The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-23 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

The MASTER of the ROLLS was occupied a consider-
able portion of the morning in hearing petitions andcon-
sent causes of little general interest.

ATTORNEY• GENERAL V. PRETTYMAN.

This suit, which it may be remembered was instituted
by the Attorney-General at the instance of the Charity
Commissioners against the defendant and the Bishop
and Dean and Chapter of Lincoln, for the recovery of
certain trust funds, which have been for a long period di-
verted from the purposes of the trust, and now enjoyed
by the defendant, came again before the Court this morn-
ing, upon arranging the terms of the order.
Mr. KINDERSLEY stated that what had been sug-
gested by the Court was, that the defendant should
be charged with rack rent from the time the Com-
missioners made their inquiry. It was found
upon inquiry that if this were done the result would be
that the defendant would be charged to the extent of
22,000 i. Under these circumstances he would suggest
the further exercise of the principle on which the Court
was disposed to act in cases like the present, where the
parties had been dealing with charity property on the full
conviction that it was their own.lt appeared that three leases
had been granted over in 1819, another in 1826, and an-
other in 1834, and that the fines received on these
amounted to about 13,000/. The lease of 1819, would
have expired last year, that of 1826 had about eight
years, and that of 1834 about 14 years to
run. What, therefore, he would submit to
his Lordship on behalf of the defendant, was
that, acting on the principle the Court adopted in these
cases, the defendant should not be charged with the fine
received on the lease already expired. Supposing Dr.
Prettyman had died at the expiration of the leases, the
Court would not have been more disposed to make his exe-
tutors liable, than it was to make liable the executors of ,
his predecessors. With regard to the other two leases,
he would suggest that they be reckoned in the proportion
of the number of years current on each. This was
about one-third .of the second lease, and about
two-thirds of the other. He . would propose,
therefore, that the defendant should be charged
with one-third of the value of the one, and with two-
thirds of the value of the other, which would amount to
about 1,900/. This gentleman derived his income en-
.tirely from his preferment, and it would be absolute
ruin to him and his family if the Court should order him
to pay so large a gross sum of money as that for
which he was liable. He could not of course ask for in-
dulgence at the expense of justice, but he believed the
Court would take into its consideration the circumstance
that the party had only received what he bona fide be-
lieved belonged to him, and would not therefora carry
the demand so far back as absolutely to crush him, espe-
cially when there was a person living from whom it had
been taken.
The MASTER of the RoLLs—The principle on which
the order was made was that the defendant should pay
the value reported to have grown due since the time
when he had notice of the foundation. lam not aware
of what could be more lenient (I might say) than that.
Mr. KINDERSLEY--The effect of that will be that he
will have to pay about 22,0001.
The MASTER of the RoLLs.—Then see what the Cha-
rity has lost. All this was lost because this gentleman,
after notice of the deed which deprived him of it, thought
fit to apply it to his own use.
Mr. KINDERSLEY—NO, my Lord, not after notice that
he was not entitled to it.
The MASTER of the ROLLS—It comes to that, for
though he has not received the rents he has received
and enjoyed, and does enjoy, the consideration for these
rents.
Mr. KINDERSLEY—He has received that undoubtedly,
but before his attention was called to the fact that he was
not entitled to it as he had conceived, and as his prede-
cessors had conceived also. The period for renewal of
the lease, in the usual course, has arrived, but defendant
has not renewed, nor has he done anything since
the Commissioners made their inquiry in 1836.
The MASTER of the ROLLS—He objected to repay the
fines, thinking it wouldbe better for him to pay the value.
He then finds payment of the real value would be
a greater charge than payment of the fines, without in-
terest, and be solicits a remission. I have no objection
to allow him to apply to the Attorney-General.
Mr. KINDERSLEY—The effect of his repaying the fines
would be to charge him with 13,000/., with interest from
the time he received it. Now, although I cannot ask
your Lordship to take into consideration the circum-
stances of the individual, I believe the Court will take
into its consideration the general principle on which it
acts in these cases.

The MASTER of the Itom.s—The Court has done so,
very much.
Mr. KINDERSLEY—I must leave the matter in your
Lordship's hands. When the Commissioners made
their inquiry the lease had nineteen years to run, and
nineteen years' rack rent of the property, the annual
value being about 1,2001., would be deducting the rent
22,1921. There are now about fourteen years to run. If
you deducted discount on account of these, it will leave
about 20,0001. The defendant has no more means of
paying 20,000/. than of paying 200,0001.
Mr. PEMBERTON—I think these considerations might
be addressed to the Attorney-General with great force
and propriety. I must confess I think that the Attorney-
General could not be asked to accept less than the twp
last fines, except on the ground of the total inability of
this gentleman to pay them. But I think the better way
would be for the defendant to make these representations
to the Attorney-General, and to satisfy him that it
would not be expedient to press for more.
Mr. KINDERSLEY-I also think that would be best.
The MASTER of the BoLLs—I think so too. I can-
not measure what ought to be the decree by the amount
of pressure on the individual.
Mr.P,E3IBERTON—It is not the intention of the Attor-
ney-General to require more than the fines without in-
terest. I cannot understand how the payment of these
fines should be less than the value of the lease subsisting
after it had run a certain number of years. If it be so
the defendant may accept the arrangement proposed by
the Attorney-General, to pay the amount of the princi-
pal money received for fines without interest. Oft the
part of the Attorney-General I have nothing to do here
but to submit to the decree of the Court. If any per-
sonal discretion is to be exercised, the party must refer
to the Attorney-General himself.
The MASTER of the Rou.s—l think the better way
would be for you to consult the Attorney-General. Let
the matter stand over for a month, with liberty to apply
in the meantime.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

SALISBURY V. MORRICE.

His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England wits en-
gaged the whole morning with the further arguments in
this case, which have already occupied the Court
several days.
(Before Vice-Chancellor BRUCE.)
HOBBY AND OTHERS V. COLLINS AND OTHERS.

The plaintiffs in this case were infants, claiming under
a deed of settlement against their trustees and their
guardian Collins. A supplemental bill had also been
tiled by the plaintiff's against the assignee of Collins,
who had become a bankrupt pending the original suit.
The bill charged the trustees with a breach of the
trust, and prayed the restoration of that portion of the
trust-fund, which had been lost, the removal of the pre-
sent trustees, and the appointment of new trustees in
their stead.

The arguments in the_cause, engaged the Court during
the greater part of the morning, but were of a nature by
no means interesting to the public.
Mr. COOPER appeared for the plaintiffs. Mr. PID-
MILLY for the co-trustee, and Mr. itOLFE for the tenant
for life.
His Honour decreed the discharge of Hobby and Eck-
ley from the trust ; the Master to appoint new Trustees,
and to inquire what portion of the estate had been sold,
when, and for what price ; an account to be taken of all
the sums, in respect of the estates sold, which had
been renewed by Hobby, Eckley,' and Collins, or
any of them, and the application thereof ; the Mater
also to inquire whether there were any after-born chil-
dren who would be the objects of the trust, with liberty
to state special circumstances. The costs to be paid by
the trustee:'.
Several other causes which stood on the paper for
this day, were called on, but owing to the parties not
beinig,
,ware 'to what Court their suits were allotted;
Attey wel e not prepared, and in consequence, his I-lonour
rose PRI ly.
It is expected that such order will be established in
the distribution of the several causes, among the Equity
Courts against the sittings after term, that no disap-
pointment or loss of time, shall be experienced by either
counsel or their clients.