The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-12-02 00:00:00

LAV NOTICES.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
The Lord Chancellor will continue to give judrnenta radar.
The Muter of the Rolls will her causes this triornitig as tea
o'clock.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
CAUSEI TO BE TRIED IT If IDDLI:IIEX commit ;mast,
TRIS MOIIITIVO. AT NALT-PAST NINE.
Stevens v. blahllow Eqpilant v. Irelagd l I rally v. Jl,rrett
Smirlt v. Winter Foster v. Wel. Fuller v. Wigley
Moorhoose v. Sam- Doe, &e. i. Hart Praketortiv.clapattew
pave Gower v. Beethohne Thamoney v.Calver-
Ileeley v. Graham Bc.ll v. Manton !mum
Illakie v. Mark Cornwell v. Ricliod- Richards v. Am:lines,
Hewitt • Bowden eon • Forte? s. Jones
Fiorillo r. Cmwden Same v. lame I Chadwick v; )fanning
Doe, &c. v. Scram-. Sower v. Taber Wood v. Wslior
Lewis, clerk, v. Stewart v. Vhittaker Kent tr, Curtis
llama The Rir.gv.Lavcoek I Melton v. Gomptrtto
Cole v. 31edley I Oultnan T. OFOISOI Prik.
; , ounger v. Brooks Willis v. ....kcT
Chancellor v.Parsons I Bond v. Clark I Eatly v. Isaac

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
It is ordered that causes to be tried at the Sittings after Term io
London, which. by the present rule of Nisi Pries, must be entered
with the proper officer on or before the adjournment day, may be
entered on the adjournment day and three following days.
MIDDLESEX CACIRS TO RE TRIED Tills MORNING, AT Tzar
o'cLocx.
Thormlukev.Hervey Firth v. Harman Oomme v. Someone
Tooke v. Nicholas Jerkins v. Biddulph, Davies and oaten v.,
Pedley v. Burch E. Burton
Hicks v. Clark: Same v. Perry, Esq.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
EXCISE CAUSES TO Jr TRIED THIS INIORNIAO. AT WIVE.
attlatmey.l3lNlATAl T. Thomas I Attorney-Gen. v..ismesStutag
Stevens—Part heard Ditto v. Wm. Stevens •
Ditto v. Thomas Mareeet Ditto v. Robertson

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Tau Unity, Dzc. i.

The Court was crowded at an early hour this morolog by the
parties interested in the several causes in which It wu anderstood
Judgment was to be given.

COLEMAN V. SKITEIERS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said he could not, =he bad berate
determined. come down to-morrow to give judgment, but would
most certainly attend for that purnase on Monday; but as he felt
d'.spesed to relieve the anxiety of the gentleman who applied to hint
the other day, he would on Saturday morning give judgment in
Coleman at. Smithers, and in the other cause which involved the
same point. He was desirous of setting the question at rest, as,
from what occurred on the day of the application to him, the gen-
tlemen seemed not to be well informed as to what took place in the
other Court, for he supposed that a decree had been there pronounced
in his favour. isinw, according to the icnpmsiou on his Lordship's
mind that was not exactly the case.

EX-PARTE ORTMSTEAD.
Mr. lilowrsatt hoped his Lordship would appoint some day
for hearing Counsel in this cause. it had been already arranged
that only one Counsel was to be heard on each side.
The Loan CHANCELLOR—I am very glad you have mentioned
the matter. as I intended to have done so myself before I left the
Court. The question is a very complicated one, and one of grea
difficulty, and if the two gentlemen who are to argue it will give
up a holiday during the vacation, rpromise that it shall be me
holiday.!o me. .

Mr:HART said that when he consented to have the causeeroed
by one Counsel on each side, he did so from a conviction that in
ninety-nine cases out of a hundred the Court got as much Informa-
tion from cne Counsel as from more. lie thought too, at the time,
that the duty of addressing the Court would devolve on Mr. Mon.
tap,. who had already been so much steeped in the case ; but now
he found it was his client's wish that he (Mr. Hart) stiould
argue it.
The Loan CHANCICLLOR—No one can deny tha: Mr. Montagu
has been heard long enough in it.
Mr. HART felt sorry his Lordship shoulii be deprived of other
assistance, as he unfortunately *as not well acquainted with the
case.

The Lour) CHANcrt.tott...—Well, then, to reliave you, I'll glee
up two days for the hearing.

Mt. HART said he could not resist going into it if his Lordship
thought tit.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he was not fond of hearing only
two Counsel in a cause. In the other Courts. where four Judges
sat, they were more likely to be able to give sufficient answers to the
arguments of Counsel than one individual Judge could ; particularly
(said his Lordship) if that single Judge is so foolish as to inquire
into ail the bearings, and think that he ought to look in, through.
and around a case. before he decides on it. 'Nothing can be more lit
than that, in tlfs Court or King's Bench, one Counsel only should
argue on each side ; for if one of the Judges were called off to at-
tend at Nisi Prius. he leaves three behind him, who prepare infer,
motion for him. This is not the case, however, with an unfortunate
Judge who sits alone.
Mr. HART hoped his Lordship would have the benefit of Mr.
Montagu's assistance.
Mr. Mowvanu said that if the opposite party consented, he ha,l
no disinclination to be heard again.
The Lorna CHANCELLOR—It is not with any pleasure I hear
the case at all; it w;11 impose a very great labour on me.
Mr. HART intimated that he would make arrangements to attend
the Court on whatever day his Lordship should appoint.

EX-PARTE WADE IN THE MATTER OF WADE.
In this come a petition had been presented by a Mr. Wade of
Saxmundharn, praying that the commission of bankrupt whici4
wes sued out against him might be superseded, and that if it were
superseded the petitioning creditors be ordered to pay the costa. It
appeared that Mr. Wade, in April, IEI9, being then in embar-
rassed circumstances, executed a trust deed, by which he conveyed.
all his property to his attorneys, Messrs. Lebat and Mayhew, and
to certain other persons, for the general benefit of his creditors.
His affairs were managel under this trust deed till 1821, when 4
commission was sued out by two of Mr. Wade's creditors, whose
joint debts merely amounted to as much as entitled them to sue
it out. Megan. Lebat and Mayhew were the solicitors employed
by the petitioning creditors, became solicitors to the commission.
Their bill of costs, up to the issuing of the commission. aniounted
to 211 f. All the items in the bill of costs had been alies-eel, sou.'
two of them were for travelling to consult the petitioning creditors.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in giving judgment, said he was
sorry the advice which he had given to the parties before the long
vacation. to come to a private arrangement, had not been followed.
It was clear, he said, that the execution of the trust deed by Itlr
Wade was an act of bankruptcy, and the only question for the
Court to consider was, whether the great seal could allow the com-
mission to stand for he did not see What the issue which the
Viee.Chancellor directed when the case was before him had to do
with the matter. His Lordship was clearly of opinion that the
commission ought to be superseded. After an accurate investlga.
tion of all the circumstances of the CAM, be came to the inevitable
conclusion that the petitioning creditors were the mere instruments
of Messrs. Lebat and Mayhew, that recourse was had to them by
the solicitors, solely because it was necessary to have petitfonteg
creditors, and that the suing out of the commission was, in fact,
the work of Messrs. Lebat and Mayhew. Now he thought the
safety of mankind required that those who advised their eltents to
execute deeds, the legal effect of which their clients might not be
aware of, should not be allowed, after acting under these deeds for
two or three years, to turn round on their clients and call for s
commission of bankrupt, grounding there demands on a deed.
which they themselves advised, and under which they bad AW
long acted. This was a principle from which he thought the Court
should never depart. He ordered the present commission to be
superseded ; he saw no reason, however, why an othkr.,ers-•
ditors, not being polies to the deed, might nor apply for a hods
comaiissioe. s• ii

PARRY AND DE TASTE?.

The Lotto CHANCELLOR said that in the present eases dill r.
enee of opinion existed between the Gooey' of Common Pleas and
King's Bench, aa to whether Mr. de Twee should, under certain .
circumstances, retain a quantity of rum. lie said that his deckling
was final in all cases of bankruptcy. and he must decide which eff
these high judicial authorities he thought right, unless some meaner
were afforded him of having the opinion of the Twelve Judges ea'
the question at issue. Ile knew no other way of coining at that:
opinion than by directing that another action be brought. and that
a bill of exceptions be taken to the Judge's charge, whatever .its
eras. He would then wish that the bill of exceptions be argoeff
the usual way. If the parties did not consent to that arrangers's*.
he should be reduced to the necessity of saying which of the Wee
judicial authorities he thought right. t t
Mr. Lowe, the Solicitor, said, the question could at anytkage
be brought before the Twelve Judges by a writ of error. • .
The LORD CHANCELLOR—It appears you and I direr. t
Mr. LowE said, he was an Old practitioner both in the L•• sad
Equity Courts.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—You think yturself leas likely
fall into error than I am• There u a mighty difference Detests!'
writs of error and bills of exceptions, for many things may be ad,/
'bitted imo the latter which cannot enter into the former. Lct tot
see the hill of exceptions, and pardon me if I then decide on say.
own judgment.

Mr. LowE said, there was always great diMcul,y is sett
Counsel to take exceptions: he had himself tendered some,
which he took great credit to himself.
The Loan CHANCELLOR WAS willing to give Mr. Lowe sAtlier
credit he could require, ar.d expressed a wish to see the Sig..
cepiiors, as all bills of exceptions might not please him.
His Lonnsilie said, there were some other muse. in wbiAilkis
wav then prepared to give judgment, but should defer 40111 elf
until Saturday, in consequence of Mr. Apr's absence.
COfltT OF KINO'! BENCH, Wiragutstra„ t
:
THURSDAY. DEC 1.

Sinedgs at Xis: Flail, before the 11.01 D anti' JUST'S/I.llle
a Common jar,. •
There were twenty five crver net down for tritd, of Which
twenty Went off, and the records were withdrawn, tn. conswassete
the absence of anciney v.
TAPS:OTT V elves,.
The plaint'ir is a r..ltlicso t the ditrndanc is the CAW er atuialia
ttelah-ated female acroveut, who, In the salt met of List u,
an eu:;•1 with alt Hattie, why wee killed en that usaneina L