The Sun.
London, England, 1823-11-11 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 8.
Bonnet L. SIR GEORGE WOOD.
Mr. WETHEREit was heard in reply upon the motion
which he had made on Saturday, for quashing; the writ of etc
czeat regno granted against the defendant in this case.
The Loan Ceteetcr.t.e.Oit said that the first 'question was,
ought the writ to be now discharged ? There was no question
that if the 36,000/. were paid into Court, the writ must be dis-
charged. But if the writ ought not to have issued ip the first
place, there could be no pretence for the plaintiff's requiring
that deposit. He had nothing to do with tne,complaintagainst
the conduct of the sheriff, who had a difficult duty, and exc-
' ciited with perhaps a sound, and certainly' with a legal disere.
tion, as the law made him the jotigeeef hie :per reeponsibility,
and the measures be might deem necessary for lus.own sect'.
riey—subject, of course, to the rebuke of the law if he should
abuse hicauthority. The case had Lwow on originelly before
the Mager of the Rolls, whosejurio‘diction as to granting the
writ of ne exeat was as great as that Otthis Court, with one ex,
eeption—that after granting it, the writ must be laid teefore
him who held the great seal, without. the, epplieationaff Which
it was of no effect. The writ had been . granted during hie
Lordship's absence from town'. and from the representation of
the Master of the Roils he clad no diffienilty in affixing the
great seal to it. Not that he had any opportunity of judging
of the arguments which might be urged against the proe
priety of granting the writ, to which, however, beedeter..
mined to give the closest attention whenever the subject
should come before him. An opinion had been much in..
misted on by some persons in the country, that it was a
vain, ueele.ss • and expensive form to appeal from the opi-
nions of A delivered at one time, to the deliberate judgment of
'A at another time. From the earliest constitution of the Court;
it had been a principal of it to subject the proceedings on par.
titular occasions to the review of the Judge who had conducted
them ; and he could fancy it much more probable that Judges
generally would he more apt to feel alarm for the incorreeteeee
of their first opinions on such appeals, than to, betray an obni.
nate prejudice end favour in behalf of these opinions. Until it
very late period the writ of re ester rrgno was merely a high
prerogative writ, only issuable for purposes of state, such as
that of detaining subjects in the, country whose services were
considered necessary to its welfare : the use of it as it ineans'of
obtaining security forproperty in civil suits was at that time
unknown to the law. It would be difficult now to describe
upon what grounds the use of it was adopted into the practice
of equity, so as to make it available between subject and sub-.
ject„ as it lal before been between the King and the subject.
'lf the issuing of the writ were not upon the manic footing with
writs demandable ex debitojinnitice, without all question the
.Court was beund-to grant the writ upon examination of the
circumstance.' under the exercise of a sound discretion. The
cite timetances cetsential to the granting of it must be—first, that
the defendantlias nodisposition to fulfil his contract; secondly,
that there is an equitable debt ; thirdly, that such debt is fully
due; and lastly, the Court, seeing its way clear in these preli-
minaries, had to consider with what sum the writ should be
mai k. d. With respect to cases of account, this Court had a
surer method of dealing than that at common law. By re-
ference to the Master, e balance would be found frequently to
which there was an 'equitable as,well as a legal claim, and cer.
tainty was given .here to debts in balance of accounts which
were scarcely recoverable at' all at conemon law. There the
account must appear upon the declaration, and.the proofs must
strictly correspond. So that if the opponents of this juristic.
tion could succeed in destroying its equitable fuoctiOns within
six months, they would find that in matters of account and spe-
cific performance of contract, the constitution of the country
would leave them no remedy at all. The same observations
were applicable to the cases of executors and administrators,
who could only b6brought to account for assets received, by the
process cf this Coml. His Lordship went on to the lam of the
case immediately before •him. He apprehended thaelt Was
enough if the party deposed that this other party _was going
abroad, and that the debt was thereby in danger. The rule
of Lord Apsley was wholly inapplicable. This was not a
mere case of contract. A bill lied been filed for 'meat; perform-
ance, anti the contract having been established, the estate in
equity was vested in Sir George Wood. It was his to demise,
to dispose of, or to use as a security for debt—to do any thing;,
in short, with it which the equitable holder of an estate might do.
This was not a case, therefore, which fell even within Lord
Thurlow's rule, in which the judgment seemed to squint at the,
other property which a defendant might pos.sess. The posses-
sion ae'it'was before the Court being in Sir George Wood; no
man could say, that after the report'affirming the title, the writ
shouldi be marked for less than 38,000/. ; fur that was the tiebt
due upon the contract. Ile held, that in all such contracts, it
was for the vendee to prepare the conveyance and tender it to
the vender. . But there were other difficulties to be considered,
How were the plaintiff,' to sell the property while the equitable.
estate was in Sir George Wood ? How could the title he' got'
out of him ; and by what means could the parties ready to
purchase be held, while the plaintiffs were'getting the title out
of him ? • Certainly, then, thie must be an equitable debt for;
36,000/., the whcie of the,purchaae-money fbr the estate, which,
was a full consideretion. Of alum reasonable, deductions.
were to be made; but the rights of the parties were now dee
Glared to be the :tame as they were declared to be at the tiling
of the bill. It had never been denied' that the affidavit was
sufficient for the issuing of the writ. Some explanation had
been given on the part of Sir George Wood, but not such an
explanation as would discharge the writ. There were no
averments of Sir George Wood to meet the answer that he was'
going abroad, and that the debt tees in danger. The very:
integrity of Sir George Wood's intentioes, in supposing that!
his property left behind might be made anSwerable, might also
have prevented hint from removing the objections to thequash—
frig of the writ. There was no statement of any arraligement;
by which the debt might be secured. Ha could have no diffi.
cults in ordering Sir George 'Wood to pay 30,000/. into Court
if the panics should choose, otherwise the writ could not be
quashed: - 7
Mr. WgritEnte.t. asked leave to have the Miley now in
the hands of the Sheriff paid into Cowl,
Mr. lIART had no objection to have it paid in as part of the
purchaseemoney.
The Loan CHANcEI.I,OR said, that it :might be paid in
withoutdrejudice the questions; now before the Court-
Mr. Atte! said, that, Sir Gedrge Wood had profited 20. per,
cent. by the rise in the funds since the time of the contract._
if the money were to be paid in, it must' be with leave to the
plaintiff,' to ley it out immediately,
The Lon n ettaiecre..ion acceded, to this proposition. The'
Sheriff must be released from all reeponsibility, and deduct
hisecoste, or else receive 'them 'front. George Wood, who:
must also pay the costs of this application, as it was in en ap-
peal from a decree.
GoURLAT V. THE WORE 05' 50 MERIET.
The LORD CHANCELLOR received an immoderate pile of
papers from 'the parties, being a selection 'froin nine or ten
times as many, 'which 'were brought up for his selection ; and
until his Lordship shall have road them, he declined hearing
further argument in the case;

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. /0.
His Honour sat this day during she neeu,stumed hours; but
:he business before die Courthad no public interest.

COURT OF RINCVS PENCI!, Nov. 10.
Mr. Jamea'Snimp atitton whiptelrioceedinis in Staf-
fordabire and elsewhere have obtained for him so much noto-
riety, appeared in Coiirt; ' anti pleaded to the indictment for
conspiracy, pre.ferred against bird And otheut, by Sir Ororge
Jerninghani. The indictment will be tried at the next Staf-
ford asairks.
CLA/tX.I: V. 'r INRASITANTS OF TILE itIYNDRXD OF

111.1MICING.
Air. STortxq moycd for a rule 0 atiow cause why the %Tn.Urt
in tliiii CUe'shoillit hot be set agile, and. a new trial grit.,.-'d•
It waa au action
,a.gttinst the hondretl to recover damages
'sus-
tained in consequence of fire, uncles I/ Oett. L, commonly call.:
ed the Bincic...ttk3 ; and At the trial before Alt. Serjeant Rosen;
quet, at Bury S. Edmund's, the jury found a verdict for the,
Plaintiff— It appearetl' at the trial that the plaintiff had previ
husly received the. full arnoi'mt
°I. the 4‘4ll.agg, from an :riv.ir.:
ance-ciffice in which•his ituaaings weitl iheitred, and the action,
utg
though carried on- in hie haw, was.fcallY hro,ught for the . he.
,
:tat of Elie' Office. ' The 'Learned tlouthiel now contended
that-he ones ti,ot to recover, ea the actiott tired by the ,Statute
WAS grounded ors the dens e '"tAined.bY the individual and
here theindividual had qiiitaintdll4:damage. but, the- pro- 1
of opihtoh, *si prinelple,
reeding were intended to prntcct a third partr..frorn the effects
?r. ,Jtkatice NYE.gx,.p.nii
t3°4ifi:T•h:4jthee:':ln:e:"D:dtr*i:toe'iwtituCElVr;,ig3:fl''elhh*titgctrfjkgeTri.Ccbl;ltte.nt of the s tatute was to

N V. ASKEW...
Mr. PEARSON moved for'dtßule caning upon the defend-
ant to show cause why the nonsuit hluiin this actionfor i malt.
cious prosecution should not be set-ivae, and a verdict entered
for the plaintiff.
The plaintiff, who is a farmer at tliyerbury in Gloucester-
shire, had land adjoining the hind of a Dr Tunbrell, a Magis.
trate for the County of Gloucester: a dispute arose respecting a
1 pathway which the plaintiff alleged ought to run through Dr,
• I".'s huid Instead of his; the dispute was referred to arbitra-
tion, and it was decided that the path ought to run through Dr.
T. 's land, but the award was never earned . into execution.—
The defendant, who was surveyor of tlie•roads, was striking
out the path through the plaintiff's land, and the plaintiff pre-
vented him front doing so : the plaintiff' was then brought be.
fora Dr. Tunbrell,' who decided that he was wrong, and con_
victed him In a penalty of forty shillings: the plaintiffWita ad-
vised to appeal against that conviction, and he obtained the do.
content from the defendant, avowedly for the purpose of copy-
ing it, but with the view of taking it from him entirely: the
defendant endeavoured to get it hick, but the plaintiff resisted,
and kept possession of the conviction. The defendant went-be-
fore a Magistrate and took out a warrant against the plaintiff for
an assault, and for takingpossession of the conviction against
his will, and upon that warrant the plaintiff was committed to
gaol, where he lay live days before he could provide bail. At
the Sessions the indictment was preferred for the common
' assault only, but the Grand Jury threw out the bill. On the
trial at the last Assizes for Gloucestershire the Clerk of the Peace
was examined, but he could not produce the original informa-
tion and the warrant issued thereupon, and the Learned Coun-
sel for the plaintiff then proposed to give other evidence of its
contents, but Mr. Justice Park refused to hear such evidence,
and the plaintiff' was non-suited. The Learned Counsel this
day contended that such evidence ought to havo been received.
--Rule granted.
THE KING ON THE PROSECUTION OF JOSEPH ILAYTHORN,
ESQ. V. -BRYANT AND OTHERS.
Mr. Serjeant PELL moved for a rule to show cause why the
Verdict of " guilty" should not be set aside, and a new trial
granted. It was an indictment charging the defendants with
a conspiracy to defeat a judgMent obtained by the prosecutor
against Mr. Bryant, be a fraudulent assignment of his property.
The case was tried at the last assizes for Bristol, before fur.
Justice But-rough, when, after a very long trial, the defendants
were found-guilty. The Learned Serjeant now moved for the
rule on the ground that the verdict was against evidence, anti
contrary to the opinion'of the Learned Judge.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said that he would take an op-
portunity of speaking to Mr. Justice Burrough on the subject,
and if he expressed his dissatisfaction with the verdict, a rule
would be granted at once ; if not, it would be better to postpone
the discussion until all the facts were brought before the Judges
on the report of the proceedings.
At a few miniitea before three o'clock, the Lord Mayor, ac.
cotnpanied by the late Lord Mayor and the Recorder, came
into Court, in the customary form. The Recorder demanded
a 'recognition of the rights of the City as usual, and invited the
Judges to dinner; on which their Lordships bowed. The Lord
Mayor conversed with several of the King's Counsel, especially
with the Solicitor-General and Mr. Scatlett.

COURT OF COMAION PLEAS, Nov. 10.

LATE FIRE IN WATLIN(3-STREET'.
Titunirrir. r. AEATIMON'T.
This was an action brought against Mr. B. Beaumont, as
Managing Director of the County Office, by Thomas Thurtell
(brother of the unfortimate man occulted of the murder of Mr.
Weare,) to recover the sum of 2,aOD/., the alleged value of
goods insured by the plaintiff, which it was alleged were con-
sumed by .fire in his warehouse, No. 93, Wading-stiett, Lon-
don, id January last. The case was tiled at Omldlst) before
Mr. Justice PARK, at the sittings after last Term. The de-
fendant on that occasion endeavoured to show that the tire was'
caused by the plaintiff, or with his privity; but the jury, after
hearing the case,, and the opinion of the Learned Judge, gave
a verdict for the plitintiff-Lciamages 1,9131., as the value of the
goods sworn to have been oh the preterit:4s at the time of the fire.
Mr. Serjeant 'Rumor, for the defendant, this day moved fur
a rule to sew cause why the verdict should not be set aside,
anti a new trial granted. Before mentioning the points upon
which he founded his motion, the Learned Serjeant gave an
outline of the case as it was proved on the trial. It appeared
that in December, 1822, an insurance was effected in the
County Fire-office for 2,a00/., on stock in trade and utensils in'
a warehouse, No. 93, Wading-siteet, in London. This ware-
honse was consumed on the 2.flth January following, on u Sun-
day mnrniog, about five o'clock. The warehouse of Thurtell
consisted of two rooms on the first floor of the house; the lower
part wits occupied as the store of Mr: Penny, a winc-merchant.
The plaintiff sustained his case by the evidence of 3 witnesses.
The first and most material of these was John Thurtell. The
account he gave of himself and of the transaction was, that he:,
had been. in business on his own account hi Norwich—that he
became a bankrupt, and was then uncertificated. His brother
Thomas, he added, had been a farmer, but having failed in
that, he came to town and took a pliblic-hbdile in the Hay..
market, for, which he gave 1,000/.. Soon after this, he empleye
ed him (the brother John) to, take the warehouse in question
for the purpose of selling job-goods. The goods he dealt in
were principally bombasina. John Thurtell further stated,
that be was the last person in the warehouse on the evening be-
fore the tire--that he .then raked out the tire; and that he Wes
always in the habit of turning down the candle before he left
the place in the evening. Arideeooreor Eonieson,the warehouse.
man, he mild, left the place before him, about half an hour.—
fle,,himeelf left it at half-past five in the evening. He went that
evening to the Opera, in company with Enitor and re-
maineti till it, was over. From thence they went to a public.,
house or tavern in Piccadilly, called " The Saloon" and there
remained several hours. Mr. Easter in his testithony 'stated,
that he was in company with 'John Thurtell the whole of this
time, and that be parted with him on the Sundey inorning(thit
cf the tire) neer Charing-cross, Thtirtell taking the'direction of
the Strand, and he (Ensor) going by Whitehall towards West-
mineter.britige; that as he was passing the florae (heads the
clock struck tive, so that it must have been within a few niinutes
of that hour when he patted froM.Thartell: In his evidence,
filburtell atided,lbat after-parting from' Fensor on the morning
in question,, he proceedtel slog the Strand up as far as the
end of Fleet-street text to Fleet-market ; from thence, instead
of going-up Ludgate-hill and'along by his Warehoutie, lie turn-
ed down into Bridge-street, and from thence through Titeir.es-
street to fearlick-hill, to a house where he hed been-in the habit
of sleeping with a woman with whoth he vi,habited. In the
evidence of the. woman of this hoiesel it appeared that it was
a (platter beanie five when he arrived at home. So (conti-
nued the Learned 'Serjeant)r there waif here- adiffcrence of tea-
timony r.S to the time of' his returningefor according to Envies
account, it reuse have been.a consideribld time after five when
Thurtell get home. It farther appeared that John Thurtell
hati slept et this home in Garlick-bill every night for some time
before, theitgle, according to hianecotint, brother Theme
believed' that be Slept on those highte at the premises he Wet:
iingLstreet. rfe aide sworeethaf goods to; rat Amount exceeding
,000/. had be.!ir broitght into time warehouse, and that-none of
thern had hten,rotOved from •it before the the, except sone
piece's eel!i bait 'Veen, returned. It also appeared, that on
the day before the fire, goods .tollie amount of 421. had been
brought
The Lelrd 'chief Justice DALLAS.—What wa.s the value of
the geode proved P
lilr Sereatit TAnDY.---My Lord, the velure. insured was
2,6(h)1. hot tbe,./tiry`gave a 'verdiev for 1,9131 e as the'Ygne of
the geode proved to been been ,on the premised at the; time of
the fire. Thilicanted..Serjeatit continued--The proof of the
goods in the warelieuee-rested Mainly owthe evidence df a wit-
ness narned-1. north-rick .SrioWdeni whir-proved the receipt on-
* preithes of se Veralrercelt Of goncls,,46lTiCiftinifte'cottritiy
m iii some,from'•l,ehit and Co.; and !Oki finite Totht laid' 009 in
London, ten of W.-eh:were paid cfttr, 'On'-bitog..delivertd: at 'did
holier in 'Wadioreeitreet. This- *sashed Maven 40 by. a 110 On
naintet Fanner, The' tnineipal avitokitif for .tht •klifetidlittit was
is tit wserrivihit Witri+Wifeitihrt'beionifitilt to ?VI Pony;
whb Sferrt !tithe liaell4iFtire4ittat tadtkittite hottoe: r tiled mated;
that on hang alarmed by the watchman, who bud his box oppo. ,