Star.
London, England, 1829-07-31 00:00:00

- --s•• '1))
•

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCWIT. Jowr SO.
WALKER V. STILICILLAND.

JUDGMENT- WILFORD T. BULKELET.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH. Jinx $O.
Y&ATES ♦ND ANOTHER •. DENTED.

At a lam hour this morning Mr. KIIGHT mentioned
this. case, which it will •be recollected was an application
made last week to commit the Earl of Roscommon and
several other individuals to the custody of the Warden of
the Fleet, for contempt in infringing an injunction that
Platt been granted to restrain the noble defendant from all
intercourse with Miss Rachael Walker, a ward.
The Learned. Counsel said that he appeared in behalf
of Mrs. and Miss Booth, who were included in the order.
These ladies had made an affidavit distinctly denying any
participation whatever in the matter. The charge against
them had been made public, and from the situation they
tilled, as the conductresses of a highly respectable semi-
nary, it was necessary fur their refutation to be equally
public. The Learned Gentleman complained of the in-
jury these ex-parte applications inflicted upon innocent
parties. He understood that the other side would not
object to the order being discharged, as far as related to
these ladies.

The LORD CHANCELLOR inquired whether the Counsel
on the other side were present ; and, on being answered
in the negative, desired that Sir Charles Wetherell should
be sent for.

On Sir CnAnt.Es's coming into Court, he said that he
had read the affidavit, of these ladies, and he felt bound
to say that they had completely exonerated themselves
ftxtra all suspicion. It was quite right that. the refutation
should be as public as the charge.
.me LORD CHANCELLOR ..blllll Booth wishes it to
be so. She denies the fact in every part, and to my mind
most satisfactorily.
Mr. KNIGHT—Her father swears that he saw the let-
ter that was sent to the ward written and sealed, and that
he himself pat it into the post office, and that it con-
tained nothing like the billet-dour mentioned by Sir C.
Wetherell.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said that Sir Charles had
moat candidly stated that the case was full and satisfac-
torily answered.
Mr. KNIGHT- -Knew he had—that he had acted like

himself, but whatever feelings of courtesy he felt towards
him, he must apply for the costs of this application.
' Sir CHARLES WETHERELL inquired from what fund
were they to come ?
LORD CHANCELLOR—I think you must follow up this
courtesy and pay these ladies their costs. His Lordship
then inquired whether Counsel were prepared to go on
ith other parts of the case ?
Sir CHARLES WITHERELL said it was the particular
wish of Lord Roscommon to have the matter heard in
his Lordship's private room, and he should offer no ob-
jection to that course. Lord Roscommon would be in
court at three o'clock.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, if it would take much
time it had better be proceeded with now, fbr he could
wait but a very short time after three o'clock.
Mr. ROUPEL said it would occupy but a very short
time. An arrangement had been entered into between
the parties, and all that was wanted was his Lordship's
consent.

It was then arranged for the matter to be heard pri-
vately at three o'cleck.

The LORD CHANCELLOR disposed of this case. Gen.
Wilford employed the defendant, his heir-at-law, and a
solicitor, to levy a fine for him in respect of certain lands,
the General having previously, by will, devised those
lands to his widow ; the fine was levied, and by its opera-
tion it revoked the will. as far as concerned the lands ;
it did not appear that Mr. Bulkeley knew the General
had made a will ; other solicitors had been employed to
assist him in the making of it ; the General died in a
month after the fine was levied, without having repub-
lished his will, or made a new one ; and very shortly
afterwards the defendant claimed the lands as heir-at-
law, alleging that the testator had died intestate as
regarded them ; he took possession accordingly of the
estates in 1822 ; the widow filed a bill, calling on the
defendant to re-convey and to account ; the cause came
on for hearing before the then Vice-Chancellor, Sir J.
Leach ; he directed two issues to be tried at law—the first
was, whether the defendant had fraudulently induced the
General to extend the fine beyond the property sold to
the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital ? and the second,
whether the defendant had fraudulently omitted to inform
the General that the fine revoked his will as to the lands
(part of the Ranelagh estate at Chelsea) therein con-
firmed ? Upon the trial the Jury found for the defendant
on the first issue, but on the second they found for the
plaintiff. An application was made by the defendant for
a new trial ; this was refused, and the present judgment
upon the case was upon the discussion on further direc-
tiros. The Court was of opinion that it was the duty of
the defendant to have informed the General of the effect
of the fine upon any will he might have made, and that
the Jury had found their verdicts rightly on the evidence
before them ; that under these circumstances Mr. Bulke-
ley could not be permitted to retain the estates ; that
therefore he should be decreed to reconvey the estate, to
give up possession,' to account for the rents and profits
he had received, pay the costs of the proceedings in this
Court, and so much of those at common law as by the
findings ofthe Jury had been against him.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Let those costs be taxed
by the Master of the Court, and he will divide the casts'
es they should be. This case is exceedingly important,
as it is anew point ; and it gives me great satisfaction to
think that Mr. Bulkeley can take it to a higher tribunal
if be thinks fit.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL. whom were Mr.
GURNEY and Mr. RICHARDS) stated that this was an
amnion brought by the plaintiffs as assignees of the estate
4a person named Marshall, who had formerly been a
Blac.kwell Hall factor, carrying on his business in Basing-
halt-street, against the defendant, a dealer in cloth. The
bankrupt had commenced business as a factor only, and,
for a young beginner, was doing very well, clearing by
his commission between 3001. and 400/. per annum. Not
satisfied, however, with this, be became a dealer himself,
and was then in the habit of taking to his own account
wane of the goods consigned to himto sell oncommission.
These cloths he (the Attorney-General) should peeve the
bankrupt to have sold at a loss of about thirty-five per
cent. to the defendant. In one instance the latter had
purchased a lot of cloths for 332/. 6s. which had cost the
bankrupt 4291. 65.. so that upon that ono transaction
there was a loss of 971. or about 22 per coast. Many
other dealing between the parties had taken place, the
average loss, to the bankrupt on all being above 32/. per
cent. A sale had been made to the defendant prior to
the act of bankruptcy, and if his Lordship was of opinion
thee thosaseispees were entitled to claim the amount of
tlioceekkose anus soolauch as lalat takes plait%
vowel Is the aanunissies of the act, is tem mei* by
this actioh would be 2,9601. Its. 6d. ; but if his Lard,

ship would not allow that claim, then the sum would be