Star.
London, England, 1825-07-23 00:00:00

I. 4W E.PORT.

N

ti P~_

COURT OF CHANCERY, JULY 22.
MOTIONS.
The Lonn CHANCELLOR stated, that as next Tues-
day was seal-day, he wished it to be understood that he
s:lotild hear no motion of which notice bad not been
previously given ; and, with reference to the extension
of the seal, 4: should not allow, unless under parricu-
lar circumstances, a motion to be brought in of which
notLe had not been given before the seal-day.
BOWES V. STRATHMORE.
His LORDSHIP made some observations upon this
rase, but without giving judgment, which he deterred
till to-morrow, when it was his intention to go at length
through the evidence in this important case. His Lord-
ship remarked, that the Master of the Rolls had dis-
toissed the Peti ion (though without cosh) for want of
j arisdiction ; but it might appear that the Court, under
all ciicumvances, had a civil jurisdiction, by virtue of
which the money obtained from the hands of the Court
by the process stated in the bill might be directed to be
teplaced iu.statu quo.
ALLEN V. GWYNNE.
. Mr. 11 EA LD was heard on behalf of the defendant,
Thomas Gwynne, who possessed the estate through
his fathers John Gwynne. Mr. Heald recapitulated the
facts, which shewed that no fraud was imputable to
the devisee under the mill of David Allen. '[he object
of the teststor was Writ so much to benefit John
Gel rine, as to disappoint his on n family, of is hom
be had so much reason to complain ; he therefore gave
the estate in succession to Gwynne's brothers, in case
the devisee should die before him. The plaintiff never
bad any equity in the case, and had no remedy at law.
Mr. Heald mentioned an instance of an attorney be-
coming the devisee of a client, in spite of refusal on
his part; but %%hen the testator died, the magnanimous
attorney called together the relatives of the deceased,
and divided the estate amongst them to the last far-
thing. Such was the feeling of the Gentlemen of the
county where the lawyer resided (the East Riding of
I'mkshire, not a greet way from Beverley), that they
gave him so much employment, that he speedily
realized a larger fortune than he had given away.—
This was nolrle conduct; but others were not to be
Charged with fraud if they did not choose to imitate it.
Dlr. littatmtsrese followed on the same side.
11 r. I I ART replied.
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that this was a
very important case. The trial of the action of eject-
ment had been cf no use, and it did not appear that an
i-sue could now be properly sent to a Jury. His Lord-
ship proceeded to remark that there was some appear-
s nce of advantage taken of the elder Allen; but the
transaction was so old, that it was unsafe for the Court
to meddle with it, after the lapse of half a century.
The stnalltst circumstance might make out the fraud,
and a very small circumstance might turn the scale the
Wier way. His Lordship thought that when the deed
of c mrpromise was executed, David Allen and Gwynne
Were intent upon the will. The Court could not say
that an attorney cs.uld not take a devise or bequest of
his client's estate, or provide that if he died the gift
should go to his brothers, whom the testator did not
know: He•tliought that Gwynne had acted indiscreetly
in letting his clerk copy *the will from his own draught,
ico
locking up the or iginal in his closet, without giving
Lis -client a copy. His Lordship considered that the
Court had jurisdiction to say, that it the will.had been
vitiated' by the finding of a Jury, the fine would not
avail; but the true question was, whether the fine could
be connected with the alleged fraud? The fine need nut
have been levied on account of the Lady Mr. Gwynne
was about to marry, had the will been good. It was
necessary for the Court to go carefully throu'i,h the
pleadings, and consider of all the circumstances found
there. The case was not only important, but not very
ea;y to decide. His Lordship then addressed a serious
admonition to the Solicitors of the Court ; observing
that nothing was more delicate than for an attorney or
a barrister to appear as the absolute devisee or legatee
in a client's will. He hoped they would lay this up
seriously in their remembrance.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, JULY 22.
•
DUNBAR AND OTHERS V. BALDER() AND OTHERS.
Thi, cage came before his Honour upon exceptions to
tie- Master's Report, and involved a question upon the
emistr uction of a will under the following circumstances:
The testator, Mr. Grey, a Gentleman who had realised
a• fortune in the East Indies, bequeathed the sum of
00.0001. to the plaintiffs, as Trustees, to be' applied to
the election of an Hospital at Elgin, in Scotland. He
:also bequeathed the interest of 60001. to his sister, Mrs.
Williamson, for her tie ; and 4001. gi to each of her
children, who might be tying and unprovided for by
Marriage at the time of her death :" the residue to be
applied to the support of the intended Institution.
After the will was proved, the 60001. were paid into
Ccurthy the Trustees, and Mrs. Williamson continued
to receive the interest during her life. Upon her death,
a Petition was presented to the Court to declare who
were entitled to the legacies of 4001. under the will of
Mr. Grey. It was referred to the Master, and lie re-
/rated that Mrs. Williamson had left several daughters
nd one son living ; of whom he considered the son,
and one of the daughters, who was a widow, to be
excluded, by the terms of the will, from any claim
under it; the others, being unmarried daughters, were
clearly entitled to 4001. each. To this report the son
stied widow excepted ; and contended, by their Counsel
(Messrs. Horne and Wyatt), that under the words
children nnprovided for by marriage," they also were
entitled to similar legacies ; for the son had not been
married at all, and the widow's husband being dead at
tne time of Mrs. Williamson's death, she, too, was then
unmarried. Besides, she must be considered as unpro-
aided for, having only a trifling income of 901. a year.
Messrs. SUGDEN and Rostima, on behalf of the
ti ostees, argued that the testator had no intention of
bequeathing legacies to any sister's children, except her
daughters who were unmarried at the time of her death ;'
for in another part of his will, after complaining of his
sister's foolish marriage, which had obliged him to sup-
i,ort her family for twenty yeas, and remain ten years
1i oger than he intended in India, he said,. " I have left
mall legacies to my sister's children, in order that they
may not, in their turn, become the prey of unprincipled
men." It was clear, therefore, from these words, that
ne did not mean to include his sister's sons, as' they
eould not become " the prey of unprincipled men."
And with respect to the widow 'oeing unmarried at the
time of her mother's death, it was decided in several
ases reported in Vecey, that the word unmarried"
meant " never having been married." -
The Vtne-Citaxext.i.ott overruled the exception with respect to
t,ie son, whom he consis4ereil the testator did not contemplate as
iegatee I but his Honour allowed the exception' respecting the
•,:d.w ; tor, although he agreed with the decisions in those casts
.. eittd, yet to the rrescut case the widow was in that

' situatior (dltivneh r,st, p. rhapi, in 'an• equal degree with her le".!'
experienced sisters) w hich he secnied to have in view—namely, in
a situation to become by marriage the prey elan unprincipled man ;
and she could not be said, from the trifling income she possessed. to
be provided for.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JULY es.
Joseph Nevil Eastwood, a Captain in • his Majesty's
service, who had fought at the battle of Bunker's Hill,
and who was now in his 72d year, came before the
Court to obtain his discharae under the Insolvent Act,.l
but was opposed by Mr. POLLOCK on behalf of a Mr.
Charles Kinder. From the insolvent's examination and
the opposing creditor's observations, it appeared that a
few months since Mr. Kinder put a distress into the
house of a Lady named Sanders, the widow of an Offi-
cer. She received a pension of 681. a-year from the
War-office, and at the time the distress was pot into her
house, was confined to her bed by illness. She went to
the insolvent, who was her friend, and who, to extri-
cate her from her difficulties, represented himself to Mr.
Kinder as holding the rank of a Captain in his Majesty's
set vice, and that he received a considerable pension for
his long services. Mr. Kinder was saisfied with those
representations, and a.,:cepted his security on a prom's-
sory note for sixty pounds, and which the insolvent said
he was capable of paying, but which was dishonoured.
--It also appeared, that his income was greatly embar-
rassed with annuities, wi;11 warrants attorrey, pro-
missory note,, and other securities, and he deda:ed to
the C3urt that he could not give a satisfacto:y account
of his net inc ,me, as he left the entire management of
his concerns to a Gentleman named Armstrong, arid
to whom the annuities were granted. The insolvent
also admitted, th it the greater part of the furniture
which was in his house belonged to Mr. Armstrong ;
and he declared that lie should not have given the
promissory note to satisfy the distress, had not Mrs.
Sanders fully assured him that it should have been paid
out of her pension, which was then becoming due.—
Mr. Cootie, who appeared as his advocate, examined
him, when he stated that he fought in the memorable
battle of Bunker's Hill, in 1775 ; that during his long
service he had received several wounds, two of which
were in his head, and which, at certain periods of the
year, almost deprived him of reason. He al,o said
his wife was in a most infirm state.

Mr. POLLOCK said, his client, when he put the execu-
tion in Mrs. Sanders's !Imre, placed so much reliance
upon the insolvent's as,ertions, that lie considered he
was treating with a person in the most ailuent circum-
stances. He now had great reason to complain ; he
immediately withdrew his execution when the insolvent
offered his security, and now he could not recover a
tarthing, whereas he should have received it all had he
remained on the premises.
Mr. COORS, in most pathetic language, implored the
Court to take into its consideration the fact i f the

insolvent having been led into an error. He had, in the
time of distress, come forward to relieve the widcsv of a

brother Officer, and to give her some temporary assist-
ance umtil she arose from the bed of sickness. He might
in so doing have been too zealous in her behalf, but the
Court were to remember that this might have been oc-
casioned by his frequent aberrations of mind in conse-
quence.ot his wounds and his advanced age.
The Couassaid, that without taking into consideration any dis--
tinction of persons, it had a duty imposed upon it, however painful'
that duty might be to perform. In this cue it had been clearly
proved that the insolvent had contracted the debt without having
any means of paying it ; and the sentence therefore was, that far,
such offence be should be confined for six months within the walls
of the priaou.

?SUMMER ASSIZL.S.:

CHELMSFORD, JULY 21.

James Mallet was indicted for stealing at Stanford Rivers, on
the 25th of March, a horse, the property of Edward Rayner.
It appeared in evidence, that on the night of the
25th of March, the prosecutor, a farmer of Ungar,
had his stable and cart-lodge broken open, and robbed
of a horse, a cart, and four sets of harnes3. Oh- the
27th, Hall, the officer of Union-hall police-office, ap-
prehended the prisoner at some stables in the Borough
of Southwark ; and on searching his person found a
key which opened the stable in which was the horse in
question. The prisoner then directed the officer to
another stable in the same neighbourhood, in which
were found three other stolen horses, and a regular
set of housebreaking implements. One of the witnes-es
examined for the prosecution, proved that he was
coming to London early on the morning of the 26th of
March, and was overtaken by the prisoner and another
man, riding in a cart. The prisoner offered to give
him a lift, but he declined. He swore pcsitively as
to the prisoner's identity.
The prisoner declared his innocence, but called no witnesses.
Tile Jury, under the Learned Judges directions, immediately
found the prisoner Guilty.
The LORD CurEr JUSTICE then proceFded to pass the
awful sentence of • death upon this, and two other
prisoners, named Walter Nwtn and James Moy, who had been con-
victed of a similar offence during the Assizes. His Lordship told
the unhappy culprits, that the crime of horse-stealing had now be-
come so cilmmon in every part of the kingdom, that it became ab-
' solutely necessary, for the protection of such property, that the
dreadful sentence of the law should take its course.

The prisoners were all deeply affected, and were with difficulty
removed from the dock.

LINCOLN, JULY 21.

John Royte, aged 30, was found guilty of rubbing on
the highway, J. Bellamy, and taking three El country
bank-notes, and silver to the amount of £l.—Sentence
of Death recorded.

William Wright, aged 32, was capitally indicted for
the wilful murder of his wife, at Great Grimsby, in
this county.
Robert Hill, a journeyman in the service of the pri-
soner, who is a hair-dresser,was sent by him, on the 2cl
of May, to dress a Gentleman's hair at the White Hart.
Witness went, but found nobody there. On his return,
he remonstrated with the prisoner for having played
him such a trick. Soon afterwards the prisoner took up
a comb and a pair of scissors, and said he was going
to cut a Gentleman's hair. He was at this time fresh
—neither drunk nor sober. His wife Inged him not
to go out. She was standing between him and the door.
He stretched out his hand as if to put her aside; but
without any g.eat violence. She struck the prisoner
on the arm with a hammer. After receiving the push,.
she sat down, and witness • perceived that she was
bleeding. He said to the prisoner, " What have you
done? You have killed your. wife." He replied, " 1
hope I have not hurt her ;" and then begged witness to
go for a ductor." The blow appeared to have been
given at the lower part of the woman's belly. .1 he scis-
sots were such as ate commonly used by hair-dressers.
Ann 'Nlason was looking through the window of the
prisoner's 11Juse, and saw the posh given by the pri-
soner to his v We, which she desctibed to the same
affect as the last witness. Witness he:pe.i to place the
deceased in a chair. Inc* 'prisoner , expresred great
sorrow for !raving vile: • .teprirred sv