Star.
London, England, 1822-06-07 00:00:00


.

right hand aftis•Luri 41_01WOrrotthen sworn.
She remembered seeing Lady Thomoad at. her own ,
house in the year MI6 or 1817: in • a state of some
agitation, when she ilia she had a favour to ask tal
the Bishop. Mrs. Tor**, thinking that she spas
about to request him to become firer executor, replied.
that she was afraid he would not accepx,sluss ofd
as he had refused to do so for other friends. Shells.
Tared, • after a pause, whether he would object to
witness her will? to 'thick Mrs. Tosnline replied, that
she had no doubt he would witness it, and that he
would wait on her the next day, or the day after. She
said she wished to go to the Bishop's house to execute
the will; and accordingly went thither a day or two
afterwards, and took the will in her muff. Them
were several papers, but Mrs. Tomline could not re-
collect the exact number. After she had signed the'
will, the Bishop recollected, that in case freehold pro-
perty were devised, it would be necessary that, the
execution should be attested by three witnesses; lie
!suggested this to the Marchioness, who expressed her
gratitude for the information, and said that the house
in George-street (that in question) was freehold. Mr.
Smith was sent for, and she either wrote her name or
retraced the signature, and said it was her will, on
which it was attested by the three witnesses, in her
presence.—On her cross.examination, Mrs. Tomlinel
said that the Marchioness only signed one of the
sheets, nor could she identify those others produced
as the same which accompanied the paper attested.
The Bishop of Winchester being sworn, expressed
his distinct recollection of all the circumstances stated
by his Lady, as attending the execution of the will.
Mr. Smith, the other witness to are execution, gave
the same account of all those circumstances which
took place after his arrival.
The papers endorsed " Last Will and Testament
of Mary, Marchioness of Thomond," were put in, and
partly read. The passages at the beginning and con-
clusion of the sheets were evidently connected in sense,
and there was nO pecuniary bequest in the last paper
to which the £6OOO, alluded to in the last paragraph,
could be applied.
Mr. Ma aavarr, for the lessor of the plaintiff, sub-
mitted, that the whole case resolved itself into a ques-
tion of law. It differed from any cases which had
been already decided, although these were many
resembling it in principle. Certain it was, that an
ill-executed will would not be made good by a well-
executed codicil: and here a will ill-executed was to
be made valid by a conversation, to shew that the
testatrix contemplated a devise of the freehold when
she executed the last paper. If this were permitted,
it would destroy all the benefit intended br the Sta-
tute of Frauds, by substituting the parole declarations
of parties for. those solemnities which it was most im-
poi taut to observe.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, that, in his judg-
ment, it was entirely a question of fact for the Jury,
whether the Marchioness republished all the papers
produced as her will, or only the last of them?
Mr. MARRYATT, then proceeded to contend, that
the evidence did not sufficiently prove the identity
of the papers.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE felt no hesitation in
leaving the whole case to the Jury. Unquestionably
a person might write his will on different sheets of
paper, without attesting every sheet. Unquestion-
ably, also, it was unnecessary that these papers should
be united by wax or string ; it was enough if they
were all published as one entire will. Whether the
papers in question were so published, the Jury would
decide, from the purport and connection of the docu-
ments themselves, and the highly respectable evi-
dence which they had heard ; and if they were of
opinion in the affirmative, they would find a verdict
fur the defendant.—The Jury immediately found a
verdict fur the defendants.
WHATELEY D. PIGOT, COTTON, AND OTHERS.

The SOLItITOR-GENERAL stated the case. The
plaintiff had been a clerk in the i.ffices of Mr. Pullen
and other lawyers. He was also a member of the
Friendly Society, to the funds of which he became
unable to subscribe in consequence of illness. Re-
fusing him that relief which their laws had provided
for pumas in his circumstances, he obtained an or-
der from the Magistrates to enforce it. In order to
he entitled to the benefit of the Society's laws he was
•obliged to take an oath that he was not under twenty-
one years of age. The defendants then circulated
printed papers charging him with perjury, and hence
' the peseta action originated.
It appeared from the statement of Mr. SCARLETT,
for the defence, that the plaintiff had gone right and
left to work, having an indictment at Middlesex, and
an action at Westminster, and that be had eluded
one of the laws of the Society, which said that no
folkower, scrivener, nor lawyer's clerk, could
belong to the bociety. This law he eluded by repre-
senting himself as a merchant's clerk. -
These circumstances had some weight with the Jury
in mitigation of damages, and they, in consequence,
gave the plaintiff A Farthing.

HON. LADY BROMLEY V. KINSEY AND ANOTHER.

This was an action by Lady Bromley and her sis-
ter, who reside together in Berkeley-squarecto re-
cover from the defendants, two inhabitants of the
Hundred of Ossulston, damages for the injury done
to their house by the mob on the day of his Majesty's
Coronation. It appeared in evidence, that on the
morning of the day in question, a crowd of persons,
to the number of one hundred or more, passed by the
house, where preparations were making for an illu-
mination in the evening, and threw stones against
the window-s. They broke as many as required.
1:28.65. 3d. to repair them, which the glazier swore
was a reasonable charge.
Mr. GASELEEI for the defendants, submitted to the
Jury whether £4.75. 3d. a pane for plate glass was
sum which the Hundred ought to pay?
The Lona) CH lET JUSTICE.--013, certainly. Ix would
be too much to the injury of trade to say to the con-
trary, and so discourage the use of those ornaments
which occasion the employment of so many hands.—
There would be no knowing where to stop, if we were
to admit that the costliness of an article should de-.
prive its-owner of the protection which the law gives
to his property. We might restrain every one to the
use of mere necessaries, and the injttry to trade would
be incalculable.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Da.
znages, £28.65. 3d. the fell amount of the bill:
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE e.
A TAILOR'S BILLNIGJITINGALII V. IMAM
The plaintiff is a first-rate tailor, in the west end
of the town, and brought this action against a first-1

- -


rate Imam, to vdeober-13114141he.gdorli sold and deli-
vered. A bill had been ',slam months for £l6l.
Serjemst Pact. &pod drisi hissof Ha prisair.
The foreman proved the delivesiy. .The artistes
which witness did not diver Jigsaw en the perh..ll of
.the defendant. •
• Cross,exassined.--Couki tell breeches of his own
make upon a Goodman In the street, by the lung of
'sheen before or Wilda l
" Were. them sot tiro of the- eossithst did sot fit r—“, They
id sot it the bead I"
," The head! Ibet coats were usually made to St the
hody r—Whness be might not be compelled to disclose
secrets of trade. The was pressed. Witness.-.." We
often make coats w It extremely well, but some fault Is
km* Ned they arc eau back to be altered. In such a case, we
gm obey do est ht the head. We keep tkan a proper time; end
tbso Nod them back untouched, when they are found to be just
else Mot, sod to fit ddigbtfidly !"
Part of the bill had been paid.--Two witnesses
swore the pt ices were most moderate.
Berjeant Pa r. called three tailors, who swore the
charges were much too high ; R 6. 6s. should have,
been charged-instead of Li. Bs. and £B. Bs. instead
of 12s. 125..
The sum sought for was 1:110. The witnesses for the
defence thought £74 a proper charge.—Verdict JC9S.
PREROGATIVE COURT.
- 'fr• SATO V. ATKINSON AND WESTCOTT.
1 TMX was a question respecting the validity of a paper, pro-
pounded by Mrs. Susannah Saph, purporting to be the last will
of William Harcourt, Esq. of Salisbury, deceased, appoi vier her
sole executrix and residuary legatee, and which was opposed by
Thomas Atkinson, Rsq. and Mr. W. Westcost, executors named in
two forma wills, on the ground of fraud, forgery, con piracy,
and perjury. This case having occupied several days argument,
the Court this day gave judgment at great length.
Sir J. Nicuott observed, the factum of two former wills was
pleaded—the one dated the 24th of October, 1818 ; and the other
the 14th of June in the same year. The pretended will was
dated June 14, 1819. Seventy witnesses had been examined,and
a great mass of evidence introduced. This case did not turn on
the question of capacity, but on the factum of execution, whe-
ther in reality it was the act of the testator. Three witnesses had
attested the instrument, and if they were to be believed, there
was an end of the question. The manner in which instruments are
found after the decease of testators, was molt material to connect
the instrument with the testamentary intentions of the deceased.
The disinterest of the panics producing the instrument, or where
it was in possession of the testator, tended to shew its genuineness.
On the death of the testator, this instrument did not possess these
advantagest It was produced by Mrs. Saph, the deceased's house-
keeper. Other circumstances which excited still stronger suspi-
cion of the fairness of the transaction was, the will was in the hand-
writing of John Saph, her son ; and the attesting witnesses were
himself, his brother, and a sister. The parties, it was evident' were
not unacquainted with his affairs, as his housekeeper, Mrs. Saph,
had the entire management of his domestic concerns. This in-
strument was evidently drawn from the substance of former
wills; but whethee by the directions of the deceased, became
material to inquire. It was represented by the parties to this,
that the former will had been destroyed; but it turns out, al-
though the original was not forthcoming, yet two former
wills were actually in their possession, although they stated
them to have been destroyed. This discovery took place after
it was deposed by John Saph, that when he prepared the will
of 1319, both the former wills and instructions for the present
had been destroye.:. The Court remarked, that in general
suspicion attached to the destruction of former wills or in-
structions ' • this happened frequently where there was something
to conceal. The Court did not attach muck importance to the
party in this case endeavouring to snatch a probate before due
time had expired, but as connected with other circumstances of
more weight. The parties to this instrument were the mother and
three children. Mrs. Saph, the mother, takes the bulk of the
property; and if the others were not directly benefited as lega-
tees, they were likely to be influenced in the mother', interest.
Jane Mayer, who lived servant with the deceased, deposed to
a conversation between them, in which Mrs. Saph said to the
testator, she wished him to do something more for her; to which
the testator answered,• he had done enough already. The de-
ceased was afflicted with erysipelis, which had caused him to
lox the use of his hands. Mrs. Saph said, she wished he could
get the use of his hands to write, for she believed he would then
do something more for her. This was before the date of the
former will, and by which it appeared she took only ten pounds
per annum. There was nothing beyond personal care and at-
tendance on the deceased that gave Mrs. Saph any claim on
him; though, after discharging his servant, she became his
nurse and only attendant. Her history was this :—She had
been noticed by the deceased before her marriage. At this time
she was separated from her husband, and had a large family to
support in a humble situation of life. John Saph, her son, had
b-en three years Clerk to an Attorney, and had been dismissed
from his situation ; and his general character was liable to dis-
credit. Ile was at this time in no situation. These circuits-
atances, although they did not warrant the presumption, yet"
favoured the suspicion, that he was capable of fabricating this
instrument. The law was extremely jealous in such a trans- ,
action, conducted entirely by parties who were themselves to be
benefited ; and it was a painful duty the Court was called on to
perform, in deciding on conflicting testimony. In this case,
however, it was under no necessity of pronouncing against the
party, as in a case of forgery, supported by perjury, which
belonged to their' jurisdiction to determine, it merely pro-
d for, or against the validity of the instrument pro-1
pounded. In a charge of forgery, if any doubt existed, the
presumption was in favour of innocence. The Court would
merely decide as to the probability whether this execution was
the act of the deceased, or of the party bringing forward the
instrument. It was led to consider the instrument itself, and
the nature of the disposition. It would compare It with former
wills. By these the testator had adhered to one deliberate pur-
pose of leaving the bulk of his property to Mr. Westcott and his
family, and considerable legacies to Mr. Atkinson and his family.
These persons were in his entire confidence, and he appointed,,
them Executors and Trustees. I
By the paper propounded, an entire revolution in his testa-
mentary intention had been manifested, not only substituting
Mts. Saph for Messrs. Atkinson and Westcott, but even to cer-
tain Dank Stock which he had left to charitable purposes; and
which alteration was insufficiently accounted for by extrinsic ctrl
cumstancee. Both the former wills were prepared by his confi-
dential Attorney, Mr. Wilmot, who had been so for forty years,
and had prepared his wife's will, and he continued to be so em-
ployed by the deceased even after the date of this last instrument.
The deceased was nearly eighty years of age when he died, and
was of sound mind. In the summers of 1817 and 1818, Mrs.
Saph, with her son and daughter, accompanied him to Lyming-
toq, and skewed great attention to him during his illness- The
son, John, was employed by the deceased in receiving rents for
him, when he could not write, and signing receipts in his (Mr.
Ilarcourt's) name.
The JOVE commented upon thw signature to the will being
different from the manner in which the testator usually signed
his name, by comparison of hand-writing. The final t at the
end of Harcourt, had the stroke drawn back instead of for-
ward. This appeared to correspond with the signatures to
all those receipts wherein he had signed the name of Mr. Har-
court, by his permission; but there was no positive evidence
whether this was or was not the execution of the testator. The
story told by the attesting witnesses was, that the deceased read
over the will himself, sheet by sheet, and put his signature and
characters to each of the four sheets,- J. Saph having previously
read them to the deceased. After dwelling upon a variety of
irreconsilable circumstances, which induced the Court altoge-
ther to discredit the testimony of these witnesses, as resembling,
a family compact, it came to the decision, that although it was
not warranted in pronouncing this paper a forgery, and that
supported by perjury, which was the province of another juris-
diction to determine, yet, upon the whole of the evidence, it felt
it was not warranted in giving effect to this iustrument, as hav-
ing been executed by the testator, but Abe duty of the Court was
to give effect to the former instrument; ancrthis party propound-
iug nothaving-furnished such evidence as that upon which the
moral justice of the Court could rely, it was bound to condemn
t. them in costs.

4I

Lately, the mail coach horses bicoming unmanageable, near
Thurso, M'Gregor, the guard, attempted to leap a% but his
great coat becoming entangled, the coach well overturned before
he could get himself disengaged: he felt underneath it, and was
so much hurt that he died in two hours.