The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-20 00:00:00

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
THE MARQUIS OF HEITFORD V. LORD LowTur.R.
The arguments in this case, which came before the
Court upon exceptions to the _Master's report, occu-
pied the Court the whole day.

VICE-CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
The Vice-Chancellor of England was occupied the
whole day with causes of no general interest.
(Before Sir J. WIGRAM.)
COOKE V. FRYER--JUDGMENT.
This case, in which his Honour gave judgment
this morning, came before the Court on further direc-
tions. The question at issue is the sufficiency of a
settlement proposed to be made by the defendant on his
wife, who was the daughter of Sir Gregory P. Turner.
At the time of his daughter's marriage this gentleman
was in a state of mental derangement. The treaty
for the marriage between Mr. Fryer and Miss Turner
was pending during the month of July 1838, when
a petition was presented to the Lord Chancellor, pray-
ing for his sanction to the marriage, according to the
Act 4th of George IV., c. 76, sec. 17. The petition
stated the nature of the marriage settlement proposed
to be made on the lady, and it was referred to the
Master for consideration. He made his report ap-
proving of the marriage settlement, and the marriage
took place by banns, at Southampton, in the
month of August, 1838. Subsequently to the mar-
riage, Mr. Fryer wished to make an alteration in the
settlement, by substituting another description of
property as the trust, to that stated in the proposal of
the petition to the Chancellor ; the alteration, how-
ever, making no difference in the actual value of it.
The suit was instituted by one of the trustees on be-
half of Mrs. Fryer, to ascertain the suffi •
ciency of the trust property proposed to be
substituted. On the part of the defendant, it
had been submitted that under the circumstances re-
ported to the Court, there had been substantially a
performance of the articles required. On the part
of Mrs. Fryer it was prayed that the Court would
direct the settlement to be made according to the ori-
ginal articles.

- His HoNoun. Eaid, if the Southampton articles of set-
tlement, differing as they did from the proposals
carried into the Master's office for approval, had been
less beneficial to the parties interested than
those first proposals, considerable difficulty might
perhaps have arisen in the admitting of the South-
ampton articles to be properly substituted for the
orig4nal proposals. But a perfectly satisfactory ex-
planation had been given of the case, leading to the
conclusion that the parties had acted with perfect
bona fides, and that the property comprised in the
articles, so far as it differed from that inen-
Owlea in the firat proposals, had in truth repre-
sented the property which was the subject of
the settlement before the Master. He was there-
fore satisfied that, as there was no difference of
benefit in either settlement, he was doing the best
for all parties, by accepting the Southampton articles,
especially as Mr. Fryer had imported into those
articles the personal estate, if any, to which the lady
might be entitled, upon 4 fllesstinn of comparative
benefit to the parties. The circumstances of this case
were so special, that he thought he might
safely adopt the Southampton articles for the
original proposal without a reference to the Master,
and in so doing he apprehended it was not likely the
vase would ever be drawn into a precedent. With
respect to costs, it was impossible for him to say that
the trustee was not justified in seeking the opinion of
the Court in the vase, and lie was therefore of opinion
that Mr. Cooke must have his costs, and that it be
referred to the Master to approve of the settlement in
conformity with the Southampton articles, Mr. Fryer
consenting that the personal property, if any, to
which the lady might be entitled hereafter should be
included in that settlement.
NERSOAI V. CLARKSON.
His HONOUR also gave his decision':in this case,
which was a re-hearing—a decree having been made
in the cause in 1843. It was contended that a mis-
apprehension of the decision of the court had arisen
in drawing up the decree, and that the defendents
ought not to be alloss ed to stand creditors upon the
estate in question for substantial improvements
effected before the year 1821. His Honour was of
opinion that the petitioners were entitled to have the
decree altered, and counsel agreed to arrange the
minutes of the new decree to be made in the case.

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
The Court took the Crown paper to-day, and was
engaged the whole morning in listening to arguments
in a case relating to the disputed settlement of a
pauper.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)

EX PARTE -

Mr. HUMPUREY moved in this case for a certiorari
to remove an indictment from the Central Criminal
Court into the Court of Queen's Bench. It appeared
from the affidavit that the present indictment arose
out of a case which went down to trial at Kingston.
It was then referred to arbitration, and was now
going on before the arbitrators. The defendant in
the action, however, indicted the plaintiff in the
action, the attorney for the plaintiff, and all his wit-
nesses, for a conspiracy to bring an action against
him. The attorney, in his affidavit, swore he had
nothing whatever to do with the cause, except as
an attorney. lie stated that he wished to have the
case tried by a special jury, and to have the Solicitor-
General as his counsel, who was also the counsel in
the cause, and also that important questions of law
were likely to arise.—The application was granted.