The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-05-04 00:00:00

LAW LVT,ELLTGLACE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, L . RSAT $.
SRE;t:Yoss of LORD HOLLAND St.All•Xlia 'ad
SAYRE.
This was an application to set aside an onlit'of
Loral Erskine, directing that 3113504-011;11t i 4 and
Sayre, Solicitors, aliould he istad a fin of costs
'unit or certain funds in Cotirt. _ . .

-
It appeured that Mr. Peter Taylor, %name dos
ceased. and his son, Robert Puris Tailor, sieve in
partnership in a large contract 'and commissary
husittess, during which time Robert Paris Taylor
became indebted to the lute Lord Ilolland in the
sum of 46,11440 L ; and to secure the pay meat of that
sum, hi: father Peter Taylor joined him in securi-
ties. On the decease of Peter Taylor, he be-
queathed to Robert an annuity of buol. a-year,
ou condittea tbot he gave up all claims ou his
estate as a creditor, which Robert did not *swept,
preferring to be a creditor. It was doubted by
the Exacuairs of Peter Taylor that he was a cre-
ditor, on which he tiled a Bill spinet them, and
the then Chancellor referred the accounts to a
Master, who reported he was a creditor. :\lessrs.
Miller and Sayre were the Solicitor* of Robert •
Paris:Taylor in that suit, and the costs is question
accrued on it. It further appeared, that the Exe-
cutors of Lord Holland filed a bill against the
Executors of Peter Taylor and Robert Paris Tay-
ler, tin the issue of that cause, in 1791. Lard
Kenyon decreed, that there shook} be a receiver
appointed to both their estates, and the interest of
them should be paid into Court ; and also a glum-
tity of slaves that belonged to Robert in the West
lollies should be veld, and the purchase-mimeo
paid into Court, for the purpose of discharging tbe
..itt due by the father sad son to the estate of
Lord Holland ; and that the different bills t.f
costs should be taxed and paid, except those of
Ttichard Paris 'Taylor ; they were to he taxed,
and the amount of them paid into Court, and to,
be cousiiiercAl as a start of the load for liquidating
Lord —inns. There was a subsequent
applicution tootle so the part of Lord llolland to
Lbrd Rosalyn, the then Chancellor, who ordered
the estate of Peter Tayliir to be mild, and the
tatmey in Court received Iron, the estate of Hobert
to be paid to the Fcteutors of Lord Ifulland;which
was accordingly done, and they both together were
sot sufficient to Day off the debt. When Lord
Erskine was Lord Cnaneellor, Miller and Sayre
mode an application for their costs, and lie made
an order in their favour.
Mr. Rtrasaos coutendeil, that the Solicitors
could.hare em clines in. the estates, or the motley
arising front them; that that Court never interfere
with the casts of Solicitors. If they choose to be
employed by en insolvent, they must abide by the
inaolveacy. if the Coen was to secure to Solici-
tors their costs, Solicitors would not care what baits
they were engaged in, the merits or the poodiless
of their ease would be a matter of no conseipieitee.
Lord Erskiiie never could have known the merits
of the case ; for if he had, he would never have
;made an order so contrary to the practice of that
Court.
Mr. HART contended, that the Solicitors had a
riAht to be paid their costs, and quoted a number
of awes in the King's Hooch and Commoo Pleas,
where they had recovered under the same circum-
stances as the present 4 are. He stated, that if an
Attorney brought an action for his client nu a pro-
missory note, and recovered it, although the
Plaintiff might be indebted to the Defendant in a
much greater sum, by some ether transaction, yet
as the Attorney revniered in the action, the De-
fendant would be obliged to pay him his costs.
The Loan Cuancxxi.oa observed, there were
two ways of considering the case. As to costs, in
a case where there were costs het seen Plaintiff and
Defradant, the Court always took care to settle it
between them, without any considgration of the
Solicitors. He could not perceive bow he could
ellnw the order of Lord Erskine to *mud, without
altering the decree of Lord Kenyon, and that
could not be done without a oshearing. This
was his opinion at present; but he would read
over the different papers relative to the cause, and
if he foitiel any meson to make alter his opinion,
he would infortn,Mr. Ilan of it ; but if he said no-
thing on the subject before Saturday, Mr. Richards
might take out his /mire.

ROLLS COURT, C . T Lair, MAT a.
vinotraT MAHON C. EARL STARIROPI.

Earl Stanhope preseuted • Petition, praying.
that the decree In this cause, made by his Honour,
might he varied.
Earl Sr A SHOPE ILlLlftlstd tis Honour, and after
apologising for diaring with him in judgment,
cointneaced as follows :-4. Sir, I believe there never
were persons a ho perfr :Wwal the trusts reposed in
them better than my reciter and snyselE If there
had tenl been an estate ia_aaatstrwiation, .(which
there w.fal. I would have been justified in ea:.
ing. The marriage settlement provides the power
of selling, and the money to be laid out in
mortgage ; althonei it rays, 1 am to pureliase
another estate, it makes theproviso, proviso, that it is to be
done with convenient speed--and what a the
meaning of convenient speed ? It means when it
can be done with coavenience--that is—when it
can be done to advantage. Whatever may be the
general law on this guestion, it cannot apply, where
a case is specially prov ded for. 1 am very glad to
see my learned friend Sir Samuel Romilly here,
as 1 have a serious complaint against him, whieh,
from his candour. I am sure he will acknowledge;
his statement as to the 121,000 wa. fallacious—trot
true; this was an estate sold in my father's day ; but
allowing it to bean act of my own. I have a right
to have each a sum by me. I may at any day I
please pay off any three daughters portions, which
amount to 1'25,000! so instead of my having
t'21,000 ready. I ought to base £25,900. This
a strong ground why that snm should sentairt bu
mortgage ; but there is a stwateor—.J Can 'lnc!
purchase a cheap estate by burpg isstPplione. fat
there are persons always ready to IiSI fot.theni; and it
it possible to fano u manor by going thrubgh the
count 7 and purchasing cagy stuki farm you
can find ? The praverof the tall did net Tueiluor.
did not ask far lisle redress which is give, by the
decree, for they limirthe prayer to my own life-
time, but Mr. Richards stated, they prayed fer,
genetal relict. its a Parr of the Realm, I argue

aria: its general polity. They were wards of
CeStiSe."set 101381; YAW superfluous words in a bill
. wens the:attar as in an tilietineot, where it stated
nht Xeilig.iu the fear of Cud, but under the ludo-
elsce of the Devil. • The prayer of a bill must be
stippirtipilty charges, and the charges supported
by facts.
wanted to try Mr. Ilithtilig4; to impeach liiiu for
one thing, uud try him for another. Suppose the
if,OOUl. was iu the 3 per cents. and the trustee had
found an estate which he coo ld purcluise for 30,00u1.
he went to sell out, sail the funds lied fallen. and
he could only get 17,0001. for them, be must
either let it remain as it was, oe lose 40001.
But by the money .being out oe mortgage, it we
not flutikak log. and was at all times ready to be
called M. Sir, iu respect to the Derbyshire estate,
I have stated in my answer, that every thing that
ought to he done has been done, and that not any.
thing derogatory to die interest of my sou has taken
place ; then why should your llouour grant un in-
junction on that cluirge ? What was my agreement
with Mr. Ilartwright, who was to have been the
purchaser ? I have a copy of it, and these are the
exact worts: 64 that la mild execute the sale as far
us I was lawfullyanthoriscil." This ass not taking
any thing from the .trustre, it was only securing a
purchaser, and ouch a one us abut is not to
be found every day ; a gentleman possessed of
fortyssix thotsaud a year. Did this infringe on
the rights of the trustee ?—No, it was for hint to
have carried the sale into execution, if he thought it
was en advantageous one. My agree:neat was no
longer binding ou toe, only as. it met .the appro-
bation or disapprobation of the trustee, and it
'Autd not be said that this was not a cause loran
application for ad injunction. I never heard
Counsel mistate facts so much as Mr. Ilichairt!s
and Sir Samuel Itiouilly have done. Ido not say
they have. done sa intentis 'tally, but they have got it
' from the isifinnotis brief* put into their hands."
Mr. ittemseo, said, he would take up the at-
tention of the Court only far a few moments ; it
was not from disrespect to Earl Stanhope, bat he
raulel hot see the object of the Noble Lord's peti-
tion, except it was to make a speech. that no
Coutisel could make without a dereliction of his
profession.
The MASTER of the Rota.' observed, that the
minutes stood now as they did after the arguments,
when he heard this anise before, and as it was not
a petition for a reaheicitig, he world dismiss it, but
as there was an alteration made iu the decree, he
would not dismiss it with costa.