The Sun.
London, England, 1842-12-03 00:00:00

t
I-4 A, 147, 'NIT j 1 I G ENCE .
.if _I -I
~,C AN- CERY
~.....(TIILS DAY.)
' nis is,,i • IT .1 ditiam tO."tn, the
Lora , 'ng the hrst seal after ici.aci _,
a ',‘-'halleenor. tqq. in' Lincoln's Ilse hall, and took
PPez-1. motions to-dar.

, .
The MELETONTM V. RANKIN.
big Loo
r 11.111911tS in this part-heard motion occcuped
fore b; t4e whole morning. The casethe "On:lshii) upon appeal from thn judgment of
tior, • Ice-Chancellor of Eng/and, dissolving an injunc-
n. Yest,Pining the delivery of a cargo of.currants.
bl'4 LORbSIIIP, at the conclusion of the arguments,
e itulf,Thent affirming the decision of the Court
°W, with COfit3.
IN RR SUISSS.
stood on the paper to-day, but upon its
an, in consequence of the absence of Mr.
Nv ''s'•D,—"arPe, who was engaged in Vice-Chancellor
overarns
.Court, the motion was ordered to stand
r to Thursday, the next seal.
•
-Ld-Cfsi INCER Y,-(T HIS DAY.)
T
441:''fwe Coe VICE-CnANcELLon of ENGLAND).
"T 4 :\IARI2. V. TIIL -NORTH INIDIAND RAILWAY

Hi IT COMP Y.—JUDGMENT.
eons TA',.OI7R gave t.iilcsinerit to-day on this ease,
then, •fig. the purchase of certain lands, not included
acheitile of the Act constituting the railway.
b, V..IAMES.—JUDGMENT.
10,,,1-loatoun also g:;vc judgment in this case, in
• the bill was filed for an account. The Court
teci the account as pen yed.
It WHITE V. HUNT. --JUDGMENT.
erEt* 11°Xourt also ga.:c judgment in this case, de-
transfer of certa:n stock to the plaintiff.
C:ITTS 27. T_TIO7)r.—PIDGM ENT.
teetin, °N eel?. also gave judgment in this case, di-
To the specific performance prayed by the bill.
fie COs
rt- be:ng the. first seal after Micheelmas term,
proceeded to hear motions, 'none of which
-ssaci and feature of public interest.
(Before Sir JAMES WIG RA M.)
His rmxtirr I'. WRIGHT.
lloNoun gave judgtnent. in this case. His
tibia° said the case appeared to he this. In the
Ivss-,u,uf April, 1880, the sum of 21.0001. Consols
and iian'iing in the 1121110 of Jelni 'Wright, banker,
Rehieson, aspen the trusts of a Settlement,
the 4 of Ain- ;1, 1828, of which Francis John-
ahtreez.secloviis the author, and under which settle-
kial, the plaintiffs in this cause eh:lined to be bene-
the k
interested. The trestees of the settlement, in
abs,
4tee s 'lce of Johnson, sfild • out 5,000/. part'of this
fowl ..and with that .3",c.,001. purchased 160 shares
eaCh in tho capital of the Provincial Bank of
Its schich were transferred into the name of
ght •
fib lit .110ne hat as trustee, and upon the trusts of
settlement. On the 9th n January, 1830, John-
ttastlVfl;sfit, and Robinson, executed a declaration of
bal,vOnlels 'was indorsed on the original settlement,
to th _lOl they declared that Wright and Robinson as
21,00 e, 't.ise of 16,0001. Consols the residue of the
in; v and Wright es to the IGO shares purchased
Aeres name with the other part of the trust money,
pratrustees upon the trusts of the settlement of
tht, 1828, slolinssin died in 1833, and Reynolds
184t;fselul'ant, Was his eiecutor. On the 23d of Nov.
‘Vright, the trustee, and his partners, who
qap,el, on the business of bankers in London,
lkifier,,N Payment, and on the 24th of Nov., .1840,
der tlle the claims of the parties interested
settlethent of the 3d of April, 1828, of the
tia,l6o
".4,1-e6 in the Provincial Bank of Ireland, pur-
13Y tit'. in the bankrupt's name, was given to the bank
1840 e • Solicitor. On the 17th December,
theme
fiat in bankruptcy issued against Wright.
°fUinta of his bankruptcy, Wright had 225 shares
qtas capital of the Provincial Bank standing in his
inane' 4"(-4. Upton these shares the followins claims were
the l'first, the plaintiff claimed 160 shares upon
;Illu-nd al ready stated.- Secondly, the Bank of
4taaaa?4 itself claimed a specific lien on 100 shares
the Ing'i in 'Wright's y name, for securing to the Bank
Wment, of 4,0001. and interest, owing by hini to
giaitt.`4ll( ; and also a general lien upon all the shares
tta„, in
‘g in Wright's name for whatever might be due
cI,C Wright to the Bank. The former of these
18411IP was rested upon the specific contract of Jan.
e and the latter upon the proposition that Wright
Ivith"lcl€l‘ of the shares in the Bank as a partner
q. ~the other Shareholders, and that by the general
tuutZ Partnership those who claimed from Wright
teal
.„'3llly be entitled to what remained, after he had
Lash eu with his other partners. Thirdly, Walter
1.10,1 t claiined 20 shares standing in Wright's name
for he? flu' which he alleged that 'Wright was a trustee
koft,u,n• 1 he date assigned to this purchase was 1825,
tse„'llint said that Wright being his banker, he had
th'tegularly debited and accounted with in. respect
I\e,-"e,severel instalments. Fourthly, the assignees of
44, .1,,F1t1 by' their answer, submitted that all the shares
Nei"' in the name of Wright at the tune of his
gilt",ruf ptee were in his order and disposition, and
Ihit-a`,Uo SF:1110 now form•A part of his estate to be ad-
lottiblft under the bankruptcy. The defendant
• siCtla who had at one time set up a claim to some
claima,,44,a'ses standing in the name of Wright, had dis-
-43 e7l,ll?,Pbe record. It appeared by the pleadings
B,_
• ser4V, that besides the 22.5 shares mentioned,
rcl, •
?Mtge additional shares of 10/. each, which
woelii ,Oven by way of bonus to the shareholders.
cisiohleave those out of the case, because his de-
baAjito itothe 226 would also include the others.
kt.„-',,lit, therefore, was, that at the time of the
l'Attle'l‘' there were 22.5 shares only standing in the
, , 7
the bankrupt, whereas the number of shares
„laisa,',l as against the bankrupt, different persons
ae limier specific contract, was 280 ; namely,
(4 ad' ntitfs 160, Blunt 20, and the Bank 100 ; and
qaitoerii„"°ll to these claims the Provincial Bank
the a lien upon the 225 shares upon
Zt Nvi,.icneral ground which he had stated.
4410;1:id he, convenient to consider the claims in the
co, oaf,''4B: order ;—first, that of the assignees ; se-
i'ety,l7,l: the claims of the plaintiff and the bank as
losq--,`" the
other; thirdly, he would consider the
as affected by Blunt's existing claim, by Bun-
tq th-e.?,rlner elaiin, and by the transfer of 100 shares
hib"unlz to .nlr. John Petty Muspratt. To begin
h 0 a claim of the assignees. It was admitted,
t Lneuglit properly admitted, that if a trust un-
Nisi,lele,e deed. of the 3d of April, 1828, could be esta-
,taa ,`1 in favour of the plaintiffs, the assignees could
by tiiiueeessfully contend that sixty shares claimed
thea Plalntiff were in the order and disposition of
third4olcrupt as against the bank, who claimed those
tlik,,. under Mr. Wright's letter of the Ist of Ja-
ils N-,?' 1840. Now, with respect to the 160 shares,
ao clear that the trust-attached. His reasons for
the would appear from the view he took of
tiff,4' aims of the bank in competition with the plain-
t Ile .anlhe observation pressed upon him on behalf of
,tlsasndiint was, that Mr. Wright not being sole
Ikea': of the settlement, and the trustees not having
ceiaeutherisect by trusts of the settlement, the bank
• ti let be considered as bound by the settlement.o
Aeinbservation he could certainly . give n
vsas•l:- The reason why the name of Wright. alone.
,the deed
would be found in the 29th section of
4,41ad,„ecl a settlement of the Provincial Bank of Ire-
glen:uil which required that shares should stand in
iolaCule of one proprietor only, though others, as%ye °ners,.e,eAuique trusts, or encumbrances, might
asn, 84 interest in the shares. That could give no
tla;4linitage, therefore, to Air. Wright, or those who
righted under under ,A cestuique trust might have a
the t,„`•" complain of irregularity in the execution of
Atithst, and might repudiate an investment not
the -„risctl by the trust, but the trustee who made
of t'f:estMent with trust money, and for the purposes
asar trust, could not arbitrarily say, " I claim the
loliel'„ttkent as my own," and become a creditorh
per-
eo throug=h the breach of trust which e had
thqkltted. this ease. it was perfectly clear that
-tt.6aPhares were purchased with the trust moneys,
e'‘,ll:4,4l_!4'A!usts and for the purpose of the settlement.
trusteel'ieclly clear as against • Mr. Wright; he was
in the, ki,„._t)rtheSo shares) although there was irregularity
fiction. As far as the question of irre -
teelsel;taile.suicerned the case of the assignees was
'the case of Mr. Wright would
Bider
been. `iii.arflencliAst question which he had to Tu-
. Ivhire,ns, the ti;dpr and disposition, and the question
141:1111hrA41.°''(' between the plaintiffs and Mr. Wright,
It ap-
Peared - ti"stien presented more difficulty.
4124 t z that the shares in the capital of the bank were
hisbsedin, the shares of some similar concerns, distin-
/114, t number or otherwise from each other, so
benefically interested in the shares
44Y- in the name of a trustee might be able to
N,erewhicii shares were his own. The original shares
sharer ia certain nominal value, 1001. each, and each
the • appeared in the books of the bank as
of so many shares only. If as to
• Vrls a trustee, and as to another part a bane-
aisd from time to time he bought and sold
or th'''nere was nothing in the form of the transfers,
male or registering, from which it could be
ti ngut,that had sold any specific shares rather as dii-
-4ssttliE"(''.l from other shares. The case in that respect
of ?led tilat ef a person who might purchase stock
,„owneJa~kplich like was Partly trustee, and partly beneficial
The whole was blended in one mass in the
-
the nf Ireland, aril there was nothing either in
t,raase)„°`l° of entering the name in the form of the
-r' from which it would appear what stock he
cssiti(4`l' What was his own, or what belonged to his
tir_4o 'lite trusts. New in this cese, the shares from
tit(n itki. time standing- hi 11r.Wright.'3 name, from
PtaZdtzr,cl3sk of the 160 down to October, 1837, ap-
ing
4 bare varied in amount, at one time exceed-
"u, but / • • i• • below 225. In October,
▪ the lei•el reoueet.
... ,
was
44% le- number was 220, and no chant,
I.lll444:ft'ra'Allat_time 110 W to the time of the bank-
thee 140usthis state of facts, having first come
t,near-s?nciusion the:, the 160 shares purchased for
were in the first instance due to the trust,
'Writ no Thesitation in scsumine- as against Mr.
glit a • ‘• „,,,
trasasts IQ- his asslgnees, that the shares would be
Ted frc.n3a:tlme to time which he might law-