The Press.
London, England, 1858-07-10 00:00:00

resist his demand, or whether I shall find it expedient to yield. In many
cases, in the present excessive competition, the employers would be
tempted to run their mills seven days in the week ; and they would soon
find, and soon let it be known, that if one man would not serve them on
these terms, another would. And then the slavery of the working men
would be complete. To this statement of natural and inevitable results
no answer can be found. The pretext, therefore, that in asking for the
mere opening of the public galleries and museums, the deputation only ask
that a few should labour for the benefit of the many, is as utter a delusion
as ever was attempted.

The House of Lords was occupied last Thursday week in hearing an
appeal arising out of the trusts created by the will of the celebrated PETER
TtiELLussoN. " The Thellusson case" is one of the causes celebres of the
Court of Chancery. It is one of those portentous affairs which appear like
comets in the legal firmament, which complete their orbit and return at
intervals with a sort of periodic regularity, and which correspond to one
of the supposed purposes of these bodies by conveying from time to time a
good deal of pabulum to the legal luminaries who revolve therein. After
imbibing the arguments of learned counsel on the last new phase of the
matter for one day, their Lordships appeared to have had enough of it, and
intimated that the appeal must stand over till next session. In the mean-
time, we may give a short outline of the plot of this long-winded legal
comedy, the last act of which may, before many months, be expected to be
—we dare not say more than—in a state of forward preparation.
It is commonly said that the man whose offence causes a law to be
made must be a very signal offender. Mr. PETER THELLUSSON attained
this unenviable distinction. In 1795 he made his will, by which he dis-
posed of landed property of the value of 30,0001., and of personal property
amounting to about 600,0001., and attempted to give effect to the desire
he entertained of founding an opulent and powerful family. For such a
purpose these large sums were not, in his opinion, sufficient. If he Could
only live sixty years more they certainly might become so ; but as that
was out of the question, he determined to use all the power which the law
allowed him to cause his money to be employed in the manner most suit-
able for carrying out his desire. Then, as now, the law permitted a testator
to limit or " tie up" his estate during any life, however protracted, which
is in existence at the time of his decease and for twenty-one years in addi-
tion to such period—in fact, during the minority of the testator's imme-
diate successor, who in such a case is of course supposed to have the usu-
fruct of the property during his life. Mr. THELLUSBON employed this
power of disposition in a way which the law hardly contemplated. He or-
dered that his property should not begin to be enjoyed till after the death
of all of his descendants who should be living at the time of his decease ;
but that, during the life of the longest liver among them, it should go on
accumulating for the benefit of certain persons then unborn. In the event
of no persons being properly entitled at the time of distribution, the whole
was to pass to the Crown. Immediately after the testator's death, an at-
tempt was made by his sons to set aside the will, but on a final appeal to
the House of Lords it was confirmed. It was stated during this trial that
the value of the property which would have to be divided would in any
case amount to nineteen millions, and in all probability would rise to up-
wards of thirty-two millions—a sum which, if centred in one individual,
might, it was thought, enable him to " disturb the economy of the country."
The unfortunate persons by the exclusion of whom this vast heap of money
was to be collected were, at the death of the testator, nine in number ; and
we shall probably make the above statement most intelligible, as well as
throw the clearest light on the point respecting which the present appeal
is made, if we arrange them in the form of a genealogical tree :

Peter Thellnsson.•

(1) Peter Isaac (afterwards Baron Rendleaham) (2) George

Poodford (3) Charles

(4) John (5) George (6) Henry (7) William(B) Frederick. Arthur (9) Chlles THOS. Rout TS
FREDERICK WILLIAM ARTHUR CHARLES SABINE
(present Baron R.) AUGUSTUS
The accumulation having been directed to continue during the
lives of the three sons and six grandsons of the testator, whose
names we have numbered from (1) to (9), was, on the death of the
survivor of them, to be divided into three lots, of which one was to be
"conveyed to the use of the eldest male lineal descendant " of PETER
IsAAc, one to the "eldest male lineal descendant" of GFonoß WOODFORD,
and the third to the "eldest male lineal descendant" of CHARLES.
GEORGE. WOODFORD, however, left no sons, and his descendants
through the female line were excluded from inheriting by a decree
of Lord Eux)x in 1821. JOHN, GEORGE, HENRY, and WILLIAM, also
left no male issue. The last survivor of the nine lives died in 1856,
and the present Baron RENDLESITAM then filed a bill, praying that he might
be declared entitled to one-half of the estates, as " the eldest male lineal
descendant" of the testator's eldest son. CHARLES SABINE AUGUSTUS
THELLUSSON filed a similar bill, as the representative of the third son. It
happened, however, that these two claimants, though of the elder branch
in point of lineage, arc not the eldest in age of the testator's descendants;
the sixth son of PETER ISAAC, being older than his nephew the
Baron ; and THOMAS RoBARTs, the second son of CHARLES, being older
than his nephew, CARLES SABLNE AUGUSTUS. Thus, in each branch of
the family there are two claimants—one in each claiming in virtue of
seniority in years; one in each claiming in virtue of priority of descent.
The two uncles having also filed hills, praying to be entitled to the
moieties of the estates instead of their nephews, were excluded by a decree
of the Master of the Rolls ; and it is from this decree that they now

• The italicised names are the excluded descendants ; those in large capitals the
present respondents ; those in small capitals the present appellauts.
t Arthur is since dead, but is represented in the suit by his son Arthur.