Star.
London, England, 1827-06-22 00:00:00

Court. and espiesseci his de.irrthat•the nutter shuslit
be investigated by the Piono chi:vary.

• DIXON V. antrrcevroatie.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE said t 1 is was a., action brunette
by his clietit, a Gentleman named DIXO.I, Jeaj, St
the
defendant, a well known auctioneer, f r 11,e recnver) of
the sum of 5501. which had been deposited in Ili, hods
during the pending of certain negotiatiobs.hjween the
plaintiff and anoti.er Gentleman (whose agent Mr.
Shattleworth was) for the sale or an estate, which the
1 plaintiff had agreed to putchase, upon Condition th.the
I obtained a valid title. Several years had elapse.l since
the money had been dcposited ; and a gout! tale could
not be obtained to the property, nor would the prate
refund the money.
Witnesses were called, and Mr. Sergeant LAWS Eally
admitted that 'a satisfactory title could not be given;
and, under the direction of the Court, the Jury gen d
verdict for the plaintiff for 8501.

COURT OF RXCHRQURR, Jove 21.
WIntIGIALL v. Tilt LIATHERSZLLCRS CA/PANT.
This was a suit instituted by the plaintiff, who is inr4
propriate Rector of the parish of St. Helen's, Swop,:
gate, to recover tithes, at the rate of 2s. 9d. in the pound,
upon the rent of the premises of the Leathersellers
Company. The claim was ma.'e uncer a Statute of
Henry VIII. and the defendants pleaded, first, a casts
mary payment in the nature of a modus, and, secondly,
' that the decree by which the particular tithes in ques.
tion were granted away, after the dissolution of the
monasteries, was not enrolled as was specifically directed
by the Statute of Henry VIII.
Mr. BICIMUITint, for the defendants, observed, in
the course of bis address, that it having been customary
before the Reformation, for the people to pay certain
fees to the Clergy, on the festival of a Saint, Arch-
bishop Arundel, upon one occasion, introduced twe and
twenty new Saints into the calendar all at cue, and
that, from that day to the present, there had never been
any tranquillity in the City upon the subject of tither.
The case, which was part heard before, occupied the
whole of yesterday, and was adjourned for further bear-
ing to Wednesday next.

COURT OF CON ORURO ATES, Jon 21.
WESTMEATH AGAINST WESTMEATH.

This is an appeal by the Marquis of West=Ath against
the sentence of the Arches Court, by which the sentence
pronounced in the Cohbistory Court, in favour of the
Marquis, was reversed.
_ _ _

The Proctor for the Marchioness of Westmeath, the
respondent, applied to the Court to have the costs in.
curred in the Court below taxed as against the hurbaarl,
in order to enable her Ladyship to carry on her defence.
Dr. JENNRR and Dr. PHILLIMORI, on behalf of the
appellant, objected to the motion. This Court could
not direct the taxation of costs in the Court below; the
payment of colts formed part of the sentence, which this
Court could not decide by piecemeal. The respondent
was entitled to ask for her costs, de die in diem, in this
Court; and it would be competent for the appellants
object to their payment, if he thought proper.
The COURT were of this opinion, and rettheJ to en.
terrain the motion.

The Proctor for the respondent then prayed tatition
of costs in the present appeal.-
The Proctor for the appellant opposed the applico
tion, and prayed to be heard on his petition.
The COURT ordered accordingly. This incidental
point remains, therefore, to be tbscussed.