The Statesman.
London, England, 1821-11-05 00:00:00

LAW INTEI•LIGE.NCR.

—.....—.
COURT OF CIIANCIERY, No•. 3.

HZALD moved to commit a person of the name
.4 'N.Dongal to the Fleet, for refusing to pay the rent
. f tin house and premises, situate in the parish of St.
*am to James Dodd, Bog , the receiver appointed by
the Court. There were, be said, a number of houses in
St. mien's, which were the property of an infant. His
father had left him the principal parts of his estates by
will; but with respect to these houses he bad omitted
to do so. and he took them by descent as his heir. The
tenants imagined that this infant was not legitimate,
aid that, as &Datuml consequence of their landlord's
illegitiomoy, they themselves acquired the character of
owners. This erroneous notion had, some time since,
made it necessary to move to commit M'Dougal, who,
however, submitted to pay his rent on receiving a sum
of money be bad expended in repairs, an account of
which repairs be was to deliver to the receiver. Sub-
sequent to .this.'* similaritpplieation had been lode
against another tenant, nied Perri', and he wan- or'
d .red by the Vice Chancellor to stand committed; but
it being the practice that the warrant for his commit-
ment should be signed by the Lord Chancellor, the
order for issuing it bad been left at his Lordship's
house previous to his leaving town; his Lordship con-
sidering that the order required some explanation, had
returned the warrant without signing it. The canoe-
winence of this has bete, that all the tenants, who un-
questionably would have submitted if Perry had i•een
sent to the Fleet, were now convinced they could ret
the Court at defiance and become their own landlord.
Among the rest, ill'Dougal refused to obey the order
be had before consented to; he would neither pay his
rent or give in the account of his repairs; the receiver
had, therefore, been obliged to apply to his Lordship
to request that by committing Mr. M'Dougal to prison,
he would convince him, that he was not by his own
mere act of authority, to convert himself from the
tenant of his house Into its owner.

The Login CHANCILLOR observed, that the tenants
Te...re extremely mistaken in the Lotion they had formed
of their own rights. It was far from the w ish of the
Court by commitment to compel them to pay their
rent, but it would be necessary to enforce the payment
if they persevered in their resistance. His Lordship
twill, be had Mt some difficulty with regard to the
hurter!: of the former order. Ele thought it had gone
rather further than it should have done: if the order
was handed to him he would set the matter right.
Mr. ligALD.—These tenants all think they are now
quite safe.

MURRAY V. XVIIDELL.
Mr. Holt moved os the part of Mr. Murray, the
plaintiff, to discharge an order for an injunction
vranted by the Vice-Chanoellor. at the instance of Mrs.
Eliza Itnndell, to restrain him from publishing a work
Irhich treated of matters certainly of great importance

to the comforts of society.
Loan Cnawczt.Loa.—Not a book upon law, I pre-
tome.
Mr. floaste.—lt was a book on the science of Cook-
ery and the Art of Carving. In 1805, Mrs. Rundell,
a lady of education, having collected sad composed a
great number of receipts in cookery, conceived that
eke could not better promote the interests of the public
than by devoting her labours to its service. This she
determined to do without the most distant view of any
pecuniary remuneration. Her only object was to make
the book find its way into the world, witlythat sort of eclat
which was calculated to ensure its becoming fashion.
able ; and, therefore, her first work was to find out
sore person through whose auspices she could intro-
duce 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 com-
panion of the works of the most celebrated poets, his-
torians, and philosophers, and with them site fancied
it would descend to posterity. '1 his to an author, and
a 'female author, actuated by the laudable vanity of
seeing her work so ushered forth to general attention
was sufficient reward. She presented her work to Mr.
Murray in 1805, upon his undertaking to publish it
at his own expense and risque. At this time nothing
was farther from her thoughts than receiving or claim-
ing any remnueration of a pecuniary nature. Upon
presenting her manuscript to Mr. Murray, it was found
to be a rude undigested mass of receipts, without form
or order. The plaintiff expended a considerable sum
e money in bringing out the first edition: he bad
added an index, bad the preface materially enlarged;
end, above all, he had procured a number of plates to
be engraved, illustrative of the art of carving. The
first edition wits soon disposed of, and a second was
prepared.
The Loan efIANCELLOR observed, that in the pre-
face to the edition he held in his hand, the authoress
said she had given the work to the public, and ex-
pected no emolument for it.
Mr. HORNE said, what he bad to contend for was,
that this work, having- Sees freely and voluntarily
given to the public, through the medium of Mr.
Murray, and lie having been at all the expense of
bringi”g oat the various editions, had acquired an
meitable right to republish the work at the expira-
tion of the first fourteen years. To shew that this
lady never expected to be paid, be would only mention
tbat, in the year 1808, travelling about like other
Learned persons, she happened to be at Edinburgh—
perhaps for the paryisse of collecting more receipts in
the heart of cookery. Mr. Murray was in that city at
the same time, and, availing himself of the oppor-
tunity, he, with those feelings of delicacy which
were cot likely to intuence any publisher who was
about to pay an author for his labours, enclosed
her Ditik-ootes to the amount of 1501., trusting that
she Witold think it as honorable in her to receive it
as it afforded him pleasure to send It. In her an-
serer, the Lady expressed her surprise at the pre-
sent she had so unexpectedly received, observing,
that she never had entertained the smallest idea of i
receiving any pecuniary return for what had been on
her part a free gift : she expressed further, hew re-
joiced she was that her little work should have been
received by the public in a way so far beyond her ex-
pectations as to hare rendered the enclosed present a
eatisfaction,fir the giver. Thus, it appeared, bee mo-
tive fee accepting the gift was not of a mercenary asp
lure, hitt beeanse. bee vanity was tattered by the idea
that it was a testimony of reepoct to. her
Vine letter% ha were quite decisive of the