The Express.
London, England, 1853-11-26 00:00:00

IZIOIT V. JIRYT.DOWER.

This suit, which now came on upon further directions,
was instituted to administer the estate of Mr. Jermy, who
was murdered some time since by Rush. The widow of
Mr. Jermy elected upon his death to receive one-third of
the rents and profits of the estates of the deceased gentle-
man in respect of her dower, in lieu of having one-third set
out by metes and bounds. A portion of the timber on the
estate having been sold, and some fines having been received
from copyholds, a question arose between the widow and
the heir as to whether she was entitled to a third of the
sum arising from these two sources.
Kr. J. V. Prior and Mr. Prendergast represented the
parties interested.
In the course of the statement of counsel, it appeared that
it had been hitherto found impossible to let the mask*
house in which the murder took place, although the parties
were willing to allow a tenant to have it for two years rent
free.
The Vice-Chancellor held that the widow was entitled to
one-third of the copyhold fines and of the proceeds of the
higher.

110011 YIVI.CILLEVILLOR STD W. PADS WOOD.
GRITFITMS V. THZ OFFICIAL MANAGER OF MHZ NATIONAL

LAND COMPANY.

Mr. T. H. Tenon renewed a motion which he had mad.
on a previous occasion, to restrain the defendant from issu-
ing a writ of possession against the plaintiff, in respect of
some meadow land, part of one of the estates formerly pur-
chased by Mr. Feargus O'Connor, and called " Lowland
and ApplehuntFarms.', It appeared that the plaintiff had
worked upon the estate in question fur Mr. O'Connor, and
there being a large bill owing to him, the amount of which
was in dispute (he claiming upwards of 4001., Mr. O'Connor
admitting only 2751), it was arranged that the plaintiff
should take to some meadow land at Lowland, at the price
of 4001., and if upon a settlement of account more was
found due to him, Mr. O'Connor should pay it, but if leas,
then tke plaintiff should hand over the balance.
On the 9th July, 1851. a letter was written by O'Connor
to the plaintiff, as follows :
"Dear Oriffitba,—You shall not be deprived of the mea-
dow land ; the ruffians at Lowland have no power to do
so. But you make a mistake when you say a balance of
4001 is due to you ; it is only 2751. and lam prepared to
convey the meadows to you, though you have got them at
a much cheaper price than I paid for them, if you are pre-
' pared to pay the balance."
Shortly after this an act was passed for winding up the
affairs of the company, and it being known that Mr.
O'Connor bad been dealing with the property in an kil-
-1 proper manner, and selling parts of it as his own, the act
provided, that certain persons therein specified, who had
got allotments, and others who had purchased, should be
confirmed in possession; and that all those whom the
Master in Chancery charged with winding up the affairs
of the company should find to be bona fide purchasers,
should be entitled to have the land so purchased. The
question in dispute was, whether the plaintiff was a bona
fide purchaser within the meaning of that part of the
clause. On the Bth of February, the official manager made
application to Master Richards, before whom the case Ina
being wound up, for directions in respect of this property.
Ile directed an action of ejectment to be brought. On the
2nd May, a meeting took place, at which thsrplaintiff sought
to induce the Muter to review his decision. At that time
an arrangement was made that the plaintiff should give
judgment in the action, but that no writ of poeticism
should issue till the let day of August, with power to ex-
tend the time, in order to enable the plaintiff to take such
proceedings as he might be &stilted to establish his claim;
this time was afterwards extended till the 20th August.
The official manager opposed the plaintiff's claim, on the
ground that the meadow land was worth much more than
the 4001. given by the plaintiff for it. The present bill was
afterwards filed, and an application had been made to the
Vice-Chancellor in the vacation to extend the time, which
he bad done ; and, then, when the matter went back to the
Master for adjudication, on the plaintiff's claim, he refused
to entertain the question, on the ground that when the bill
was filed he was ousted of his jurisdiction.
Mr. Roxburgh appeared for the official !dm
The Vice-Chancellor, after recapies the facts,
granted the injunction ; but stated/Vitt' that he
had said on the previous occasion was Winded Is *Ai to
the inference that the matter was Oil Op as helm the
Muter. He thought it would be • • ttioshoela him-
self comratuticate with the Master, *rim
• *4.

•

.jl

'~

I