Star.
London, England, 1814-07-30 00:00:00

LAW INTE !LICENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY.
vis COUNTESS OF ORSIOND V. HUTCHINNON.
This case came on for rehearing on the Master's
report.—lt appeared from the pleadings, that the
Earl of Wandesford (father to the plaintiff) was pos-
sessed in 1773 of estates in Yorkshire ; and that the
defendant, who is a Solicitor, acted as his steward.
In September 1773, the Earl granted a lease for 21,
years, of a very large part of those estates, to a Mr.
Lodge, since deceased. Two months after, Mr.
Lodge assigned a portion of them by an under-lease
to the defendant, on the same terms that he held them
himself. Before the year 1776, he assigned to the de-
fendant so large a proportion of the lands so held, as
to leave him more than a moiety. In 17/6, the Earl,
in consideration of money expended by the defendant
on the pottion originally assigned to him, granted
him a reversionary lease, after the expiration of 21
years. In 1784 the Earl died, and the estates became
the property of his daughter, the present plaintiff.—
The Defendant -still continued to manage those
estates, and retained considerable balances until 1803,
when the original bill (pr,tyiag for an account) was
filed. The cause was heard before Lord Erskine,'
who directed an account to be taken of the real value
of the lands, and the balances in the hands of the de-
fendant. On rehearing the case, Lord Eldon directed
a further account to be taken as to the interest on

those balances ; and observed, that he thought Lord
Erskine-had not gone too far in directing the Master
to report as to the real value of the reversionary lease
granted under those circumstances. Upon the re-
port of the Master on these additional instructions,
the cause now came on. _ _

Sir S. ROMILLY, Mr. LEACH, and Mr.WINGPIELD,
were heard on the part of the plaintiff. They con-
tended, that if ever there Was a case in which not
only' simple but compound interest should Le allow-
ed on balances of money retained by an agent, it
ought in the present, where the defend tnt had re-
tained a growing balance, which had amounted to
upwards of £4,000, without flirt oshing any -accounts,
or informing the plaintiff that he had any money in
hand. The plaintiff, as well as her lather,. had re-
sided constantly in Ireland, and relied upon his inte-.
.grity for the management of the Yorkshire estates.—
As the Master had reported, that the reversionary lease
'was taken considerably below its real value, they
thought it clear that a steward taking such a lease
must account for the Teal value of the lands so taken.
They also contended that the original lease granted to.
Mr. L,4ge el lands (ofwhich more than a rucrety was
soon transferred to the defendant) was procured by a
fraudulent combinAtion between Mr. Lodge and the
defendant. who had deceived the Larl as to the real
value. Upon those grounds they conceived that the
defendant should also be obliged to account for the
real value of that portion, which he had got into pos.
ses.si:o by astignments from Mr. Lodge.
Sir A. I'mo.r, on the part of the defendant, con-
tended, that the original lease to Mr. Lodge was not
a fraud ; as Lord Wandesworth (although generally
residing in Ireland) had come over to Yorkshire pre-
vious to the signing it, and had consulted skillulrnenl
with respect to the value. Whatever rent the defen-
dant undertook to pay to Mr. Lodge, was a question
for which he could not be made accountable, either
to Lord Wandesworth or his representatives. It the
lease granted to Mr. Lodge was now to be impeached
as fraudulent, Mr. Lodge's representatives ought to
have been made parties in this cause. But as they
had not, he thought it would be too much for the
Court to presume, without a tittle of evidence, that
the transaction was fraudulent. If they did not pre-
sume the original lease to be a fraud, he thought it
impossible for them to order the defendant to account
for the under-value at which he had held this lease of

21 years that had expired so long ago as the year
1795. On account of ate lateness of the hour, Sir A.
Pigot was only heard in part, and the further bearing
postponed.

ASSIZES.
CHELMSFORD, JULY n.

Yesterday in the al ternoon Mr. Justice HEATH and
Mr. J. La BLANC, came across the country from
Hertford, and having read their Commission at the
Town Hall this morning, at twelve o'clock began the
legal business of the county.

THZ ZING N. PARSONS.
This was an indictment for an assault. The prose-
cutor and the defendant were both respectable Lon-
don merchants, who had, on the day of the assault,
dined with another respectable merchant, at his house
near Stratford, in this county. After dinucr they
adjourned to a whist club, which met at the Swan
Inn, at Stratford. There, during the game Mr.
Goodwyn was plying a Mr. Morgan, the latter, in
throwing his card upon the table, did it in such a
manner that it slipped under the others. The defen-
dant rather angrily reproached Mr. Morris, because
he had not seen the card, and desired the trick to be
turned. Mr. Goodwyn said he might have seen the
card when it was upon the table if he had looked.—
Upon this the defendant called him " a d—TI imper-
tinent fellow for interfering," and having the cards in
his hand in the act of dealing, he struck the prosecu-
tor a blow on the face. The company interfered and
pinioned the prosecutor's hand, .who was about to re-
taliate, as he was much the stronger mans but in
doing this the defendant had an opportunity of
giving him two other blows, which gave him a black
eye.—Guilty.