The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-13 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

The MASTER of the ROLLS durieg the early part of the morn-
ng took consent petitions and short causes.

SILVERTOP V. RAMSAY.—SOLICITORS' BILLS OF COSTS.
Mr. KINDERSLEY, who appeared fur the petitioner, Mr.
Ge•wge Dacre, said this was an application by a creditor to be
paid out of the fund in Court the amount which the Master
bad reported to be due to him. The Master had found 1,7004
to be due to him, and the only question on this petition wa.,
whether Mr. Dacre ought to pay the costs of ascertain-
ing what was duo to him. In the common case of a
creditor, he would not have to pay or receive costs, but he un-
d rstood it would be contended he ought to pay costs on this
ground, that what was due to him was due to him in the
charac,er of solicitor on bills of costs, and that inasmuch as
the Master found the sum duo to him to be one-sixth less than
he originally claimed, it was a case in which, under the Act of
the Ist Geo. IL, regulating the practice of solicitors, Mr.
Dacre ought to pay the costs of taxation. That statute di.
reefed that whet e more than one-sixth of a solicitor's bill was
taken off the solicitor should pay the costs of taxation. But ho
submitted that Act did not apply to the present case, because
Mr. Dacre must be considered as a creditor.
Lord LANGDALE—IS he a common creditor, or does he
come here by petition ?
Mr. KINDERSLEY—By petition.
Lord LANGDALE—Why, is he not paid in the ordinary dis-
tribution of the estate?
Mr. KINDERSLEY—What the cause is, Ido not know my
Lord ; he did not come in with the general body of creditors.
Lord LANGDALE—Then he has created the expence by his
own ladies.

Mr. KINDIRSLEY—There is no additional expense oc.
casioncd.

KiLndoerrd sie Ly, "DLord LANGDALE-This petition is occasioned by it.
Mr. KINDERSLEY—TIIO question does not relate to the costs
--GthaAtiißf
of this petition, but to the proceedings in the Masters' office.
aeDao,diytonur
aceaersriyn
ai tndsom
alki iegsh a aeslaitmhi,shMnwr:
ever vexatious, he is not to be charged with costs ?
Mr. KINDERSLEY thought his Lordship would hardly say
that in every common case where a solicitor had a sixth of his
bill taken off, it was to be treated as vexatious.
Mr. PEMBERTON, contra, submitted that even if there were
no special circumstances in this case it would be quite of
course that Mr. Dacre should pay the costs; and for this
reason, that if he had brought an action to recover payment
of his bill, and the client had petitioned to have the bill
taxed, and a sixth had been taken off, Mr. Dacre must have
paid the costs. In this case there had been a decree for an
account, and Mr. Dacre came in after his time. Mr. Dacre
had been a solictor, but ceased to be so in 1837. A decree
was made in the cause in July, 1830, for taking the usual ac-
counts, and in July, 1831, the Master having made his report
of debts, the cause was heard on further directions; and in
May, 1832, Mr. Dacre presented his petition for leave to esta-
blish his debt. He did nothing under that order till March, 1837,
when he brought in 29 bills of costs, amounting in the whole
to 2,1711. ; those bills were taxed, and 7911. taken off. He
was now applying to have the amount of his bills, minus the
791/ , paid to him, but objected to pay the costs of taxing the
29 bills, the whole expense of which he had thrown upon his
(Mr. Pemberton's) client. The Court could not do less than
order him to pay those costs. _

Mr. KINDERSLEY submitted Mr. I/lore must be considered
as a creditor, and his bill of costs treated the same as if it
were a bill of costs for business done as general agent or a
tradesman's bill.
Lord LANGDALE-This gentleman comes and asks the as-
sistance of this Court in establishing a legal demand. For
that purpose it is necessary to resort to taxation; that taxation
has considerably reduced the demand, and I cannot help think-
ng this is a case in which the Court has sufficient jurisdiction
,o make him pay the costs of that proceeding.
SCOTT V. SCARBOROUGH.
art-heard case was then proceeded with.

This

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

PROTHEROE D. GOOD.
The arguments in this case which were commenced yester-
day, were resumed to-day. The case came before the Court
upon a motion to dissolve an injunction restraining the de-
fendant from using a level in a Welch coal mine.
His Hosoun refused to dissolve the injunction.