The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-10 00:00:00

PRIVY COUNCIL.

The Lords of his Majesty's Privy Council held a meet-
ing yesterday in the Council Chamber, which was attended
by the Lord President, the Vice-Chancellor, Mr. Baron
Parke, the Right Honourables Sir John Nicholl and Thos.
Erskine.
The Lords were occupied during their sitting, with hear-
ing the objections, by way of appeal, of Mr. Burge, as
the agent for the island of Jamaica, against, the rules of the
Commissioners of the West India Compensation Fund.
The appeal was supported by Mr. Burge, K.C., and Mr.
Bethell. By the 47th section of the Abolition Act the
Commissioners were required to institute a full and exact
inquiry into all the circumstances connected with each of the
eolonies, which ought in justice or equity to regulate the
apportionment of the Compensation Fund, and afterwards to
draw up and frame all such general rules (regard being had
to the laws and usages in force in each colony respectively)
as to them might seem best adapted in each colony for se-
curing the just and equitable distribution of the funds.
It was contended that the Commissioners had not made
this full inquiry here required, but in the general rules they
had issued, had taken, as the principle of apportion-
ment the ordinary rule of priority of incumbrance—thus
benefitting the mortgagee of an estate to the exclusion of
the right of the mortgagor, and satisfying the prior in-
cumbrance without any regard to the capability of the
owner of an estate to continue its cultivation ; whereas the
Legislature intended that all persons bearing a portion
of the loss by the abolition of slavery should be entitled to
a portion of the compensation. The rule of the Commis-
sioners, however, would except the first mortgagee from
loss, and would be an indemnity to one class of persons
only, viz., the holders of incumbrances.
The negroes in Jamaica alone had been valued at twenty-
one millions, so that the assumption of the appellants that
the amount of compensation was less than the value of the
negroes was justified.
It was further contended that an extension of time be-
yond the term fixed by the Commissioners should be allowed
to parties to prefer their claims in the colonies.
Objections were also urged against the appointment of
trustees by the Commissioners in certain cases, to the prin-
ciple of calculating the compensations per capita, and on
several points.
Mr. Wigram, K.C., afterwards addressed their Lord-
ships on an appeal from Messrs. Bentinck against an award
of the Commissioners.
Their Lordships adjourned at four o'clock.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

HARMS V. DALBY.

This was an action to recover damages from the de-
fendant, an attorney, for negligence in the conduct of the
plaintiff's cause in Chancery. The plaintiff was the son of
a person who was the tenant in tail of some property, and
who persuaded his son, upon the promise of some equiva-
lent to be secured to him, to cut off the entail, and enable
his father to sell the estate. When the father died the son
did not think himself sufficiently provided for in the will,
and he filed his bill in Chancery. That bill was dismissed
for want of prosecution, and the defendant was charged
with having improperly neglected the matter, so as to pro-
duce this event. The Jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff, damages 22.3/. 10s., that being the sum which the
plaintiff had been obliged to pay in consequence of the neg-
ligence of the defendant.