The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-12 00:00:00

LAW NOTICES.

COURT OF CHANCERY.

111171, OS■ Till LODZ CIASICiI.LOIII, 1341171C0LiiINIII NILL, Tilly DAY,
AT TlM—Appeals.
further directions, Marsh v. Hunter, ap-
part heard I peal
In re Mt. Peter and St. Mackentie v. Marken-
Paul's Charity, ap- 71e, (nit
Pitt v Italie, ditto
Hienate'rPv!illatabd, and Davis I. Pitt. ditto

Webb v. Cord Shatter-
bury, petirk,n, per
order
Askew V. Mania, ap-
peal; I.art beard
Atty.-ties. v. Mayor of
Exeter, axons. and

!-CHANCELLOR'S Cot
ANCILLOR, IN LINCOLN
lIALT-rAsT TIN.
Canttev.
Tilbury •. Wakefield, Ittsom •. Thorold
per Judgment Junes •. David,
Wienholt v. Logan. do. Kenrick v. Wilson
Cbaddockv.tireenougb, Goblet( tr. iteechey
ditto Ives v. Stead
Watkins V. Atone, to I "Itilne v. same
be spoke to Lewis v. Allnutt

VICI
IMPURE TIM VICS-C1

UM.
l'S INX, TUN DAT, AT

Peachy), v. evens
Wrightun v. Master•

man
Voden •. Finney
Pritchard V. Thornron
Itudgerwn a. Bradbury
Lancaster v. Varty

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

stOURT OFTRANCERY, TVIIIDAY, JULY 11.
IN THIt NLITHANT AND CARTLII CHARITY.
The Loan CHANCELLOR said in this case it appeared to be ex-
tremely reasonable. as the charity was founded by an ecclesiastical
body. that the article about the National School should stand pail
et the scheme. He believed that was the only question left in
dispute.
CONsT y. HARRts.
The Loma CHANCELLOR observed that he would dispose of
this motion, as to the Receiver paying two sums of IS.llhO/. and
2,00 W. into the Bank, being the amount of the profits of Covent.
guden Theatre. to-morrow morning.
EXPARTE GRIMsTEAD, IN RE HOWARD AND OHMS.
When this case was called on, Mr. HORISE said he had only to
ink for the costs of the proceedings, as being clearly according to
the practice of the Court. If his Lordship did not give the costs to
the assignees, it would have been better for them to have let Mr.
Orimstead take his dividend under the Commission.
Mr. Haar opposed the application, and said he had never yet
heard, because a party who had contested a claim was unsue.
*eyeful, that, as a matter of course, he was to pay the costs. The
event of Mr. Grimatesill's resistance to the decision of the Commis-
sioners hail been, that by their excluding the proof of 36,11120 f. by
Mr. Ifitinistead against the estate, that money had fallen into the
hands of these bankers, whereby they had been enabled to pay 20s.
in the pound to every other creditor, whose debts were not more
meritorious than Mr. Grimstead's. He considered costs to be go.
Tuned by this principle—that where there was a fair question to
litigate between the claimant and the assignees, if the claimant
had not litigated the question with unreasonable perseverance, or
had not done anything by which any imputation might attach to
him, the Coart would say the same as it Mil incases of equity—that
although the party had rot succeeded, yet it was a fair question to
submit to the opinion of the Court, and therefore the party should
Leer be visited with more than ordinary costs.
Mr. lIIONTAOI,, on the sante side, hoped his Lordship would
ROI compel Mr. Grinstead to ray the costs applied for by Mr.
llorne.as he thought that gentleman bad suffered quite sufficient
for 1 is imprutlet,ce in trusting these persons with his money, by
having lost the sum of 40,090 f., and by his family being reduced
feom a state of afflueree to abject misery.
The Lotto CIIANcE Lion said he would look over the proceed-
ings which had taken place since the petition, and would give his
opinion on Thursday morning upon the subject.
EDENBoROUGH v. oaxt.xv.
The Loan CHANCELLOR observed that the question had been
see down to be argued as to the costs, and he had been informed by
Mr. Walk-r, the Registrar, that that gentleman had been very in-
dustrious in endeavour,7,i- to cacti emcu "109;(1 fattish
some authority as to the practice of allowing Bishops their cents.
The cues were very few in which Bishops had been made parties
:n a war similar to the present. In a Case in which some of the
Townley family were parties, Bishops had been allowed their costs
as between solicitor and client ; and in the present case he was of
opinion the costs must be given in the sante way. It was the niece
evident that this was the most proper mode of disposing of the costs,
as, In the event of the election being declared void, the right of pre-
sentation entirely reverted to the Bishop.
WaST kilted for the costs of the Attorney-General.
The Lotto CnANCELLOI—Take his costs.
Dl r. WRAY—IIe is unrelenting, and will have his costs.
BITE y. CVNYWOHAME.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said this ease resolved itself into two
points, which were—whether the Marquis of Bute was obliged to
satisfy the annuity of 6001. out of the produce of the collieries ;
and the second was, ',nether the will was a compliance with the
Janditions in question, and to what extent.
WHITE v. VITTY.
In this cave she LORD CHANCELLOR said he would give his
lodgment on naturday.