The National Register.
London, England, 1819-07-04 00:00:00

EI-PA RTE 11A MILTON.

Mr. Andreas moven, in behalf of Mes. Hamilton, a Lady
who recently made lice-self known in the I neat. by brow. ic4
act ions agaimt the Editors of Papers, for a rale to sheer esiwe
tanaby 3 moms's, employed to Ming the 53. d actions
should 'tot be struck oil the roll of the l.
The application oas made on Mrs. Hamilton's oflidai it,
which stated th I the ...id Attorneys hail brought no less limo
li:"teen actions ill her name. She only dove imitructmies In
mums lice sus, and all the others wcse commenced a about
her knowled4e sir consent. lu four of these actions lare
sums were received, which the Attorneys had never paid
over to her. On the contrary, she hid been arrested for
cottaot and cossfiend a cobsideralele time in prison.
Mr. A wassit s further shied, (hat the Hasten had tasted
the tlinN of the ad A (tomes s. r;.• less. la in ilton Ws
2`1.0t. and had aciaully f,taiel a balsiice slue to that lady. It
was ttied that the polehe would be served by a prop, r
enquiry imee this ielleged miscoaduct.-I'be Court granted A
rule to :het%

MORRI: v, MINT.

Mr. Searlet, 41w1.11 cause against a rule obtained by
IIU" nu a fart,"das, tut the Ittleter to crvie o his taxation
f costs. It appeare•l t• the Court, owlet all lbr t unt-
quitters, that the %I.t•ier had alln•s eft in ovurcharre of a few
%rob tr,pert to the numb• riii Rdio• in tLc de, k-
r:Olio°, and uoisu that item alone they allured Mr. Hunt's
rile to be mode absolute.

COURT OF' CDANCFRY.
Tut:spay, hiss: r).
The Primers. of Wuks v. I.oed roast Abinstre,
amd gloater.
The Solicitor Genera/ in this CAC_ moved, that the Rill filed by
her Royal Highness against the defendants should Ise distributed.
with costs to be taxed by the Master. The laic Duke 01 Bruns-
wrk had signed several documents, living the Princess I3,0(01.
and the swim day lie also, ow alleged in the bill, gave her by
annthtr docuinent 15.000 French louts. lAutl !Averred and
Count Munster were appointed executors, and the present suit
was instituted to compel them to make payount of the libove
claim. On Peeing the document. Count Murster had some
doubts as to the hand-writing, it bring different lions that .'Melt
his Serene Highness used. The other document had not been
proditatl, nor could the defatilants put in their answer till that
was dime, and the fonds in the mean time could not be atliniiie.•
tered. Four terms having now elapsed since the Court oulet,vl
this document to be produced, they tilt it their duty to move for
thithill being domiisi-d.
Sir A. rigmtt, at great Imigth, followc.l on the same side ; as
did Mr. /leak].

Mr. Martin, for the royal plaintiff; said that the present case
certainly lay in a very narrow compass. The sum IVAC not of the
slightest importance. %%lien the order SV 34 made. the dedendanta
were told that they shm id have a fortnight to put is their answer
tater the document had been produced, and 11c contcnacil that the.

JULY 4.

defendant.' could not aide for the bill being dismissed till they had
pat in their answer. hest plan would have been to obtain
an order the the pnaltiction of that deal in a given time. and if
that was not dome, then they might apply for dismissing the bill.
Ile regretted that the motion had been made at a tune when the
Princess could have no opportunity of instructing her legal
advisers. He concluded by repressing a hope that his Lord-
ship would not agree to the motion.
Mr. Shatlwell (allowed on the same side, and contended that
Jr any delay had taken place the defendants alone were to blame;
Inc if they thought lit to complain, they ought to have put in their
answer, and then an delay could hays taken place. It would
certainly be a new feature in the 'Practice of the Court to make
the order as prayed for.
The Slicetor-General, in reply, clattended the defendants
could not answer till they had the doc tttttt mt. as Count Munster
had declared by affidavits his doubts of tit being genuine. The
aLearned Control then entered into a long detail of the particulars.
The Lord l'hancellor was clear that when a defendant pledged
hiat.elf by oath to put in his *newer on a certain paper or docu-
ment being produced, and that till that was produced he could
trot answer without real injury to those for whom he acted; the
Cmirt, would not make any degree till that was done. The pre-
sent case must be decided on principle rather than precedent,
and the question was, whether the defendants, placed in their
present situation, had a right welsh!' the dismissal of the billow,
though they had been differently situated ? Ile hoped in Cud
molten • on earth would induce him to have his judgment
biased either way, and his order, therefore, s as, that the paper
lie produced by the third seal, with liberty to her Royal Highness
to make any motion on the first on seamd seal. If he said
nothing on this subject to-morrow, then this order would be
considered as final ; but should he see cause to alter his opinion,
he would state what lie thought. His not saying any thing
would he a proof that his eat r was final.
The case aratpied several hours.
wrupt r:stiax, .111'NE 30.
The Lord Chancellor. at the sitting of the Court this day,
observed to Sir Arthur Piggott. that on further considatetion of
this case, lie was continued in his opinion that the order he had
stated yesterday was the proper one to be made under all the pe-
culiar areutustanes-s of the case. Therefore he pronounced it to
be his order.