The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-10 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings in Banco, before Chief Baron Pollock, Rawls

Martin, Bramwell, arid Wat Hon.)

LANGSTON FAN V. WRATH ERALL -STRANGE PROCEEDINGS

Mr. Barstow- applied for a rule to show cause why the
name cf Lord (iluneig, one of the two plaintiffs, should
not be struck out ; the proceedings stopped and the at-
torney bo compelled to pay the costs incurred. Lord
Glenelg's name had been used against his consent or
knowledge, and it appeared from the affidavits filed in
the case that in 1843 a gentleman named John William
Cooke married the Rev. Mr. Weatberall's daughter,
when a part nuptial settlement was made on aidebt of
15,0001. stated to be owing from the father to the de-
fendant. Two trustees were named in the settle-
ment. One, the plaintiff Mr. Langston, and the
ether L-. rd Glenelg, whose name was used without his
lordship's knowledgecr consent. He knew nothing of the
parties, except that on one occasion, many years since, he
met Mr. Weatherall at a friend's house, and afterwards
accepted an invitation from him to dino at his house.
Lord Glenelg was ignorant of the liberty that had been
taken with his name, until be had received a letter from
Mr. Cooke's trustee, stating it was intended to have the
settlement set aside. Lord Glenelg immediately wrote
in reply that ho would have nothing to do with the
matter, and expressed his surprise at his name having
been used in the settlement. The Rev. Mr. Weatherall
afterwards wrote to Lord Glenelg, apologising for having
used his lordship's name without previous application to
him for that purpose, and asking bun to act. Lord
Glenelg wrote in reply that he c mid not as t, and
he should renounce the trust ; and in 1844
a deed of disclaimer was prepared which re-
cited the above facts and renouncing the trust.
His lordship afterwards found that a warrant of attorney
for the amount had been given concurrently with the
execution of the settlement, and thatjudgmeut had been
entered up in his name as one of the trustees. On an
applicaion to this court, Mr. Baron Parke made an
order striking Lord Glenelg's name out of the proceee-
ings, and his lordship imagined he should never mote
hear anything about the matter. After the disclaimer
had been executed, an action was brought against the
father in the name of the other trustee to re civer the
amount named as the settlement, when judgment passed
fur the plaint'ff, without argument. It was afterward,
taken to the Exchequer Criaraber where the judgment
was set aside, on the ground that, notwithstanding the
disclaimer the action should have been brought iu the
names of the two truslees named in the settlement. WI at
(,Ir. Barstow) subtni ted was that, in 1844, the partieP, be
instead cf proceeding by action at lap', should have
gone to a Court c f Equity, when in all protab lity the
court would have ordered tire money to have been paid.
Subselnent proceedings were taken, and in 1858 Lord
Glenelg found that the attorney in the case bad i,stied
proceedin:-,a in his lordship's name without any applica-
tion to his lordship far his permission to do so. His
lordship wished to hove nothing to do with the parties,
eed bale great ohj ,ction to his name being mixed up
with the parties. Yesterday a similar application wes
made at chambers to Mr. Baron Martin, when his lord-
ship made an order in accordance with the present appli