The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-22 00:00:00

FLAW iintelitgence.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-YESTERDAY.
ArrwA.
MACDONALD O. LOCKHART.
. . -

This is an appeal from the Court of Session in Scotland.
The appellants are the Hon. Mrs. Mary Jane Lockhart
Macdonald, wife of the lion. Augustus Henry Moreton,
and Laurence Hill, of Glasgow ; and the respondents are
Sir Norman Macdonald Lockhart, Bart., of Lee and Carn-
wath, a minor, tbs. Margaret Macdonald Lockhart, his
mother, and others, the guardians of Sir Norman, and trus-
tees and executors of the late Sir Norman Lockhart. The
question involved has been in process of litigation since
1814, and has been renewed at intervals under different
terms, until the court below, by the judgment now under
appeal, finally decided against the appellants, and in
favour of the respondent, Sir Norman Lockhart, as heir
of entail of the estates of Lee and Carnwath. Mr.
Laurence Hill, a writer to the signet, in Glasgow, one
of the appellants, is the party really interested, the other
appellants being the representatives of the late Sir Charles
Macdonald Lockhart (tram whom the respondent, Sir Nor-
man inherits) who have allowed their names to be used in
trying the question in dispute. The late Sir Norman was and
the present Sir Norman is heir of entail of the estates of
Lee and Carnwath, of which the lands and barony of
Covington. Lanarkshire, including the lands of Conner-
land and others are part, of which they and their prede-
cessors have been possessed since 1722, as crown vassals,
under successive charters. Mr. Hill claims as disponee
and auccersor of the Earl of Haddington, of 1643, to be the
superior of the Temple lands of Cunnerumd, in the barony
of Covington, and that the late Sir Norman ought to have
made geed the title and right of Mr. Hill in that respect.
The object of Mr. Hill was originally when the litigation
commenced in 1814 against Sir Alexander Lockhart, the
grandfather of the present respondent, to establish his
right to the alleged superiority, in order to support his
claim to be admitted a freeholder in the county of Lanark
in right of that superiority. The cause has been proceeding
against the successive owners of the property in question
until, as stated above, it has reached to judgment in favour
of the respondents in the c •.urt below, and hence the pre-
sent appeal. The point involved turns_on abstruse ques-
tions of old Scotch law, anal the matter is of little interest
except to the parties concerned. The case was opened on
Thursday last ; the arguments were continued on Monday,
Tuesday, and yesterday, and were not concluded when
their lordship; rose. They will, however, be finished this
day.

EQUITY COURTS.YESTERDAY•
HIPTOLE tits Monza or rim Komi.
HARDEN V. MOSSY.

Mr. Goldsmith moved the court cx parte for an injunc-
tion, under the following circumstances :—The plaintiff in
his affidavit stated that he is an old man in humble circum-
stances. On the 11th March last he was at a public-house
with a man and a woman named Holmes, who informed
him that his son was dead, and had died in the preceding
month. 'I his was the first time he had heard of the death,
and he was much agitated. The Holmes's then produced
a paper which they stated was to enable them to pay his
son's debts out of his property, and ho signed it without
knowing the effect of it. He had since ascertained that it
was a renunciation Of his right to probate, and that a per-
son who represented himself as a creditor, and who was
brother-in-law to the Holmes's, had taken out administra-
tion. Plaintiff had caused a distringas to be placed on about
8001. consols, part of the estate of the deceased, which
would expire to-morrow; and the object of the motion was
to prevent the defendant from selling out the stock or re-
ceiving the dividends.
His Honour granted the injunction; plaintiff to enter
into the usual undertaking.