Star.
London, England, 1822-11-28 00:00:00

BEAUMONT V. BRAMBEY.

This was an application to amend a decree pro-
?minced upon the finding of a Jury, in an issue di-
rected to be tried in the Court of King's Bench.
Mr.Wernattem. stated, the case for the considera-
tion of his Lordship was one which arose out of- a
sale of an estate of freehold belonging to the plain-
tiff, called Sheepshead Field, in the County of Lei-
cester, to a person of the name of Norman, whose
assigr.ee the present defendant was. The case had.
been under the consideration of the Court in the life-
time of that great ornament of his profession Sir
Samuel Romilly, when the Court directed the issue
abovementioned to be tried, the decree upon which
his client was now desirous to have amended. From
the documents in the cause it would appear the bar-
gain in this case was for a farm, and the sale was as
of a farm; accordingly the conveyance should have
been of certain lands and tenements accurately de-
sctibed. Such, however, was not the case, and it,
was now contended, Ora% by this conveyance Mr.
Beaumont had made over the tectrrial tithes of this
perish, whit h had never been contemplated, and
which; in Net, was in itself a tar more valuable pro-
perty than that originally intended to be conveyed.
The right contended for was said to arise out of the
construction of an Act for inclosing Charlwood
Forest, in Leicestershire, over which the Rector must

have had a omiderable claire, 414.,up to the'
time of the Inclotbne Act, an,opetitiniticlosed forest.
Mr. Beaumont claimed a right over this property
proportionate to the amount of No acres,-pursuant
to an allotment made at the time of the inclosure.
According to the valuation by a Mr. Wyatt, it was
ascertained that the property of the estate of Sheeps-
head Field, Was worth A.'6.552, but the purchase was
completed for £.6260, not a word being said by Mr.
Norman on the right of John Beaumont, Esq. to the'
Rectory of Sheepshead, or to the future claim of this
Gentleman on the allotment of Charlwood Forest, in
tight of his property in the neighbourhood. The
deed, it would be observed, contained a clause to
convey all rights, commons, and appurtenances
thereunto belonging ; and alluded m other heredita-
ments in the liberties of Sheepsbead Field. It was
said, that because an exception had been made of the
tithes of two acres, the constructive claim of the pur-
chaser to the whole tithes was clearly made oat, or
else there was no necessity for the-exception.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, the deed was cer-
tainly a curiosity. Sir Samuel Romilly thought, in-
deed he knew he did, that by this deed the Rectory
did pass. Now, unless it-kiid pass, Mr. Wetherell's
client had nothing to do in a Court of Equity. But
supposing it to have passed, then there might be
some ground to claim the interference of a Court of
Equity, en the ground that it had .passed by mistake,
if there could be shewn to the satisfaction of the Court
how it could get at the mistake. The exception of
the two parcels- of land would seem to imply, that
had not the exception been inserted, the conveyancer
himself imagined the whole tithes, or this part of
them particularly, would pass with the estate or free-
hold. His Lordship could not see how he could, con-
sistently with the practice of the Court laid down if.ir
years, interfere with the decree pronounced in this
case. His Lordship, on rising, mentioned inciden-
tally, that to-morrow would be the last dayehe would
receive motions.