The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1819-03-13 00:00:00

• produced to establisis the Plain:in—a psi!;grre,
which was clearly deduced 1 a Mr. Nathan
Wright, who was possessed ul the property in noes-
,-•
ton in Ifiti-l.
. Nlr. Ingham!, Norrny King at Arms. Was the
first witness called, sod lie produced a visitat.
: made ln King Chad's the Second's C ))))) lois.
%inn in 1664, by which it mfaiwared that Mr. Nathan
Wright ha I then a von ionised Benjamin, who was
created rs Intimmt, anti the patent of his creation
i being produced, Nathan Wright's will was diet'
read, and it appeared that nt his death his l'amily
Consisted of lielijamin, a daughter. Susan, who was
first inimical to Stephen Potts, Esq. and afterwards
to Frauds Drake, Esq. of which marri.tges there
were six children. His next daughter, Mary, was
married to Robert Bartlett, so Alderman of Lon.
dolt. A third daughter, Alice, was married toJoina
Wolfri., a merchant of Lomltin,said there were two
unmarried daughters. Sir Benjamin Wright was
',weeded by his sons Sir Nathaniel Wright—Sir
Nathaniel by his son, Sir Nathaniel—and the
latter by his brother, Sir Samuel, who was the last
Bartnitt ; and he was succeded by his sister, Elisa-
beth, who married Gen. Oglethorpe, and was the
last person seised of the fee, and in her ended the
last lineal &avoid:tett of the ‘Vriglits. It appear.
ed from the rest of the Plaintiff's evidence, that all
the intermediate claimants in the right line were
extinct, and that he claimed as the descendant of
Mr. Wright Burdett, this fifth son of the original
ancestor, and who was rector of Kimsey, in
Middlesex, having a von, named Wright Bur.
nett, front whom the Plaintiff was immediately
descended.—The facts in support of the Plaintiff's
case were proved principally by wills, certificates of
marriages, births and burials, by monumental in-
scriptions, and by recitals in deeds.
Mr. 51 ARRTATT suggested several objections on
the part of the Deferitlaiit, contending principally
that the legal estate was outstanding in time heirs of
Mr. Granville Sharpe. He theta attempted to set
up ND old outstanding mortgage term, created 150
years since. but which °sweated to have been de..
charged. Ile also contended, that the extinctimi
of the elder brothers of the first ‘Vright Burdett
had not been sufficiently proved, and insisted that
the Jury would presume that they had married and
bad issue.

The cai.e went to the Jnry, under the Learned
Judwe's direction, and a verdict was found fur the
Plaintiff, with liberty to the Defendant to move
the Count above.

Doc on the demise of SACKETT V. NARTEY and

others.

This wag an action against the assignees of Mr.
Nl:Aitken Mallard Harvey, a bankrupt, to recover
the pooStt.-1011 of certain.premises, consisting of two
tenements, in Witham, which the bankrupt had
plittine.ed of the grandfather of the lessor of the
Pl.ontift:

The Plaintiff's case was conducted by Mr.
MARRYATT and Mr. COMYN, rind the Defendant's
by Mr. Guett and Mi. STEPHEN.
The case made out on the part of the lessor of
the Plaintiff was this :—The grandfather of the
Weer of the Plaintiff, Mr. Baker, had by his will
devired the premises in question to las son, Thomas
Baker, for life, Ivith remainder in fee to his
grand-daughter, Itaehael Baker. The latter, be-
fore she had attained the age of twenty-one,
intermarried with a Mr. Sackett, be whom she
had issue the lessor of the During
the life-time of Thomas Baker, Mr. M. 11. Harvey
pur,•littsed the estate in question of the former, in
fee, for valuable consideration, although lie was
only tenant for life, but with an understanding,
that when his daughter attained the age or 21, she
was to levy a fine, and suffer a recovery. The
bankrupt having obtained posseasion of the pro.
party tinder this contract, had laid out a very
large IWO of money in the 11111110Ventellt of the pre-
mises ; hut, in point of fact, the mother of the lessor
of the Plaintiff died without levying a fine, or suf.
feting a recovery ; but, since then, Mr. Harvey had
paid the customary IlliftW(1711 dues of the property,
until his bankruptcy : since then, his assignees kept
possession of the premises, and being about to bell
them, for the benefit of his estate, the present ac-
tion was brought by the lessor of the Plaintiff; ua
heir at law to his soother.

There bring no solosiontiel defence stt up, in or-
der to impeach the l'lsiartilrs title to the premises,
the Jury founds verdict for the Pleintiff.—Da-
mixes Is.
lo the course of the cense, Mr. Justice PARE
said, that lie remembered Is case preci.ely of the
emote 'astute, on the Northern Circuit, where he
had been instrumented, as Counsel, iu recovering
property to the amount of 18,000/. for allobli;
Lord of great poetic celebrity—Lord Byron.