The Express.
London, England, 1864-06-14 00:00:00

1861:

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS.- Jrxs 13.
APPEALS.
TILLVICITON v.. TILVIZTON.

After our repoinefTiesterday,
Sir H. Cairns referred to &device of the reepoodent to me-
lon the witueseas in the suit by the intro.
duetioo of Miss Cribb*, who bore a great reeem-
blames to her, and who had personated her at
plasm to which the parties went before the
at Rostrevor—her object being to get up her case completely
with regard to the Irish marriage, and in unison with the
endeavour to obtain a witnessed certificate from Mr.
Mooney. All this was wholly incompatible with an ac-
tually strong case, but was quite consistent with a conscious-
ness of the inherent weakness and defects of her cam, and
with a desire to bolster it up by any means. The learned
mimel then proceeded to examine and comment upon the
judgments of the two judges of the court of session by which
the marriage of the reapoodeat was established, and brought
his argument to a conclusion just before the usual hour at
which the hoes, adjourns.

IQUITY OOURTS.—J tate 13.
(Beton the Lords Justices.)

soLicrroas Anui CIMRAL un Amylases compANT V.

LMiB.

This was a very curious ease, and remarkable because
the question bad
lamb wishing to borrow some money mortgaged certain
property to ace [tideway, and at the same time inlayed his
own life for 1,0001. in the Solicitors and Gomel Life As-
sanioos Company, and mortgaged the policy also. The
policy contained the %anal proviso that it should
be void in the event of the insured dying by
his own act, except to the extent of any interest ac-
quired therein by actual assignment by deed for valuable
consideration or as security. He afterwards borrowed fur-
ther sums, and assured his life for 500/. more.
In February, 1861, Laraboommitted suicide, and his widow
tonic out administration to his estate. Some correspondence

took plats between the office and the solicitors Of Mrs.
Lamb and Ridgway, and is August, 1862, the office paid
the inssrasee money to Ridgway, and then filed a bill
against Mrs. Lamb praying that they might be declared en-
titled to a charge (subject to the sums due to the mortgagee)
ca all the mortgaged property, or otherwise for an appor-
tioned charge. e cause came before Vice-Chancellor
Wood, who dismissed the bill with costa. From this
decree the plaintiffs appealed.
Mr. Rolt and Mr. Barrage for the plaintiffs, the office,
contended that the mortgagee could recover his debt oat of
the property, and need not recur to the policy. If be did the
amount isolated on the policy relieved the morNmati pro.
party, and was a direct benefit to the estate of Mr. lamb.
Tel express object of this proviso was to prevent the
estate of a snieide from getting any benefit.
Mr. Giffard and Mr. Morgan, for Mrs. lamb, said that
the mortgages had had the property assigned to him, and
came widths the terms of the proviso. Otherwise is every
such case the office would be a creditor on the estate of the
hawed.

-----
The use wee argued on the 2nd of June, and their lord-
ships now delivered judgment.
Lord Justice Knight Bruce said that there was no cue
made of fraud or ullesion on the part of Mrs. Lamb or Mr.
Midway. Itidgwey was entitled to receive, end did receive,
the amount from the office, being entitled on his security to
• larger amount. If there had, been nothing due he would
have received nothing, and the case would have been dif-
ferent, but in the absence of fraud or collusion the office had
no equity. There was nothing in the condition to show that
the estate of Mr. Lamb was in Doi:we to be benefited.
Lord Justice Tuner stated the factaottheaaeeal consider.
&billionth, and then said that the questionbetween the office
and Mrs. Lamb was, whether the debt ought to be thrown
upon the mortgaged property. If there had been an absolute
sale there could have been no doubt about it, or if there
had been no other property; and yet in that case the estate
would have had the benefit. As to contribution, which had
been suggested, the office was not a surety, and mast pay
all or none. It was true that the mortgagee might elect
which to proceed against, but here the offunthad paid Mao.
Decree affirmed.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—Jusz 13.
(Before Mr. Commistiomer Goa'burp.)
IN RN A. BROUGH.

The bankrupt weed;eoriocieiageumal merchant, of
Great Tomer-etreek

Cluoirmoved that the petition should be dis-
missed, on the ground that the bankrupt had, in January
bet, executed a trust deed, which had been signed by the
requisite proportion of creditors and duly registered. The
creditors were 107 io number, their claims amounting to
18,8001.; of these, 60, wham debts; were upwards at 14,0001.,
had assented to the deed. . . .

Mr. Darla, in support of the adjudicatioe, st►ted that the
deed was vicious on the face of it ; it contained provisions
which were held to be illegal, es that the noo•aaaenting cre-
ditors abonkl, after the lapse of two months, lose all benefit
of the deed. _ _ . _ . _

Hi Honour adjourned the case for the production of the
necessary dominate.