The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-05 00:00:00

TE-114] SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1855..

ROLLS'. COURT-WEDNESDAY.

that of the 1,20,000/., and in respect of that she was advised
by her Counsel not to enter into any evidence, but to file a
hill either to have the benefit of the agreement, together
with the-parole declaration, or to have it set aside, as ob•
tamed by fraud and misrepresentation. In this state of
things the Master made his report, by which he found the
only outstanding estate to be 20,0001. advanced and lent in
April, 1826, by the intestate to Mr. Mortimer through the
house of Bazett and Co., being the 20,0001. in question,
and the 18,0001. part of the purchase money of Foothill
Abbey. To that report the plaintiffs, together with Mr.
Frazer, have taken exceptions in, respect of the sums dis-
allowed—and these exceptions are now pending for argu-
ment at the Rolls. The question upon them will wholl),
turn upon the weight of evidence. Should they be over-
ruled, Mrs. Mortimer has no desire to dispute the allowance
of the 20,0001. But as it was expressly sworn that the
Master allowed that sum merely on the admission signed
by Mr. Mortimer, and as that admission was made only
on the faith of there being no .other claim advanced,
she was desirous, should the plaintiff and Mr. Frazer at
all succeed on their exceptions, to have that admissio❑ set
aside. The Learned Counsel then detailed and commented
on all the affidavits on both sides, which were, in some
respects, very contradictory. Mrs. Mortimer was not now
asking the Court to decide on the question raised in the pe-
tition, although she, for her part, was willing, on the evi-
dence adduced, to leave it to the Court to decide. All she
asked was investigation ; that in the form the Court should
think most desirable, either by an issue or else a special re-
ference to the Master, or by the Bill, for leave to file which
the petition was presented.
Mr. KINCIERSLEY, for Mr. Aitkin, the husband of one of
the next of kin,' said his petition was peculiar. He was
resident in Scotland, and stood aloof from the animosity
unfortunately exhibited in this case. He was one of the
persons who was an ear-witness to the arrangement, and
his conviction was clear and firm that Mrs. Mortimer's
Counsel had justly represented its tenor, If Mr. Aitkin
was perjuring himself, he was. doing so not only gratui-
tously, but against all the motives ordinarily considered to
affect credibility. The true conflict was between 14 tes-
timony and that of some of the other persons whose affida-
vits were produced. The whole contest was as to the right
to. administer— , , ,

Mr. TunNELappeared for Mrs.,Aitkin and ,her, children
who loft themselves in the hands of the. Court- - •

Mr. JACOB, who opposed the petition, inquireit what
amount of intetpst Mrt Aitkin had in the fund,?''.

4Mr..,KiNDEasLEY said Mr. Aitkin.appeared•by separate
Counsel, because involved as his credibility was in the case
against the interest of his wife and children, he was re-
solved to let their interests be protected by their own Coun-
sel. Mrs. Aitkin's share of the property was in fact a se-
curity for a fund which was settled, so that Mr. Aitkin had
a direct interest in the-estate. '

Mr. WALKER, for Mr. Lumsden and his family, said
although from his situation he could not consent to any-
thing, his clients did not object to the prayer of the petition.
They were desirous the contest should be settled amicably ;
but if that was impossible they conceived Mrs. Mortimer
ought to be allowed an opportunity to substantiate her case
in a regular manner to entitle her to relief.
Mr. JACOB (followed on the same side by Mr. DANIEL)
appeared in opposition to the petition on the part of the
defendants, Mr. Frazer, Mr. James Mortimer, and Sir W.
and Lady Cole. If the bill could be filed without the leave
of the Court the petition was uncalled for, and if that
could not be done, then the petitionei ought to produce
some authority to show that leave should be given in such
a late stage of the proceedings, after she had been so long
in possession of the facts in respect to which she now claimed
relief. No such authority had been shown, and therefore
he had a right to demur to the prayer of the petition. The
Learned Gentleman then entered into the case of the de-
fendants at considerable length, after which
Mr. WIGRAM rose to address the Court for Mr. and
Mrs. Trezevant ; but as the hour for rising had nearly ar-
rived the case was adjourned again until to-morrow morning.