The Sun.
London, England, 1829-11-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
EX. PARTE DE TASTET, IN THE MATTER OF CARROLL, A

BANKRUPT.

Mr. PEusEwroN stated that a petition had been pre-
sented
in this matter respecting directions upon the trial of
an issue ; the order was made by Lord Eldon, but it was
not obtained till after the period limited for the trial to
have taken place. Under these circumstances another
petition had been presented, for the substitution of a
renewed order, and the present application was, that that
petition might be ordered to be advanced.
The LORD CHANCELLOR directed it to stand at the head
of the bankrupt paper.
Mr. PEMBERTON had not given notice of the application.
His Loansuir observed, that it should stand as he had
directed, subject to any well founded objection subse-
quently to be made by the opposite party.
DUKE OF ST. ALBANS V. DUCHESS OF ST. ALBANS.

Mr. PEMBERTON replied, and his Lordship stated that
after he bad read over the documents with great attention,
he should give judgment. •

WRIT OF ERROR.

The Loan CHANCELLOR attended in the equity de-
partment of the Court of Exchequer with the Loid Chief
Justices of the Courts of King's Bench and Common Pleas,
and the Barons of that Court, fur the purpose of deliberating
upon a writ of error in Blakemore v. the Glamorganshire
Canal Company, brought by the defendants, and ?lived
at Lord Tenterden's house on Friday night before himself,
and the Learned Judge of the Court of Common Pleas.—
Jn the result they decided that the question would have to
stand over till toe upxt Term for their future consideration.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
JUDGMENT.--BROWN V. CLAXTON.

The VIcE-CHANcELLon.gavejudgment this morning in
this ease. The principal question in which was, whether
two ladies of the name of Claxton and Bennett, the repre-
sentatives of a Mrs. Luther, who was the representative of
Sir Humphrey Morris, were bound to account to the
committee of tle plaintiff, a lunatic, for the personal estate
cif Lady Brown, after a lapse of nearly 4,0 years. Lady
Brown, by her will, gave an annuity to the plaintiff for
William Brown, and one question raised in the cause was,
whether that annuity could be considered as charged upon
the personal estate of Lady Brown. It appeared to the
Court impossible to raise a serious question upon the paint
Lady Brown appointed threw executors, Sir Humphrey
rsior.ith ''Wilmot, and John Cruikshanks. By thew
.111-
1 her liilyship's estates were given to Sir Humphrey
MOrriS with gtfts over, h.nd he was appointed her residuary
Fgatee. LadY Browh died in 1772. Sir Humphrey
Morris and Caxton proved the wilf,'Wiltnot dyin4 with-
out proving. A bill was afterwards filed by some of the
legatees, an 4 cti.-,er persons claiming upwards of 400,0001.
Sir fruMphrey Morris put in his answer, and shortly after-
wards died, his executors were made parties by a bill of
reviver, a reference was made 'to time Master, exceptions
wqe taken to his rep-ort arbich were 'imsei ruled; and' the
executors ordered to pay the legacies out of the personal
estate. The Master repotted against the persons ma.king
the demand fi;r •400,001. The Court declared the clear
residue of the personal estate belonged to Sir Pumphrey

Morris or his representatives ; the present defendants were
through several links those representatives ; no elai
was made before the Master, in respect of the annuity
given to the plaintiff on account, as it was said, of a mis-
taken notion as to the will; that the Court considered
might be true, but it might be equally true that arrange-
meats were made between the parties that such a course
should not be adOpted. His Honour, after going most
elaborately into the case, and citing orders made by Lord
Thurlow, considered that he should be acting in a most
harsh and unjust manner, if lie held the representative of
Sir Humphrey Morris bound to account to the committees
of the plaintiff for the residuary personal estate of Lady
Brown, especially as the plaintiff, by his own act, had
led the defendants to do as they had done. His Honour
considered himself bound to dismiss the bill, and ordered
the Committee to pay the costs.