The Sun.
London, England, 1839-08-13 00:00:00

LAW IN'T'ELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS, AUG. 12.

The House sat to-day to hear Scotch Appeals. The
Peers in attendance were, the Lcrd Chancellor, the Duke
of Richmond, and Lord Calthorpe.

LANG V. LANG.

The arguments in this part heard case were concluded,
and

The LORD CHANCELLOR postponed giving judgment.
MONYPENNI V. CAMPBELL.
This case came before their Lordshii s upon appeal from
the decision of the Court of Session. The facts of the
case may be thus shortly stated :—David Stewart, Earl
of Buchan, deceased, succeeded, about the year 1768, to
the estate of Strathbrock, as heir under a deed of entail I
executed in:1664, and which, subsequent to that period, had
constituted the investiture of the estate in the persons of
the several possessors. After possessing the lands upon
these titles for more than fifty years, the late Earl, in
1819, executed a disposition of the estate in favour
of himself and his heirs and assigns whomsoever—
thus disregarding the peculiar series of heirs that would
have succeeded to him under the entail. This deed, after
being carried unto effect by a Crown charter, was followed
by a trust conveyance, executed by the late Lord Buchan
in 1822, in favour of the appellants. David, Earl of
Buchan, the granter of these deeds, died in the year
1629, and the person entitled to succeed him as heir of
entail under the deed of 1664 was Henry David, the pre-
sent Earl. By the trust-deed, however, executed by the
late Earl in 1822, the present Earl was excluded from the
possession of the estate. The respondent, Mr. Campbell,
who was the creditor of the present Earl, obtained against
him, in 1836, a decree of adjudication, Ly which he at-
tached and vested in his own person all right which the
present Earl might have to the estate of Strathbrock, and
in particular, the right of reducing the various deeds exe-
cuted by the late Earl to the exclusion of the present. In
virtue of that adjudication, the respondent. as in right of the
present Earl, raised the present proceeding of reduction
against the appellants, on the ground that the deeds
were in law fully granted by the late Earl in pre-
judice of the deeds of entail of 1664, and of the
interests of the present Earl. No defence was set up
for the Earl of Buchan, but the appellant contended
that the deeds were lawful, inasmuch as the deed of en-
tail of 1664 was not an effectual deed. The respondent
maintained that the entail of 1664 was sufficient to ex-
clude and set aside the deeds that had been executed.
Upon the case coming on before the Court of Session,
that Court decided in favour of the respondent, and from
that decision the present appeal was brought.
Mr. PEMBERTON and Mr. COWAN appeared for the ap-
pellant, and
The LORD ADVOCATE and Mr. K. BRUCE were counsel
for the respondent.
The arguments, which had not concluded at 4 o'clock,
were adjourned to to-morrow (this day).

The effects of the late hdavy rains are seriously
felt by the farmers who hold meadow land near the tour►o
of the Welland, between Harborough and Stamford.
Not more than half the crops of hay had been carried,
in some places, previous to the rain which fell
on Tuesday night, and which has inundated some
hundreds of aces. The flood at Harborough on Wednes-
day was greater than has been known for several years.
The depth of water in some parts of the street, near tbo
Sheep Market, was little short of a yard, and extended
over nearly 500 yards.—Northampton Mercury.

DIPERI AL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, Ausersr 12.
HILL COOLIES.

The Marquis of NORMANBY laid on the Table
Copies of Correspondence which had taken place rela-
tive to the Hill Coolies.
DUBLIN POLICE.

On the motion of Viscount DUNCANNON, the
House went into Committee on the Dublin Police Bill.
After a short discussion, in which Lord ELLEIVBO-
- the Marquis of WESTMEATH, and Viscount
DUNCANNON took part, the Bill went through a Com-
mittee, and was ordered to be reported to-morrow.