The Sun.
London, England, 1858-02-09 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENO.E.—(This Day.)

ROLLS COURT.
EVANS V. EVANS.
Ilia honour, the Master of the Rolls, delivered judg.
meat in this cause at the sitting of the court this
morning.

His Honour said that this question arose about the
right construction to Tie put upon the will of the late
Edward Evans, farmer, Harley well, county of Hereford.
The question wag, what signification was to be put upon
the word "survivor," whether it is to be applied t
those who take or t those who survive the tenant for
life ? The t stat,r, by his will, gave the use of all his
property to his wife during her life, and after her death.
to his two sons George and Richard, in the proportion
of one and two-thirds, and to their children. The tes-
tator directed all his debts to be paid, but there was no
gift over in case of failure. The testator desired that
301. should be paid to the eldest son of George, over
and above his father's share, if he should survive him.
His Honour said that there could be no doubt
as to the general rule of construction, laid
down in the case of Crip and Woolbrock, where
the child survived the tenant for li e be took the pro-
perty ; but the bequest to the eldest son of George, who
was alive at the date of the will, took this case out of the
ordinary rule of construction, and gave a vested right in
the children on the death of the tenant for life. In
Bouverie v. Brewer v. Philips, LordCottenhamdirected
the share of the children dying in the lifetime of their
mother to go over to their representatives on the death
of the mother. His honour was therefore of opi-
nion that George S. Richard took a vested
interest on the death of the tenant for life in
the proportions of one and two-thirds of his
property—that in the event of Jne dying without issue
ju
nior
but distribution his share would not go to the
but be divided amongst his personal representatiyes,
consequently one-third of the interest that was devised
to Richard went to his personal representatives.
His Honour passed a tiecrecaccerdingly.
His Honour is to dispose of the question of costs to-
morrow.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings at Niti Piius, before Lord Campbell and a
Common Jury.)
ASHLEY V. CHAUNCEY.

This was an action brought by
the plaintiff, an hotel
keeper, of Henrietta-street, Covent-garden, against the
defendant, an officer in the East India Company's
service, to recover the sum of 251. on a bill of ex-
change, accepted by him and drawn by R. Oineroyd
Potts. The defendant pleaded especially that the bill
was fraudulently retained by the plaintiff, which threw
the onus of proof on the defendant.
The defendant was put into the box and deposed—
That wishing to release a friend named Hind from
Whitecross-street Prison, he had a conversation with
Potts on the subject. The latter was staying at the
time at the plaintiff's hotel, and it was arranged be-
tween them, as they had no money to spare, that
Potts should draw a bill, which the defendant should
accept payable at Messrs. Grindley's, the army agents,
when he (Potts) would ask the plaintiff to discount it,
The bill was accordingly drawn, and the plaintiff con-
sented to discount it, provided the reference was satis-
factory. He called on Messrs. Grindley, and afterwards
told Potts that he should not discount the bill unless he
was permitted
to retain 101. on account of Potts' hotel
bill, for which he held in pawn Potts' luggage. He
remonstrated with the plaintiff for his conduct, he having
been informed under what circumstances the bill was
drawn, and as he refused t) give the bills up except on
the terms stated, he gave him notice not to part with the
bill, and the action was brought.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Serjeant Parry for
the plaintiff defendant said ho was with Potts in Lincoln's-
inn-fields when be was apprehended on a charge of
stealing bills from the Hon. Mr. Courteney, grandson of
the Earl of Devon, and that he appeared at Potty's
examination before the magistrate, and proved that be
had seen Potts give consideration for the bills
to Jennings who preferred the charge against him.
In June or July last he took the benefit of the act at
Exeter, but he was unable to state whether his debts
amounted to between 3,0001, and 4,0001., or 5,0001. and
6,0001. He did not read over his schedule before signing
it, and be believed several debts were afterwards
inserted. He was several times under examination.
He was in this country on sick leave, and during the
time he had been in the country he bad carried on busi-
ness as a wine merchant. His debts under his insolvency
were principally for bills, for which he received no consi-
deration, and they were given for a friend who deceived
him.

Mr. R. 0. Potts, a fashionably-dressed young man,
deposed that he and his wife had stopped at the plain-
tiff's hotel, and not being able to pay him his bid he
held witness's luggage as security. He never told the
plaintiff that he would get a friend of his to accept a
bill with which to pay him ; but two days after the
plaintiff had this bill be left the hotel with his wife and
their baggage, which the plaintiff gave up to them. He
dibtinctly declined to statewhether or not belied 15,000/.
worth of Mr. Courteney's bills now in his possession. He
did not give a farthing's consideration for the bills
about which he was summoned before a magistrate ; he
never offered to return the bills for 501., but he believed
his solicitor said something about 701. for giving them
up. When the plaintiff held witness's luggage for his
debts, he told Mr. Courteney he could get advance for him
on bills ; he was in debt to several lodging-housekeepers,
and in the case of one, a Mr. Ditnsdale, he informed
against him for giving him a receipt without a stamp ;
he afterwards obtained a mitigation of the penalty—
(laughter)—for her, but he had never received any part
of the penalty for his information ; be bad been and was
now in difficulties, in 1851 he took the benefit of the
act, and he had his petition now before the insolvent
act ; in his schedule it was stated, the truth of which he
had sworn to, that he owed the plaintiff about 151. for
hotel expenses, for which he held a bill of xoliange for 251.
drawn by him and accepted by the defendant (the bill
in question). The bill was incorrect:y described in his
schedule, which contained so Inarq blunders that he
won' I be unable to pass the court.
Mr. Seijeant Parry was about to address the jury
wken

Lord Campbell said he thought that the action was
not maintainable, and ho doubted if the jury, after the
statement in the schedule, would place much reliance on
Potts's e valence.
Ultimately a verdict was taken by consent for the
plaintiff for 20/. the amount of the hotel bill.

P3LIOE INTELLIGENCE.— (This Day.)

- -
FURIOUS DRIVINg.—John Hill a carman,
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
of No. 1,
Garden-place, Regent-square was charged before Mr.
Beadon, with furiously driving a, horse and cart in the
Haymarket, at between eight and nine yesterday
evening, and thereby
endangering life and limb. John Judd, a public carriage attendant, No. 26, said
he saw the defendant who was drunk, furiously trotting
the hone. He appeared to have no control over the
animal, and drove against cab No. 2,653
which was
coming out of Charles-utreet by which he threw his own
horse down and drove the c' ah
011 the kerb and against
a man who keeps au orange-stall, overturning cab-
driver, stall-kof per,
and stall. The diiver fortunately
wheel, and was taken off to the
rseaped without any injuryinjury but the stall-keeper had his
hospital.
John Cronin, the stall-keeper
said he was upset in
the way described by last witness, and his leg was
leg injured by the w-
bruised by the cart Wheel. It vrai properly attended to
at
,he hospital,
n and fortunately he was enabled to
appear here this
pletely over and his fruit scattered about.
Defendant, in answer, said, it was all the cabman's
r.ornimorning,His 6tall Ran driven com-
fault—not his. He had called out to him to get out of
the way, but was n-it heeded. He was quite sober.
C. 46, who, took defendant into custody, said be was
quite drunk.
Fined 40P., and 20 4. as compensation to the stall-
keeper, or one month in default.