Star.
London, England, 1828-04-28 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Aran 26.
WELLESLEY AND THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT.
Mr. HORNE said there was a Petition in this cause on
a subject which pressed very much. This was the last
day on which boys could be received at Eton, and he
was instructed to apply for the Lord Chancellor's order
that the children of Mr. Wellesley should be sent today.
Mr. PEPYS, who entered the Court while Mr. Herne
was speaking, said he was instructed by the petitioner,
whose first object was that the children might be di.
rected to be treated in exactly the same manner as any
other boys who had a private tutor. He was quite as
desirous as any other person could be that no further
delay might take place. The boys were to be removed
from the house of Mr. Dobson, with whom they for-
merly boarded, to that of Mr. Handley; and this, as be
understood, was done at the request of Mr. Ebden. who
had been appointed their tutor under the sanction of
the Court.

Mr. HORNE said it was thought better, as Mr. Dob-1
son, who made an affidavit on a former o:casion, had
in some degree mixed himself up with the parties, that
he should hate no further opportunity of interfering.—
There was no other ohjectitin to him.
The LORD CHANCELLOR asked if the Master had
made any order on this subject, and being answered by
Mr. Parrs in the negative, his Lordship said.that Mr.
Ebden was perfectly fit to arrange such a point as that
now submitted, arid he should therefore make no order
in the matter. Some further discussion took place be-
tween the Counsel, which the Lord Chancellor put an
end to by repeating, that the parties must abide by Mr.
Ebden's decision.

Mr. PErle said that the petition stated some other
Objettions as to the sums charged for washing, board,
lodging, dee.
The 140 ED CHANCELLOR said, it was better that these
payments should be made by Mr. Ebden, who would
be personally liable for them. His Lordship thought
the whole dispute was quite useless.
Mr. NM said, that however that might appear, the
petitioner had a right to ask what was usually done in
other cases should be done in this.
Mr. HORNE had no objection that the matter should
be decided by Master Eden, to whom the 'cause had
been referred, and who was himself an Eton man, but
without a formal order for that purpose.
Mr. Pisses agreed to that arrangement. Some dis-
cussion took place between the Counsel, when
Mr. HoaNa said he Celt it his duty to state this fact
to the Court—that the boys had been kept at Draycot I
for a length of time by Mr. Pep) s clients. He wished
that it might now be ordered by the Court that.they
griruld be brought to London and delivered up to the
care of Mr. Ebden, who was now waiting hem to take
them to Eton. _ _

Mr. Puts said the boys bad been brought from
Diaycot. and would be sent to Eton immediately.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Court expected
that ths would be done, and shat the panics would obey
Immediately the order of the Court.

TAT& V. MOSS.

Mr. LOWNDES aprlied for an order that certain arti
ties of settlement might be brought ti) the Master to br
cancelled. This was the case of a ward of Coutt, a Miss
Tate, who hail married a Mr. Dixon, in Paris; without
the consent of her guardians. On a former occasion a
reference had been directed to the Master to inquire as
to a proper settlement, and it was then found that arti-
cles had been executed presious to the marriage. The
Mists were to pay the rents and profits to the wife, in.
dependently of her husband; and there was a poser to
the husband and wife jointly to raise from the estates such
monies as they might think necessary for the advance.
meat or provision of the children of the marriage, " or
for their own nse." This provision, it was clear, the
Master would reject, and no new settlement could be
made until the articles in which it was contained should
be cancelled.

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, the settlement might
be prepared in the mean time, and until it was trady
this petition should stand over.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Arrut. 26.
JENKINS V. JAMES.

Mr. SCARLWTT moved for a rule to show cause w hy
a new trial should not be granted, on the around of
excessive damages. The action, which was tried before
Lord Tenterden, was brought for damage:, for having
sued out an outlawry against the plaintiff, and also for
special damage sustained. The plaintiff and her two
sisters resided in Herefordshire, where they possessed a
cottage and about seven acres of land. The defendant
was an attorney, residing at the same place, and his land
adjoining that of the plaintiff and her sisters, he was
desirous of adding theirs to hit own, *ad purchased the
share of one of the sisters who was married. He
also endeavoured to purchase the shares of the plain-
tiff and her other sister, but they rejected every
offer, and also every proposal for dividing the land.
He then filed a bill in Chancery, for a writ of partition,
which they did not answer, and the plaintiff's sister was
sent to prison. In the meantime, the defendant's sheep
sod pigs were impounded,for trespassingon the plaint iff's
land. He sued out a replevin in the Court of Common
Pleas, to which the plaintiff and her sister did not ap-
pear. A capias ad respondendass Wised, to which the
Sheriff, at the defendant's desire,returned non eat invents's.
The defendant then had proclamation made at the
Church and Court House, and sued out an outlawry.
The plaintiff and her sister's land having, by this process,
vested in the Crown, the defendant became the Crown's
tenant. The plaintiff and her sister now applied to the
Court of Common Pleas, and had the outlawry reversed,,
and the plaintiff brought her action for damages. Mr.
Gettig stated the case very pitiably to the Jury, and
thongb the only special damage proved was, that the
defendant bad ploughed some of the land while it was
is his possession, the Jory, probably acting tinder the
infiaence of excited feelings, gave .a verdict for One
Hundred and Fifty Pounds.
Laid Turruusan ,said, it was proved on the trial,
that- the Under Sheriff had at first refitted to make the
!anus non est kroentus to the Capias; and that the de.
fanstsnt exerted himself to Waal him to comply. He
dos& if the plaintiff's sister would consent to drop the
sett* Wilda be understood she had anions aced, that,

it would be better for the defendant than obtaining a
rule. A, second Jutz might perhaps give ppm
Mr. ScsaLarr intsmated his asouloseeoce, ,
Mr. Gummi said be should recoMtriend she sister to
do so, provided her costs vete paid...
Lord MITERDZN thought that reascmable, and a
rule was granted. on the understanding dun if .his
ship's recommendation should be adopted, all proceed{
logs should terminate.