The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-12 00:00:00

IN THE MATTER OF FINNIE, A SUPPOSED LUNATIC.

This was a petition presented by Mr. Abraham Finnic,
the brother of the supposed lunatic, praying for a Com-
mission to inquire into the state of his brother's mind.
Mr. WAKEFIELD, with whom was Mr. WCHRISTIE,
was about to open the petition, when
Mr. WHITMARSII, who appeared for the wife of the
lunatic, stated that he should not act respectfully to the
Court, after the certificate that had been furnished to
his Lordship by Dr. Reynold, as to the state of the sup;
posed lunatic's mind, if he did not state that it was not
his intention to oppose the issuing of the Commission,
provided his Lordship thought that certificate satisfactory,
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after reading the certificate,
said there could be no doubt as to the state of mind, of
Mr. Finnic. The Commission must therefore issue.
Mr. WAKEFIELD and Mr. APCHRISTIE submitted that
the Commission should take place at Liverpool, that
place being the domicile of Mr.
Mr. lirmninusn objected to this, contending that the
supposed lunatic having resided in Park-lane, the Coin-
mission ought to take place in London.
There being contradictory affidavits on this point, the
petition was ordered to stand over for a week.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

ALLEN V. CARTER.

In this case an'order had been .obtained last February
from his Lordship, authorising the marriage of the
plaintiff's sister, she being then under age and a ward
in Chancery. This marriage had not taken place, and
the petition originally instituted by the plaintiff alleged
that it was delayed by the intended husband of the young
lady, in order that the marriage should take place with-
out any settlement being made. It also alleged collusion
against the
.guardians, and various other charges were
brought against all three. The suit had caused consi-
derable distress to the young lady, wire is now but
eighteen, and her family. On the case being called on
this morning,
His LORDSHIP said that he had seen the young lady
and her guardian, and he was perfectly satisfied with the
conduct of both. He thought that under the circum-
stances of the case it was right to appeal to the Court, in
consequence of the marriage not.taking place according
to the intentions of the guardian. The reason for post-
poning the marriage, given by the lady herself, seemed
quite satisfactory. His Lordship wished now to express
his opinion in this case, which was, that Allen was not
entitled to one far thing costs, nor should he allow any.
He was perfectly satisfied that it was his conduct which
had :caused the distressing circumstances of this case.
When this petition was first brought forward his Lordship
'thought it was necessary to explain the reasons why
the marriage had been postponed, and had he (Mr.
Allen) stopped the petition, his Lordship should have
had no hesitation in allowing the costs ; instead of which
he had attributed the circumstance'ef the ease which he
(Mr. Allen) had brought about, to the grandson and the
intended husband of the young lady. Bad it been other-
wise, his Lordship would have allowed his 'costs, but
now his order was that no costs whatever should be
allowed. The guardian was most certainly entitled to
his costs—he had undertaken a very arduous office. his
Lordship was very much afraid that this ease must be
characterised as a measure merely to extort money.
Mr.: ROGERS—I appear for the brother, who has just
come of
His LORDSHIP—I perfectly understand his position,
and the less you say about it the better.
Mr. ROGERS proceeded to make an application in this
case, relative to the will of the father, whereby '6,000/.
was left to the two children, George Allen and Elizabeth •
Allen, the young lady above referred to. The interest
of this sum was to- be appropriated to the education of
both till they were of age, when it was to be laid out in
stock upon trust, and the above-named to receive. the
dividends, after setting aside 201. a-year. Mr. Rogers
was proceeding with his application, when
His Lonnsirtr .decided that it was not the proper
time to make it, and the case was postponed.

DAY V. CROFT. - -
In this case Mr. TINNEY made an application to his
Lordship, on the part of the executor to the plaintiff, to
ascertain what proceedings should be taken to recover
the sum of 1,053/. from the executor of the Earl of Ros-
common. During the reign of his late Majesty George
IV. a pension of 200/. was granted to Lord Roscommon,
and on the 6th July, 1830, this pension was mortgaged
by Lord Roscommon to the plaintiff, and his Lordship-
-further granted to him upon the said pension an annuity
of 1001. per annum, enabling the plaintiff to demand
payment of the pension. He (Mr. Tinncy) had under-
stood since he came into Court that there was a mistake
in the.petition, as it stated that Lord Roscommon was
dead, and it appeared that ho was not, although ho was
dangerously ill;• but this,' he apprehended, would make
no difference, as the sum named was in:arrear.

His LORDSHIP—The petition had certainly better be
put right. The part of the receiver is to inquire before
expensive proceedings are instituted:
Mr. TINNEY said they could demand the amount.
His LORDSHIP—It is not a demand until there has
been a refusal. to pay ; there might have been neglect
to pay, but no refusal. Has any application been made?
Mr. TINNEY—Lord Roscommon gave notice that he
intended to dispute the annuity, and object to the pay-
ment. The consequence of this was that Mr. Barry,
the executor's attorney, immediately transmitted to the
treasury in Ireland the deed of mortgage.
Mr. TURNER, for the defendant, said that his Lord-
ship had forestalled his objection, viz., that no applica-
tion had been made by the executors, and the petition
simply stated that it was made upon the ground of the
debt being unpaid.
Mr. TIERNEY said that Mr. Barry had written to
the Treasurer, in Dublin, and he replied that Lord Ros-
common disputed the debt.
His LORDSHIP said he could make no order upon the
petition then, as it stated a fact which was erroneous ;
but if the petition was amended, it seemed to him, as a
matter of course, that they should refer the case to the
Master to know what course should be adopted.