The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-11-26 00:00:00

• - • • •
en short time since he received notice of the present motion obliged
►ten to oppose it In person.
His Holton a said that. as Mr. Wilmot appeared to have pro-
ceeded by mistake, be would not inflict a sevrre penalty upon him.
He must, howeser, pay the costs of all parties in the present appli.
cation ; and Übe had now ascertained that he had any new title, it
oas for him to file a supplementary answer.
In • cause is which Mr. Wakefield was engaged, the Attorney
applied that the motion might stand over until the Learned Coun.
eel were in attendance.
His flionovis replied. that he could not on etch grounds sanc-
tion a delay of public bosines". The motion could not stand.

OIVINNE •ND_ROIII XS v. DAVIS,

Mr. Hama! mewed for an injunction to restrain the defendant
/tows nailing proceedings at law against one o► the plaintiffs in this
case, Mr. Robins the auctioneer, for the recovery of auction duty,
and deposit paid by him as part of the purchase-money for the ad.
'meson of • vicarage in Cornwall, sold by public auction. The
Learned Counsel stated, that the other plaintiff', Mr. liwynne, had
purchased the vicarage for 4,300/. and afterwards, wishing to dis.
pose of it, he applied to Mr. Robins, who sold it by public aut.
lion to Mr. I tsvis--he being the highest bidder. The vicarage was
advertised, and in the advertisement it was stated to be worth CM/.
per annum. The defendant agreed to purchase the advowson for
4,8201. and to complete the purchase in that sum, agreeable to the
conditions of the sale. Mr. Davis, however, afterwards asserted that
te had been imposed upon, and that the property was not worth so
mach as he was led to suppose it to be ; that it had not for the last
eleven years yielded such an income as 51001. per annum ; and that
the vicarage house, instead of being " • comfortable, substantial,
and well-built modern house," (as stated in the advertisements, &c.)
had been built nearly • century, and was very uncomfortable and
old fashioned. The defendant admitted that he had brought an
action against the plaintiffs, though • bill was pending to oblige
him to perform his contract ; but he contended that the misrepre-
sentations of the plaintiff, induced him to give a larger sum for the
advowson than it was fairly worth. Now, in point of fact. this
geadeenan's estimate of the value of the advowson was merely a
ewe statement.
Mr. HAaT, for the defendant, stated that his client did not mean
1• contravene the general principle, that during a suit in this Court
to cempel the performance of an executory contract, proceedings
could not be taken at law ; but as the whole value of the advoirson
was in the next presentation, and as the present incumbent was
7. yews of age, that life might lapse while the suit was pending,
and it might therefore be impossible to execute the contract between
those parties, because. as soon as the incumbent died, a presents.
lion must be made. The Learned Counsel, therefore, had to pro.
pose, that the plaintiffs should bring an action for the remainder of
the purchase money, in • court of law, when the defendant -would
be cashied to produce any evidence in his power, as to the manna
Soso fide value of the advowson for which he had esntracted to pay
• large •um, and in the transaction concerning which he conceived
himself to have been imposed upon. The question would thus be
set at tent.

His Hosorn conceited this proposition to be an extremely fair
01211.
Mr. H Elan Raid he was disposed to acquiesce in the proposal,
but requested that his honour would defer his final judgment until
Monday morning, in order that he might hays time to consult his
OVAL
This was recordingly granted.