The Express.
London, England, 1863-01-27 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

Sittings in Banoo.—(Before Lord Chid Justice Erle and
Justices Wil Wilke, and Keating.)

GRZLN V. ICkto.—CONWIBBIOII.

Mr. Justice Williams, in delivering judgment, said that
this matter, which came before the court upon., motion for
a new trial, involved a point of importance, viz., whether
an agent employed to procure a ken on security of a certein
estate for a fixed sum of money for commission, could
recover that commission became he had found a person
willing to advance the money, although the negotiation had
gone off in consequence of the borrower not being able to
show a legal title to the estate. At the trial, however, the
only contest ma, what was the agreement between the
parties ; and this being so it was not competent for
the defendant to ma. the point to which had referred for
thchisttirne upon a motion for a new trial.

Rule discharged.
cavgT e. LIDBITTER.-bRIC[BUIDIENG.
_ . . .

The plaintiff is this case took about 11 acre of land on
lease at Plumatead, and resided on the property, and carried
on the businese of a gardener and florist. The defendant
took a piece of land on the opposite side of the road and
commenced burning bricks ; and the plaintiff now claimed
to recover for the loss which he had sustained in conse-
quence.
The court this morning delivered judgment upon •
motion for • new trial. The learned judge who tried the
case directed the jury to find for the plaintiff if they
thought that the brick.burniog was a nuisance in • sub-
stantial degree ; and refused to ask them whether the
place was a convenient one for brick-burning. The court
thought that there was no misdirection in the course taken
by the learned judge and discharged the rule for a new
trial.
Rule discharged.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

Bitting in lkaeo.—(Before Lord Chief Baron Pollock,
and Berms Martin, Channel], and Wilda.)

THE ATTORSET•GLYERAL T. BRACKENBURT AND ANOTHER.-

This was an informatiTiateolrieisi from the defendants,
the acting executors of the will of Harriette Mary Bracken.
bury, deceased, payment of legacy duty in respect of
certain property which under the will of her father James
B. Brackenbery, and in the event of her death, without
having been warned, she had power to dispose of as she
might think fit.
The Attorney-General, the Solicitor-General, Mr. J.
Locke, Q.C., and Mr. Hunan were counsel for the crown ;
and Mr. Mellish, Q.C., and Mr. Dart for the defendants.
It appeared that James B. Brackenbury, by will dated
sth June, 1843, directed his executors to invest the net
proceeds arising from the isle of his real estates and
the convention of his personal estates, and hold
the same in trust, to pay the income thereof to
Harriette M. Brackenbury, his daughter. In cue
she died unmarried the funds and annual income were
to remain br such trusts and as she should by
will direct or appoint. She survived her father, and by will
of 23rd July, 1859, after giving certain legacies and an-
nuities, left the residue of her property equally between
her uncle, the defeedant, Ralph Brackenbury and
her aunt Hannah Brackenbury, and made the
defendants her executors. The testator died with.
out having been married, and her will was duly
proved on 30th June, 1861. The Attorney-General
now claimed legacy duty at the, rate of 51. per cent. in
respect of so much of the residuary estate of James B.
Brackenbury as wee disposed of by her will in favour of her
uncle and aunt The defendants contended that this was
not the proper rate, but expressed their willingness to pay
3/. per cent which they submitted was the highest rate to
which they were liable. The question was whether the
testator had exercised the'power of appointment given to her
under the will of her father. The property on which the
five per cent. was claimed amounted to 90,0004
The Lord Chief Baron saki he was of opinion that the
executors were bound to pay legacy duty at 51. per coat.
Harriette IL Brackenbery, by the mode in which she framed
her will, exercised dominion over the trust foods by
making them liable to her debts, legacies as well r
annuities. It was properly admitted by the defendante that
as far as those debts, he., were concerned, she had exercised
the power of appointment, and that admiesioa settled the
whole case.
The other judges being of the same °pike,
Judgment was given for the CROWD for legacy duty at the
rate of five per cent.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Coromiosiooor Hokept)

The bankrupt was iirearlied7s of Olsersr.sguate, rm.
Soo, a lieutenant in the Navy, oo half-pay, and formerly of
her Majesty's ship Cram, Curacao, Calypso, SU* Warp,
Narcissus, and Ooarok. His debts are about 800& • no
amts. This was the sitting for examination sad diatb;rge.
Mr. Joao opposed for the aseigneen Tim debts bad been
recce tly contracted ; they were chiefly for money leak
, and ovate ; and the bankrupt appeared to bare
Ist
at every place where he went to.
The bankrupt in examination said he had obtained •
orbital box from Mr. Moses, of Portsmouth, value 8
guineas ; he had loft it at the Cape, having made
• present of it there. Some cabin furniture
which he had obtained on credit was now
at his father's house, as well is a full-drees gold snit. His
ball-pay was 701.; in addition ha bad an allowance
from his father. He was on full pay whim at the
Cape. His father allowed him 601. a year. He bad
written • letter in . September last to Mums. Moms,
ratio; that he was going oat to China to take gavial with
Captain Sherard Ombova, under the Chimes pverament,
where his pay would be 4001. a year, and applying for •
loan of M. and • revolver and other articles on medlk He
came to the court in November.
The Coniminiocer—What are your expectations now
Bankrupt—l have not been able to get my appointment
from Captain Cable% mad have no expectation of going to
China.

Attie bearing Mr. Lewis for the bankrupt,
Re Houma nisi the bankrupt ought to make a plasma
told' creditors to set wide auswiltiag for Ulm when he
wee ca fall pay, bat sot wham be was at half pay. There
start be an dfor a mouth, in order that the
bankrupt t give an account of the property which be
bad sat
some i yank SAW up ;and
ereditere bersig. ht then be prepared to make

mAcaow.—TWO 116111113APTC1X8 111 A YZAR.
The inakmpt, a pear, at Chearia, applied for his order
2801. ; se meet&
.up] r..
lb/ Goodiky opposed ; Mr. Buchanan
ararpeared that the bankrupt had been bankrupt in
January hut, and had come to the court again on his own
on the Ist Demenber. He had elm been
petitions of
vent in 1866. He had kept no books—net
even a cash amount. He attributed his last
bat= to his having taken an extra shop. Both
businesses were still going on; be wee conducting one,
receiving an allowance of 16. a week,and his wife the other.
His wetors knew of his former bankruptcy, and were
willing to give him credit again.
His Honour granted the order of discharge, observing
that creditor who knew a trader's position could not urge
against him that he had contracted debts without probable
asses of payment.

IN 11 LAVNIGTON.
The bankrupt was denoribed as of Owalebury, Rants, out
of businors. He load only ewe creditor co a bill for 5001.,
which he had gives as a deposit on the purchase of an
Pints for 5,0001.. bat had bean unable to complete the rac-
ism*. There ware no meta.
Mr. Barrood opposed ; Mr. Linklater supported.
The order of • was granted.