The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-07 00:00:00

tab) Enttlltavnct.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Present. the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brosgham, and Lord Campbell.
8111 THOMAS AND LADY WILDS V. WM/N.—BILL TO
SIT ASIDE A PLIICKASI AND CONVEYANCE ►OR FRAVD
ALLEORD, BUT NOT PROtED, DISMISSED WITH COSTS.
—Judgment was given in this ease, which was an appeal
from a decree of Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce, directing
the purchase of Mount Albion House and pleasure grounds
at Ramsgate, by Mr. Gibson, from Lady Wilde, to be set
aside. The purchase was made in 1838, the whole purchase '
money wa• paid, and the conveyance was executed by .L. dy
Wilde (then Mademoiselle d'Kste), and possession was de.
livered to Gibson. In 1311 he was applied to by the parish
officers of Ramsgate (or 2s. 641., in acknowledgment of • 1
former right of way, which was allowed by the Countess
d'Ameland, Lady Wilde's mother, with consent of
the parish, she undertaking by deed to pay such
sum yearly, in acknowledgment of the right. The
Lord Cbai.cellor in moving the judgment, stated the
circumstances and said the bill stated a we of fraud and
wilful concealment, by the vendor of the right of way, but
the evidence did not support such a case. The learned
judge, whose decree was appealed from, stated most dis-
tinctly that in his view of the whole of the evidence there
woo no personal fraud, so that one case was made by
the bill, but a different case was made in the evidence. All
t,,at the evidence did was to make a case of concealment of a
defect in the title, not by direct, but constructive notice.
Now to set aside a conveyance, constructive notice is not
sufficient, there must be direct fraud proved. Yet here
there was not even a case of constructive notice, for it did
not appear that this lady knew cf the deed of 1820, or that
• sum of 2.5. 61 was paid fir the acknowledgment of the
right of way. Wightwick who spoke to that point was not
her agent in the transaction of the tale. His lordship after
going through the points of the evidence and again
observing that the case stated by the bill was not sustained
by the evid,nce, and referring to the two cases most ap-
plicable to the present, " Edward's v. M'Leay" and" Legge
v. Croker," proposed that the decree should be rev. reed,
and the bill dismissed with the tests in the court below.—
' Lord Brougham also expressed his opinion at length, and
concurred in the proposal of the Lord Chancellor, re-
gretting that the rule of the house was such th►t the costa of
the appeal could not be given to the successful party ; they
in this case far exceeded the value of the property in dis-
pute.—Lord Campbell also expressed his concurrence, and
the decree was reversed and the bill was ordered to be die-
miss.d, with costs in the court below.

BAIL COURT.
Sittings In Banco. Before Mr. Justice Wightman.
Ex PARTE SIMMONUA —TIM ALLEGED 11,011101 RT Or
BANK Nores.—Mr. Ballantine applied to admit a per-
son of the name of Abraham Simoionds, now a prl once
in Newgate, to bail. The party on whose behilf
he made the application was a publican carrying on bu•iness
in the Blackfriars road, and* he had been brought up before
the Lord Mayor, charged with having stolen two bank-
notes.
PURCHASING AN Oence.—ln the case reported under
this head yesterday, another application was male to set
aside a warrant of attorney given by Mr. Teague (not Fean
as misprinted) for the punhase of the office of cl rk to the
Guildhall magistrates, and a rule nisi was hranted by Mr,
Justice Wightman.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
Mating, in Banco.
Glens n. FL10117.-Bir. STEPUMIN'a, WALBROOX.—A
rule was obtained Wt term on behalf of defendanta, calling
upon the plaintiffs to show cause why an order of Mr. Justice
Erie and the rule of court founded thereon should not be set
aside. The facts of the case arising out of the disputes in
the parish of St. Stephen's, Waibrook, were recently before
the public, and it is unnecessary therefore to relate them et
length. It will be remembered an action was brought to try
the question of the existence of a select vestry in the parish
alluded to ; that at the trial the question was turned into •
special cue, which, after judgment for the defendant, was
turned into a special verdict, in order further to raise the
point upon a writ of error; but that finally negotiations were
commenced, and the terms of a proposed compromise were
referred to Mr. Justice Eric Accordingly counsel and at-
torneys for both parties attended before Mr. Justioe Erle
at Guildhall on Bth January last, and again on 26th February,
when, the consent:of the clients having been first obtained,
the following terms suggested by Mr. Justice Erle were
dr.,wn up in writing, and signed by counsel on both sides
"The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas to stand ; the
costs of both sides to be paid out of the parish funds ; the
select vestry to be considered at an end ; the vestry under-
taking not voluntarily to raise the question again ; and if
either party require it, • formal document to be drawn up
embodying the above." At a meeting of the parishioners
afterwards held • resolution was come to, voting 5501. to
eark of the two contending parties to defray cuts. But et a
subsequent meeting a letter from Mr. Phillips, the attorney
to Mr. Aldermen Gibbs, was reed, which, not being a defi-
nitive acceptance of the 5501. offered, the meeting treated as
a refusal, and pared a resolutioa declaring that the arrange-
ment was at an end. The order of Mr. Justice Erie, now
aosght to be set aside, contained the terms of the agreement