The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-20 00:00:00

STREET V. PROCTOR.

Mr. SistruNsoN said the defendant, as a prisoner, was
in Court, brought up for not appearing to a supplemental
order, and he (Mi. S.) had to ask that the Clerk in Court
might be ordered to enter an appearance for the prisoner.
The LORD CHANCELLOR. inquired of the prisoner why
he did not appear?
Prisoner—(smiling)—l always do appear whenever I
am asked. _

The LORD CHANCELLOR—Aye, here;—(Laughter, in
which the prisoner joined heartily)—but why don't you
appear to the bill? It's of no use, you know, refusing to
do so, because if you will not, somebody else will for you.
Prisoner—Very well; I don't care.--(Laughter.)

. -
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL--Oh, I know Mr. Proctor;
he is a very old friend of mine. The fact is, he will not
leave his present abode in the Fleet.—(Laughter.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR-0 yes; the fact is he does
not want to get out.—Remanded.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
JUDGMENT—GRANT V. GRANT.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR gave judgment in this ease
to-day. The question in which arose under the following
circumstances :—ln the year 1772 Sir Alexander Grant
made his will, by which he gave a legacy of 3,0001. to his
eons, Peter and James Grant, and 2,0001. to his son
Charles Grant, directing that those legacies should not be
considered as a release from any debt they might owe
him, but that such debt was to be deducted from
the legacies. The payment of these legacies was charged
by the testator on all his real and personal estate, except
an estate in Scotland called Dalby. The legacies were not
to be paid till the expiration of seven years after the de-
cease of the testator. On the 2d of August, 1772, the
testator died ; and Ludovico Grant, as his heir, became
entitled to the ,estate of Dalby. Upon this occasion,
Alexander Grant, the grandson of the testator, and eldest
son of Ludovico Grant, went to Jamaica as the agent of the
executors of his grandfather. By a deed in 1774
James Grant assigned 7501. of his legacy to Sir H. Inglis,
as a security for a debt; he also assigned 7aol. to a gen-
tleman named Russell. By a deed on the 2d of January,
1779, Peter Grant assigned his legacy to James, redeem-
abie upon the payment of, 4,0001. In the month of Dec.
1787, Charles Grant purchased an estate in the island of
Jamaica, called Hopewell, front a gentleman named
Douglas, for 10,000/. As a security for part of the
purchase money, Charles and Peter Grant executed
what in effect turned out to be five bends. On
the 31st of July, 1778, Douglas at the request of
Charles Grant filed a bill in Jamaica against the execu-
tors of the testator, and against Charles, Peter, and James
Grant, to obtain payment of the legacies, in discharge of
the purchase money. On this cause being beard, a de-
cree was pronounced for an account of what was due on
the legacies. An appeal was made from the effect of that
decree to the King in Council. In 1789 James and
Peter Grant became bankrupts. In April, 1790, they
obtained their certificates, and ultimately paid to Sir H.
Inglis and Mr. Russell what they had advanced.
Sir Ludovico Grant died in 1790, and Sir Alexander
Grant, the father of the present plaintiff, became entitled
to the estate in Scotland. In 1793 Sir Alexander Grant
contracted with the executors of Douglass for the pur-
chase of the debt of 10,000/., and the bonds were assigned
to Sir Alexander's agent. Actions were brought in Ja-
maica on the bonds—injunctions were obtained restraining
the proceedings in that action. This order for an injunction
upon appeal to the King in Council was affirmed. Many
other proceedings of a most complicated nature took place
in the Courts of Jamaica relative•to the accounts between
the parties, almost all of which formed subjects of appeal
to the Privy Council. On the 14th of July, 1825, the
present plaintiff, Sir Alexander Cray Grant, filed his bill
for an account-of all the money due in respect of the five
bonds, and praying for a ne exeat Resin°, to restrain
Charles Grant from leaving the country. The prin-
cipal question in the cause was, in what manner
the accounts relative to the complicated proceedings be-
tween these parties were to be taken, and from what
period Sir Alexander Cray Grant was to have interest cal-
culated upon the five bonds. His Honour was clearly of
opinion upon the whole that the account ought to be
taken, computing interest upon the bonds, up to the time of
the making of the Master's report.