The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-07-29 00:00:00

lILLIOTT

Mr.BeLi. stated, on the
vied lady, that she bad been
bequeathed, during her
children, the dividends arisii
3 per Cent. Bank Annuities.
family being in some enil
husband in an assignment
dends to the present defendant
ation, and in the year if
her husband, assigned the
this gentlemen, during he
the present year, Mr. Elli
ons misfortunes, became ,
was advised that she, being
maintenance by the cnndi''
was reduced, had an equit
which had been assigned
consequence was, that she
assert this claim. Ihe Learned
of the claim, contended
client to file a bill of this
tent to her to file it against .
an assignee of a life estate.
cases determined before
wicke, Thorlow, and Eldon,
out hf

that
upon
Had ,
posed
any di
the assi;
right '
Court •
disposed
He cunr
was hel
the fut
many es,
.ng down
dreds
pertivs.

Mr
concurred
taken
your
lay down
no instance
his
alleged
cause
to afford
how
could

- •
................ ............lIIIi
...._..w...,.
...
' \ .
1.4 *or t 4:.... I , .
' i. ~
eftitr
. A
.e. _.. J •, .-
.".. lA, '*.‘• •14 A I
'.., .7. .' • lar4- ‘. 1 • %t= .
/4
T-..
" •
.;
44 *Nt se gel . • '
4111
,
, , . , :• I. I,
.1 ,k'
.1
. 1
. ~
. _
PRICE SEVEN PENCE.
. ,
4.. %,:
habitants of the parish of blarylebone, yet by the
des of the Court, he could only consider the Bill as
'at of the plaintiff alone, because he came here only • 1
i the ground of his own contract. After reading the •
•ctioni
of the Act, in which it is provided, that the
tea shall be such as are " mutually agreed upoti," .I
• I
•
• observed, that in common sense, that mutual agree- ,
rnt depended on the particular circumstances of each
habitant's necessity for a greater or smaller quantity
~
' water, on the bore of the pipe and on other considc-
tions, from which it followed, that the contract with •
to might be extremely different from the contract isi
ith another. The clause also proved, that the whol
ght of any inhabitant to a supply of water, originate I ' 4 ''' 1 •
direly in the contract, into which he entered with • i!
e Company: from which it appeared, that the Le-
J
slature, in passing the Act, did not contemplate the • 1 `I
'continuance or refusal of that supply by the Cow- •
ny as an irreparable injury to the inhabitant. In
is Act also it was provided, that in certain cases,
mely, where the rate was refused, where the ii.- • •
.hitant supplied by the Company did of himself sup- ..
y part of the water to any other person, In these
ses penalties were provided in the latter, and in . .
Cher it was declared lawful for the Company to serer • I
e pipe of such inhabitant, It was therefore impos-
)le for him to suppose that the Legislature looked
on the refusal or discontinuance of the supply to bs' i 1
ch an irreparable injury as would bring it under
e jurisdiction of this Court. Besides, it was vt ry
portant to observe that there was nothing in this
t.
ct which would authorise him to compel any person
take water from this Company; on the other hand, 1
could not find any thing in the Act which woul.l
thorise him to compel the Company to supply water
any inhabitant, if they chose to refuse it. Under
ese circumstances he was of opinion that he could
ot grant this injunction. I
Motion refused. I
-......
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT:4I3.e 29.
.
KLLIOTT C. CORDILL.
Mr. BaLI. stated, on the part of the plaintiff, a mar-
td lady, that she bad been shortly after her marriage
queathed, during her life, with remainder to her
ildren, the dividends arising out of 90001. Imperial ••
per Cent. Bank Annuities. In the year 1806, her
nily being in some embarrassment, she joined her
tsband in an assignment of a portion of the disi- 1
ads to the present defendant for a valuable consider-
ion, and in the year lel 13, she, in conjunction with 1
r husband, assigned the whole of the dividends en •01 .'
is gentlemen, during her life. In the beginning of
e present year, Mr. Elliott, in consequence of rani- . •
.5 misfortunes, became a bankrupt, when the plaintiff
IS advised that she, being deprived of all means of
dintenance by the condition to which her husband ''
.
is rednceil, had an equitable claim on the property ;
iich had been assigned to the defendant, and the I
-,sequence was, that she filed a -bill in Chancery to
sect this claim. 'I he Learned Uentleman, in support
the claim, contended that it was competent to his
eat to file a bill of this nature—that it was coupe-
st to her to file it against a particular assignee, and
assignee of a life estate. He cited a numb, r of
ses determined before Lords Northington, Hard-
eke, Thurlow, and Eldon, for the purpose of making
t his case.
Mr. HAtsT maintained, on behalf of the defen,lint,
at the plaintiff in this case had no power of calling
on the Court for the relief which she prayed for.
id the fluids been in Court, and about to be dis-
setl of, she might be admitted to be beard against
v disposal of them to her prejudice. If, at the time
r assignment was making, she insisted upon, her
rht to a settlement, even then the utmost that a ' , •
met could do was, not to suffer the property to bc
'posed of without provision for her maintenance. 1
• contended, that if the title of the assignee which 11
is held to be good so long, and in reliance of winch .
e funds in question had been now involved iu so
my establishments were subverted, it would be lay-
g down a principle, calculated to give alarm to him- '.l.
Hs that were now in quiet possession of their I
pro- ••
.
rties. i
Mr. HARBIN followed on the same side, and entirely
ncurred with Mr. Hart in the view which he had
;en of thie ease. If the Court were decided in fi-
lar of the plaintiff, the principle which it would thus .•.../ „i•
r down would go to the extent of declaring, that in 1
.;:..
instance could a husband aleniate the property of
t nife. Seven years ago it would not have been
a
eged that this Lady had an equity on the funds, be-
use the circumstanoes of the husband were such as
afford her every prospect of good maintenance—bas
w was it possible that the title of the defendant
old he altered by events over which be could has'. .
possible contralti?
The Vice Cuancet.Loa said that in a case where •
rre was a gross , fund belonging to a wife its her
,n right, and about to be disposed of by the bus-
ed, a Court of Equity could reclaim that fund and
ntroul the power of the husband over it, so as to
•
sure a maintenance to her. But here was a life
operty alienated by her own consent, and not in
art. He thought if he were to decide that the
timid' should have an equity upon it, the prinvi-
, ....
r would prove very detrimental to the interrsts of .
e public. Before, however, he should 11n1Wensiss
important a point, he should take time OD MN* ,
r. At present, the inclination of his mind uss..
at he should not make such a principle. . .
His Honour did not rise till past 5 o'clock. 1
..........—...—....., .. ,
• Th. Spanish patciotts Society, established the Ist
.
staThermiay
ut,asdco, nsatittugoirdabeetirlonofinsa native*
motiv ullaisso. .1 .
Spada, .•
it i i
irate the opening of the Cartes, at mill stk.. t
1
issaikgaainsattudAinta
ca:aibasr.7dits, Ltedsad lepresideacy thein Dukesies,crigiusty.,
4
1 , 0 .