The Sun.
London, England, 1823-01-22 00:00:00

LAW INTELIAGENCE.

• • COURT OF CHANCBRY, lot. 2h
TheLoRD CHANCELLOR !Mt in the private room In conse-
quence of continued indisposition.

BATH 11051.1TA1.5. , .
This was a petition from the trustees of St. John's Hospital,
which was founded in the 12th century. It bad made grants
of land to the Bath Infirmary, and upon the expiring of the
lease, A dispute arose between them As to the terms of .renewal.
Sir John Trevor was at Bath at the time for the benefit of his
health • and the mutter being amicably referred, he made' an
award 'requiring the lessees to pay one year's amotineeitthe
witted rent as the price of renewal. • The lease. has again
pired,, and the lessees sought to renew it on the terms of that
award. It was contended by the Other Side, that the Court
could have no jurisdiction over the. award. The owners:of
the freehold )Maintained their right to a year's value of the, rent
as now improved,' and that the Court had jurisdiction, Which
It had subsequently exerted Ivan the ground of that award in
two instances. • , •
The LOUD CITANCET.I.On said, that.the power of the COurt
in cases of 'charities. was very great. Still he would have allow.
ed the doubts on his mind as to, the jurisdiction to weigh, but
for, the precedents of two of his learned predecessors. Ai be
found it safer to relate them than to trtist told* own opinion; he
would do so. If the jurisdiction wereto he disturbed, it must
he done in the House of Lords, He ,could see. no reason why
the renewal should not be proportioned to the increased value: of
lands; and he would refer the matter to the Master for . that,
purpose, reserving the question of costs for another time.
EX•PAILTE AN SMITH, ISt RE SITITII, A DECI:ASED

LUNATIC.
There were two petitions ; one prayed for allotment and ar-
rears of dower, anti the other that the residue' in the hands of
the receiver of the estate eliould be withheld from liability .to
any charges, including his own a:xi-fences, until the costs in very
extensive proceedings, had in Doctors' Commons to try the yet .
dity of the marriage, all of which were adjudged aguinst the
friends and relations, could' be ascertained, andthat the said
residue should be proportioned accordingly. It was objected
that there could be no prayer for dower in a lunatic petition;, to
which it was replied, that there could be no objection to a re-.
erenee under the petition, for the Mutter to inquire if any and
what dower should be granted. The question was argued at
some length.
The ii0111)CIIANCVLI.011 did not ,see tiny objection to, in.
(wiring as to what dower, if any, the widow was entitled ; but
that reference must depend upon die contents of other petitions
pending in the case. As to the prayer respecting costs, that
must be distbissed. lI.W4IIITIaIbn of course that the receiver
should reimburse himself, and the estate must also bear the eX-•
pence: incurred by the'conunittet of the perstm, of the estate,
and also of the next of kin, in those liroccediriga which sought
the remedy or advantage of the lunatic; otherwise there would
be a deficiency of that providence arid care which the law in-
tended should surround parties suffering such severe dispenta.
tions.
AGILICULTUTIAL DISTII,I:B9,—T.X4AIITE TOWN IN Tux
NATTER or wit.stor, A LITNAT4.•
Mr. Hoitxx stated that the, petitioner had ic.2l a lease of
land, situated in the county of Kent, *am the committee; cal-
culating .the profits and proceeds- at the prices which gtain
fetched in'lBl9 ; that those prices had afterwards declined so
much, that whereas wheat sold then, at :735. the quarter, it
would now produce no more than 4.15. peter:tarter ; that he. led
laid out considerable money en therstate.oviiich at the present
prices did not 'remunerate the expences of cultivation: The
prayer was for & reduction of rent, such as the -Court should
judge suitable to the decline of egricolturkl produce sleet the
execution of the lease.
'Mr. Stiuritie maintained that the petitioner was not 'entitled..
to his prayer in any case., and especially not in the rase which
he had submitted. He had taken possession in 18111: and the
lease was executed in 1821. Between these periods there could
have been no very extraordinary decline of value in t.reduce o'
he would not have consented to the execution of the least. • e