The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-10 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
V/CE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, July 9.
(Before Sir J, KNIGHT RarcE )
BLAIR V. OR310141).
This bill was filed for the purpose of recovering the
sum of 8771. 4s. ld.. Navy Five per Cent. Annuities and
the dividends of the same, which one Joseph Buckley
lent to Thomas Wood, and which the latter alleged to
have been repaid or forgiven.
The plaintiff, Mr. James Blair, a solicitor of Uttoxeter,
is the surviving executor of Thomas Buckley Bridger,
who was the nephew and only relative of Joseph Buckley,
the lender, and is also the administrator of Joseph
Buckley. The defendants, Mr. William Ormond and
Mr. William Hayward, are the trustees and executors
of the will of Thomas Wood, the borrower.
The facts out of which the suit arose appear to be as
follow :—Buckley was a ticket porter in London, and on
the death of his brother, some time before 1812, he be-
came possessed of about the above-mentioned sum of
stock. Thomas Wood, who was originally a Vintner's
porter, in London, formed an acquaintance with Buckley,
and the former lodged with him and his wife Prudence
from 1796 to 1802, when Wood bought some property at
Charlton, when Buckley accompanied him from London,
and paid 10s. or 12s. a week for board and lodging.
Every half-year Buckley went from Charlton to London
to receive his dividends. Upon representations made to
him, Buckley early in 1812 sold out part of his stock
and lent the produce, 1001., to Wood, and afterwards
sold out the remainder, and received the produce, 733/.,
in Bank notes, which he took to the house of Wood's
nephew, who sewed up the money in Buckley's shirt-
sleeve, under his arm, and apprised his uncle of the fact.
On the sth of December, 1812, Buckley lent the 7331.
to Wood, and Wood's solicitor prepared a bond for him
to Buckley for 2,0001., conditioned to transfer 8771.45.
ld., Navy Five per Cent. Annuities, and to pay a sum
equal to the dividends in the meantime; and also a me-
morandum by way of equitable mortgage, or a deposit of
title deeds, relating to a house and land at Charlton, be-
longing to Wood, and which deeds were, therefore, de-
livered to Buckley, but afterwards came back to the pos-
session of Wood. ,Buckley continued to live as a
boarder and lodger with Wood at Charlton until his
death, which happened in September, 1842, and during
that time Wood supplied him with money to pay for
clothes, and with very small sums of money, such as two
crown pieces, which Buckley carefully preserved as
pocket pieces. Ile frequently demanded payment of his
money from Wood, and also possession of the deeds, and
when very troublesome Wood used to humour him by
talking about a nobleman's daughter who he thought
was in love with him. Immediately after Buckley's
death, which happened after a week's illness, during
which he was insensible, Wood directed his nephew to
write a letter to the nephew of Buckley, which letter
Wood signed, informing him of Buckley's death, and in-
forming him that he had lived to spend all his money,
and that nothing was left; and on going over to Charlton
the same story was repeated, :excepting only that it was
said Buckley had left an old coat with silver buttons,
two crown pieces, and a watch. These articles the ne-
phew Bridger refused to take, and demanded his uncle's
deeds, but could not get them, and then went and con-
sulted the defendant, Mr. Ormond, a solicitor at \Van-
tage, who declined to act for Bridger as he was solicitor
for Wood. He, however, made some inquiry of
Wood, but then declined further interference.
Wood, the debtor, died in March, 1843, having, by will,
devised his real estates to the defendants in trust for
sale, and appointed them executors. Bridger having
died, but that fact being unknown to William Wood, the
nephew of Wood the debtor, a letter was written by
William Wood to him, offering to disclose the facts re-
lating to the loan of the money. This letter was for-
warded by Bridger's surviving partner to Mr. Blair, the
plaintiff, who thereupon investigated the matter and
took proceedings, giving notice to the several persons
who had agreed to buy Wood's estate not to complete,
for that he had a claim by reason of the bond. The de-
fence set up by the answer was that Buckley gave Wood
the money, and on his death-bed acknowledged that he
had done so; and the statute of limitation was set up as
a bar to the claim if any; so long ago as 1824, the de-
ceased, Bridger, knew every fact relating to the case, but
never took proceedings, and that, although Mr. Wood
died early in 1843, yet the bill was not filed till the latter
part of 1844. Buckley died on the 11th of Sept., 1824,
and the bill was filed on the 4th of Sept., 1844, seven
days within the 20 years.
Mr. Swanston and Mr. Wright appeared for the plain-
tiff ; Mr. Russell, Mr. Kenyon Parker, Mr. Heathfield,
and Mr. Haynes for the defendant.
His HONOUR said, that if the defendants required to
try the validity of the bond by an action at law, he
thought they were entitled to it ; but the plaintiff's
counsel could be heard against such right.
Mr. RUSSELL said he wished to try the action.
Mr. SWANSTON was heard in opposition to the right to
bring an action ; and was followed by
Mr. WRIGHT, who contended that in such a case there
was no need of an action. The plaintiff had made out
such a case as entitled him to a decree on the evidence
as it stood. If the plaintiff went to law, he might hasard
his case by the caprice, the folly, and the ignorance of a
jury. Even in the present day, little as people could
believe it, verdicts were tossed up for. If a jury were
shut up, without fire, or food, or drink, when halt
starved, who could say they would not toss up for a
verdict?

His HONOUR remarked that the Learned Judge now
on the bench had allowed a jury water, holding that
that element did not come within the description of
drink.

Mr. Wavairr would not like to trust even a water-
drinking jury. It might happen that all the jury but
one might be of the same opinion, and yet the eleven
might be beaten by the one. Such a case did happen in
Ireland, and the one who stood out against his companions
admitted that he could not afford to convict a prisoner,
who, if convicted, would have been hanged, because he
was the last life in his, the juryman's lease
His HONOUR said, that if the counsel for the de-
fendant would consent that he should give his decision
on the whole case without any reference being made to
the jury, he would do so.
Mr. RUSSELL declined to accede to the proposition.
The defendant was entitled to have the right tried at
law.
His HONOUR gave judgment, in which he detailed
the whole facts with great minuteness, and said, that
considering the date of the time when Mr. Bridger,
through his solicitor, Mr. Simpson, communicated with
Mr. Ormond, when, if notsbesutosrpei,cihoenskanweawketnheadt, Mir.
Ormond had been or was Mr. Wood's solicitor, and that
kMnre.wl3,raidt legearstt, theoutline h enhavinghis
of his case, still lived for fif-
teen years and took no step ; that Wood lived three
years after and nothing done; Mr. Blair, the executor,
of Bridger, and Bridger himself, must be considered as
identical. In such a case it was not proper that the
Court should interfere unless the bond were established
at law; an action must therefore be tried on the bond.
The bill must be dismissed with costs as to the pur-
chasers, and in all other respects the cause must stand
over until after judgment in the action.
Solicitor for the plaintiff, Mr. Brackenridge, for Mr.
Blair, of Uttoxeter. ; solicitors for the defendants,
Messrs. Fennell, Child, and Kelly,

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, July 9.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HoLROYD.)
IN THE BANKRUPTCY OP WRIGHT AND CO.
A meeting for the purpose of receiving proofs of debts
in this estate, where the bankrupts had been bankers in
Henrietta street,3o,Coeo.vl7 Whicht-gardwena,s
admitted eras heldwtiot-hdoauyt,bu
dis-
cussion.but
only one proof was tendered, that of the Norwich Union
Company, for 2

Mr.esc riCommissionerbed
a s
a s hPANE.)daeler of the
are
IN THE BANKRUPTCY OF W. C. WELLS.
This bankrupt, d
Poultry, applied for his certificate, whi h c was unopposed.
His debts were 7781, and his assets one good debt of
21. 16s.
Mr. Commissioner PANE refused to grant the certifi-
cate forthwith, observing that persons who chose to
speculate in railway shares to the injury of their credi-
tors could not be allowed to use this court as a means to
rid themselves of their liabilities, and to start afresh in
a similar course. The allowance of the certificate in
this case must be adjourned for 12 months from the date
of the fiat.
(Before Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN.)
IN THE BANKRUPTCY OF D. E COLUMBINE.
This bankrupt was a well-known attorney of Carlton
Chambers, Regent-street,;and this was appointed for the
passing of the adjourned last examination.
The COMMISSIONER, read the report of the official as-
signee, which set forth that the bankrupt's balance-sheet
commenced in 1831 with a sum of 6,9491. ss. as capital
received from his parents, upon an agreement to pay
them the same rate of interest as its investment in the
public funds would have produced. The total amount
of the bankrupt's debts was 18,7431. 1 ls. 9d., while his
assets were the value of 1,500 shares in the Direct Lon-
don and Exeter Railway Company, duo for services ren-
dered to that company up to September, 1845, a bill of
costs against that company about 3501., a debt owing by
a person named Miller 361., furniture and fixtures about
100/., and some cash given up, making a total of 3,3631.
There was also a claim of 5001. as a proportion of the
profits as joint solicitor to the Direct London and Exeter
Railway Company with Messrs. Stokes, and various bills
of costs due by parties whose names were not specified
upon the balance-sheet. The report concluded by stat-
ing that better accounts were desirable, including a de-
tailed profit and loss account, and a statement of the
names of the parties against whom the bankrupt had
claims for professional business done.
Mr. BAGLEr, counsel for the assignees, agreed with
the official assignee in asking for an adjournment, and
complained that the bankrupt had withheld his assist-
ance from his creditors in some proceedings now pending
in the courts at Boulogne for the recovery. of property
which belonged to Mr. Columbine. Some jewels, which
the bankrupt alleged he bad sent from Boulogne to
Amsterdam to a banker whose name he did not recol-
lect, by a person whose name he did not know, had now
found their way back to England, but a claim to them
was set up on behalf of the bankrupt's daughter; and the
assignees desired that the property should be deposited
in some safe hands until the right to it was established.
There was also a book at Boulogne relating to the
affairs of a Major Teesdale, which the bankrupt had
hitherto withheld from his creditors by refusing to give
any authority for its removal.
Mr. CooxE, on behalf of the bankrupt, professed an
entire willingness to render every reasonable assistance
to the assignees.
The Learned COMMISSIONER hoped that the bankrupt
would, as he was bound to do, assist his creditors in their
efforts to recover property, which would tend to place
him in a better position before the Court.
After some discussion the last examination was ad.
journed until Nov. 4.

Mr. Ewart and Dr. Bowring had an interview yester-
day with Earl Grey. The Rev. Dr. Lang had also an
interview with Ilia Lordship yesterday at the C9lQllO,l'
office,