The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-11-18 00:00:00

LAW NOTICES.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
APPEALS BEFORE THE LOAD CHANCELLOR THIS DAY.
PART HEARD.—Detaynes and Bating v. Noble; Devayncs,
Baring, and Garrett, v. Noble.
Magdalen College v. Sibthorpe 130nutPrown v. Brown M
Chard v. Eaton ( o per V. ove
PATENT PETITION—In re 's I-.

BANKRUPT PETITI ws.
Exparte Geller and Leyland v. I R chard‘on v. Const 4
Hinde Wbite V. Pullan
King and Alexander y. Tills

BEFORE THE VICE-CHANCELLOR.
Motions only this day.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH.
There will be no second sitting in Middlesex on Saturday. *fn.
19th instant, but there will be a sitting in Middlesex on the 2,:h
inst. for undefended causes.

COURT OF COMMON PEAS.
There will be no sittings till Wedn L
esday nes;the 211 d Inst.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
No causes will be heard till Monday next, the 21at iflllt.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, THURSDAY, Nov. 17.

MANNINO AND ANDERTON V. RULE.
The facts of this case are as follow :—ln the yeur 1811, it was
agreed between the plainuths, who then possessed an estate in the
island of St. Vincent, and a Mr. Alexander, the owner of an estate
in Trinidad. to make an exchange of their estates. The agreement
contained clauses, that possessions should be taken immediately
upon signing the agreement ; that the possessions should be held
without prejudice to any question until good titles were made; that
arbitrators should be appointed to value the estates, and whatever
the value of the one estate should be reported to be more than the
other, those in possession of the beat estate should pay the difference
over to the possessor of the inferior estate ; and that Mr. Alexander
should procure a good title to the plaintiff., both as against a Mr.
Rule, and all the world. The reason of this last clause having been
inserted was, that Mr. Rule was at that time in partnership with
Mr. Alexander, which partnership was about to be dissolved, and
accounts taken ; and upon this being done, it was expected to be
found, that Mr. Rule would be greatly indebted to Mr. Alexander,
and that as he had purchased a moiety of Mr. Alexander's estate in
Trinidad, it was thought lie would at once re-convey that moiety to
Mr. Alexander, rather than pay the money he was indebted. Ur.
Alexander died soon afterwards, and the defendant is his personal
representative. In the Year 1021, the plaintiffs tiled their bill for the
Ppeci6e performance of the agreement. It was then found that the
defendant was quite unable to make a good title; that Mr. Rule
had retained his legal claim on the estate, and that he had actually
instituted proceedings in the Weld Indies respecting the estate,
making the present plaintiff's co-defendants. The plaintiff's had
laid out many thousand pounds on the estates they now hold ; and,
beyond all this, the defendant had entered into a new agreement to
sell the St. Vincent estate fur about the sum of 11.0001., to a gen-
tleman of the name of Symons, which agreement the plaintiffs had
sanctioned ; but then they considered themselves entitled to the
purchase-money. In the year 11324, another suit was instituted by
the defendant, stating that, agreeable to the arbitration alluded
to above, the estate the plaintiffs took possession of was worth 4,000:.
more than the estate they had parted with, and praying that they
might be decreed to pay that money. A reference upon the point
of title was made to the Master in the original cause. That refer-
ence was attended by all parties ; and just before the report was
made, Mr. Hart moved for the defendant In both ca•lses to have
the 4,0001. paid into Court, with six per cent. interest.
Mr. Home, for the plaintiffs, contended that the order ought
never to have been made. His clients had always been ready to
make a good title, as soon as, on the other hand, a good title was
tendered to them. If Mr. Rule succeeded in his suit in the %Vest
Indies, the detendant never could call for the 4,0001., on die con-
trary it would belong to the plaintiff's, who would also have a de-
mand upon the defendant for what they had laid out in improve-
ments on the estate, and likewise for the purchase money paid by
Mr. Symons.
Mr. HART did not intend to answer the observations of his Learned
Friend. He was in possession of the order directing the money to
be paid into Court, where it would be in safety tor whoever might
ultimately be adjudged entitled to it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR perfectly well recollected making
the order, but upon reading the papers again, in the course of the
long vacation, he found a paper which led him to doubt exceed-
ingly whether, under the circunistatlces of this case, looking at the
contract and covenants between., and the conduct of the parties,
the Court was right in making that order ; the result was, that he
would look into all the papers again. and state, on Saturday moth-
ing, what occured to him as best to be done.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, THURSDAY, Nov. 17.

APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTIDN TO RESTRAIN
PIRA ry.
His Honour the Vice-Chancellor having taken his seat,
Mr. 131.10 u intimated his desire to move the Court for a Special
Injunction to restrain the publication of a pirated edition of a work,
the sale of which was now proceeding, to the manifest injury of thu
legal possessor of the copy right.
The VICEXHANCELLOR—Have you given notice of your in-
tended motion to the opposite party ?
Mr. BLIGH—No your Honour; but there is an urgent necessity
for thepplication, as the sale is going on.
The VICE.CII•NCELLOR—ThAI miy be; but the evil is not
irremediable. The Court cannot entertain your application with-
out previous notice. Give notice to the other party, and make your
motion on Saturday.
The nature of the publication, or the names of the parties did tot
transpire.
MARSH V. CLOUGH.
During the remainder of the day, the Court was occupied with
this case, which was one of no public interest.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WESSKINSTIR,
THURSDAY, N0v.17.
ARTICLES OF TILE PEACE.

TLIt MARQUIS OF HERTFORD AND TAR HON. AUGUSTUS