Star.
London, England, 1831-06-02 00:00:00

LAW REPORTI

COURT OF CHANCERY.—Wrnimppay, Juxs 1.
TEI ATTOINZY.GEWRI•L 0. THE 111/1111QUIE Oi NUT.

INGS.THE SAME V. LORD HURTIRODON.
At the sitting of the Court this morning the LoaD
CHANCELLOR gave judgment in these CUSS. They were
informations filed by Attorney.Ctenettal ; the first prayer
of which was fix the'Court to decide whether ft was the in.
tendon of the first founder of the free school at Hastings
that it ehould be a grammar school only. It also prayed
that an account might be taken of all the property belonging
to the foundations that an injunction might issue to restrain
the trustees from granting any new leases; that an account
of all the rents and profits that had been received by them
might be rendered t and, lastly, that a reference should be
directed to the Master to inquire into, and approve of, a
plan for the future government of the charity.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after recapitulating the facts
of the case, and its history during its progress through Chan-
cery, now more than thirty years, the original bill being filed
in 1800, said that that part of the bill that prayed for an
injunction must be refused. The Court had no power to
restrain trustees from performing their trust, unless they had
committed some wrong, through negligence or fraud, and no
such allegation was in this case attempted to be made. The
most important point, however, was, whether the school was
intended by its founder to be • grammar school only, in the
true sense of that term ? booking at the terms of the origi.
nal endowment, extractsof which his Lordship read, and
which was executed in the year 11567, he said that he was
most decidedly of opinion, that it was not the intention of
the founder that it should' be a grammar school only, and
as the principal object of these informations was to procure
a decision of that Court that it was a grammar school, the
informations must be dismissed with costs.
ASHBY DE.LA.ZOUCH CHARITY SCHOOL.

This matter was disposed of in judgment as far as the
questions raised at the bar were concerned. There were
several informations. Dr. Curtis, the schoolmaster, was
the relator in the main proceeding. His information tabled
the principal question, which was, whether the school was
to be considered, strictly and technically, a free grammar
school, a school in which the classics alone were to be taught,
or whether English, writing and ciphering. were to be taught
in it as well as the classics. If the decision were in favour
of the restricted construction—among other consequences that
would follow would be the reversal of an order made
so long ago as the year 1806, which affirmed a re.
poet made by Master Stanley. The school was founded in
the fourteenth century by Earl Huntingdon ; and upon look-
ing at the instrument upon which it was founded (and which
was to be taken as its governing charter) as well as at the
statutes, &c. affecting the school, his Lordship had not the
slightest doubt that it was consistent with the original inten-
tion that English, writing, and arithmetic should be taught
in the school, as well as the classics, and that the =gets
had acted properly In Introducing the teaching of those in-
ferior branches of education. This conclusion induced the
Court to dismiss this information, and with obits as against
the master; but, as regarded the costs, his Lordship, on a
suggestion from the liar, subsequently consented to look
agaM into some of the papers.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Juin: I.
SPECIAL INJUNCTIONIIINDE V. STUMM.
_

The plaintiff in this cue had filed his bill for the pur-
pose of having four bills of exchange cancelled, which bad
been given by him to the defendant in stock-braking transac-
dons, which had taken place between them is February,
March, and April, 1821. On those transactions the defend.
ant, who is a stock-broker, claimed from the plaintiff a sum
of I,IBIL as a balance, for which the plaintiff gave the bills
in question, which the broker threatened to negotiate, in
order to enable him to sue upon them. This morning, at
the sitting of the Court, Mr.Waiarter.zi applied for a
special injunction to restrain the defendant from negotiating
the bills, which the Court granted.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, *lux* 1.
PARISH APPRINTICRS.
_'PHI LINO V. HILLS AND COURTSNAY.

Mr. CaurisELL showed cause against a rule obtained by
the Attorney-General.- calling on Mr. Mills and Mr. Cour.
tenay, two of the Justices of Essex, by mandamus, to de-
termine whether they had any valid ground of objection to
the allowance of certain indentures, for binding three poor
boys apprentices to fishermen. The boys were paupers in three
united parishes in Suffolk, and the Essex Magistrates ob.
jetted to bind them to mariners in a parish in Essex, upon
a representation made by the bases parish °Seen at a petty
sessions held In Colchester, that such binding increased pa.
rochial settlements, and the Essex fishermen might have boys
out of their own parish. By the 66th of George 111. the
justices have a discretion to exercise in allowing pauper boys
to be bound apprentices, and the question was, whether they
had properly exercised that thsmtion in the present
instance.

The affidavits of Mr. Mills and Mr. Courtenay stated the
before themthe Petty Passions, and that they
eMmeeedins:gas
to a conclusion that they ought not to allow the
said indentures. Their determination was founded upon the
information of the Eases parish officers; and after some ar-
gument,
Lord Tsarinas)! said—lt appears to me, under this
Act of Parliament, that the Justices of the County into
which it is proposed to bind parish apprentices, have a ge-
neral discretion, to decide whether the binding shall or shall
not take place. If that discretion applied to a particular
matter, the Court might interpose; but hem they have a ge-
neral discretion to exercise,, and the Court cannot interpose.
Rule discharged, with edge.
Till XING V. PIPES.
_ _ _

The defendant, an inhabitant of was committed
to the County Gaol, for wilfully and malicioutly firing out
of his window at bliss Campbell, who resided with her is.
then, In an opposite direction. An application was made to
admit the defindaot to bail, on the ground that the evidence
was not strong against him. The Court allowed him four
sureties in 201. each, and to bind himself in 1001. to appear
at the amiss&

COURT OF COMMON FLEAS, JUMH 1.
JOHN •T. JOHN LON4II T. CHUM.

The Nisi Prins Court wu this day crowded to excess, the
cue of it. John Long v. Cbubb having been died specially
to come on this day. Mr. Justice Alders.= took his seat on
the bench at eleven o'clock, and Alr. eergestit Wilde having
been sent for, the cause wu wiled ort

Mr. Sergeant N% u.nz suggested that the muse should
stand over, on the ground that as it would occupy a cups'.
dersble time, it would be more convenient to take it at the
Sittings after Term.
After a short consultation it was determined that the cue
should stand over until the Sittings after Term.
SZCONDA RI ES'OFFIC 11, BASING H ALL-ST R ENT.

EXTENT IX CHIEF AOAIRST TIRE PROPERTY OF
MESSRS. WATIRHOUSE
_ -

A Jury was summoned before Mr. Potter. In consequence
of the issue of an extent lu chief, at the suit of the Crown,
foe 3,4871. 18s. 10d., fur duties due by Messrs. Waterhouse,
the stage.cuach proprietors, of Lad-lane, in respect of Cer-
tain carriages wed and employed by the defendants, in cat.
✓ ying passengers for hits to and from different places in
Oreat Britain. The writ bore test the 24th of %lay, and
was issued out of the Court of Exchequer.--Thomas
°rayons, Berjeant at Mace, stated that he had seised
property of the defendants, at the Stvan.with.two.
Necks, Lad-lane, and at Milton-street livery stables.
—Joseph Alger, au appraiser, produced an inventory. con-
taining a-list of horses, goods, and chattel., which had been
seised for the King's duties. and which he valued at
1,7801. 10s. No opposition was made. The jury returned
a verdict, that the property described was the property of the
defendants, and that its value was 1.7801. br pro.
perry was seised into his Majesty's bands by the Sheriff, for
the use of the Crown.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, June 1.
- - - - -

Joseph Muithsop Fraser Dodgem, of Hayes-place, las
soa.gruec, Paddington. surgeon, was opposed by Mr. Cooke.
no behalf of Colonel Lyster, of t)stend, and Mr. Thomas
Jepson, merchant, Old Broad street, The insolvent
was also opposed by Mr. Creswell, on the pan of Messrs.
Gillett, mine-merchanis, -street, Cheapside ; and was
supported by Mr. Woodnee.
he insolvent underwent a long and rigid examination,
front which it appeared that in the beginning of the year
1848, while pursuing his studies as a medial student, he
had formed an acquaintance with a female, named Mary
Anne Thompson, then residing in Theobalde-road, and had
lived with her ever since the October of that year, at various
platys inilannslon, as well as on the Continent. She hadad-
vanced him 4001. from the above period, the greater portion
of which, he stated, he required to pass the College of Sur.
aeons, although he had been in the habit fur a considerable
time of receiving monthly between 301. and 401. from his
mother, a lady of large fortune residing in Lancashire,
who bad besides advanced him, In the year 1828, the sum of
7001. to enable him to set up In business as a surgeon.
In Charlotte-street, Portland.plaa. About July last, when
he was 'ready Immersed In debt, owing between 3.0001. and
4,0001. he gave bliss Thompson an annuity deed for 4001.
chargeable on • aunt of 8001. to which be should be entitled
under his passes will, after the expiration of two years, a.