Vice Chancellor's Court, ...
The Times, 1824-08-13T00:00:00

Before Lord nTyp'frT n. Alr. HEALIs, in thiiscase, moved that the apvearraflee .entered for Richard. Swvaine, Mlartha S-waine; his wife, and Ricbur3d~ Thomas Swvaine., tliree of she defendanta, should b'e 4is harged aufd that the Order for revisving the suit; so far as regarded thu above thiree defendants, shouild also be discharged ; and thiat the plain- tiff's attorr.ey thould be directed to pay ihe costs of tsaid torder undl appearance. This was a motion of the greatest inmportanc as relat- ing to the practice of the C.ourt. UTndoubtedly, the public hia rea- son to complaini of the delays which too plc in the Court of Chancery; but the L-ord Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor had greater reason to complain of the statements which were~ madfe gout1 of Court, attiuigtoedl othemi, when in pdinr of f?t. theY wre Occasi'oned b ' the persons who had thie conzduct of thosej suits int whiich the dela's occurred. The present was one of thoseI suit,,. It was instituted in the year 1815, the testator having died in l1112; and from that time down to thie present day, no benefit hd been derived fromn It by, any of the parties, no acco-nt had been taken ; end althoughi the testator's personal property amounted to 25,0001., and the rent of his estates to near 70111. per annum, yet not one shilling had been divided amongst tSit parties hiitherto. The bill was filed by the accounttitt parties, two persons of the name of !Smith, the executors to thle wil , b-oth of' whiom hadl since gone down to their graves withiout having accotunted, against I18 defendants, legatees; utnder the will, all of them in an htim. ble tlasis of life, several of' these hald also sunik into death, dyines as thev bad fiveud-poor and distressed ; leaving children with slender holies that they, an', more than their untortunate parents, would ever derive any benefit from the bounlty of their deceased relative. except through the possible chanrce that'now that the matter would be brouight uinder thie immediate notice of the C.ourt, some degree of despatelh would be tesed. He (Mfr. Heald) did not mnean to thryow discredit on any person ; it might be that thie suit- could not hiave2 been proceeded with with greater clespatch ; neither diti he. mittn to convey to the Court that the gentleman whto had conducted the suit oni behalf of all' thie parties, bothi plaintifFs and defendants, amounting to 29 in numrber, was the cause. of this delay. Thiat gentleman might be a very respectable solicitor ; nod he (Mtr. Heald) was instructed that he was so inor did he think it necessary- to allude to his natne :however, hisi (Sinr 1leald's) clients had been ativised to make this miotion, to dischiarge the appearance whiich this: getntlen-ian hiad entered for themr, anti the otder which he had ob- tained to revive the suit. It mighit be aisked why they ished t miake this; retrograde nmotion, which wouldI have the eW1clbc, f trill - f'urthier retardling the suit ? His answer was, that his client M4rs. Swaine, as she ftasl already sitown hierself, was not impatient ; and aithotigh she was driven to the nieces;sity of earning the tueants of. subsistence by, witeeling a wheelbarrow about the Streets with oysters, - yet, as shie had done so from rthe comnmencement of the suit, 'and as the estate of thec testator was large, she satisfied herself with the litope that although she and her hus4bandl shioulti end their dlays, asR other of' the defendants hadi done, without deriving any beniefit fromn the tsu,it, yet her son, Thomias IRichard Swaine, who was but an in-; tau, might possibly live to reap some fruits from it onie time or an- otlher. He (Alir. Heald) should stare to the Court, that this gentle- ntiin had (he would not say with what miotive-no doubt, without any dishonouriable miotive, bxte hie had) thiought proper etowv, after a lapse of' nine years fromi tite commencemrent of ithe stiit, and twelve from thec death of thse tertator, to give notice of' a motion to appoint, a re- ceiver. It aippearedl from their affidavits, that MIrs. Swvaine and her husband being told that it was possible, thougli not probable, that nine years mote mig,ht roll away before the suit would be brought to at determination, were advised to emnploy some other solicitor. It '--s thouht ust possible thiat ithe former solicitor mnighit find some aili,etel~tyi sjuiting ilte interests of all parties. He might, to be etire, be able to give some other reason for tlte delay front 1815 to 1824 ; htowever, as his ('lir. Heald's) clients and titeir child were ad- vi,eti to try sonie other solicitor, they applied to Mlr. Monlkhose. They heard every body talking of the delays of a proceedin in the Costrt of Citaincery,; five of the defendants, and both thle plantill,haddid sncethecomencement of the suit; stil the rhoglttthatsishughthe father anod mother miglt nt, teirinfat rse mghtderive some beniefit fronti it; ad theeforethey erveda reglar notice osH th eiso lictor tht h wa thir oliito nologer, and MNr. Sokos would act for themi in future. Hle (Mlr. Ileald) was not saying that ties learned friendc Mlr. Hart would not be able to show th-at this sit had been carried on withi a degree of sdcill andI despatchi whichsruc- Elected great credit on this gentleman. The affidlavit of the Swainecs stated, that in the month of Mlarch. 1823, they applied to 24r. Slonkhouse to art as their solicitor, and on the 1th of No- t'esnber -a letter was forwarded by them to Sir. John Pownall, of ~tpeIn.., abpprisin,g him of that Circumstance. Tite affidavit statd tat te dponnts were never served witti a subpcena upon the bill of reiorbing filed on the death of the second plaintiff. )]T. Alookhoase, in hiii affidavit, stated that he apprised Mlr. Pow- aall, thiroughi his c1retk, of his eitttry in the cause. fn the mnonth of Juzne last, Slr. P,. Pownall called upon Sir. Mlonkhoute to sere him with a subptena; but Mir. Slonkhouse stid he would thank Alr. Pownall to serve it on the parties themselves ; Air. Powoiall said Ite wouldl, anad took it away apparenitly for tbat ptmrposee In reply to. thist affidavit, the two Mllr. Powriallu made an affidavit, in wihi was strated that in Easter term 1815, AIr. John PownslI wasem thie plaintiffs to file a bill against the defendants, to whic heen=re~an apperance, and put in ati answer for die Sansa Ltheir requtest. Thae cauise was heard before the Vice-Chanelo in. March, 18-20. Now wheni he (MIr. Heald) found that Mr. Pown0ll entered an appearance, aitd put in an anFwer for the defendants to the bill he hadfiled for the plaintiffs, it was aft important feature in Lhe case, sitowing thiat only one solicir(er conducted title cause for all thepasies Itwassai tht sme xpesewas saved by this butthat wasa tiflngconideatin,whe th etate bore it. compared with thedificltyanddeay t ocaiond.A hearing, it seem-ed, wook p lae i Mach,1112; bt wy te dlay fromn 11115 to that peeled hadtakn pac, nbod knw,norhadSMr. Pownafl assdigited any reaon.It as henrelrre totheSlater, who made his report on the 26! of larch, 1822, which report being oDofirmed, the cause was set down for hearing on further directions, aud hit. Pownall prepare briefs for thie three Swaines. Why lee had not included them in the other defendants' briefs, he (Mtr. Heald) could not say. On the 27th of Mlarch, (the affidavit did not state the year, but it ntust be I1823,).it w,,,,as en~tered in rthe paper for heating. Thie Vice. Chnelrcoeing -ttc it was likely to occupy some timne, direct- e-d it to stand over to next term. He could not isay what year, as there were no dates nientioneti. Slr. POWWALL.-It Was 1823. Air. kl EAL.D continued.-W Ity the cause had been, 15 months without being even set down for hearing, he couild nor say. On the 30th of April, 18-23, the suit became abatetd by, the death of the cce- rontd plaintiff. The niotice of a new solicitor was served upoin Air. Potwnall in November, 1823 "1 which,"' said the affidait su- piethsdponent."' Well he might be surprised, after teyha watdfr12 years for nothitng. But the reason assigned for his surprise was, that Mlartha Swaine had been at depontent's chambers A few days before, anti iniformned him thatt she had been asked to sign a paper appoititing another solicitor, betz she refuised to do so, an,d said she never would employ aniy other solicitor, as he hadaced for her uncle (testator) atid her brothers (the original plaintiffs.) The present plaintiff, Dorothy Smiith, was the represen- trtrive of the lastt executor, but there was now no represntative of the teestator before the Court. How was every individual, from the head down to the lowest officer of the Couirt, to escape the Indigna- tion of the public, if such proceedings as these were suffered to pRass? The affidavit went on to state, that Mr. 'Edward. Pewntall waited on Mr. onkoos, te de' o ~vichthesubpoena was. returnable,and he dclied o acep it Deonet restcaused the appearance to be enteed t expditethebill So,saidDir Ilald, after a long dream of 0or 1 yeas, he gntlean aokeat last. The fact was, tEne hedetrmiud o aailhimelfof Ma.F Slonkhoase'b de-' sire to gcer' ithe sub p ena upon his clients, to continue their solicitor for eteri His Lordship must he aware of the complaints that wgere evtry' day made of theedeluys which took place in causes of this description; but the present was the strongest case of the kirnd he had ever witrnesed. And how did he 5ustify this pro- ecedilg ? By statine that be hacl been thetr solicitor before, and hadl nut been removed hy an order of Court, nor had smy offer been made to discharge his, bill of costs. Whatever he (Mfr. J*eaki) might hav thugh ofthi getlean,whowasrepresnted to him as a re. tupetale an -h cetailyclesigt tisthe worst part of' his con- duct So beaus thee por eope cotuld not pay the costs, of twlve ears litgatin, tey wre s go abotet the streets for ver alht,zghi th case ereproperly, conducted the solcitr mst av hi cots ut f he fund. It was tree thie tetator bad left as complicated and absixrd a wrill ast had eve? been penned ; but was that a. sufficietYt cause why, in 18-20, the suit hiad psoceesled no farther than the obtaining an ordler direcuing thne Aliasier to inquire wb~at neplhews and nieves the testator haag left; and why it had remained for 15 months, afterwards without being set down in the paper ? A-nd this gentleman. miuse still continue their solicitor, atgainst their will, because thley mnade no oiffer so pay hisi costs f But he made no demand of costs aganst thiem even seupposinig hte dousle assign such an excuse. Sir. Slonklrouse had marla an affidaCtti in answer to thiat of Mr. Pownail), stat- ing that when Mr. Edward Pownsall called on hima with the sub- ptrena, lie told him it would be m-ore satisfactory if he would sevo it on ithe Swalnes, asi he was anxious Sir. Fownall s5hould~ be satisfied that it was their wish, and iet hs, that he tshould acfo them. To this Si r. Edward Pownall rep lied, that he should not have elite, as the subpiens. was returnable that day. Sir. Mlonkhoose said that ivould tuake no difference, for if the Swaines brOught him" thecub~dn~ h. wuld appear for thenm without taking atdvantage of the delay, Al1 r. Edward Powrmal then ask-ed where they lie ;ai on being told, he said h'e *ould go to the-m on A1ondaY,i that being Saturdlay evening. At thattime teontinused Air. Heald,)Mrts.Swaitle hdtknout letters of tAainisfration, and had, titerefore, lahad toke reev.Arona htwsdiscovered, she received no- tic-eof amotion for a rceiver. That was all very right, as she was1 a poor woman,an therefore not fit to beaypont5 o eevethese fundis; but whby ws niot this done vesrs aido? When tie motion canie on, lite (SJr. Heald) would certainly oppose it, for the purpoise of' inquiiring into the mnotives for thle delay),; for the Statute Of Limi.ta- tions mnight Itavo tatken effect twice over as to some of the arEIes Under all the circurstitatices, he trusted his Lordship wonl~ think that his motion ouaght to be gratited. Islr. FEAlSNL.EX followedl on the same side, and quoted somle auethorities to prove that a uolicitor was not at liblerty to continue to act for a party %Aginst his will1, alteir h ereceived noLice that h e was disontnue, utilhis bill of costs was paitd, although he had alien Air.ki ALT oposd th moton.A clearer or shtorter ease hlad nevercomebefoe hisLordhip;satt he was astonishaed at Mkr. !4cids wstng hetim o th Curtiat tis eason of the vear, wit,h'stattnenjt and sevtin whc were wholly irrelev ant to tue njsilication ; for he bad mot slated white citcumsUpme hAd occa- sinottithe delay of which so snucehbad been said. Afr.fHealdwsee- 6aj"tICiakplfiabxure .in ..dercribi ng his client driving a wlitelbarrow ~bedt;as ~fthere was somnething coneic in it ; but thlat 'eso ~ cicuretnue wiih -bad nothing, to do 'with .bssice.He (Mrt flnrt).ou1, ifeetsnsay, ststVy~ the Cests he catuse of dieode. ~iietsio~Wasa an illiterate mnan, whae, by industry and at. tivityli n~aitis mconsitiereeble property; -wblch 'he beqnseathet bys ostcompieseel ill - oa~eat ntunber of egtweest, whtcu was 1111% ~w!sae, co etsin d, Tvhiranftere* ,t-stnrO deeh~wiic vra lls~thsey pid Tenth as4.'elife thowe~eee -lea toa the rW5idi~e; lo th sjm t c Plwce. I'benrthe Vlce-Chacflor ordered dlie,sa is rnd. 0Y in the jiltervol, anoihar abatement teek ;lacZ an tihat ct delay occasioned another. Biits h was Sort` ~to bear Ilie vbw~r tons whbigh had beenms4e by hit i"-frsd enali wbo l4ied ant dtuged topic -iue6te se which werae ahage efr at limbe.nl'l had stna&de an auiaressato poincnt oiluti;ioi wi bsl, sb-teize by those who heard bina, for the purpose of -inflaming tb& dl mindan a subject with vwhich tlhey were utterily unacquainted;~ though those -whe examinied the system so loudly compl;ained found that it wias not in humrosa ingenuity to frame u systernmi talculatedto do justice to.allpartueg, These,lhowever,-were ohi vatifana which were nearly at irrelevant as5 theseif' biseKLa rn ice. Mr. H*eald, whi&t. had elicited *.thet. Theb leared couns2 the. I, ceeded to argUe, thast a1 patty could ntot dizeldh e a solicitorfwifbh taking the Papers ouit of hi~s hands rind payinghilscoats; jand on othei'hand, a tkollcitox, whin oince i-cteunaneceda a su3j't b a cli could tiot,strip the cau.%,, althouighi he mnight rese-,re a lien fbr', costs on the PaLpem in hit po8sseasn. He denied the aasrtion) Dir. ltawrk1tva3 tbeeollicior.fpeT zll the pafties in the UrsetI- thete had bein two other soAcitor enjac ni,ftuJrset lity arnd acdvti-vritwith M1r. Pownall.The antaoirspc. Mant in theprafession than Mir.Pownslhs eptbll,ites was admnitted on the other side; hat h diso auld obiservations whic'h threw a wet baktoe nHsdn a~o to prevert this womian from going whr sh hs;btsewas A mian of'eainelc,adhdbe hton y her kuhiri who had left her In a situiation sco desiue ha h a nabi, procuire a Iogtg>po sta odgin g was ti S nelffir onedothe plain ri ts, *ent teritrzy ?oi her; and haiziigbher clothed with a characte to receive, she ends Ae Pownilil nt that she has ciangred her solicitor, altbautih a iewdv ct we-nt to his chaimbers to informn hita of her refsalto naa Gl that efrect Mr. Pownall only dlid what he had a tgtt o he entered an appearance for'her, although he showed that he willing to relinquish that right when he offered4 Iltr. Dlonkhouse subpcera, w-hich, however, was refused. ItPwas ao,l his diEhin keep~ these people as clients,~ buit let the secord stand as it was aLt sent, ed let not a new saliestorbhe al1lowed tI recjeive those coat which Air. Pownall was entitled. The Court coultd risot make order up plied for, except with the consent of Air. Pownall watm ,it must be as a concesson from hint, and not frmm b avn cted contrary to tfie rules of the Court. Alr.ffl oonEfroIlo*etda gainstthemoto,ndstaid,thgtSwidne abandoned hss wife, and lived in adulte-y with another woman. in he was induced to come bark to her for a'purpose whinci t'isi pro ing rendered intelligible. The learned i-tteademade'eindedtpIi duct of Air. Pownall, andl insisted that improper influence had I exercised over iM . H eEad's clients, he wouild not s;ay by Al r. 111 house, bu. by "ome pers-on or other. He contended that MIr. P tiail was justified in entering the appearance. Mlr. HEALD repjiLd. If' counsel were to be detered fronm tin such observations ats they deemed the .iustice of' the case and th; tereste of their cdier.ts demanded, because the long vacation wzn ha~nd, nothing could be mare dli%-raceful to themi. Mr. Hiart nlot been sparinig of' his observationrs, but bis conaduct haLd notkxepr. had been saidchanot Mr. onl'repcaitybuthree bilitry .f'the paLttywas the very reaso.n whyithie case was the r, imnportant. l-ie (Mr. Held bAdad nothigabout the husbani this woman abandonin his wfe,ad living in adultery with other, because he fonsotigo hteortin the affidavits, and heard it only from Alr. Pownall'scounsel; butwas ithbecaume tha happy woman was; so beref't on el sides, that her interestst were r neglected? Al r. Ha-rt contende.d that his client was no;to bebla for the delay of' ihia suiZt, which proceedod withi habn same rapidity as a sledge drawn by, a wvorn; but~ continued Her,1l, if Ill. Hart admits that Isr. Pownall could nor drag it quicker, then is it not disgraceful to Ehe countr%y that such a cou thi3 should exisqt for one mtomnent ? But why am I sawd to rin on Mfr. Pownall, because I ask why he does not state what he done with the suit fram IfilD to lA20? People saY the iudjn( this court are to blamne; but it isbecause theylknow noehi;gof' things as these. Then,ags.in,why am I said tohbe comit,brrnube I dliat try client is a pasuper, and deacribe the hard meant; by which earnis her livelihood ? But ! should betruilty of' a dercliction of' duty if' I had in u calm cold.blooded manner stated things, as if I was merely reading over an affidav-it I did spes this delayvas a ground of' complait ; and so long a-s I wear gown, 1 ;will feirret oxitt such grounds. of' complaint whenever come before mne in) affidavit; for the fault does not lie ini thie C1 or the judge, or the officers, or thte catinsel : but the delay it present ease arises, forsooth, from the teatator baring left a cor cated will! But, do the Judlges shrifak from their d;it ? 1) they Kay, we must take a winter's day to consider it? I here PIat. of a period of nine years having elapsged, and we do no9t even knott whetheronta single shillinig af' thos assets has coillected. I do comnplain of'chip, and I tshould no', rest in priv, I had not brouight it before the Court. What ? Is this cause to frorn age to age, the parties dy-ing one after anothes. letters of a. nistrmtior sand bills of' rev'ivor the only signals of' their de-nths. tilth soictorony bins i t a loe,that he may record the suIt pon heir ombsone? re sch auses as this to be tolera 'Why itmaks m hlod ticke i myveine. Mr. Hart savs is sre our ordhip illnot ran thi orer without Alr. Powr consnt.I a vey sue tat r. artnever would have vent to ..e uchanohervtin ti heoter Court. Why lilt. I nallsr consent ? If' the Couart cannot prornounce itie decfsion wit th~e solicilor's consent, then it ought to be instantly abolished. s.aid, that my et.ietbhas got somrething; I!know notlung of'that I concede it, because it is sitated ; hut wrhat has she got ? Five lugs, ten shillings, or a guinea, to stop her mouth. Is din the people receive their rishthi through this court which is establish readtr justice to ever.i subject of' the realm ? W'hat wil the p say when they learn that in this country, the mee;t favtc atay for industry and the mneans; of' aiuasiiig wealth, the fru yesra of' active industry spent in realizing riches are rendered tive to those for whom they were desuined, by mneans of's suit ir Court ? And ye-t I sa; to be told 1 ougrtu not to waste the tit the Court at this se_ason by maLing observations On such a grie- aiAthis! As if' the justice of' th cuidepnd.ed oppen the st of the year ! I amnquite astotunded astewa inhich ny f hasq forg'ottet his, usual dexterity in this cas. thaughe MY mut was a mere motion of couree. and that I had onliy to the affldavitg, until I1 found that Mr. Pownall had structed two counselI to oppose it ; and by, themi I told that a party cannot chnehis solicitor without Paying him his bill of' coats I If th-is be so, I hope thai commission now inqui 'g into the practices of' this Court wi quire fnto this, dreadful evil. .2nd sayt if n pant saitor when on. can never get out of' such a tra-.. wooden trap, that does nt at once, hut presses and pine him to death ? SO the '10"Yt! pauper who ca-ncno pay him, miust trundle about a harrow fOr th of her life. The learned Couttsel then argued against Mr, ik ropostion, and quoted the case " Thwapt v. Darrel," l1kh V M7Mw0hic;h the LoDrd Chancellor decided that a solicitor coul proceed wilith ra it against the will of his, client, because -he bat been paid his costs. it is. not my tdisposition, said kMould, to raise papular opinions, as is everlastingly ii friend's mouth ; hut felt myself'the niore bound to'bring this ject forward, because Mr. Poyrnall wa arpectable Mau, and I f'are calculated to set a great example; aTndul I posseso Hart's calmness and coolsier of' mind, 2 couild not sqtate thoset as if' I were readinig rmer matter of coursle, or applying for tit answer. I must staite my feelinspe what is contained in gentleman's owrn affidavt an coulrnt do tart in such a thiat it would not surprise me to finda thset these geatlernets op mne (the ~ters), whfo write with almaost greater rmpidfity canl stpeak, rud tak en it all downi as part of the 5ffidS'ait Mlr. HARtT said thst the authority cited by A1r. HeelddI decision of Lord Erskineas. He did not mean to Say It was rnOt fore entitled to have its weight with the Court ; buit as Lord El was More celebraed for his knowled e of common law tti equity, he thought it right to apprize- a court of the fhct~ Air. HE5ALD Was not aware that the decision, whrhtl bee=u into itis hand was one of Ljord Erskirie's he thou hdbee pronounlced by the preset Chancellor. He admittet it had noar therefisre all the weight he hied beforeO attributed but still it wes important from his Lordshi's I knowledge of moon law; e nd in the decision quoted be haTd.d-w the diist between the casw at common law andl equity. Howev-er, there other decisions es-tablishing the same point. g na er Lord. GIFFaORD %aid this cast, although it la navr compass, was one cfgret importAnce- to thest suitors, end to tJ licitor ; and was ren crAof etill grater Imotnc ytoloc had beeai incidental inrdcditwshdsuso. it ee was an extranatard cic1tnc hta aial si hc menced in 1815l, shedntdebogt oaefltsii 18 than shoulda svmain, when the Mtastersrpra btied,f a beng sea down fo,r further direction unbufe helpeo year;. however, thittqueseica -rasnt obfrhCii u ther theddeavywasright or wrsg,teclL anIda nthe mi soine of the suitors, whichi led to the Aeve.i ttOiCuO l I nail, that they had chansged thei taict ho. wthrtMx Pow considered it, was evidne ywa okpaeu osqe up"n the bill of revisor heisg filed. kl(Iidifod a to believe whbat rwa Staed in the last affidavit, asit was not dicted. Tewhterth atofteas?A gentlemaur same naLme as Mr. Pow7nt.ll his saon or nephilew, applies Monkhause as the solicitortlof these parties, and never expr. dloubron ehesubject.ll.Aokos Iaseev thelAubpr parties themseves, and if theybringr it tome, Iwlappear. A nail, mr.kes no objectian totdi, but leaves MVr. DlonkhFoweun. impressin that he had gone to do so, and without any ftnrthez m.NUnmata with him, enter the appearance. Now it was a qte. great importance whether or not a solicitor could be chaniget willof the client. They had all eard the Lard Chancellorsi a solicitor could not capriciously abandon the interests oif hit nor could adcient chauge his solictr without leaving-him the of' nfocin hi clim gaist im.But the presenct case leae tat uetio fo th dcison f'the Court:th lbirt. consnte tothechage,and acted upon the (Lord ord)shoud besorr formanyreasons er a hst deison tssuc acas a this; ut, und oresnt Ipresion he houl hae n hesitation in 'me order which ws sought for. Whether this order Ihave the effect of deiaying the suit or nor, he was 11St inquire. He was untwilong to make refleftions on the car sliciteors when itwas notbeforehimjudicially; attheaeus one colUa notbutperceivefthatgret inischiefarose fron th gentleman acting as solidtor for iames with conficting in nor could one help lamenting, that ina suit of this kind Comr in 1815, a notie in served in 1824 of a motion to appoint a His opinion, however, would not be influenaced bythesetopi though collaterally introduced,werenotrelev=at to the quessjo he had to decide. He would trlte to-morrow to conisder it, alteration took place inbis mid biv that time,-he tsh order. That etder, however, wouid not affect Mr. Pawns on the decusaents in his possession. Ile suer not esirt this would be a nost inefficient Cosrtindeai, if it w rain acting without theconsentiof the partiasconcerned. Alr. HART aid, be wold now mi ae-his motion for a-aec lilr. H E.LD said be could pot,do to, for the suit was na1 fect. If his Loship conteileto entertainthe same opini, he ditbat prceent, bis (Mr. 14>id s) 4xLmts were not Court. I lilr. HAmtir.-I have no oljeciion to its stadin2 aver dertakenot to receve any thiessn the meeatune. Dir. iERs.LD certatinly; 1 do not think it wiouldbt to receive any thing at preseat The motPa for a teceier then stool overgvnsal5y. I VICP CHANCELLOR'S COURT. THvXSDAY, A1G. 12. ( CItAfCERr DELAY.-SAMLTH V. STARttE AN-D OTItERS.