Star.
London, England, 1821-11-06 00:00:00

LAW IN TELLIGBN CE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 3.
COONERY.--MURRAY D. RUNDELL.
__

Mr. Honig, on the part of the plaintiff, prayed his
Lordship to dissolve an injunction which the defend-
ant had obtained to restrain his client from publish-
ing a Work on a very interesting subject, Cookery.—
The circumstances of the case were as follow:
Some time previous to the year 1805, the defendant,
Mrs. Rundell, who was a Lady of great respectability,
had composed and collected several receipts anti
observations on the important art of cooking, of
which she was generously anxious that society
should have the benefit. Her only object was to,
make the book find its way into the world with that
sort of eclat which was calculated to ensure its be-
coming fashionable! and therefore her first object
was to find out some person through whose auspices
she could introduce it to the west end of the town.—
She had the good fortune to find a Gentleman of all
others the most likely to promote the circulation of
her literary labours on this ancient and important art
and mystery. Upon the shelves of Mr. Murray it
would become the companion of the works of the
most celebrated poets, historians, and philosophers,
and with them she fancied it would descend to pos-
terity. This to an author, and a female author, ac-
tuated by the laudable vanity of seeing her work so
ushered forth to general attention, was sufficient re-
ward. She therefore assigned her manuscript to the
plaintiff, Mr. Murray, Vie bookseller, with liberty to
publish it for his own us: and benefit; with this re-
striction, however, that her name should not appear
as the author. Mr. Murray found that the receipts
were in many respects imperfect, and required classi-
fication ; he, therefore, at his own expense, placed
the manuscript tinder the revisal of a person to ren-
der it fit for publication. He also suggested to Mrs.
Rundell the propriety of making several additions to
the work, which she accordingly made. When the
work was at length ready for publication, it was
found that a title-page was wanting, which Mrs. Run-
dell had omitted to furnish. The task of composing
one devolved upon Mr. Murray, and the book which
was destined to add so largely to the comfort and hap-
piness of the people of this country, was ushered into
the world under the title of " A New System of Do-
mestic Cookery, founded upon principles of Eciamomy,
and adapted to the Use of Peivate Families—by a
Lady." This publication was effected entirely at the
expense of Mr. Murray, and the profits of the work
did not at first make an adequate return for the money
he had expended upon it. However, the sale in-
creased, and in 1807, Mr. Murray thought lie might
venture to publish a second edition of the book, with
many alterations and improvements,. among which
was the addition of a table of contents, which he em-
ployed a person to compose. He also requested Mrs.
Rundell to furnish him with some observations on
carving, and the fair author accordingly dished him
up an Essay on that subject. Mr. Murray, how-
ever, was not satisfied with the manner in which
this essay was served up, and he was compelled. to
give it to another disciple of Apicius to be set in pro-
per order. Anxious that every possible light should•
be thrown on the subject, Mr. Murray caused nine
plates to be drawn and engraved, illustrative of the
sublime mystery of carving. Tile plaintiff, too, added
diverse new receipts of his own, together with some
most interesting matter under the title of " Bills of
Fare for Family Dinners." In short, he made an en-
tirely new arrangement of the work for the second
edition, which was published in 1809; and in doing
'this lie incurred great expense. The plaintiff had since
that time published several new editions of the book,
with many further improvements, so that he calcu-
lated that one-fourth of the matter contained in the
last edition of the work was supplied by him. There
was now a great demand for the book, which demand,
it was but reasonable to infer, was occasioned solely
by the improvements which Mr. Murray had effected
upon the work, and to the exertions which he had
made to circulate it. The Learned Counsel said, that
he now came to the point which had induced him to
address his Lordship on the present occasion. It ap-
peared that Mrs. Rundell, after having for so many
years surrendered up to Mr. Murray all right in the
work, wished now to resume the power which she had
abandoned, and had obtained an injunction from his
Honour the Vice-Chancellor, prohibiting Mr. Murray
from publishing the work. It was somewhat difficult
to understand what were the grounds of this conduct
on the part of Mrs. Rundell. He (Mr. Horn) thought
he should be able to satisfy his Lordship, by the evi-
dence of a letter of Mrs. Rundell, that that Lady had
resigned all property in the work. This letter was writ-
ten in answer to one addressed to Mrs. Rundell by
Mr. Murray. That Gentleman being at Edinburgh in
September, 1808, in which city Mrs. Rundell was also
residing, thought himself bound in gratitude, as the
work had turned out more profitable than he had
expected, to make the Lady some acknowledgment.
Under the influence of this feeling he sent her the fol-
lowing letter :
4i My dearest Madam—The unexpected occurrence of some
hasiness induces me to solicit your pardon for being obliged to
delay the pleasure of attending you until Monday morning. In
the meantime I am happy to avail myself of this first opportunity
at sending the inclosure, which I trust you will feel it is as highly
honourable in you to receive as it is gratifying in me to have
such means for offering. Although your gift to me has proved
far more valuable than I expected, yet it has added little to the
gratefulness which I have so long entertained for a friendship
which it is my highest pride to maintain, and which must ever
render me your obliged servant, " JOHN MURRAY."
The Lotto Coaacetton.—That's good cooking.
Mr. HORN.—The inclosure spoken of in the letter
was a draft on Mr. Murray's Banker for £l5O. Mrs.
Rundell returned an answer to Mr. Murray, in the
following terms :
" My dear Sir—Your very handsome and most unexpected
present I have just received, and can truly say I never had the
smallest idea of any return for what I considered and which
really was a free gift to one whom I had long regarded as my
friend. If in truth you have found my little work productive so
far above your expectations as to render your very obliging in-
closure any satisfaction to your own feelings, I will not affront
your noble sentiment by returning It; although your persuasion
of ita being honourable to my poor abilities is really necessary to
make me believe 1 do not err in accepting it, I beg to return
you my best acknowledgments, my' ear Sir, and to assure you
of what, however, I hope you do not doubt, lam your obliged
friend and obedient servant,
" MARY ELIZA RUNDELL."
It might be seen from this letter that Mrs. Mundell
did not accept this money from any mercenary motive;
she did not receive it in the shape of payment, but as a
testimony of merit which could not fail tobe agreeable
to the feelings of an author. He could not conceive
how it was possible for Mrs. Rundell, after writing