The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-11-28 00:00:00

LAit nrrninnisti:

*

COURT OF Lit .pier.iti, Nov St
-..
tett.tscaN and PIOA NT 11. C97RE. • .
This was a bill filnl against the Defer:Ault, for
the purpose of compelling him to make good his
contract, and refer it to the Mitstet, to inure into
what compensation should be al!ovred the Plaintiff
out of his purchase-matey, in consequence of a
&Ira of title. It appeared that Mr. Cooke had par-
chved the house, gai-dens, fi:lds, green house, and
but-horse plants, -furniture, etc. held by the late
E.trl of Rosalyn, at Bellasise, near Hampstead, un-
der lease from the Earl of Chesterfield. for the
term of twenty-one years, with a covenant that
the Earl should renew the lease twice, mak-
ing, in the whole, a term of sisty-three years.
The covenant provided, that, should the eldest son
and heir of the Earl, after his coming of are, or his
assign., refuse to give renewals of the lease, the pair-
chasi_i should be entitled to such convensatina nut
of the real or personal effeas of the said Eta. as
his son should inherit from him, as should be award-
ed in an aaionnt damages, or a decree of a Court
of Equity. Mr. Cooke ordered this estate to he
sold by Mr. Shuttleworth, an auaioneer, at public
ail ion ; but a sufficient sum not having been bid-
den for it in that way, Mr. Shuttleworth disposed of
it by private contrast to Mr.l hare,who aa ad as aunt
for Mr. Millegati, and the sale was concluded for
the sum of 44001. Theie was an article in tile agree-
ment, that if any thing was mis-,fated or omitted in
the represensetion. it should not violate the sales but
be allowed Fr by the purchaser, in proportion to
the amnont of the whole purchase. The agreement
was made on the 27th April, on the 28th possession
was given at the request of Mr. Millegan, and the de.
fea in the title was discovered on the 2d of May. On
the 4th of the same month, notice was given to Mr.
Mille an, that, it he were dissat'sfied with the title.
Mr. Cooke was Waling to relieve him from the whole
of the agreement ; on the 6th he began his improve-
ment's on the estate, and, on the itli filed t' is bill
in Chancery, to be allowed a compensation for the
detca of title.
The application was sepporred, at considerable
length, by Messrs. Rostrata and Newsoto, and
very ably tesisted by the AT rotto s v.GEN Es AL, Mr.
Rtcli A ens, and Mr. MARTIN. These latter gentle-
men argued, that the lands were held by Lord . .
Chesterfield, under lease from the Dean and Chap- ilitaggi
ter of Westminster, who had not prover to give a '.-
lease for m ire than three years, or twenty-one years.
The purchaser, therefore, was hound to take it upon
the best title the vender could assign to him, such
as it might he. They thought it impossible for
the Master to estim tre the value of any compensa-
tion between the difference of 2t and 63 years; and
the more so, as it might be possible for Lord Clans-
terfield to fuffil his covenant, by using his brat
or
in-
fluence with the Dean and Chapter t renewals of
the lease before the rerpeStive terrcs were tors. ! -
clu .led.
On the other hand. it was urged, that as the vein. Ilk
der had made a d.fferent representation from the '
co, the purchaser was entitled to an abatement of
the pwchase-money in preportion to the different¢
bet's. een the title which he received, and that wbich
it w..s represented so be
As there was not tim- for going through the
whole of the case, the 1.0110 CfI4NCELLon ordered
it to stand over for a future bearing. .

.

COURT OF ICING'..BEN::II, Wurminshm, Nov. V.
CRIMINAL INFORM NTIONS.
Mr. DISK'S?, on behalf of I. Wing s:lde Itte.
a Mairiorate of Rutlandshire, applied far leave to
file a Criminal Information aoairot Mr. J. Thomp-
son, an Attorney, residi'g at. Stamford, for an in-
sult, with intent to pro li'ke him to fight a du.l.
l'he affidavit of Mr. Wing6.ltl set forth, that he. O.
gether with five other genilem in, of Rutlande re,
was possessed of a fishery, on which frequent de-
predations had been comm tied, and they were an•
der the necessity of pnblis' ing a notice, that any
person or potion found trespa sing upon this fishea y,
would he prosecuted with the tom ist rigour of the
law. Some time after this not Ce, a servant of Mr.
Wingfield's found Mr. Thom pson, with some friends,
amusing themselves in fishing upon the river in ques-
tion, and desired to know their names ; which Mr.
Thompson refusing, was bought before a aright:our-
ing Magi.trate, and cotiviaed in a penalty of Si.
The next market day, in the town of Stamford, where
there was a vast number of t'armers, and other
persons, Thompson, accosting Mr. Wingfield, told
him he was a dirty scoundrel, and he took that pub-
lic opportunity of teUing him so ; ar.d he thought to
have found him a gentleman, but was disappoiuted.
These expressions were repeated. before all the
people in the market ; and Mr. Wingfield replied,
that he had done nothing but what be had a right
to do, as Mr. Thompson had refused to give his
name to his servant ; he alss said, he supposed he
(Thompson) wished to provoke him to strikes to
which Mr. Thompson answered, hr did not wish he
should ; and. although he himself was a profer
einnal man, he was a gentleman, but did not expea
to find Mr. Wingfield one.
The Court considered thii a case roach more
proper to go before a Grand Jut,' of the County.
than one in which their Lordships could interfere.
The rule. therefore, was refused.
iiii, Rim°, o. 'CLAY'S° S'Ai woos.
This sis as a rnle for a criminal information, ob-
tained by Mr. GA 'mow on the first day of the term,
as mentioned in our Paper of the 7th of November,
inst. against the Defendants ; the first a Lieutenant,
and. tke second Assistant-Surgeon, in the 433 Regi-
ment of Font. The former for writing. and the
latter for carrying, a challenge to Mr. roxcroft, an
Attorney, at Nottingham
Mr. ER.oolst. and Mr. Mara ttlr, on behalf of the
Defendant, Mr. Wilde, %hexed muse against this
rule. In his nffidavir, he exp: eared great sorrow and
contrition for the offence he bad been guilty of ;
which the Learned Counsel admitted, war being
the bearer ef a dims challenge to fight a duel, and
called for very severe animadversion from their
Lordships; but they trusted, upon the disclosure of
all the circumstances, the Court would be of opi-
nion, he was not a subjeft for a criminal informa-
tion. Lieut. Keating had eontraaed a debt with the
sisters of Mr. Folcroft, in 1797 ; and, in September
last, Mr. Folcroft asked Rim to settle the business.
Re answoredthe knew scathing about it a asi,..if he