Star.
London, England, 1823-12-17 00:00:00

I `1
,
. .

L4W INTELLIGENCE.
•
VICE-CITANCELLORII COURT, DECEMBER le.

MINI= AND •ANOTEIZA V. BLOM. -

Mt. Strobssetbie habalf of the plaintiffs, stated, that'
they, were daughters of the late Sir Robert Sloper, and
Sled the bill against the defendant., who was tenant for
lifer of the real.estate, to compel the payment-of annui-
ties left them by the will of their late father.
Mr. Wiscateill, on behalf of the defendant, stated,
that the testator, by his will, directed his debts to be paid
our of his personal estate, and left the remainder to
the plaintiffs as residuary legatees, and also left them
, •
annuities to be paid out of his real estate by the de-
fendant. The executor, in pursuance of the directions
of the will, paid such of the testator's debts as he know
to be dub, and then divided the residue of the personal
between the plaintiffs. Since then a demand was
made on the defendant, by persons of the name of Page,
who held a bond and mortgage of the testator's for
£lOOO, arid the defendant retained the annuities for the
payment of that mortgage debt. They always received
the annuities, till they received notice of that debt.
Mr. Scooes said, the bill charged that there was no:
mortgage debt due, the executor having paid the same
out of the personal estate, and charged the amount in
an account rendered the plaintiffs, as residuary lega-
tees ; or, if, in point of fact, the executor had misap-
plied the money' he kept out of the personal estate for.
the payment of this mortgage, still it was not to be
paid by them &fir-again.
The VlcerCtiolstmtu,oit said, that on the facts of the
Case as stated; there could be no doubt of the decision'
the Couit would come to. It was'cleAr that the defen-1
dant's life estate was subject to the mortgagee for his
debt of £lOOO, and that he was entitled to have that
debt paid out of the testator's personal estate;, and if,
is appeared to be the case, the executor had misapplied
£lOOO of the testator's personal estate, that could not
affect the right of the defendant to have the mortgage
paid out of that part of the personal estate that had
ken paid over to the plaintiffs as residuary legatees.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DECEMBER 16.
DUAL AND °TIMES, ASSIGNEES V. ELLERMAN.

Mr. So accroa-Gatianat. stated this case to the Jury.
It was an action brought for the recovery of a sum of
money from .the defendant, a German _merchant, for
quantities of cotton-twist sold and delivered by Messrs.
Thomas Newland Co. who became bankrupts in 4 810,
and assigned, ia.lB/I,their claims against the defendant
to Mr. Dalinalloy,e.creditor of theirs, wbo was, in fact,
the plaintiff in,alies,,ease,,, although it was necessary to
bring the action• iu,dae name of the assignees. The
bankrupt hail, meived his certificate, and had since be-
some.vers weal r.. The statute of limitations would
be mouoiohlriapori this case by transaction% so late as 1821.
I.l4a.uswil formalities. of the bankruptcy of Messrs.
raw and. Co. and the assignment to Mr: Dalmahoy
bt the assignees were then produced.
Uri !Afford proved that lie saw Alr. Dalmahoy and
Mr. Elierman,in Antwerp, In 1820, and that he and
Mr. Leming; were arbitrators to adjust the accounts be-
tween diem. The award was signed by Ellerman, and,
in a letter to the at hitrators, in 1821, he regretted that
Dalmahoy had accepted, from their arbitration, a claim
against him of 1:1,018, which consisted of £862, prin-
cipal-and interest upon that sum till 1811. The de-
fendant contended that the sum aas only £597, and
offerei to pay all that Dalmahoy could prove to by/-
been given to Messrs. Thomas Porter and Co.
Mr. MAVIIVATT objected. in point of law, that there
vas here no promise to pay, which could take this case
out of the Statute. An acknowledgment of debt .with•
out a promise, was not sufficient. It bad been upheld
during the last seven or ten years.
The LoaD CHIEF Jusrics could not agree with the
Learned Counsel.
Alr. MARRIATT addressed the Jury, and then called
several witnesses to support his case.
The SOLICITCR•GCNCRAL replied. He admitted that.
no interest could be proved, for it never appeared on,
the accounts.
The Loco Cum JUSTiCIL summed up the evidence
on both sides with great minuteness. nad . left it to the
Jury to say whether Bilerman, or Dalmalloy, or both,
were debtors to. Messrs. Porter and Cab? The whole.
debt was. in fact, %nit CM; if they thought. that any
parcel it bad been paid by either, party, the balance
could only • be, clairaadop—oAresdict for the plaintiff—
Damstgas 4189.175. 84.:-,Costs 40s.
• iliasdual V. KIIIVILLS AND CO.
•:$l2lll was sulk:idea to recover 4.0001. Prussian Bonds,

lfai~ed by plaintiff with. Messrs. Agassiz and Sons,l
pts,. tad ideposited by,dessrs. Agassiz and Sons
with the defendants. as *aunty for. money advanced
prior. to theieibaiktutey. gushing was said to de-
fendrustsiof timilsoilis* et whose they were.
Tire iniksCliaestiost.was whether Prussian Bonds were
to beiieTdoegociable securities if not, plaintiff Wald
mover lay.ttoverl , ,
. Tbi I.OIIAtUILIS AllalCl said,. there is a question of
fact, which I.,itiate to the Jury, whether the iietembints
knew dieberadi nit to be the property of Messrs: Agassis
aid Sons? If tiler believed them to be at their 'disposal,
em of.opioios that the bonds could be negotiated.
Verdict for the defendant.
The St7LWITOR GIIIWZRAL obtained leave to move P'
Cpurt,.on the law, whether the bonds were neso"
fSr.betlioiiglit this .was extending the negocial-
gree farther Olin it had ever been brolight.
-• BENDLItSOI4 C. riRODIE.
-.-This was an actionon a bill of exchange, indorsed by
deffindant to the plaintiff.-
• 14r. ifenderson is a painter in enamel, and in the
course insist winter he was employed by the defend-. 1
ant, a dealer_ in curiosities and antique ornaments, to
repaint the figures upon the dial of a French clock.
• Hasid;restored the fa-Jed appearance of the hours,
14011 originally been exhibited in their diurnal
round; the defendant paid him by accepting a bill for
isk: at three months. When it became due there was.
ao per nient, and the plaintiff brought this action.
T hand-writing and consideration were proved, and
dine*" sso defence, the Jury found a verdict for
the piaintsifi—Damages 151.—Costs 40s.
M TalOcih-
t9-1101.8Itoittr.
-throwing

:y a de

~Printfie cl,anr 77"--Ei
a work bay
s'oinethint
e ran

boys

near andee,_ two _
iving guar. relied, the dill ps
or going to strike Usti*,
!put

when, to avoid it, _ _ _v_ some of the machi-
nery, which. • got hialLit km, and instantly unshod
Lich to death.
The bootee,' Mr. P.'

boot-maker, in St. Ner-
d and robbed of 40 pair of