Star.
London, England, 1827-03-20 00:00:00

VICE.CHANCELLOR'S COURT, 1118sca 111

.t ,;41.111

LAW

t.

osi.ier

~1

MORTIMIR V. DAVIS.
This was a bill filed fel- the administr

n of the

- .
assets of the te,,,totor, a Gentleman who, whilst living
with a airman named Sarah Davis, and by. whom he
had then two illegitimate children, made his will. devi-
sing a considerable property to such children as be
should have by that female. Subsequently to the exe-
cution of the will, two other illegitimate children were
born, and the question for the decision of the Court
now was, whether or not the latter were entitled by
law to the property devised to them by the testator ?
Some difficulty arose as to the jurisdiction of the
Court, in consequence of an order for sustenance pro.
nonnced by the Master of the Rolls, which the Vice-
Chancellor said be should be obliged to stop.
Mr. SUGDZN said, that his Lordship was expressly pre-
vented from rehearing a decree of the Master of the
Rolls, by the terms of the Act of Parliament.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought that the Lord Chan-
cellor might authorise him to hear the case.
Mr. &JODIE was positive that the Lord Chancellor
could. not give his Honour a power which was contrary
to the Act of Parliament.
The case was ordered to stand over to Wednesday, to
allow some technical alteration to be made in the form
of the pleadings, his Honour observing, however, that
the law did not recognise a bequest made in cootem-,
plation of illegitimate children not then born, or its
venire sa mere.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

LANCASTER, Y•acz IT.

TRUMAN AND °THIRD V. lIOLLINSWID AND OTNIERS.
This was an action brought to recover compensation
for a breach of contract. The plaintiffs were cotton ma.
nufacturers in Manchester, and the defendants mer-
chants in Liverpool. The year before last there was a
great demand for cotton, and no quarter of the world
was left unexplored for the purpose of supplying that
demand; and in a short time the market soon because
stocked with a quantity of Egyptian cotton. Among
others who exerted themselves to procure a in&
leient supply, was a Gentleman named Wilkinson,
resident in London, who transmitted to his agent in
Trieste an order to purchase two thousand five hundred
bags of cotton.which were to be conveyed to this country.
Relying upon this order,Mr.Wilkinson desired his agents
at Liverpool, Messrs. Tetley and Richards, to sell 500
bags of the cotton in question. In pursuance of this or-
der they sold, on the 14th April, 1825, 500 bags of
cotton to Messrs. Tattershall and Son, brokers, of Liver-
pool, on account of the present plaintiffs. The contract
did not contain any specific time for the delivery of the
cotton. Speculation having risen to a considerable
height, within two days after the purchase, the plaintiffs,
desired their brokers to dispose of the cotton at an ad
vaned price. Messrs. Tattershall, accordingly, sold 1001
bags of cotton to another person, and the remaining
400 to the defendants. These goods were sold upon the,
very same terms contained in the original contract,
except that the price was to be 19d. per lb. cotton having,
in the meantime, risen 2d. per lb. Frequent application
was made by the defendants to the plaintiffs, to know
when 'the cotton would arrive, but reference for an
answer was always made to Mr. Wilkinson, the original
vendor. It so happened, that the number of vessels at
Trieste, at the time, was wholly insufficient to convey
the quantity of cotton collected there to this country.
In consequence, the transmission of the'cotioa ordered
by Mr. W. was delayed; he was, therefore, obligild to
charter a vessel called the Bristol,from Liverpool, for the
express purpose of conveying to this country the cotton
lying there in his name. The vessel, thongh chartered on
the 12th April, was detained in Liverpool until the 14th
of May, and, owing to adverse winds, did not arrive at
Trieste until the month of July. Immediately on the
arrival of this vessel, the shipment of the cotton com-
menced, of which advice was sent to Mr. Wilkinson, and
by him to the plaintiffs, and by them to the defendants
Cotton continued to rise in price until May, and then a
decline began; and in August it was so low as to
make it clear that a most disadvantageous bargain had
been rattled into by all the. purchasers. The cotton
did not arrive until the Bth of October, when notice
was given to the plaintiffs that it was ready for deli-

very, who gave isimilar notice to the defeadants, to
whom, he now contended, the cotton belon;ed. 'They,
however, refused to accept that notice, idleking that the
cotton had not arrived within the reasonable time.
Upon this tefusal the plaintiffs gave notice to Mr. Wile'
Innson. of whom they had purchased, that as their buyers
had refused to accept the cotton, they also must decline
taking it. Mr. W. immediately commenced an action
against the plaintiffs, and a verdict was given against
them, and they were obliged to pay Mr. Wilkinson the
whole of his claim. The plaintiffs now, therefore, called
upon the defendants to reimburse them for the loss they
had sustained, in consequence of the breach of contract
with them.

For the defence it was contended, that the contract
could not be considered valid, the cotton not having
been delivered within a reasonable time. The Jury,
however, gave a verdict for the plaintiffs. The damages
to be settled out of Court. The damages in the decla.
ration were laid at Ten Thousand Pounds.

The following are the Appointments for the ensuing Spring Qr.
cuits of the Jury Court, Scotland:
NORTH—Lord Mocciums.

Perth Wednesday April 11.
Aberdeen.... Monday - 16.
Inverness.... Monday -- 25.
WEST—Lord Oswes.
Inverary..... Monday
Stirling Saturday 2B.
Glasgow .... . Monday May 7.
SOUTH—Lord PITIOLLT.
Ayr. Wednesday April 16.
Dumfries.... Monday.. .....
Jedburgb.... Friday —l..— 27.