The Express.
London, England, 1852-01-14 00:00:00

Eau, lintelligence.

EQUITY COURTS.—YESTERDAT.
11 nixes is 1 motives-irs. —ewes. rose LOAM ellAser tat
' as DALTON'S Titter.-•-TILLST besu.—revl'Ea
MAINTENANCS UV entrouce.
This was en aypeal (rum an onlsr mad: by the thin Vice-
Chancellor Sir J. Knight Bruce on a petition presented on
behalf of the children of Mr. and Mrs. Dalton, praying
that certain interest of a trust fund 'bottle' be applied to
their use. The question arose under a settlement executed
by Mr. William Augustus Dalton and Mrs. Harriet Dalton,
Its wife, on the 29th of July, 1839. Mr. Dalton being
about to sell an estate in which his wife Mid a right of
dower, she agreed to relinquish her right of dower in con-
sideration of the sum of 4,000/. being settled on the terms
stated in the indenture of the above date. The property
was vested in trustees, who were directed, inter alia, to pay
the interest and dividends arising from the said RIM of
4,0001. to the -..id W. A. Dalton and Ilarriet, his wife. and
on the decease of either of them the interest of one moiety
and the principal sum of the other to the survivor,
with the remainder to their children, upon the con-
dition that they should from time to time provide
sucheliadren during their minority with proper diet, cloth-
ing. general maintenance, and support. The trustees tierces*
empowered with the con-ent in writing of the said Dalian and
his wife, or the survivor of them, to pay or apply all
or any share of such children towards the proper educauon
of said children. Mr. Dalton ultimately became insolvent,
and proeeedin:s were take u under the Protection Act, and
the learned coiamiesioner, on the 21st of February, 1813,
mad • a final urder, the insolvent having s, reed to pay
from the fund in, question the annual sum tit :WI. till hie
debts were paid. In the same year Mr. and Mrs. DeWitt
applied to Mr. Anderson, a solicitor, to advance a sum of
6001. on the security of their interest in the trust fond, for
the purpose of elevating their children, six in number, end
all minors, and 500/. were accordingly ndvanced by Mr.
Are lertente client, • Mr. Ohhard. The mortgage was
dat, il 30th December, 1643, and by it the life interest of
the inurtiagors in the interest of the one moiety and In
the principal of the other, were as-igned to Obbanl, as
also a policy of assurance on the life of Dalton.
The Dolton appeared to have fallen into yet,
nee. whose eireunistanc, e, and a petition was pre-
sented to the court by the next friend of the
children, praying that the interest of the trust fund
which was invested in the funds should be applied to
their use. Ills Honour the Vice-Chancellor made an
order in terms of the prayer, against which Mr. Onbard,
the mortgagee. now appealed.
T • Lord Chancellor in giving judgment, said on the
best rensideration he had been able to give to this case, he
did not and any good or just construction of the deed to
=rt the arguments against the order. The tint point
was whether the question involved was a question
it to he decided =petition, or by 001130 other course, either
by inquiry, hill, cc Wane at law. It was contended that
n was • main of evidence. But it did not
appear that thew was anything in this evidence essential to
a decision of the substantial question. With respect to
the second objection, how far the interests of Dalton were
vest in the assigner under the insolvency, the construc-
tion of the art of parliament was no doubt attended with
some difficaltiee; but the question of how far the interest
might so vest did not appear to him now necessary to be
considered, as the question might be decided on the merits
quite iodepruileutly. With respect to the circumstance* of
hardship which had been so strongly insisted on in the
course of the argument, these could not affect a written
legal instrument. It was the duty of the court to consider
how that instrument was expressed. It appeared that
Mr. Daiwa was et one time possessed of an es-
tate in Yorkshire which having become encumbered,
was Inought to pale. The estate was subject to a claim of
dower, and Mrs. Dalton only consented to release it there-
from on an agreement that a sum of 4,00 n/. should be in-
vomited is went ea the terms stated in the settlement. It
was plainly a main object of that settlement to secure a
pan bma for their children; the instrument was prepared
obviously with that view. it was admitted that the terms
of this ,heed 'mount to a erinditinn regulating the applica-
tion of the interest of the mon, y invested in the funds.
The nutriment provided that the funds should be applied
in • certain
children during their minority should be provided with
proper diet, clothing, general maintenance and support.
What was the meaning of that condition ? If they had a
right to demand payment of the dividends on the perform-
ante of the condition exerweil,would they have had aright
to call for them if they had failed to perform the conditions ?
Ile could see no difference between the case of the
condition rape...wed as respected the children, and any con-
dition that might be expressed as respected any other per-
wins. What was the obligation of the trustees in the event
of a proper maintenance not being provided ? Would it
not be their duty to we the condition fulfilled by the pa-
rents, on which the right of the latter to receive the divi-
dends depended ? The neat point for consideration was
how this provision was to be measured, The settlement
said in proportion to the circumstances and condition in
life of the parents and the expectations of the children. Mr.
Dalton was described as a gentleman not following any oc-
cupation. If he was • gentleman possessed of the COLTe•
spending education, and his wife and relatives were in the
mine rank and condition, what was the education which
the children should receive in proportion to the
condition of their parents? If it happened that
through misfortune the parents fell into circum-
stances of poverty, did it follow that the children
were to receive the education of the charity school ? Poe-
sibly a person under such circumstances would be enabled
by the assistance of relatives or friends to live in some way
corresponding to the position in life previously occupied ;
but it did not follow that relatives or friends would provide
for the education of children, and much lees so in • saw
like the present, where an income hail been
eldest for that purpose. lie could not readVirmirta.
the restricted sense contended for at the be:. The ambles
a proper provision for the children being the condillest 4IS
which the parents were to receive the income Ikeda lie
fund, the court was bound to give effect to it by Elowilig
the application of so much of it as was necessary forsr
maintenance. It had been argued that the sum a
interest from the trust fund was an excessive gm flit
the purpose. But it seemed to him that the 11611.11
12111. • year for the education and maintemthe
six children could not be considered too meagb.
It was then said that the case was one of great hardship en
the petitioner, who had advanced the sum of .5001. Teem,'
it was • hardship • but be advanced the money under Ind
advice, with ample means of knowledge of all the circum-
stances, and of the value of the security. He (the Lord
Chancellor) was therefore of opinion that the order below
was • correct one, and quite within the power which the
court possessed under this settlement. The fund was so
limited in amount, that he did not think the application of
the whole of it to the maintenance of the children too
much. The petition must therefore be dismissed, with
costs.

Bova? no Ilmru or nes ants.s.
THE ATTOILMIT•GINERtL C. THE HAIM
_ _

The Blaster of the Rolls- gai;etiondrint in this case. Ile
said be was of opinion that aivenity of Durham
ought to be included in the places front which ezhibitii
might be seat.
Iv ra TUB

AND GLAMORGAN/MIS

BAszixo Co ?Ac'.

The matter of the petition, for bringing this company
under the operatim of the Winding-up Act was again
brought before the court.
The Solicitor General, who appeared on behalf of the
committee of thereholden and creditors, said a meeting of
creditor, bed bees MK at which creation to the mwsuat
of 231,0001. bed agreed te swept lac is Os purl is Mr
charge of their eiethes de. he the paled Is be paid is the
pre.ent month, sad the rrentthes is other belehesthk the
last Instalment of le. ed. in the pored le be paid hi Nulls-
ber, 11W. The sue of 64,5431. bad bass Weed is eta,
which was lodpil is the Breach Bask et lisstead. red
3.5.1921. is bide lei ware awl areditear &sum whisk
would he seillsisst to peg r isslahaest sib is the pawl
in the mash of Jemmy. as Ms swepte react
ow • the bash after pastes is hi the suell mails
of sal miler. Of Ibis tom Mr. Theme Wis-
e. had esslthseed 2,0081.; Me. Timm It
mow. ; sod Mr. William Bewisty Wadokiallig
Mr. Mat had contribeted 111., smd Br. Tallow
gill, et doss supposed dellarsuise. as a dinar,
soarty mesh led ben said, but whs. is Vs* bad bus se
pei wry way to theee sets el siussiket. bad ledpd
WOK Ifibad before paid 7,oool.leametheriter. Moms
• creditor Mimi( fur 26,0001., sad wee hthik thr Ohre tome
staking the Mel eentribution 54,0001. Me wee emthweind to
may that if the ttherigentlemen he had semi, Mseims. Whitley
Nicholson, and Waddles were appeieted ussippes. they
would guaraitoo tito inadadminsts. ad Stany weal maw
Um concern without emy warp. Twechisis of the IMO.
eared creditor bed ems Ws this simeisseet, and the
shareholders had, up se this eeriest. bees protected, only
two writs of eninthmelsthig beim meth&
Mr. Freeliag, wkeeppeared for Mr. tames, said there
was acuities is Ms pathless hr the appointment of these
this, af maiden, and ha submitted that it
be In better to leave the matter entirely to the
Master.
Mr. Istapdi shilused the court on behalf of Mr. Ed-
ema% whisked_ patithmed the coati that the many, be ra-
lbroddi lb. Mos et the District Court of Bankruptcy.
Ssesirli patiliss thepseud of the convenience
it be to the parties to MOM the district court, rather
Ow to bows le emu up to Liman to attend before the
Bfiefitie.
Mr. Chiba followed as the teas side.
Ihuphswi mid be mermaid shareholder. holding
mitsliM the Mew that wee taken by
petisiessr. llit. Illhinsia.
Itt. liessidi ?akar. who up for Mr. Reedit', •
est it wet iasstaout with the term
of the me ft with the mast is he Master with 'pasha
dinUiess as le the oppelainsat el mown, or say ease
mid ihsth wadi be asseidlisi Mu is Sado.
Mies le im by ibe
. Wahl slid le unwed tor a beds of median who
was wine Met the mew &odd be 'shined le the Die-
Nisfigeess et Dethreptep. be/swift teen marina Os
eel la Wishes up amiable of tido dadt-
tit Muter is Chummy.
Ihe Master of the Zeno said it was set dimmed the is
Sib saw it was seeessry he the emit in make ea sear
he he wishes up of this essepm. The ably peisb is
toter he had to digest his asteatiss wee whether ray
sputa Muslim timid be plum is the wrist. sad Se shot
Islbsesi th• air thud be mt. Ms ma of peasemwd
ire Map dielealiusoy pewees to the asset, net be sited
"Wee pesmsmi but he eashesed he teak a large leash
who Ms UM we hat beeeiht Wire bias ia }adminp
ths issalfss Y ohs le glee lbw to the parties in sake
smesswiii emi. Usrailay, it was a gratilhaths to