The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1818-04-01 00:00:00

MAILTELLA v. blaitsliALL.

Air. BELL requested that Isis Lordship would
permit hint to locution this case; it was tone where
children were entitled to a large fortune, ■nd the
testator, the late Mr. Holloway, by Isis will, left it
to arconsolate thry came to a ceitaiu site,
without provwting means fur their education. His
Lordship had been so good as to take home the
will for the purpose of looking into it, to see if
there could be such a coustruction put on the
meaning of thee testator as to justify him in sp.
;saluting • fund fi►r such a tkorable object as that
of enabling those children to be educated. What
lie had to request of his Lordship war, that be •
would appoint some early day to hear Conusel. fur
if he could not grunt relief it might be necessary to
apple to the Legislatu►e.
Tile Lotto CSANCIELLOII—" I think you will
have little chance of relief from the Legi►lature,
for it seems to me to have been the iutetstion of the
testator to take care that no part of the property
should fall into the lauds of a certain person, but
that it should accumulate for the benefit of the
children until they became of age."
Mr. That peimu is now removed, and
although the children ate entitled to property on
becoming of age there is net uue shilling fur their
support or rdra►tsun in the interval."
The Lore Catatlest.Los--46 I will hear Counorl
on it any day you appoint its the heat Teton, but

,

hi at. kiln, Iwo ails ht fort the appointra iloy, ••n
ind 3 rerresh my onvmory by again retiiissig the
will."

PRACTICE.

SSITTI4.e. sINYTDE.
The SORICII,OII-OERF.RAL Rinsed for isijiinc-
-0011 to restrain the Defendent from cothinotting
we to on certain estates, by cutting down
Sic. The Plainuff was heir in remainder, the De,
fendant not having any children. The Defendant
hail pelt in his moaner to the Plaintiff's bill, and
denims that lie has cut down any sapling*, c. or
that he is going to do sr). lie held in his hand alli7
dai its to contradict that, on which his present 441,
plicatinn,yreaAroutideds
Sir &DUEL Roll, LLY said, he °birched to those
affidavits being read, as it was contrary to practice
to ask for an injunction on affidavits, after in au'.
Parer wall put in which made no adireission.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL contended, that whit%
an injunction was granted net eX-parte
and afterwards au answer was put in, the Plaintiff
yes allowed to file fresh affidavits, and 1w could see
no difference between the two cases. The tree~
acre marked to be cut down, and if the Pkiiistiff
was not restrained by an injunction of that Court,
thcY would be cut.
Mr. Ross followed on the sant. side.
Sir tisatixt, Romtwr twirl, it was contrary to
till practice; the case of Roe v. Romney was tint
. in point —for, instead of the order 44 practice he.
itig enlarged, in that cae it wisp narrowed: Thefts
WWI not a case in existence where an injiitictinn was
granted on alfi 'sprits lifter an answer w. a piss in.--
In case of Bowes and Lord Strathmore, the
Court there allowed affidavits to he read slier the
answer was put in, hut the injunction had been
originally granted on affidavits.
The LORD CIIANCELLOR...." This is certainly
the first case I ever recollect of a motion for an in.
junction being Mnde after an answer being put in
on affidavits. Where a party by bill states wastes
supported by affidavits, the Defendant, in his an-
swer, bus •an opportunity of corsktraditting them ;
but you are not tp keep hack affidavits until the
answer is pot iii, so as to leave :him in the dark.—
At the first blush of this case, I think it is against
the practice of the Court. The practice must be
looked into; let it be Mentioned again to-morroW
morning. The terms of the hotice of motion up-
!seared to me at first to he extraordinary. The
words good husbandry' are very large indeed.--
Bring it on again to-morrow."
Tins was the first Seal before Eater Term.,

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, LINCOLN'S Ism,
Turspitt,Aiwa 31.

00ERA HOUSE.

WATERS V. TAYLOR.
Mr. ROUPELr„ at the sitting of the Court, moved,
that the exceptions in this cave, which were to be
set (low!' for argument before his Honour on the
first day of heating exceptions in the ensuing Term.
should not be set down in the paper until the
second day. He stated that the papers in the ease
were extremely voluminous, and the arguing of the
exceptions would necessarily occupy much of the
time of the Court. It had Leen impossible for his
client. the Defendant, to prepare a case for hearing
in the interval of the short vacation. He therefore
hop!d his Honour would allow it to be postponed.
His Honour the VICE-CHANCELLOR oh•erve<l,
he could have no objection after what had been
stated by the Learned Counsel, that his c:ient had
not been able to peruse the papers, sous to be pre-
pared for the argument. He was, however, of opt.
nio►►, that it would be most desirable that the case
WA% finally disposed of.
Mr. RourELL—" It certainly would be better
for all the parties ; but it was impossible for may
clirnt to be ready."
The Vice-CHANCELLOR--" Let it stand at the
head of the paper for the second day of hearing ex-.
ceptioos in next Term. Are the points to be ar•
gued very numerous ?"
Mr. ROUPELL—.." They certainly are, and your
Honour must be aware that they will occupy a you.
siiieroble time of the Court."

The VICB-CRANCILLLOR-11 Let it be under.
stood that they will peremptorily come on fur argil.
anent on the second day of hearing exceptions in
mat Term."

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

Yesterday the Middlesex Sessions commenced at
flicka's Nall, Clerkenwell. before. W. WATSON,
E.q. and a full trench of Magistrates. The trials
were unimportant.

Joseph Goold was indicted for having written a
letter to Mr. J. P. Williams. of Islington, threat.
ening to expose hint by publishing a charge or an
indecent kind against him, unless he received a
certain sum of money.
It was proved in evidence. that the letter was
written by the Prisoner. but Mr. ALLEY Wok au
objection to the indictment, which stopped the
ease. It appeared that the indictment, in setting
forth the name of the street ►n which the letter was
arbitraged, merely said " St." instead of the word
in full.
The Couair admitted the validity of the objec-
tion, and the Prisoner was discharged.
Mr. ALLEY, on the part of the Defendant, ex.
pressed his contrition for having written the letter.
sod admitted the charge it contained against the
Prosecutor to have beets entirely false.

Alr„ George Cross •was indicted for anaulting
Robert Cubit.
The Prisoner is an extensive coach owner, and
had employed the Prostcator as one of his post.
boys; the latter. on bringing a chaise home, left it
iu the entrance of the yard. sou to prevent souse
waggons sod a comb of Mrs. ()Africk from coining
out for some tine. This enraged the Prisoner,
who. on receiving some insolence from. the Prost.
color. committed the assault for which he was
charged.
Verdict, Colby.—Sentenced to pay a fine of
3s. 4d.

Joan Dyer war indicted fur keeping a mis-
chievous dog in Bethnal-green. . . .

Edward 11...—rker described the vicious Lobito of
the dog, sod the injury he received from Mtn by a
bile.
It was agreed by the Prisoutt'a Counsel to make