her habit
(for many )ears) of hoarding and secreting large sums of
money in her house, the interest of whieli would have
sufficed to meet her expenditure flee time' over, and hoc
filthy and disgusting habits—all tended to show that the
change which the counsel on the other lido contended had
taken place in 1812, was not a sudden change, but the result
of insanity long preciously existing.
The learned gentleman hail not concluded his address
when the Lord Chancellor rose.
Mr. Chandless and Mr. Stecre are on the came side.

Bows Tior..auismuot 8a Mum Palma.
ArrouNtut-OssaaLL O. Cu vs.

This was apetitTonl;ytl7el:liitora To; ih.:.-p.urpose of ef-
fecting a compromise under the authority of the court. It
appeared that the free c allowed school at Dalkon, in Staf-
fordshire, was founded some time in the reign of King
Henry VIII., and that the patronage of the school is vested
iu the Marquis of Hastings. In Iti34 arran,r. meets were
made for building anew schoolhouse at some distance from
Hilhorne, with accommodatiou fur the master. tho
ached RV converted into a grammar school. Under this
arrangement a large sum of money was borrowed, with
which the new wheelhouse and master's houeo were
built, and Mr. Curtis. the defendant, became the head master.
Dy these means the charity became heavily incumbered,
and in 184.1 this information was filed mainly fur the pur-
po.e of obtaining a declaration of the court respeetiug the
nature of the education which ought to he given at the
school, and upon a hearing before the Vice-Chancellor
Knight Drum, in M►rch, 1b47, numerous inquiries were
direct,' to be made by the Master as to the property of tho
charity, the thou condition of the school, the state and
origin and nature of the charity, and whether it would be
fit and proper that any and what change in the conduct
and plan of education should be made, regard being bad to
the act of the 3 6: I Vict., cap. 77, which provided for tha
grant of a pension to the existing waster of any school by
the governors and visitors thereof on his being desirous to

/Islip. After sack litigation between the parties in the
plashes ulcer as arrangement had been stele to for put-
ling en cad ts all disputes by the abandons-a lot or the new
solved rota master's house, sad the retirement of Mr.
Curtis, the 1 r sent master, upon his being pail I :t..1/. a
year, and an arrangement ft.r liquidating the debt incurred.
It,. would very much diminish the regular income of the
charity, and it was arranged that so lute as the fund.
should medians diminish,4 the school should he conducted
at the old school-houses( Dillsorne by monster with a salary,
sel 701. a year, to be appointed by the Marquis of Ile.tions
sad that all foundation boys should pay a uniform sum not
eseeeding a week. The propoteif arrangement com-
prised the following rale se to the roaster and the religious
instruction in the school. " The who,thist.ter shell be u
Wisher of the church of Magian', and the scholars shall
be iostrueval is the principles of the Chritdieu
•
Le nnon be taught the church catechism when the
p„,,nts or the pees,:" loop botrsetis shell °hire
thereto, not shall such child be compelled to r,ceive instruc-
tion eoutrary to the religious bunt. of rats lur the
person mobilo; in loco parentis when they shall object
thereto; prayers and suitable lemons (ruin the Scriptures
shall he duly read is the school." The patitioe the
coutirmetion of • scheme to cur/ out the above arrange-
rat . . . .

Mr. M alry support, .1 the petitkm.
Mr, J..wrt opoeartd for the Attornevfleneral, and laid
Arr.tuareteut, particularly tut of the )11stt r and the
Wigton. hoot artion to be given in tiw• school, had been
cow. to otter touch roolLet of opinion anti dimmssout.
Itlr. M. trait • consent, a on beholf of the de:, admits.
The Vies-Citedieellor made the order.

Prrosa Irre-rwvartuaa Pla B. timbals.. IT..

IN RR till'. WOLVERHAMPTON. CSEaTZIL, AND lIIIIIRN-
‘s CONII ANC II AAAAA DALY. —0 EDL I*DR
1%0 NLN o - CALL st**raxpixo rNTIL AN APP CAL
1.110.1 L:0 111 I%LAkD.

Th. ws. A motion on Ix half of Mr. Dsl., upon whom a
call of Wt. but been mule be the Master aml counrwaiii by
the court th it the order might be suspended until en ap-
pesl %Nub a.,. now act down for beating should have beim
deenle.l. Mr. I/sle w willing to piy into court the
an .ant .1 the call, a ith ,!. extra, to meet the e .1.; but
if he were to psy the meaty at once to the Ole, manager,
be aim! hr unable to get it hack, as he was nut personally
liable I ,r t'.. ...urns received by him.
Mr. Ikon I and Mr. Roxburgh, fur the official manager,
oppovil tb. motion, on the ground that if he were now
called upon tw costa, he would be obbs.Al to sy the sunkey
cot ef hi. own pocket, as there wsx nothing lift in hi.
'Chi. would be very hard upon him, atter the court
had decided upon M. Dsle's liability, and this di.v.isiou
mu 7., of emr.e, be &monied to be correct.
. .

haseellor said it war., no doubt, necessary to
bc s .ry caul i•,.is in suspending orders on the ground of an
d pending, fur in many casts it would net as an induce-
'end to appeal, in order to delay the payutent of money
ju.ll‘ due; but in this ease there were eareatmdanecs which
would r. oder it desirable that the order should b., labs-
peniliid. The Alicia' manager when he received the amount
would distribute it a: one, amongst the creditors as he had
money in hand, and if the appeal were successful Mr. Hale
might lie onside to ree.iser it owing fa the oftial man.. •er
not heiti 4 pee-molly liable. Upon these considerations he
should su,p !al the order pending an app. al upon payment
into court by Mr. Dale of 1(01. iu respect of the call anal
as security I.•r costa.
Ex ram I .1 %,4k.s.—ArToINTIIFICT OF • TOCITIC IN THE

i'L %Cr. 4.1. A LI*XATIC TIIIreTTE.

This was a motiott MatiCrtisefrnStee- let is; the appoint-
ment of a 11,* trustee in the ptaee of a trzi•teu appointed
umh r a will a ho had become a lunatic. The only question a
ht t'• .r the eown had juri.dietion a ,re the former trm.b.c
set, .1 hithr, or Whalk r the application should be mail, to
the 1,111 thNneeflOr. _ _

Mr. Moore appeared in support of the application.
The Vice-Chancellor said. upan looking through the art,
ho was cleats of opinion that he had no jurisdiction to m toe
this order. The Court of Chancery had no venerrd juri.dutwn
in the ease of trustees of unsound mind, the only power was
vested in the Lord Chancellor. The Trustee Act referred
to casts where a trust, e had died, or was incapable, or
where no heir could be found, but there was no allusion to
a trusty 1., e 'ming incapable by rearm of binary, and Le
thou ay. t'i. refore, that this application should be male to
the Lord C., accllor.

COURT OF QUEENS BENCII.-SATIAD.ty.

tx

tr COIT,ILWAILA /TIC% rATIIIIDN,

AI, Ya 7wna C*L4

TUE Qvvri (Oa me rIIOSZCVTION OF THE PCMILLAW
BoAlio) r. In. GUARDIANS OF Sr.

PINT3III,IT O► CILMAIN.

A mandamus had been issued in thie vane commanding
the defend:4las to admit the Rev. William Wright to the
performance of his duties of chaphin of the workhouse of
Bt. JlOOl. Westminster. The defendants had mole a n torn
to the writ• whisk had been demurred to. It appeared that
the Poor liw Commissioners, under the authority of the
roof-114w .tmendment Act, issued an enter on 17th July.
to the defendants, which was to take a flirt (tom the
Ist .Itigted following. Th- order in queetion directed them
whenever taaancos should occur to appoint fit persora
to hold certain dice, in the workhouse, and,
susampt others, that of ehaplaM and provided that
every such *facer should continue to hold the office
to which he bad been appointed unt,lineaparleat• d, er re-
moved by the Nor-law board. Prior to the belting of this
order, the piarillan., by the authireey of certain bye-laws
which they had mode sealer their local seta, had appointed,
the Ur,. W. Wright to the once of chaplain of the swede.'
house ; but, at a meet.og of the gurealisue on the
April. ltea, a majority of then were of weision *oat Mr.
11 right ought see to held the otter of ell.,?lain any leaner ;
that gentle MIL however, conshlering that the order of the
Peor•law Board tee.k away from the guardian the power
of removiar him from his eflice, obtaMed from this court
• writ of snandsmue to compel the gm-aliens to admit him
to the performance of its duties.
JO. Tomlineau, in support of the demurrer to the return,
fleeted the hetb and Slid articles of the order ; the first of
nbista, after giving the guardiena tow, r to appoint editors,
meat on to say t'at they could only be r. moved .7 the
Peer-lee hoard. The article previeled thatev,ryrr-
sedation applying t every °Beer L..lingotter under the
order should apply to every. unit, r of like denomination ap-
pointed by the guardian*, although such appointment might
have Is ea made before the i•suing of the order. The titith
article a ,uld there Ime nreily to the eh .plain. sotwithstaud.
lag his hieing be, n appointed before the lisuinc of the
order ; mail the guardians had no power to remote i.imn from
tin elate of Chaplain of the workhorse.
Mr. Atherton, tl C., appeared in support of the return,
and was Proceeding to address the court when
Lord Campbell said the ease seemed to he too clear (or
assumes% It was admitted that the telrd ee race alone
would not apply, end It was necessary therefore to go
lock to the 64th. Ile might assume, although he gave so
opinion on the point, that the Poor-Law Cinsuaeo:oriers had
authority to eostinue the tenure of an oiler held by a per-
mos beta, the issuing of their order loco a term of one year'
to a tern fur life. Bat it seemed to bins to be clear that the
ecennareelosers had sot eternised any inch power by the
60th artie.e.a. they declared that every regulation appls log to
any name halting office oath r the eerier should apply to
say etlieer of the like denomination appointed by the guar-
dians, elthough such appetuttuviit might have been made
b-f ,re the order caeue into operation. This applied to the
regulations concerning any officer, and not to his tenure of
*Ste. The regu!ations as to the duties of the chaplain
were contain, lin ction !P9 ; sod he was to be hound by
them, although ant appointed by their order; hut the
canarnioiossers did not say that a pereei hereto( .re hi tiling,
of., o for ors year -hould hold it huam dos bens 'emelt.
That being se, he was clearly of opinion that the court
meat ppleejludgment far the defendants.
The other learn. d Judges concurred.
Judgment for the defendants.