The Sun.
London, England, 1828-11-13 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

The LORD CHIEF BARON sat in the Exchequer
Chamber to-day to hear motions in equity.

NellPtittlES V. WILLIAMS AND OTHERS.

Mr. WILLIAMS moved that the plaintiff might be
at liberty to withdraw his replicationlin this cause,
in order that he may be enabled io amend his bid.
The bill had been filed for an account of the sums
of money received and disbursed in respect of the ship
Venus, of which certain of the defendants were the
agents ; and the application was founded upon an
affidavit of the plaintiff, stating, that ou exmnining
the books and papers deposited by the defendants,
'with their clerk in Court, he discovered entries of
monies received, which were not set forth in the
schedule to the defendant's answer. The Learned
Counsel was aware that in making an application of
this nature, it would be necessary to show to the
Court that the plaintiff had used proper diligence,
and that this motion was not made for the purpose
of delay. In order to satisfy the Court on this
point, the plaintiff swore that he resides at a great
distance in the country, and that from illness and
other causes he was unable to come up to town until
lately: he examined defendant's books and discovered
the concealment alluded to. The Learned Gentle-
man thought that the Court would perhaps have less
difficulty in granting the application, as one of the
defendants had died, and it would therefore be ne-
cessary to file a bill of revivor.
Mr. l'iGoT opposed the application, which he cha-
racterised as an attempt, from beginning to end, to
oppress and harass the defendants. The agency,
respecting which the defendants were called upon to
account, commenced in 1806, and terminated in
1818, when the ship was lost. There was scarcely
any money received since 1815. The principal
agent died soon after, and yet the present bill WAS
not filed until 1827. Not content with allowing
the matter to stand over such a length of time, the
plaintiff had, since the institution of the suit, taken'
every step which the practice of the Court could ad- I
reit of to procure delay. The Learned Gentleman
referred to the rules of the Court, for the purpose of
showing that it was not competent to a plaintiff to
amend his bill, unless within six weeks after the
defendants put in their answer,or after the replication
had been tiled, without showing full and ample
grounds for the indulgence of the Court. In the
present instance the answer was filed early in 1827,
and the books and papers referred to were deposited
with the Clerk in Court,in the October of the sang
year. Besides, there was not the slightest necessity
for amending the bill, as the whole account could be
taken in the Master's office after the decree was
pronounced.
Mr. SPENCE also opposed the application.
The LORD CHIEF BARON—The only ground upon
which the plaintiff can rest his motion is the chance
that Mr. Williams may die befare the hearing of the
cause, but the chance is se very slight that I cannot
grant the indulgence on that ground. Besides
the plaintiff has already run that chance by his
own delay. The plaintiff therefore takes nothing
by his motion and pays the costs. With respect to
the bill of revivor, and the delay which must neces-
sarily be caused by it, I think that it will be quite
sufficient to bring the representatives of the deceased
party before the Court, without protracting the suit
any longer.