Star.
London, England, 1801-08-01 00:00:00

. . ...
This wai a calf,: of great importance to the
public, and occtipied the w hole of the fir(", and
tie y reate(l part of the fecund day, in this Court.
It appeared in e-idence, that Mrs. Kerby, of
Northampton, an oil lady aged 71, had cmyloyed
the Defendant (Mr. )eyes) as an Attorney ; that
the was euremely intirni in health and mind, and
had had two paralytic ()Jokes; that the Defendant
(Mr. Jeyes) having underftood Mrs. Kerby wanted
to incleaff: her income, offered her an annuity of
Sol. a year for 4001. ; that the opinions of two
Aclniii ies for infitrance-Oilices were taken, viz.
Mr. Morgan and Mr. Fairnlan—that of Mr. Mo-
rgan by the friends of the Plaintiff, and afcertained
that 641. 3%. a year Ihould be given for vol. for
the life of Mrs. Kerby—that of Mr. "'airman al-
lowed only soh a • yeai ; that rairman's opinion
was taken by Mr. jevcs, and that he concluded his
barttain upon this opinion; but it appeared, that
Mr:Faitman had required the life fliould be a good
life, which was not the cafe ; that Mrs.Kertov 41-
peared to beettremcly ill, aad utterly imbecile in
mind; that the was utterly incapable of maurigifig
her houfehold concerns ; that the frequently rnif-
took the day of the week, and fancied.herfelf per-
fonallr injured ; that the had been robbed, when
no inch thing had happened; could not write her,
name, without Mr. Jeycs's fon telling her every
letter, and how to place it on the paper; that after
The had received a bond for payment of the annui-
ty, it appeared (he had fancied, that intlead of the i
annuity her principal money was fccured, and'
could not for fome time be convinced to the con-
trar?, and it afforded her great uneafinefs; that 1
M r. Giblon, the father of the Plaintiff, was deli-,
Jo:is of preventing a ("ranger from interfering in I
the concerns of the family improperly, and as he
found that Mrs. Kerby had been prevailed upon to
ptirchafe an annuity, he very honourably offered'
Isl. a
.year more than could be obtained of any of-
„fice or of any perfon ; but the Defendant, Mr.
Jeyes, granted the annuity.—This was the fub-
Itance of the evidence as to the contra Et.
'The LOP.D CHANCELLOR declared this cattle to
I,e of the utmofl importance to the public. His
landfill's grounded his determination upon three
principal points: , I
vg, The i ft,, was the imbecility of mind of the Puithafer of thq
annuity: '1
The ad, The inadequacy of price ; and ,
The 3d, The undue advantage imputed to Mr. Jeyes, as II!
Attorney and Solicitor.
. His Loral-1p on the di point, inclined to thin
the purchafer incompstent,at the taste of the con
tra6, to make anylqch purcbafes , •
On the ad, 'he thought the opinions of the Altn-i
arics requirattfurther examination. i
But his I.ordflrip wifely reflect fo much uponi
the principles_ which ought to govern the condu -
of an Attorney', that he was extremely defirous o i
confining his..decifion ,to the evidence that We:
upon this part of the cafe. HisLordthip conceived:
that Mr. jeyes,who.had-for upWarric of fio years
maintained his citedit„ if4id.niot, t ' ti cle4 himfelf,
oritlx
properly
_in this part of the c 44.1 t tite gtould.
have taken the fame fort of car*: in is akair' on'
the behalf of his client Mrs. Kerby, As if he bad:
been treating for her as grantor Of the;annuity;
that he did not think this. Nellseen :irovlelp be
the cafe ty Mr. Jeyes ; that he had only Iniluired
for and obtained one opinion, wheikeas he (bout&
have employed better diligenie'; that as at, At-i
torney, lie w as'bound to do fo by herrnOrt arti-;
colarly, confideting her fituatin I Mat from the'
evidence it appeared, that his bond as a point o
I:rtirity, was by ttolneans equal to the landed fe-,
entity offered by GihC n ; and that the fecurity of
the Defendant, by. his bond, was aid.° greatly, • '
ftt ior to the Lcurity of the Public ,Affirriince -.
hers; and Mr. Giblon, the father of the p)aintsi
.„!
offered rcl. a year mm e than any Office or any per-
fon world give ; that he conceived it tn,be the ditty
of an Attorney, when dealing for hi's Client, to
confider that confidence was reputed itS him, and
that in this cafe the Defendant (Mr. leyes) Ihould
hare evinced that he hail made a diligent ufe of
that confidence ; and as this WAS DOE Mintier*
made out by the Defendant, the annuity mull be
decreed to be fit amide, and the Defendant (Mr.
Jeyes) to pay. the 4001. with Uncivil, to be com-
puted from the date of the bond.
And he further detreetl; that ask was ncceffaty
the great principles of the decifin% flionld.. be it-
em platy, the clefendaniThould alto pt Coll.
The Loan CHANCELLOR, in pronouncing this
impor ant Decree, obferved, that although Mere
were ciicumflances in the cafe that induced trim
riot to decree that the Defendant ihonld r 4 ce
tile flock (by the tale a which the *opl,was mir-
ed), yet his Lordlhip fignifseathat tt might miip•
t.,io the reputation of the Defendant, who he was
derv. oirt of, thinting free front impntation,And Min
better prerere the. reputation of his frilic.lf.he 1
Ihould replace the flock before he r54hiii.:4.,,.!
Islorth.tmpton. it had beta reprefentea Vy the
counf.:l for the defendant; Mr. Jeyes, that he had
paffr..l h will.fpent life of near fiintltote years;
and his Lordfhip flibtild hi fort,- that lie fltould
11114 this Court with a worfe eltar4Elei tlin he had
before he came into ii.