The Sun.
London, England, 1836-01-30 00:00:00

TAYLOR V. WATERS.

Mr. TRESLOVE supported an appeal in this case against
a decision of the Vice-Chancellor, directing Mr. Taylor to
receive back, with four per cent, interest, 3,6401., paid by
by him on a motion made in the cause in 1808. This
sum had been invested in stock, which was now greatly
increased in value, and it was contended that, as all the
costs of the different proceedings had been thrown on the
fund in another suit, that of Waters x. Taylor, Mr. Tay-
lor was now entitled to participate in these accumulations,
instead of having them divided with Mr. Waters.
The arguments were not concluded when his Lordship
rose at three o'clock.

PARKER V. DAWSON.

This was a motion by way of appeal from an order of the
Vice Chancellor.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL appeared for the appellant,
who is a trustee for the plaintiffs, and who has been ordered
to pay over a sum of money which he alleges he has already
paid to the settler on the fulfilment of the purposes of the
trust. The plaintiffs are the four sons of a Mr. Parker,
the brother-in-law of Mr. Palmer, the late Member for the
county of Surrey. Mr. and Mrs. Parker having had some
family disagreements, alleged to have arisen from the mis-
conduct of Mr. Parker, his wife quitted her residence in
the country, and came to seek the protection of her family
in London. Mr. Parker immediately followed her to town,
and Mrs. Parker having reason to believe that one of his
main objects in doing so was to deprive her of the custody
of her children, then six in number, it was suggested to her
brother, Mr. Palmer, that if a small sum of money was
settled on them by him, a bill in Chancery might be forth-
with filed on their behalf in respect of such settle-
ment, and that they might at gnce be taken out of
the power of their father, and placed under the
protection of the Court. In consequence of this
suggestion, Mr. Palmer invested a sum of 2,0001.
in the Three per Cents. in the names of the late Mr. Mas-
sey Dawson and Mr. Thomas. Mr. Palmer subsequently
applied to the trustees to permit him to sell out the fund.
The trustees gave him a power of attorney for that pur-
pose, without considering the probability of their future
liability, and Mr. Palmer shortly afterwards became hank-
rupt, and left the country. The principal money of the
trust, as far as Mr. Palmer was concerned, was, therefore,
irrecoverably lost ; but the plaintiffs, who are the four sons
of Mr. Parker, conceiving that they bad a right to the pro-
visien. made for them under the settlement, filed the pre-
sent hill to compel the trustees to make good their four-
sixths of the two thousand pounds with interest, on the
ground that the money had been lost by their breach of
trust, in giving; Mr. Palmer a power of attorney to sell out
the stock. The Vice-Chancellor, on a motion being made,
calling on Mr. Thomas, the surviving trustee, to pay the
money into Court, granted an order for the purpose, and
against that order Mr, Thomas now appealed.
After a full hearing of all the evidence in the cause,

The LOUD CHANCELLOR said the order to pay the par-
ticular money into Court was in strict conformity with the
established practice of the Court in similar cases, and could
not, therefore, be disturbed. The case was different,
however, with respect to the interest and dividends ; and
it did not appear to his Lordship that, on the mere admis-
sion contained in the answer, the plaintiff could call on
the defendant to bring that sum into Court. The order,
in that respect, his Lordship thought, must be varied—
but the order for the payment of the principal money con-
firmed.

VICE-CHANCERY-FRIDAY.