Star.
London, England, 1830-05-24 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, MAT 22.
REECE V. TABRUM AND OTHERS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR disposed of this case in
judgment.—The defendants, John Tabrum and William
Hart, were appointed trustees under the will of Mr.
Johnson Clarke, dated in the year 1813, amongst other
property of a mill, and certain premises in the county of
Essex, with directions to sell the same as soon as con-
veniently they could, either by public auction or private
sale, for the best price that could be obtained, and to ap-
ply the proceeds in a given way. Shortly before the
death of the testator he had been offered 8,6001. for the
property in question, with other property. It was then
considered to be worth 10,0001. He refused to take the
offer. The trustees put it up to sale by public auction
in 1818, (having been previously requested by a Mr.
Dutton, who had married a daughter of the testator,
not to take less for it than 7,0001.) and all they could
get offered was 6,0001. Afterwards, by private con-
tract. they got the offer of 6,5001. which also they re-
fuicd to take. In 1823 it was again put up for sale by
public auction, and finally disposed of for 3,0001. and a
fraction. The bill charged the trustees with negligence
and improper conduct in the management and disposal of
the property, and it prayed that they might be decreed to
be chargeable with the difference between the 6,5001
(which might have been got,) and the 3,0001. and frac-
tion, (the amount actually got) The trustees stated by
their answer that they had exercised their utmost discre-
tion and judgment ; that when the property was first put
up for sale it was worth at least 7,0001. that it was let at
•1001. a year ; that subsequently property of this descrip-
tion began to depreciate in value, and regularly lowered
in the market (although hopes were entertained that it
would rally) until 1823, when they were forced to sell,
an important lease having then expired. Immediately
previous to the sale a valuation of the property was
made, and the amount of that valuation was 3,0001. His
Lordship could not, on the evidence before him, come to
a conclusion that there had been any negligent or impro-
per conduct on the part of the defendants, so as to cause
him to agree with the judgment pronounced by the Vice
Chancellor in the case, holding them responsible for the
balance between that which was obtained and that which
might have been got. At the same time, he did not feel
that he ought finally to part with the case, but thought it
right to refer it to the Master to inquire under what cir-
cumstances the sale was made, under what circumstances

the delay took place, and to report specially.
BOARD OF EXCISE COURT, MAT 22.

Mr. William Western, landlord of the Merlin's Cave,
Margaret-street, Cavendish-square, appeared to an in-
formation charging him with having beer colouring in his
possession, which subjected him to a penalty of 2001.
It appeared from the statements of the Excise officers,
that, on the 4th of November, they went to search the
defendant's cellars, when they found in the beer cellar
an earthen vessel containing a small quantity of salt and
water, and in a jar a small portion of sugar ; in the spirit
cellar they found a bottle containing a little beer-coloring
made from molasses, or burnt sugar. The defendant was
not at home, but his wife accompanied the officers, and
she accounted for the salt and water by stating that it
W 33 the residue of the brine she had used in pickling
some meat, and she showed some meat which had been
in pickle. She could not account for the sugar being
there, but said it was by accident that it was there ; there
was not an ounce of sugar in the whole, and it was at
the bottom of a jar that would hold about 141bs. Some
persons did use sugar in curing or pickling meat, particu-
larly hams. The officers added, that they never observed
anything improper in the defendant's house before this,
and that, supposing the bottle in which the coloring was
had been full, it would have only sufficed to color about
three gallons.
The defendant produced a sample of his rum, which he
said he had the article to colour, his rum being so pale
that his customers would not purchase it unless it was of
a good colour, and he was not aware he was doing wrong
in having it for that purpose.
Mr. Mayew said, at all events traders could not plead
ignorance in future, after the many convictions that had
taken place.
The CHAIRMAN observed, that it was proved the de-
fendant had had beer colouring in his possession ; but as
it was only a small quantity, the Court would deal le-
niently with him, and mitigate the penalty to 20s.
Mr. Thomas Powell, landlord of a public-house in
Foley-street, was charged with a similar offence.
It appeared from the evidence of the officers, that on
the sth of November they found in the defendant's cel-
lar a stone bottle, with a very small quantity of beer-
colouring.
The defendant said, he could not account for the pos-
session of it, but he supposed it must have been there
when he took possession of the house.
The bottle was very dusty, and had no appearance of
having been recently used.
The Court convicted the defendant in the mitigated
penalty of 20s.
Mr. George Cooke, of the Rose, in Great Wild-street,
also was fined 20s. for having a smell quantity of beer-
colouring in his possession.
Mr. William Tagg, a paper-stainer, was charged with
painting paper that had not previously been marked by
the Excise-officer and charged with duty, by which he in-
curred a penalty of 201. besides the forfeiture of the paper.
Josiah Dynely, an excise-officer, stated, that on the
12th of August last he went to the defendant's manu-
factory and found him rolling up a piece of stained paper
that had been finished, and on examining it there was
neither a frame mark or charge stamp to denote that any
duty had been charged upon it, consequently the witness
seized it. There were only about seven yards in the
piece, and the duty that would have been lost to the crown
would only be a shilling and a farthing.
Mr. Mayew.—The defendant had no right to com-
mence any operation of staining until the paper had first
been measured by the excise-officer, and the duty charged
upon it.
The defendant pleaded poverty, and having a large fa-
mily. He said he only did it because he wanted one piece
of paper to finish papering a staircase, not having had
sufficient previously made.
The officer gave the defendant a good character for his
general mode of doing business.
The Chairman convicted the defendant in the penalty
of 51. and condemned the paper.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, MAT 21

Martian CorneliasSellien, a native of Germany, was
opposed, on behalf of a gentleman named Guiese, residing!
in America. The insolvent lived with Mr. Guiese, u a
confidential urvant; and in the course of the year 1828
be absconded from Philadelphia, with property to the,
amount of 2,0001. He came to England, and wee ar-
rested by Mr. Guiese's agent. He now applied to be
relieved from the demand of Mr. G. and inserted him in'
his schedule as a creditor to the amount of 2,0001.
Mr. BODKIN, on the part of Mr. Guiese, applied for
*postponement of the case until evidence could be ob-
tained from America.
the Coy at adjourned the Case till the Ist August.