The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-11-28 00:00:00

COURT OF ARCLIESMAT CRDAY, N0v.26.

WILSON o. IMMO.
This was question to try the validity of a will executed by the
denessed Lady firearm in 1812. The will had been proved in
1816, shonly after the testator'a Leath, and thi.t probate eemaioed
in force for seven years, when the executors were called upon to
show cause why administration ahould not be taken out by the next
of kit], as if Lady throve% died intestate.
It appeared from the allegation put ths, that Lady (heaves, then
Suriatinsh Blackwell, war P0,40,4ed of very consiaerable property
previous to her marriage with the late 84 hamar' Greeters, whirl,
took place in Jule 1808. Antecedent to her marriage, a will was
made by Lady (+reeves, in which she appointed two rentleme::,
named Baxter, her executors and residuary legatees. A marriage
settlement was also executed, by which it was provided, that if
'Lady finesse+ died during the lifvtime of her husband tSir Thomas)
she should possess full power over the disposal of her own pn..
: fumy ; and it wan also provided that, M case of the decease of Sir
Thomas before Lady Greaves, her property ahould revert to her as
if no marriage had taken place. In 1812, during the marring:- of
Lady Greaves, one of the executors appointed by the will of ine
died, and Lady Ureaves thought it necessary to execute anew will.
in which she continued the surviving Mr. Baxter executor, and
left 11:e property previously devised to the deceased Mr. Beater,
to his daughter. Sir T. C died in February 1811; and, four
days previous to his death, Lady (heaves wrote to Mr. Baxter her
executor, intimating her intention of sending him the will, which
came icla Mr. Baxter's possession four days after the death of Sir
T. Gramme. It was now contended, that as Lady Greaves was a
femme convert at the period when the will of 1812 was executed,
under her marriage settlement, she-wan-then posseased of no power
over the disposition of her property. lily
was argued, that under the
words of the settlement, rite could lily dispose of her property in
two cuesiiier predecease to her hutband, or her surviving him,
when the property again reverted mime, and it was admitted then
she could dispose of it in ally manner she thought proper. But as
she had executed the testament whilst after-me mower!, and had no
prover of disposing of her property. the invalidity of that will was
insisted upon. In support of the validity of the will, it was con-
tended, that the
.property was under the control of the testatrix
before her mamage; and that by a lihersl construction of the
marriage settlement, it did not destroy her right to dispose of her
property during her husband's lifetime. It was also argued, that
the Court hail demonstration of the tem:spies intention, and that
she had never entertained a doubt as to the validity of the will of
1812. now 'propounded. It was also relied upon, that Lady
(heaves, sending the will to her executor after the decease of her
husband, shoold be considered a republication of it ; by which re:
publication, it would become valid, as if executed subsequent to
her husband's decease.

Ntcnot.t. thought it nnnecessary to offer any opinion at
cresent as to the general merits of the case, or the restrictive rimy
meter of the marriage settlement. When all the facts were before
the C..urt, he should think it necessary to give his opinion on those
points. and also on the other point relied upon, that sending the
will after the deeease of Sir T. (heaves should be considered a
republication, wiiich rendered it valid. The Court had strong
opinions on those points, but would defer the expression of those
opinions to a later stage of the proceedings. There was quite suffi-
cient, however, before the Court, to authorise It to admit the
allegation to go to proof, which was the only question properly
before it.

Allegation admitted to proof.
Dm. Lushington and Dodson appeared in this cane for the
executors, and Dm. Je.nner and J. Adams on behalf of the next of
kin. Comitierable erudition and legal research was evinced by the
learned civilian► on both sides.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, SATURDAY, Nov. 26

Harrison Hudson Rowbotham, Comedian, came up to he heard
on his petition to be discharged, and was opposed by Mr. Pollock,
for Francis Verdier, a creditor, who claimed a debt of 121. 201. of
which was borrowed money, and admitted by the insolvent ; the
remainder, being charged for board and lodging, was disputed by
the insolvent, who stated that Mrs. Verdier hall told hint that no
charges should be made. It appeared, however, that the insolvent
had afterwards signed a written acknowledgment of the whole debt.
Mr. Cooxv:, who was Counsel for the insolvent, stated. that Mr.
Verdier had been discharged himself under the Act last December,
and had not returned this debt in his schedule, but had since ar-
rested Mr. Rowbothans, just as ho was about to enter on a profes-
sional engagement.
111r.1Pom. (sot said, that the reason Mr. Verdier had not returned
the debt in his schedule was, that he knew nothing of it at the time,
the transaction having taken place between his wife and Mr. Row.
bothsm. without his knowledge.
111 r. Verdict, who was in Court. stated, that he was an involun-
tary agent in the insolvent's arrest, which wok place at the instance
of his assignee.. . .
. . . . .

Mr. Polimcg observed, that it was by no means intended to in.
jure Mr. Rowbotham, or deprive ihe public of the gratification of
witnessing his performances by delaying his discharge; the only
object of the nppesition being to procure his admission of the debt
in its whole amount.

Mr. Rowbotham emended his schedule to that effect, and vu
discharged.

POLICE.

GUILDHALL.

On Saturday, ThomaidileT,;nWtieled workman in the employ
of Mr. Galloway, the engineer, was brought up for re-examina-
tion, charged, en his own confession, with havingentered into a
plan to rob his master's premises.
About four months ago the prisoner, without any apparent
cause or object, absconded, and was not again heard of until a
few weeks since, when he presented himself at Mr. Galloway's
premises, and imploring forgiveness and promising to conduct
himself with propriety in future, Mr. G. was induced to overlook
his conduct, and again set him to work. On Sundays the 20;11 inst.
the prisoner went into Newgate to visit some companion, and
upon quitting the gtol, he entered into conversation with one of
the turnkeys, named Harris, to whom lie confessed that a
set of young fellows with whom he sometimes spent his evening.
at the Coopers' Arms, in IVest•street, close to Mr. Galloway's
manufactory, were urging him to assist them in robbing his master's
premises; that they broached the same subject to hint once before,
about Mtn. months ago, and that it was to break off his connexion
with this gang of thieves that he absented himself from his master's
service for two months. Since his return they laid hold of hint again,
and were again pressing him to assist their views, but he felt shock-
ed at the idea of robbing a master who had uniformly treated him
with kindness. This confession was communicated to Hawkins, the
marshalman. who, early on Monday morning, acquainted Mr. Gal-
loway with the plot, and precautionary steps to frustrate it were ion-
mediately taken.
The prisoner did not come to work on that day, but on Tuesday
he resumed and continued at his usual employment, without making
any voluntary personal communication on the subject of the intended
robbery to Mr. Galloway, until, on Thursday morning, Mr. G.,
under the advice of Mr. Harmer, coiled the prisoner into the count-
ing-house, and proceeded to question hint very closely. He admit.
ted what he had stated to the turnkey was true, but otsdnately re-
fueled to give up the names of the gang.
lie was then given into custody, brought before the Alderman,
and solitarily confined until Saturday morning, when he was shown
loto the Alderman's private room, and woo left there with Mr. Gal-
loway, who used every kind of argument and entreaty to get from
him the names of the gang, but without success. The prisoner
constantly replied that his companions had extorted a vow from him
not to disclose their names, and he was determined never to break
'his vow. _ _

The prisoner was then placed tt the bar in public, and Mr. Gal-
loway again cithorted him to confess, promising, if he did so, to find
him employment in the country; and showed him what weakness
it was to keep faith with it knot of villains and obstinately to screen
them, sacrificing his own character for their protection, while at the
same time he had honesty enough about him to feel a repugnance
at their very overtures.
Oakes, however, conductal himself in a hardened way, and
seemed wholly insensible to Mr. Galloway's solicitude for his re.
formation. He made no reply.
Mr. Alderman ANSLEY thought there was not a sufficient ground
to send him to trial. He admonished him in pointed terms, and
assured him if ever he was brought to this office again his present
conduct would be remembered, and told him he was now discharged,
but he was sorry to say with an impure and auspicious character.