The Express.
London, England, 1847-04-19 00:00:00

Before the Mester of the Rolle.

SMITH O. LORD EFFINDHAN.—ALLOWANCI OF
COUNsted Faze, AND Cosis Of SHORTHAND WRITEICIS.
NuTY.S.—Thie was a petition by the plaintiff praying
that the Master m;ght he directed to review his report,
by which he had disallowed on taxation a special fee to
the late Sir William Follett, on the bearing of the cause
before the Master of the Molls, and the expenses of short-
hand-writers' notes of the judgment aad argument; a
special fee to Sir F. Kelly, on the cause coming nu by way of
appeal before the Lord Chancellor ; and the fees paid to one
out of two equity counsel then engaged ; and other charges,
one being for three consultations, of which the Master
allowed only one.--Mr. Willem& appeared on behalf of the
petitioner ; Messrs. Kinderaley and Cooke for two of the di-
tendants.
. . . . .

The Muter of the Role said that the points raised were
of the utmost importauce. There were certain rules for the
employment of counsel in a cause, and though a party might
have a right to be reimbursed his expenessproperly incurred
in that respect, it did nut fellow that there was to be no
limitation to such employment, or that he bad a right to
throw the whole expense so incurred upon the other party.
So also, in taking shorthand-writers' notes, cuunsel engaged
might not be able to attend tho proceedings of the rouse,
and it might be noceesary in some cases to supply their want
of knowledge by such notes; but it did not follow
of necessity that one party should be obliged to suffer for this
defect of knowledge in another party. As to the employ-
ment of a third counsel on appeal, and the extra consultations,
both might, under certain circumstances, be necessary, but
they formed matter for serious consideration, and he should
mention the ease again atter inquiring of the taxing-master
on what principles he had pr seeded in disallowing the items
is question.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. TIIII DRAPERS' COMPANY.—
KENDRICK'S CHAIIITY.—John Kendrick in 1624 by
his will directed the income of certain lands, of the
annual value of 1001., to he applied in certain pro.
portions for different charitable objects in the parishes of
St. Margaret and St. Christopher, in the City of London, and
he constituted the Drapers' Company trustees of the charity.
One of the objects of the clarity was to benefit the poor of
the parish of St. Christopher, and another to provide for
lighting the parish church. The Book of England was
subsequently built on the tote of the church, and
its buildings coveted nearly the whole of the parish,
and the parish itself was atterwards united to that of St
Margaret's. There were now only two poor persons in the
parish of St. Christopher who were eligible to participate in
the benefit of the charity, and as the annual value of the
charity property bad increased to 3001. per annum, it be-
came necessary to 'eke the opinion of the court as to the
distribution of the income, lur which purpose this suit was
iss;ituted. A scheme was approved of by the master for
that purpose, which was now submitted to the court for con-
firmation.

The Master of the Rolls:was of opinion that the above two
poor people should reciive the share of the income left by the
testator for the poor of the parish of St. Christopher, and that
on their death it should fell into the general fund ; and that
tl.e money left for lighting the church should also fall' into
the same fund. But it bring suggested that the stipend of
the curate of St. Margaret's ought to be increased, it was
arranged that the order for confirming tho scheme should
betaken, but not drawn up for one month, to give the curate
an opportunity of isppkiing by petition.

Mare Vice-Charmnor Knight Bruce.
BATS D. PLATIL.—DISCIIAUOE Ur hacztemt.—This
petition was presented for the purpose of discharging the
receiver appointed by the court tor the management of the
brewery of Messrs. Buckle and Co., at Peterborough. The
grounds for the application were the devotion of the manager
to pursuits inconsistent with the business, such as turning,
music and drawing, and the decrease of the profits under his
management. In opposition to the application, it was alleged
that the business was not neglected, but that only those'
hours which could not be employed about the brewery were
devoted by the manager to the turning-lathei in fact, the
applicants were so unreasonable as to require this manager—
who had also been charged with inexperience on account of
his having made a bad purchase of barley fur the purpose of
malting—to be as infallible as the Pope, as temperate as a
judge, and as indefatigable as an equity draughtsinan.—The
Vice-Chancellor said that he should not remove the manager
or dismiss the petition, but be would dispose of the petition
and the costs at tho hearing of the cause, which was ap-
pointed for Saturday next.
WHITBY O. WItBTBT.—NIXT FRU/IND.—III this Cue, an
account of which appeared in this paper some time
since, Mr. Cooper and Mr. Schomberg moved for an
injunction and receiver as against Mrs. Weetby.—The
result of the inquiries that had been made regarding the next
friend in this suit had shown that he was an improper person
to be in that position, as he was only a journeyman to a con-
fectioner. Mr. Schoenberg said that it had been held that
any person might be a next friend to infants. The cook of
the solicitor who filed the bill had been considered by Lord
Cottentram to be a proper next friend. The Vice-Chan-
cellor said, that as Mrs. Westby, the executrix, was out of
the jurisdiction, he must grant the injunction and appoint a
receiver as to the personal estate. Mr. Rumen and Mr.
Haldame then applied on behalf of the plaintiffs, as repre-
sented by a next tit ad in another snit, that it should be re-
ferred to the master to inquire whether it would bi for the
benefit of the infanta that this or the former suit should be
prosecuted, and that all proceedings should be stayed in the
meantime. The Vice-Ctrineellor directed an inquiry as to
I the suits, but declined to stay the proceedings in the mean-
time.

Before Cler-Clumellor Wigram.
TOLSON O. DYES& —RIGHT TO 1 Lincs.—The plaintiff,
u heir in tail under a settlement dated in 1673, claimed to
be entitled to certain tithes in Cumberland, an account of
which it war the object of the suit to obtain, as well as the
delivery up of documents relating to the claim. To establish
the title of the plaintiff, a voluminous body of documentary
evidence was produced, part of which war found to be is so
mutilated a condition as to be inadmissible for the pur-
men of proof. Mr. Serjeant Meaning and Mr.
, who were fer the plaintiff, after explaining the
mutilation, by dating that part of the document, objected
to had fallen into the hands of a junior member of the
family, by whom they had been employed for the purppooww
of private theatricals; and that the others had ver-
tautly been used al stopgaps for broken windows, submitted
to a decree dismissing the bill with costa, without prejudice
to the plaintiff s right to file a new bill, should he succeed is
edablishing his title to the tithes at law, where proceedings
were pending for the purpose—Mr. Kenyon Parker and
Mr. Wetherell appeared for the defendants.