The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-06-05 00:00:00

LAW NOTICES.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
DATORI TOI LOAD CH•NA MLLOR, AT MASTIIINOTSI, TOM DAT, AT 10.
Appeal..
Williams T. Goodchlld, appeal per Metcalfe T. Monson, pet. per order
order Exparte Edwards re Stockley, bunk-
Bray T. Fronsont, appeal rupt petition, part heard
Hanson v. Ellis Exparte Erittbard, 2 bankrupt peti-
t
Same V. Duke of Norfolk, appeal tions
linkla v. Cupe, appeal per judgment Esparta Watson, bankrupt petition
In re Sykes, : ankrupt petition, per

inel,msent
The clerks In Court, and solicitors concerned In the rehearings and ap-
peals now set down for hearing before the Lord Chancellor, are requested
to send notice to the Register ; If any of such rehearings and appeals hare
been compromised, abated, or from ■ny other cause, the same when
called on for hearing cannot be proceeded with.
Register-Mice, June 3, ltr2d. T—NV , D. Register.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COVRT.
•I 081 TDB TICI•CISANCIL1011, AT wiIIITMINOTID, Tall DAT, AT

BALI ►A•T TZN.
Causes.

Ensure Hill, bankrupt Smith v. Carpenter, at Sou..._
. petition, per order defendant's request ley
Phillips v. Mitchell, Glint v. Ross Chapman v. Schroder,
part heard Porter v. Macmillan CRUM!
Phillips v. Phillips, do. Hooke v. Hopkinson' Cousins v. some, cause,
Friedley v. llorlock, Oram v. Peachey excpts. & fur. direct.
cause and fur. direc. Att.-General v. Cough Fursaith v. Foresith
llortock v. Priestley, liaddon v. Brandon,
ditto pauper
Hi Honour the Vice• Chancellor will hear short canoes on Tuesday, the
13th lust. to be put at the head of the paper.

v. \Val.

ROLLS COURT.
SIMMS TUB 11 66666 OF THE HOLM, THIS
flollinnske v. Lister, Abraham v. Almon,
for judgment part heard
%Webster v. TbreWall, Tracey v. Abbott
petition 'Tracey v. Aerum
Doris e. Davis, to be Tracey v. Hisxham
spoke to Watkins v. Hanigan
Rickler v. Davis, ditto Crowder v. Stone
same v. same, ditto Godisall v. Ring. Furth.
•

a♦/VIVO. AT SIX.
dame •. Vents
Peckham v. Sewell
Keene T. Corbett
Felton V. Newstead,
pro Confess°
Meymott v. Hart, forth.
directions and costs
Taylor v. Manson
Clarke v. Elliott, forth.
directions and costs

Bryant v. ditto
Thomas v. Manic°
Esparte Burrldge
General Petition Day at the Rolls, Thursday, the 13th inst. at nine In
the morning.
Petitions must be set down and copies left with the Secretary before
two o'clock on the preceding day.
Short causes at the Bulls on Friday, the lgth Inst. at ten o'clock In the
morning.

- direction% and cuts.
Rikertauis v. %Vynch

COVRT OF KING'S rtpxcir.
SECOND SITTING IN TRINITY TIRM, 1828.
Iltkldlesez—Wednesday, Juno 7. London—Thursday, June 8. To alt
at hatt-pa.t twelve.
■IDDLIIII COMMON JURIES TOR THE SECOND SITTING IN
TRINITY TIRII. 1 VG.
_ . •
• •

Notice.—. ll actions brought on hills of exchange and promia.ory notes
that were not tried at the Sittings after Kanter Term, and remanet to the
Finn Sitting In Trinity Term, will be the list of causes for trial at Second
Sitting in this present Trinity Term, and no other causes, on Wednesday,
June 7.

COI•RT OF EXCHEQUEB.—Tnts DAs, .s.t. Ts w.
Hastings v. Sheppard, Hollingsworth v. Dub. I Willis v. Stone
tar judgment ton. part heard Clarke v. Hudson
Sheering v. Broom, rep. Jackson v. Bourne, pt. I Stephenson v. Tomlin-
Bickford v. Wars, pe- heard, by order son
Mon per order • Bennett v. Goode, by I Carruthers v. Douglas
Bennett v. Goode, pa- I order 1 Desforges V. Jones
titian per order

COURT OR
TLird derrion

ADMIRALTV.—To-moi
In Trinity Term.—lieforo

LAOW, AT 10.
Lurd Stowell.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, SATURDAY, JUNE 3.

PARLIAMENT.

Yesterday Parliament was dissolved till the 25th of July next ;
and the Lord Chancellor was detained in his private room, this
morning, tor some time before coming into Court, sealing the writs
tor the election of new Members for next Parliament.

WEI.I.F3LEY_T. BURS OF BEAUFORT.

Mr. STIADW ELT begged to state, that as his Lordship was going
nut of Court on Thursday, he (Mr. S.) was in the act of handing
up an affidavit that hail been made by Mr. Pitman and some
others, which they had thought necessary to make, but which the
Court did not then receive. lie had now in his hand the original
brief of the affidavits that had been marked by his Lordship, which
he would now hand in to the Court ; and also the office copies of
the different other affidavits that had been made on the part of the
petitioners. He was likewise very anxious to set a matter right upon
which there seemed to be some misunderstanding. There had been
a correspondence between the Duke of Wellington and the Misses
Long, In which the Duke had expressed his wish that a represen-
tation nude to the Court, namely, to keep the children whete they
are, met with the approbation of all the family, was not quite cor-
rect. This correspondence was also constituted of one letter, writ-
ten by Mr. Hutcainson, the solicitor of the Misses Long ; and
part of the last letter, written by the Duke, he (Mr. S.) was te-
quested to state to the Court, in the very terms of the letter,
only observing that the ratement complained of was made by him
(Mr. S.) on the 11th of April : " The Duke of Wellington had
consented to accept the guardianship of the children at the time
the Lord Chancellor had ordered the Master to fix upon guaniiar a
to take charge of then during the absence of their father. The
Duke had, at the same time, for reasons not necessary to be dis-
cussed at present, desired to have nothing to say to any proceedings in
Chancery upon this subject, or with a view of supporting the ap-
pointmeuts of a guardian, after the appointment of a guardian
should be made under an order of the Court. It is, therefore, an
error to say, that the Duke had ever expressed any wish or desire
with respect to the result of this suit."
After the Learned Counsel had read this from the Duke's own
letter, he felt he should not be doing justice to Lord Maryborough
and the Misses Long, if he did not proceed a little further.
Mr. HART (with assumed surprise)—ls all this Mr. Welleaty'll
case ?
Mr. SHADRELL —Yes.
Mr. Haar—Yes'
Mr. SHADRELL—Yes.
Mr. HAUT—Rut how does it come on ?
Mr. SITADWELL—Upon my statement.
(lie Lonnsnt p—lt comes on sow, Mr. Ilart,just as you brought
it en the other day, by saying you had received a letter from a mem-
ber of the family.
Mr. HART—I merely stated, my Lord, that I had been requested
to state a letter, from one of the family to your Lordship, which I
did not think I could do.

His LORDSHIP—You stated, that from that letter you under-
stood it was not the wish of all the family, that the representation
made to the Court on a former occasion should be considered as
correct; and Mr. Shadwell, in what he has now said, has only
confirmed your statement. How far 1 can take any notice of either
statement, made in this way, is another thing.
Mr. HART—Then if Mr. Shadwell will now stop this till Tues-
day, it won't be the worse of cooling.
Mr. SHADWELL—I only wish to state the matter in its true light,
and from the very language of his Grace himself.
Mr. HART—This Is newspaper arguMent.

Mr. SIIADWELL—Mt. liiri, it is wish on my pan to state the
cage correctly.
Mr. HAUT—WeII, but won't it be better to delay yourstatement
till Tuesday ?
Mr. SIIADIVELL—I have only a few words more to address to
the Court.

31r. HART--But this is what I certainly deprecate.
His IsOlinsittr. —3lr. Shadwell hss only confirmed your state-
ment, Mr. hart, by saying the Duke of Wellington has been no
party to the proceedings.
4.1.31 r. HART—Then I presume Mr. Shadwell is instructed by the
Duke to make this statement?
Mr. SHADY:ELL—No, I am not.
His Lon osuip—You go no further, Mr. Hart, than I dare say
I should do if I were in your place: you consider that all this goes
into the newspapers ; people read the newspapers, and then they
wish to say something for themselves.
Mr. HART—What your Lordship has just said respecting news.
papers, presents my nicking any observation, which I other.
wise should have done.
Mr. .Hersh L I.—l am sure your Lordship will always allow a
Counsel to set himself right, when it is imputed to him that he was
fn an error.
_ _

Alr. HART—This may be very fit and proper for the news.
papers.
His LORDSHIP—I believe it will tom out that what you have
both said is 110 i worth a paragraph in the newspapers.
Mr. SHADWEI.I.-31y Lord, I have the authority of the Duke
of Wellmgton for stating what I have done ; and as he has repre.
vented to the Misses Long that what I stated to your Lordship was
not stated from sufficient instructions, it is right for me now to say,
that what I represented was in consequence of a letter written by
Lord Mar) borough to the Misses Long, in these terms:—" It
mar lie well to inform you, that there is no branch of my family,
with whom I hare communicated, that does not fully concur with
me, in approbation of the views of the Misses Tilney.Long, and
in reprobation of the conduct of Mr. Lung IVellesley. ' Now, if
in what I stated I committed an error, it was only an error into
which any body would have fallen upon reading these letters.
Mr. HART—WeII, if I don't very much mistake, your Lordship
till have another very important affidavit before Tuesday.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT-.SATURDAY, JUNE 3.
JOHNSTONE. BART. V. NASTERTOW URE. ESQ.

This motion, which was made by 31r. HoRWE on Friday, for
the discharge of an order that had been obtained by the plamtiff;
for referring back to the Master the interrogatories and examine.
tine of the defendant for insufficiency, was renewed to-day, and
Mr. HEALD and Mr. ‘WitlOur were heard at considerable length
against the motion. The substance of their argument,' was, that
an order of reference for insufficiency of an examination was, in
every stage of the proceedings under that examination, previous to
the every
making his report, an order of course ; and they con.
tended, that considerable inconvenience would result if a different i
practice were to be establishes'.
The VICE-CIiAMCEI:LOI stated his opinion to be, that after
proceeding on the examination, such an order could not be ob-
tained as an order of course, but that the same ought to be moved
for on motion.
Mr. HoaNg—Tben your Honour discharges this order with
coats ?
The Vicz-Cstarrettunt—No, Mr. Home: I shall allow the
plaintiff to give a erns-twice of motion, for you to she. cause why
nits an order should nollscgraoted, and thou the twitter soy come
ore qab2 at the nest Sett,

THE BRITISH PRESS.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, SATURDAY, JUNE 3.

C ERTIORA RI.
Mr. CAMPBELL moved for a rule to chew cause why e writ of
Certiorari should not issue, to remove en indictment front Stafford-
shire into this Court, for the purpose of entering a suggestion on
the record, that a fair trial could not be had in that county. The
indictment was against certain persons for a misdemeanor, In hav-
ing ill-treated a lunatic relative, by shutting him up in a dark
MOM for a Brest many years, and depriving him of the necessaries
of life, although ample provision had been made for him by his
father's will. In consequence of the most inflamed and exagge-
rated publications respecting this trensactlon in the county of Staf-
ford, it was utterly impossible that the defendants could have a fair
trial there; and it became necessary, with a view to the due admi-
nistration of justice, that the indictment should be removed, in
order to a trial in some other county.
Under the circumstances stated, a rule Nisi was greeted.

- -
THE ZING V. HARRISON. -
This was a Quo IVarranto information against the defendant.
calling upon hint to shew by what authority. he held the office of
Mayor of the city of Chester. Several special pleas were pleaded,
raising issues upon the immemoriality of the offices of Mayor,
Aldermen, Sheriffs, and Common Council respectively, of the city
of Chester. At the trial before Mr. Baron Darrow, at the last
Summer Assizes at Shrewsbury, a verdict was found for the Crown.
In Michaelmas Term a rule Nisi was obtained for a new trial, on
two grout.ds that the several issues on the record had not
been distinctly left to the Jury by the Learned Judges and, se-
cond, that the verdict was against the weight of evidence.
On Thursday cause was shown against the rule by Mr. CAMP-
BELL Mr. RUSSELL, and Mr. JERVIS; and this day the Court,
after hearing Mr. W. E TAUNTON (with whom were Mr. R. G.
CROSS and Mr. TTRIVIIITT), were clearly of opinion that the
case ought to go down again to a new trial, in order that more light
alight be thrown upon the cue by fresh evidence.
Rule absolute.
At one o'clock the Judges rose to meet their brethren in the Ex-
chequer Chamber.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JANE 3.
THE NEW CUSTOM-HOUSE.

TRU RING V. PETO.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for a rule to chew cause
why a verdict thould not be entered for the Crown, on the issue
found by the Jury against the defendant in this ease, and judg-
ment entered accordingly now ()Wank teredicht.
This was a wire Acid, on a bond entered into by the defendant,
jointly with another person now deceased, in the penalty of 33.000/.
conditioned to build a Custom-house according to a certain specifi-
cation ; the Crown alleged a breach of the contract, inasmuch as
the piles were not driven two feet into a stratum of gravel as
required.
The defendant replied, that he had performed the work to the
satisfaction of Mr. Laing, the architect to the Commissioners of '
the Customs, as by contract bound, and that the works done were
according to the specification, except where Mr. Laing had inter-
posed. The sum contracted for, to be paid, was 185.0001., but
it was stipulated, that if in the progress of the works it should be
deemed proper that some parts Mundtl be omitted, or more added,
correspondent sums should be subtracted or added, as the case
might be.
Mr. SCARLETT said that the words of the contract were," that
if any doubt should arise in the progress of the works respecting any
parts thereof, the Commissioners of the Customs, or their architect,
Mr. Laing, may determine on such articles as may or may not be
dispensed with."
The A T TORNEY-GENERAL seittl, that the bone had been en-
tered into with his Majesty, and that the Commissioners of the
Customs were not empowered to authorize Mr. Laing to direct any
alterations in what was required by the specification ; the words of
the contract only gave him a discretionary power to omit sonic arti-
cles altogether he submitted that he was entitled either to enter up
judgment for the Crown, on the grounds of the verdict el the Jury
on the issue averting that a stratum of gravel could be found, or to
a new trial on that issue, wherein the Jury found that Mr. Laing
had authority to direct the driving of the piles ; as that finding was
not supported by evidence. He would take a rule in the alternative.
Mr. SCAM LET T. on behalf of Mr. Peto, said that he felt much
difficulty in deciding how to act on this occasion, as a verdict had
been for his client on all the issues except one. If the Court were of
opinion that that issue was not marerial, the verdict in general
should be for the defendant; but if their Lordships should come to
a different conclusion, he should request the privilege of being heard
in support of a motion for a new trial ; he thought the issue in
favour of the Crown was improperly found. The issue joined was,
that there was a stratum of gravel into which the piles could be
driven according to the specification. The Jury found, that there
was • stratum of gravel into which the piles could be driven,
without the qualification, but adding, that Mi. Peto would have
driven the piles into the bed of gravel were It not for the interference
of Mr. Laing.
Mr. Baron II trr.t.oc said, that in point of law it was no answer to
this action, it all the Lords of the Treasury had ordered Mr. Laing
to interpose as he had done, since there was no such condition in the
bond, though it might be made use of in another quarter.
SCARLETT said, that certainly if the bond were strictly en-
forced, his client would be at the mercy of the Crown.
Mr. Baron Gwatiow—lt was the duty of the contractor to say
that if a gravel bed could be found within six or seven feet of the
surface, he would sink the piles in it for 12,0001. (the sum agreed
upon to be given him); or it he could not, that he would charge
more in proportion to the depth.
Mr. SCARLETT.—Your Lordship has felicitously hit upon the
terms contained in the tender which Mr. Peto had originally sent
in, but it was burnt after the Customhouse had been built. He
then said, that he did not purpose to move for an unconditional 1
rule for a new trial, only in case their Lordships should decide
that the issue found for the Crown was sufficient to enter judgment I
upon. The grounds upon Which he founded his application for al,
new trial were two letters, written by Mr. Laing to the Commis-
sioners of the Customs after the building had been completed.
Mr. Baton Ciaanow.—These letters cannot be admitted now ;1
they ought to have been produced on the trial.
Mr. SCARLETT.—We served notice on the Crown to produce
them, and they declined.
Baron °ARROW—Then you ought to have examined Mr. '
Ling.
Mr. SCARLET t admitted that he could not claim it as a right
to have these letters read ; but as the object of the Crowr. was
to have justice clone, he hoped matters of form would be die-
pensed with. He then read the following letters, which, ac-
cording to the affidavit of Mr. Taylor, were copied from letters
written by Mr. being to the Commissioners. October T 2, 1814;
'• I beg leave to lay before your Honours an account of the
piling of the foundation of the building now erecting for the
Custom-house, in which it will be found that an unforeseen,
though necessary, expense has been incurred, occasioned by the
irregularity of the foundation, in the state of which even the
great experience of Mr. Rennie, whom your Honours appointed
to examine the ground, was deceived, the ground having been tried
by his direction, and subject to my inspection ; at the depth from
16 to 20 feet below the present level of the Quay, the auger nni.
formly brought up a complete gravel, having every appearance of
being a stratum fit for the foundation of a large buil.iing; on
which circumstance was founded the opinion of the number of
piles necessary for the stability of the proposed erection ; but not-
withstanding such favourable appearances, when the ground was
opened, it was discovered that no real stratum existed, but that
the whole ground was completely intersected by the foundation
walls of buildings, some so compact as to require the use of
iron wedges to disturb the adhesion of the cement. At the
west end, where the ground was first opened, a vaulted eel.
lining was discovered, the paving of which, fourteen feet below
the level of the quay, was of Dutch clinkers, set in tetras, and
under that • brick paving, in all fifteen feet deep, anti this had
been founded on oak piles ; and immediately close to the Thames,
at ten feet below the ground, the constructed layers of rushes
and muscle shells, indicated that in former days it was a part
of a river bank, and even tea feet below that, the auger brought up
mud, but little indurated ; yet even here the ground was so uncer.
tam, that in one place • pile would scarce enter five feet in the
ground, and close by would drive sixteen. In consequence of this,
it was found necessary to direct every other obstacle to be removed,
wherever it came in contact with the new walls, that the building,
having an equable bed, might, in case of settlement, all sink toge-
ther, that no fracture might appear. The necessity of that is appa-
rent, when it in considered that in some places the ground was
little more than mud—in others, walls of the utmost hardness pre-
sented themselves, from al to al feet below the level of the present
quay; these walls were uniformly found about 60 feet inside the
quay wall, running east and west, built of chalk rubble, and faced
with hard stone, but only firm owing to its having been water-
bound. This had been apparently the wall of the old quay, as no
less than three depths of embankment have been found, at the se-
veral distances of 58, 86, and 103 feet, the present wharf—from
which it may be inferred that the stratum by which Mr. Rennie 's
judgment, and my opinion, have been misled, must have been
thrown in at the time of some contraction of the River, and which
had acquired such a firmness, from the heavy weight on it, as to
excite the most reasonable expectation of its being a natural stratum
of the earth, in which any structure would be secure. Under these
eircumetances, every precaution was rendered necessary, and-in VA.
riouspiaties the piling was to be 28 feet long, in others 15 Feet were
cut off; the requisite lengths were ordered, and the substructure is
now rendered firm and well bonded together, which could not have
been the case if any other method had been
punned ;for the nature
of beech requiring it to be in the same situation, so as not to be sub-
ect to changes from drought to moisture,
which is provided against
by the foundation all lying level, so that the water of the River,enter-
ing at one part• is communicated to the other. keeping it always wet
and durable. Trusting that your Honours will be satisfied as to the
necessity of the extra expense being incurred, I take leave to submit
to your consideration the annexed account, it having been contracted
for under a separate head from the other part of the building; and
being now completed, it will be confoemable with the common
practice to allow the payment."

SECOND LETTER.

" May 17th, 1811

" TO THE COldmassawm mar.
" In reply to your Honours direction, 1 beg leave to state, that
the greatest precaution having been taken in constructing the faun.
dation, u well as le every other part Oche new building, and the
materials used-bin of the best description, I have no hesitation in
assuring yonrilasseen dint I ontertainno apprehensions of a failure
in that pari•sfate .beilileg. Reports of a defect in the substrue.
Han ban hem dradaisCia Nen dine, bet I have not discovered,
nay basedishessrl siMp *toy Clerk of the Worice, nor do I
t=midttesmisiotheinen disk thee never has been a building of such
tie white km priponity to irregular acido-
sis* beam elmeal. ~. viiSS hav• hatill I Ita dePinion

that the report must have originated from some defects 10 the
groined vaulting of the King's cellar, the crown of which has been
Injured by the water getting through during the winter, and partly
by having been injudiciously loaded with timber and other materials,
and the springing stones partially flushed. I have ordered all those
that arc deemed defective to be taken up, and the work reconstructed
with new and sound materials, that no similar occurrence may take
place, ■nd the walls have undergone the greatest
The Learned Counsel said, that it was evident by these letters,
that, even after the building had been completed, Mr. Laing was
of opinion that a stratum of gravel cou:d not he di,covered. Had
he been enabled to otter these in evidence at the trial, he was sails.
tied the Jury would have found all the issues in favour of his client.
He therefore hoped the Court would Allow him the privilege of
using these letters, and advancing other topics in support of a
new trial, in case he should deem it expedient to make a mo-
tion to that effect.
Afters few wards from the ATTOLINEY-GENERAL and Mr.
Baron HULI.OOK, showing the irregularity of the applica-
tion, Ale. SCARLETT wax allowed to take Ida rule to .shew
cause either why verdict should not be entered for the de-
fendant on all the issues non aginnte veredicto—or, in case the
Court was of opinion that the issue for the Crown was material
why a new trial should not be granted.
The ATTORNEY-GENEttAI. took his rule, which was also
in the alternative, to shew cauae, why either judgment should
not be entered up for the Crown an the issue found ; or why a
new trial should not be granted on the issue, finding that :Hr.
Laing was authorized by the Commissioners to give directions re-
specting the piling, &c.