The Sun.
London, England, 1823-07-18 00:00:00

LAW NTELLIG ENC E.

COURT OF .CHANCERY, JULY 17.
GOURLAY V. THE DUKE OF SOMERSET.
This was an appeal from the defendant against a decree of
the late:Master of the Hells.
Mr. HART'IMS about to state the case of the petitioner-
' Mr. 000 lay said he was not then ready to proceed. • -
The Long CitAbrcr. L. on. said that perhaps Mr. Gourley
would not object to the case being stated, as that need not
weaken.the force of his reply on another day.
Mr. Gourley-said he wished to Make a few remarks then.
The .LORD CITANCELLOR said that the other party must
open the case, and perhaps it would be as well if he would hear
it stated before the reply.
Mr.,HART said that Mr. Gourley ought to be properly in. i
formed of the practice of the Court, as lie hied no Counsel ; and
that he could not prevent the, cause from proceeding if once it
were to cernmence. He took that opportunity of observing,
that. the Attorney.deneral hid offered. to take Mr. Qourlayis
brief,' without any expcnce to Mm ; but that Mr. (imirlay had
declined it.

, . .
Mr. flout-lay admitted that hy had declined it, as licotpocted.
to make out a very good case from the watt= papers he had
with him.
The Llrti CHANCELLOR said the he had betw hear 'reliat
the other party had to MY.'
' Air:Gourley supposed thathe knew all that they.CoUld say ;
for it was contained in a newspaper which he held in his hand •
( The Somerseithire Gazette)., Now,tif that contained the true.
statement of the case, and perhaps the Court would satisfy him
as to the fact- _ _ .

The LORD CHANCEL Lon refused to vouch for the country
newspaper, and recommended Mr. Goutlay to hear the case
from the Counsel.
Mr. HART resumed his statement. There was an agree-
ment signed in 1801), between Ed. Adolphus, the present Duke
of Somerset, on one side, and Mr. Gourley on the other, 'for
the occupation of certain lands and premises belonging to
the Duke, called Tettord Farm. The. usual reservations of
mines, minerals, and timber, were contained in it. The rent.
was to be 600?. a year for the. first seven years, and a corn rent,'
afterwards. The Duke agreed to allow Mr. Gourley 2001. for
repairs and alterations, with such farther sum for alterations
and improvements, to be approved by the Duke •or his agent,
or Ur. John Gale, as might be necessary ; the whole to be al.
lowed out of the rent next growing: due after the effeeting of
the improvements and alterations ; the said Mr, Gourley to
produce vouchers for the various charges: The Duke had re-
served to himself or his agent the right of approving of the al.
terations, and the words In the agreement were, with respect to
them.." such as,upon inquiry shall be found to be proper and
necessary," and the objects which were to be answered were,
building and repairs stipulated at the time, and alterations and,
improvement& Mr. Gourley entered into possession of the
entire subject of demise in October of the, same year, excepting
the dwelling-house on the farni, the immediate occupation of
which, together with one or two other :slight advantages, were
necessarily withheld by reason of the customs of the country,
which.gave certain privileges to the outgoing tenant, and these,
• had not been specifically adverted to in the contract. Soon after
there occurred disagreements between the tenant and landlord,'
about the nature and extent of. the alterations.. The ConSel
quence was, that a lease. was tendered to Mr. Gourley, and the
rent demanded. Ile gave a qualified refusal, saying that the
agreement was enough for him, and he withheld the paYment of
rent to meet the expellees of repairs and alterations. Up till this
time, there was.= appearance of disagreement as to the nature of
the contract. The Duke, howeVer, proCeeded 'against Mr.Gour.
lay, for want of specific performance. Mr. G. filed a bill to pre-
vent the Duke from proceeding by course oflaw to an ejectment.
The Duke answered the bill, alleging misconduct in the
tenancy, and the refusal of the lease; which he construed as
art abandonment of the contract, and holding the .improve-
ments of the tenant to be absolute damage and disadvantage to
the estate. Mr. Gourley untended the bill, and averred his al.,
term-lona to be positive imprOvethents. Ile had, however, nes.
gnested Waite whether or not he had. erected the buildings, at
his own expence ; so that lie was in no condition to call upon
the ()output assist hinain obtainins.competruition. • Foe what
merit could there be In-him, if Vic Duke allowed the wholoof
the money ? The Duke. answered the amended bill, anal that
Lord Chancellor ordered that Mr. ()outlay- should stay in pos..
session, and he allowed to"deduct the 2004 mentioned in the
agreement, and another sum which he had laid out on the pre.
rinses, on his giving an undertaking to pay the rent after.
[-wards, • and -occupy the farm according ta.i the customs of the
'country ; and also undertaking to deliver up possessiOn of the
ir proms" es' , whenever the Court should so order him. The
Duke's Couosel felt that his Lordship was against.there:
on the ,material Point,—the rejection 2of the lease. In the
meantime, issues, were sett to try to what compensation
Alr,AiOurlav was entitled., under the agreentent for his
alterations on the premises, and also for the want of mime-
diato oeetipatithi of the dwelling-honse. The jury gaie him
21a,n. for, the,firat, and 100/. for the latter, making 3971, Mr.
Gale was one of the principal witnesses, and, proved that all
the alteralions, up to thiit time, in 1812, had been approred by
hill; ; 'btit it afterwards appeared that he was not the proper
agentof Duke, and, knew very little of the matter. Mr.
Gourla.y applied for a new ulal, which was granted ; but the
question was again. settled with respect simply to the expences
which. Mr. Gourley had laid out,. and not with any reference to
the . terms of the agreement. The Jury found 000/. for the
etperiees Mr. Gourley had /aid out at the time :of Ping the
bill. and 1,3001.' for expellees incurred by him suliseqUendy.
...The counsel for the Duke applied for a new trial; but the
.Master of the Rolls refused it, and proceeded to frame his de.
tree agreeably to the verdict last obtained.. The grounds on
which they now applied' to the Court to reverse ,the judgment
'upon the original bill altogether *ere, firtit; that Mr. Goer*
bad nerer furnished tine voucher. for any shilling of the expence
Ice had incurred,, and that 1,3001. of the damage given him
had been laid opt after the question raised by the Duke, of the
repudiation of tenancy by refusing the lease. ,
Mr. Maim followed on the same side, and particularly en.
forced the' consideration that the plaintiff had obtained the.
greater ,nart of his relief under the bill, on account ot'Aransiles
tions which commenced after filing of the bill.
The Lown CIIANCEtLOR rose at two o'clock, and said that
he would hear Mr. Gourley on Monday or Tuesday.
Mr. Gourlay wished to say a little just now. 2 :
The LOUD ettANe.:4Ltait said, should be most boinsy
to bear you, Mr. Gourlay, but I cannot stay; I ern going to
attend the House of Lords."

VICE•CIIANCELIaOWS COURT, JULY 17.
PEARCE v...TIAMMERSTIEY AND CITIMRS.

:31r. KNIGHT moved for an injunction to restrain the de-
ftndants from taking the benefit of the conveyance of a legal
estate, under the following circumstances :—The estate in
question consisted of the. Borough of Ilonitort and some, land
oining, which had been sold to four gentlemen; three. of
horn were partners in the bank at Honnon. One of these
:..ur purchasers M being indebted to r. Dickenson mortgagcd
foilj
his fourth share to that gentleman. Mr. Dickenson died atter
this mortgage, and two persons, named Beer and Dunsford,'
became his pelsonat representatives. Another of these pur-
chasers made an equitable mortgage of his fourth there. to :qr..
Buller, whose creditors had been obliged to file the present
bill to reap the benefit of this mottgsge. After both of these
mortgages had been made, the floniton Bank became involved
in difficulties,. and being debtors to a large amount to the
1 house of .3.lestirs. Ilaunnersleys of London, they, in concur.
1 rence whit Pearce, as trustee mortgaged the remaining part of
the estate to .I.fir. Noel, as tlie trustee for Messrs. Hammer-
4eys. The object, of the present motion was, that as Messrs.
Hammersleys, the third mortgagees, had notice of the exist-
;nee of the second mortgage, they should be restrained from
accepting a legal conveyance .of the estate which had been
made to them by the first mortgagees. The Learned Counsel
said, that by such conveyance the last mortgagees would take
a priority of advantage on the principle of tacking:, and he.
cited a case of Mackreth v. Simmons, 15th Iresey, Junior's
Reports, in which the Lord Chancellor had decided that there
was no case in which a third mortgagee, having knowledge of
the second mortgage, should be enabled to exclude the latter
by a legal conveyance from the- first. Ile, therefore, praytal
that Elie Court Would grant an injunction to restrain the first'
mortgagees from granting, and the third from accepting, a
conveyance of the legal estate.
Mr. Brr.t. and Mr. Dr. SUQMI stated, thatln the case. cited,
the Learned Reporter had used a word which the Lord ebals-
celior had inadvertemlr exprmed.
;ills Lordship meant to
say trustee, but had actually said mortgagee, which the Reporter'
had faithfully transcribed. This inadvertence had since been
noticed by' tear Lotd Chancellor, and there were., in feet, II great
number of casts opposed to that relied on.
- The motien'for an injunction was refused,

PAILLIA6IEN.F.

-

lIOUSF.I.OF LORDS, TititStpAlt, JULY 17.
~,.. , . ..
• . . SILK WLVE 5.,.. . .' •, , • •
Lord REXLEl'said,.thaf in contOrtnity to whai had gip..
peered to be the opinion of the majority of. ti:e Rotate; he had
prepared certain ,amendrnents ' to the Silk Manufacturers! Bill,,
the nature of which be wonitt now cxplain.. ,It'ti'es nut,proe
posed to interfere With the power which the existing Actiirave.
to Alagistrates to interfere in the settle' .- of wages. between
the masters acrd the men.. Hut soma 'thost-,:Xers.would
be repealed as would enable master= ufactureie t(?' ail*
their capital in any part of the -country -Which' 'tliey tragfu.-
please. A clause would•also be introduced- !Welting .the .time
at which informations were to be laid for. offences again3t:tbOse
IF
Acts, to three months, instead of th,vpresent, extensive FOOL
These alterations, he trusted, woulaWoett the'wislies of their
Lordships, and remove the chief objections which -othert bad
entertained to the Dill. . r
. Lord ELLENBOROtIfiII w . ' ems, that.thostriond..
tine -
menuspoposed would do inure
..* 'jparl,Uniel a Alin
the tote/ rejection of the Bill ' ' . :done, its' it wouldieer;
tainly have been biought for ' 'itialtpteett year, when
whole of the Acts would undoubtedly kilns been r-evaleit.l3tit
:00:n
the indefensible and unjitet part of ,theiti...being reineVed, *east
-the whole having been reduced into a mere restore of" ,
there 'Crook) be no necessity far further attenutut to tinrsubje4-
Under the amended Acts there would be ample means tbr.the.
lIIASIeL3 to employ the whole of their capital wahin the.appoiat-
ed district, if the journeymen would. accede to-a nowt :Able re-
duction of wages. • Should they refuse. the thaater4 might fOrta
new establishMents out of the district ; but'if.the men., trete
reasonable, the masters Would not be so foolish at to remove
their establishments. . - - • • ' t.
. ...
The Earl of HARROWHY expressed his perfect, Concur-
rence in all that had fallen front the Noble BEViOtl tArpite.
lie trusted that the weavers would feel the!
,if the
.Bill 'had
been modified, they owed .it to the extreme prudence and pro-
propriety of their conduct. -.
Lord CALTIIORPE felt some regret that the Bill had itOt
_putted as it originally stood, its he conceived it-was founded,
not only on, principles of sound policy, but on strict Conidderst-
' tioni Orhlllnallity and justice to those very. individtials .who
thought theY would,be injured by it. Hetrusted that hit Mit-
jesty's Ministers would continue to pursue ilie enlightened
course which they had lately undertaken, with respect to other
branches of trade, as he was convinced it would give the
greatest iinpulse to the commercial interests of the country,
that they had__ yet received. . ~ , , . --
Lord 8EX.1.4E V then moved that, the amendments' be
agreed to. ..
.After a few ,words fromthe Bari of DARLINGTON in their
favour, the amendments were agreed-to, and the Bill was read
a third time., and returned to the Commons.
Lord COLCIIES PER moved, for Returns of the Charities
.in Ireland endowed by and. for Citholica.—Ordered.--41.0-
jetumed.

t,i• . HOUSE OF COMMONS.
At o'clock the SPEAKEft took the Cliair„ when, blit,
fourteen Members being present, the House was adjourned.till
to-morrow (this day). .
It was confidently expected that 'this House Would be sum-
moned to the House of Lords•in virtue of a Royal Cormuis.sion
but the appointed hour arriving before the Messenger mid;
his appearance the SrritEn could no Ringer -delay couatkng
the Members.