The Sun.
London, England, 1823-03-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

,
-VICE CHANCELLOR'S COURT", Manor
. • cuwris v. ounirie. •
Mr. BE ta. stated, that this cause came before his Honour on
an exception to the Master's report. It was a Bill filed by Miss
siatie Curtin; &tighter to the late Sir Roger Curtis, against her
brother, Sir Luciue Curtis, and a Mr. Cooke, executent of the
testator, calling for an account of the testator's personal estate.
When the first cause came on before the Court, it was inti.
mated by the defendants, that this lady bad possessed herself
of some of the testator's personal estate, which she had not ac.
counted to'the executors for, and it was referred' to the Master
to make the proper inquirY, whether she had actually receivedor paid any of the personal estate; and he reported, that she
had not come into poSsession of any of the testator's personal
estate; but the defendants (for whom Mr. Bell appeared).say,
that he ought to have found she bad received the amount of
7101; and on that exception to the report, it now came on for
discussion,' and the question would turn on two letters written
by the late Lady' Curtli to a friend of' hers, the contents of
which were, begging her frit:llElolBer her decease, to go into
her room,, in a particular part of which she would find a ;mall,
deal box..chntainitig 2741. in gold coin, and '436/.ln Bank of Eng.
land notes, Part of which she said was given to her by her ino-
tber betbre her marriage with Sir Roger ; nor did she state in
any part 'of her letters that her husband ever knew of her hay.
ing one shilling of that property ; and It was requested that it
should bo equally divided, between her two children Sir Lu-
cius and'Mbis Curtis. Slr-Roger'died In November 1816, and
Lady Curtis died in April 1817 ; and' her Ladyship wasin an
ill state of health at the time she wrote these letters to her
friend. Now the defendants contend, that that property could
not •be considered the separate
_property of her Ladyship, it
having been in her possession when she was a married woman,
and not being devised distinctly to her for her own separate use
by her husband, they isubMitted the Court ought to declare it
to be the personal property of the testator.
His Howoult.—Tliese letters seem to have been written in
the nature of a testamentary gift; and it is evident that Lady
Curtis claimed part of 7101. as being her own separate pro-
perty. Now how am Ito decide what part of it was her own ?
Mr. BELL—We do not expect that your Honour can make a
precise mathematical distinction ; but we think it may be
known about how much of it had been given to her Ladyship
before her marriage, though we contend the whole of it ought
to be considered the testator's, (Sir Boger's).
His Hosionn—No, I do not think it ought. What you will
have to make out will be, that persons who mix their'sepitate
money With the money, of other people, if-they cannot distin-
guish their own money afterwards they must lose the :whole of
it ;,--that is the rule you must' mike out to .apply here, and
confess it will be a very hard thing to apply that rule in such a
family as this, which would,have the effect of taking the whole
of this property from Miss Curtis; let it be divided equally
betiteen her and her brother:
Mr: Blatt--.And your Honour will please to ordCr the fund
to bo brought into Court, because it will afterwards appear that,
the plaintiff huts an interest inthe funds of the testator generally,His ,
ficiwouni—Then let it be declared that a moiety °Nina
money belonged to the late Lady Curtis, for her own separate
use, which she bequeathed to her daughterl and that, the other
Moiety is'part of the personal estate of Sir Roger, which let be
brought into Court.

ATTEMPTED SVICIDE.*.AD attempt nt self-
destructirm was made yesterday morning early, bra young
woman, on Westminster-bridge. She had been obserrett
orle of the seat's, and`stispicion being
excited„ from the nuns
r.
,ber o suititles on the bridfie, -She *is watched, aml shortly
•?.fter Wards seen to go down the steps. If er rash intentions were
here frustrated by a Waterman; and after some entreaty Jew
visa taken away in the =lced", of two humane isdividuals to
her friends.