Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-02-02 00:00:00

Mr. Keightley•.wished to know what••could be done ?

The Clerk: Have the present mradanties amended,
or a new one issued. _ _

Mr. Harrison wished to know whether they had any
power to go on -?
The Clerk replied that they had not, but he did not
think that any objection would be raised to either course.
Mr. Baylis could 'hardly think that the Court of
Queen's Bench would issue a mandamus unless they knew
on what they were ;proceeding, and regretted that the
matter had not been settled before. The people were
becoming perfectly disgusted with the proceedings.
(Cries of "No, no'.l

,
After a few words. from Mr. Cooke,
The Chairman said the Commissioncrs had acted
verfectly right from the first to the last, /3 the inlndanzus
then issued fully proved. They had acted. on the advice
of the law clerk, in net allowing Mr. Garrgh to take his
seat, and if they had :they would have been doing that
which was illegal.
On the motion of Mr. Cooke, seconded by Mr.
Harrison, the law clerk was instructed to confer with
Mr. Gough's solicitor, with a view of having the
mandamus amended or A new one issued. After which
the oaceting separated..
ICOi/MUNICATED.]
VICE-CHANC LLOR STUART'S COURT,
.LINCOLN'S INN, MONDAY, 31sT JAN., 1859.

LISTER V. BELL

Mr. Malins said : In a ease of Lister v. Bell, I have
to ask your Honour for the costs of a summons in cham-
bers, which was adjourned ;into court. It was au appli-
cation by the plaintiff in the cause for a special jury. The
case is a very extraordinary one, and it-has been before
your Honour in chambers. I will tell your Honour what
it was. It is a case of very great importance to my
client, the defendant, Mr. Bell, and is considered by 'the
plaintiff to be important. It is a most oppressive pro-
ceeding as against my client. Mr. Bell is a merchant
of high reputation in Liverpool, and he undertook
for Mr. McHenry, a gentleman of large commercial
transactions, to collect debts in America, amountin g
to £lOO,OOO. He did go to America to collect
those debts ; he rendered, -as he says, most*
faithful accounts; he was charged, by the other side,
with fraud, detention of money,. and every malpractice
which could exist, under the circumstances ; and yet
those grave charges were not insisted on at the hearing
of the cause. He collected £100,000; he had a special
contract for the remuneration he was to receive for the
colledion of the accounts in America ; he has charged a
certain amount of remuneration, which was objected to
by the plaintiff before your. Honour's Chief Clerk.
The Chief Clerk has allowed him the utmost
farthing he claimed, and has disallowed all the
plaintiff's charges as to erroneous statements.
After the Chief Clerk had decided the matter, the
plaintiff took out a summons, before your Honour, that
there should be a special jury to decide the question.
Briefs were prepared, at considerable labour and expense ;
and I had a consultation with my friend, Mr. Wood,
thinking that the motion would be brought on the next
day, and they having- given us notice to read documents
of great 'extent. They gave us notice that they should
read all the affidavits in chambers, and other documents.
Then, after all that, the same evening they gave us
notice that they meant to abandon the motion altogether,
after we had gone to considerable expense Therefore,
what I want is the taxed costs of the proceedings in,
chambers, they having abandoned their whole case.
Mr. Bacon said : My friend says it is the practice of
the court to give the costs of an abandoned summons.

The Vice-Chancellor said : Ido it constantly in cham-
bers. What a monstrous thing it would be that one
person should put another to £lOO of expense, in
defending himself, and, when he 'has done so, to say,
" I abandon the motion." It is not a matter for
discussion. If a summons comes on in chambers,
and is abandoned, justice and the course of practice
require that the person summoned to chambers, when the
summons against him is abandoned, should be indemnified
in respect of the costs of that proceeding. When the
summons is adjourned into court, the same practice must
prevail. But neither forty shillings, nor any other sum,
has been fixed by the practice of the court as the costs of
an abandoned summons. I have heard of no authority
for any other course of practice than to say that a person
summoned into court to oppose a summons, and being
told after he has incurred considerable expense in prepar-
ing to oppose that it is abandoned, must have his taxed
costs. It seems to have been a Summons of an unusual
kind.

Mr. Malin said : It was intimated to me strongly that
I could only be entitled to 40s. costs.
The Vice-Chancellor said : I think you u.re outitled to
the taxed costs.