The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-29 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, Feb. 28.
Tha Lord Chancellor sat in Lincoln's-inn Hall to-day, and,
in the course of the morning, stated that it was his intention
to do so every day during the present week.

THE CORPORATION OF DARTMOUTH V. HOULDSWORTII.
JUDGMENT.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in this
case, which was argued some time since before the Court
upon appeal from the decision of the Vice-Chancellor of
England. His Lordship observed that the suit was insti-
tuted to set aside a bond that had been executed by the Cor-
poration of Dartmouth in favour of a gentleman named
Houldsworth for the sum of 1,2001. The ground upon which
the plaintiff insisted that the bond should be delivered up to
be cancelled, was, that it had been obtained by fraud and
misrepresentation. The circumstances of the case were, ge-
nerally, the following :—The defendant, Mr. Houldsworth,
was a member of the Corporation of Dartmouth, and had
great influence in that borough. The principal offices in the
Corporation were filled by friends and connections of his,
and he represented the borough in Parliament ; in short, in
general, at elections, his recommendation was attended
to ; and he was what was usually called the
patron of the borough in less pure times than
the present. Certain proceedings were instituted by the
opposite parties in the borough, for the purpose of calling in
question the title of many of the corporators, some of the
leading members of the borough; thirteen or fourteen quo
warrantos were obtained, and in consequence of this, a meet-
ing of the Corporation was held, after notice, at which it was
determined that these quo warrantos should be defended.
Mr. Houldsworth was present at this meeting, and he was
requested to attend to the defence, and to do what was neces-
sary. He went up to London, in order to see that the de-
fence was properly carried on. Ultimately it was discovered
that no effectual defence could be made, and judgment of
ouster was pronounced against the different members of the
Corporation. These proceedings were conducted by the
Town Clerk, and the Corporation having a very scanty
income, only about 7001. a-year, Mr. Houldsworth advanced
money from time to time to pay the expenses, which
ultimately amounted to 1,290/. Mr. Houldsworth applied to
the Corporation to be reimbursed that sum. The Corpora-
tion met upon the subject, and, after consideration and inquiry,
a bond was given to Mr. Houldsworth for the amount, and
the Corporation seal was affixed to it. For two years
the interest was regularly paid on the bond ; at last, however,
came the Municipal Corporation Act, and then a new set of
men became members of the Corporation, and being influenced
by purer motives than the last members, they refused to pay
the interest upon the bond. Upon this, Mr. Houldsworth
brought an action against them, which was tried at Exeter,
when a special verdict was found, which declared the bond to
be a perfectly legal instrument. The Corporation, not satis-
fied with this decision, filed their bill in this Court, for the
purpose of having the bond delivered up to be cancelled. On
the case coming on before the Vice-Chancellor of England,
he thought the plaintiffs had no equity, and dismissed their
bill, and from that decision the parties appealed. The Lord
Chancellor, after going at considerable length into the facts
of the case, and observing upon the transactions that had
taken place, and the evidence given by some of the witnesses,
stated his clear opinion to be, that the judgment of the Vice-
Chancellor was perfectly correct, and must be affirmed with
cost*,