The Sun.
London, England, 1830-02-11 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

At the sitting of the Court this morning judgment Wag
given in several cases, none of which possessed any public
interest, relating entirely to dry points of law.

♦PPLICATION TO STRIKE AN ATTORNEY OFF TAX ROLLS.

GRIFFITHS V. HUTCHINSON.

Mr. DENMAN showed cause against a rule obtained 00
a former day by Mr. Gurney, calling upon Mr. Julio°
Hutchinson, an attorney of this Court, to show cause whi
he should not deliver up to Edward Griffith,, upon the
payment of 254., certain deeds and papers, and why he
should not be struck off the rolls. It appeared front the
affidavits upon which the rule was granted, that the de-
fendant is an attorney of considerable practice, living in
Lincoln's Inn, and the facts are as follows :—Mr. Hutchin•
son's father was a gentleman of great landed and other pro'
pert}', and the plaintiff's wife lived with that gentlemen
for some years as his housekeeper. Mr. Hutchinson,
sen., however, unfortunately joined some other gentlemen
in a banking establishment, which afterwards stopped
payment, and he became a bankrupt. Subsequently to
the bankruptcy, in the year 1811, he made a will, to
which he bequeathed 500/. to his housekeeper, the Wife
of the plaintiff; but on account of the bankruptcy affairs
not being settled, it could not be made available tip
to the year 1826. In that year, the plaintiff and big
wife being in great distress, and having an execution in,
their house for rent, went to Mr. Hutchinson, who had
frequently promised them assistance, when he took ad-
vantage of their distress, and purchased their right to the
legacy of 5001. for a sum of 25/. The affidavits then
stated that Hutchinson shortly after lie had persuaded the
plaintiffs to sell their legacy, received the full amount
of 500/. The Learned Counsel said, if this account had,
been true, Mr. Hutchinson, who was a gentleman n'el'
known in the profession, had been guilty of great mean;
ness ; but he had explained it in that way which he hope"„
would be satisfactory to the Court, and that they won!"
discharge the rule. The real facts were these
plaintiff's wife certainly was left a legacy of 5001. by the
defendant's father, but the affairs under his bankruptcy
bad not to the present day been settled. It was also true
that 5001. had been received by the administrator to the
will, but it was probable a suit in Chancery might be
necessary, and then that sum would, in the first place,'
he applicable to the costs. The sum they recoifeu
did not arise from any property in the possession of Mr'
Hutchinson, sen. at the time of his death, but as his
estate had paid a dividend of 12s. 6d. in the pound, it wall
the proceeds of the allowance agreeable to the Act of Par'
liament. The plaintiffs came to Mr. Hutchinson in 113211
in great distress, and he out of the purest charity, advised
them to sell the legacy ; he had not at that time the most
remote idea that it would ever be worth one farthing.
Out of charity, however, as he before said, he advanced
them Si., and afterwards at different times other smell
sums, amounting in the whole to 25/. Mr. Hutchinson
had filed an affidavit of these facts, and alsJ stated,
that the lee hundred pounds had been paid to the ad-
ministrator under his father's will, and it was probable that
demands for more than that stun might be made against
him. It was also alleged against the defendant that he
had bought the legacy in another person's name. This
WAS the only circumstance in his (Mr. Denman's) opinion
that cast any imputation against the defendant. But
this was a circumstance well known to the plaintiffs St
the time, for he expressly told them he was the purchasers
but that he wished to have the assignment in another
name. The parties conducting this application were
Messrs. Rankin and Richards, the solicitors to Mr. Welles.
ley, and it was proper the Court should be informed that
Mr. Hutchinson was the solicitor to the Misses Long during
the progress of the Wellesley cause through the Court 01
Chancery. It was unnecessary to allude to the disputes in
that cause, but ever since his client had been annoyed in
every possible way, and this case had been hunted out for
that purpose. It was one of the most cruel motions that
had ever been made, and that against a gentleman whot
to vindicate himself, was reluctantly obliged to set forth the
difficulties in which his father had been involved, and who
had for a number of years supported himself with the
greatest honour and credit.
Mr. Cazxrry followed on the same side. He would only'
state that the defendant was a gentleman of the highest
character.

Mr. GURNEY i❑ support of the rule said, if the de-
fendant was a gentleman of such high respectability, 13°
could assure the Court the gentlemen who instructed bin'
were equally respectable. The affidavits filed by rlr.
Hutchinson gave little or no explanation : they were,
however, very voluminous, and containing four pages of
the grossest abuse, directed against gentlemen of equal re-
spectability with himself. lie would now inform their
Lordships what the case was. In 1811 Mr. Hutchinson,
sen. died, leaving an annuity of 501. per year to the plain-
tiff's wife, to he paid out of property which might be re-
ceived out of the bankruptcy estate ; but if that sun'
should not be thus received, to pay her 500/. out of any
other money that might come into the hands of bis exc..
tutor.

Lord TENTERDIN—But were there any debts owing,
Mr. Gurney?
Mr. GURNEY—No, my Lord, not 301. The parties,
as the Court had heard, were distressed, and they wished
to sell the legacy, for which purpose they had several in-
terviews with the defendant, who told them it would
never be worth a farthing. They said they would be will'
ing to take 1501. for it, but he laughed at them as foolish ;
and after several other interviews, he said he had pre'
vailed upon a person who speculated in those kind 01
things to give them 251. for it, and if they did not sell it
they would never get a sous. There were affidavits, Oat,
ing at this very time, or within a few days afterwards, be
actually received the full amount of the legacy, vie,
5001. The Court would thus see that this attorney bad
persuaded his clients, poor ignorant creatures, at a period
when they were labouring under the greatest distress, to
sell their interest of 5001. for 251. And even this paltry
sum was doled out to them a pound or two at a time, and
from first to last, at a distance of more than four months)
although at the time he had their money in his pocket.
A case of greater hardship never came before the Court.
lie trusted the rule would he made absolute.

Lord TINTERDEN said the Court were of opinion the
best course to be adopted would be to refer it to the
Master, to ascertain what sum of money the defendant
ought to pay in principal and interest, and also the costs
of this rule. Referred to the Master.

Tuesday the police force was extended to
the district of Clerkenwell, denominated the letter G divi-
sion, of which the limits are Saffron-hill, Gray's-inn-
road, Islington, Shoreditch, Finsbury, Barbican, and
Smithfield. The force, which was appointed by the
Cmnmissioners on Saturday for this division, consists of
ISO men, the usual number of inspectors, and a super'
intendent. Very few of the old watchmen have, we tio'
derstand, been selected, although nearly the whole body °f
them applied for appointments,

ON

expec
proce

suspil

appea
gener
landh

MI ini

cann(

true

press
super
In

the fl

him ;
and t
if be

MUIR'

his Ti
HOW
Some
away
natio
attrit

chast

time

years
have

distr
time!
with
ever

it is
the
mean
in or

redo(
tent
ltri al
beinE
not r
tome
tried

alter

ecorn
office
mina
!Von
In en
color

palac
ever)
cmet
slow
The
term
and
clEc€
for tl
depa,
quies

tame
the r
amoi

Colo

dang
resoL
to ac
try,
inflic
butt
glory

tails,
vaga
win
the
the

Lord

grea
WOUI
requ
;rlVe

JE
•-.

for ,