The Sun.
London, England, 1835-12-15 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY-MONDAY.

BRINE V, FERRIER.
this was a suit for the administration of the estate of a
Norwegian Gentleman named Gram. One of the ques-
tions in the cause arose in this manner :—The testator
Gram, by his will, left all his residuary estate to his wife ab-
solutely. There were found after his death some testa-
mentary papers, of which, together with the will, probate
had been granted, and in one of these he left his residuary
estate to his wife and another person, in trust for his wife for
life ; and upon this the question arose to whom the resi-
duary estate was to go on the death of his wife ? Under
the will of the wife, which appeared in the same pause,
there was a gift of 5001. out of a mixed fund, arising from
real and personal estate, to a foreign charity in Drontheim.
It was discussed, the personal estates being insufficient,
whether this bequest was void, as respected the lands,
under the Mortmain Act, or whether the Crown was not
entitled, as in the case of a devise, to a foreigner. After
hearing the arguments of Counsel, pro and con, on the
subject,
His Horcourt was of opinion, as all the testamentary
papers had been proved as one will, they constituted one
instrument. Then it was a rule of law that the prior part
of a will was revoked by a subsequent part inconsistent
with it. In this case in the prior part the whole legal and
beneficial interest was given to the wife. The wife was
therefore entitled to the whole beneficial interest. Upon
the other point his Honour held that a devise of lands in
England for a foreign charity was void under the Mortmain
Act, and the Crown had no interest in the lands as in the
case of a devise to a foreigner. But his Honour gave leave
to Mr. Wigram to mention the point again, if be should find
any authority the other way.

KING'S BENCH.-MONDAY.

PINK V. SMITH AND ANOTHER.

Mr. MATTHEW HILL appeared for the plaintiff. This
was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover from the
defendant the sum of 1001. In February the warehouse of
the defendants, who carried on a very considerable business
in silk goods was broken into, and several. hundred yards of
silk were carried off. The plaintiff was a police officer of
the city, and in March he saw a large placard posted about
the streets, offering a reward of 1001. to any one who would
discover the robbers, or give such information as would lead
to their discovery and conviction. For some time no infor-
mation could be obtained, but in April last the plaintiff re-
ceived intelligence which induced him to watch two persons
named Levi and Lazarus. The information on which he
acted was not very precise, and therefore he ran some risk
in doing what he did. He took them both to the station-
house. He communicated with Mr. Tibbald, the Marshal,
and with Messrs. Smith, and these parties having all gone
before the Magistrates, the result was that Lazarus was
committed for trial on the 14th of April. That trial took
place, and a conviction followed. The great object of the
defendants having been obtained, they ought not to have
hesitated to make good their contract.
Evidence having been called to substantiate the plain-

tiff's case,
Sir F. PoLLocK stated the case for the defendants.
Evidence was then called for the defendants, and Mr.
Hill having replied,
Lord DENNIAN summed up the whole evidence, and
The Jury returned a verdict for the defendants.

COMMON PLEAS.-MONDAY.