Court Of King's Bench, We...
The Times, 1824-01-19T00:00:00

inSL nW as an inaictment against tne countv of liddlesex tor not repairing a bridge, situate in a cross road between Hackney and Bow, which was tried befbre as an undefended cause, and a verdict ef"ar Gu.ity" returned ; but a new trial was afterwards granted on paymentI f costs I t wasproved hat thcroad was a thorouglfarcand Ithat the bndge was broken down by a flood about twenty years agO, in consequeneeofwhich. the roa-.d was, attimes, dangerous. iNo evidence, however, was given that the bridge had ever been repaired at the expense of the county, and the jury, therefore, gave a ver- dict of acquittal. HENLEY V. THE 2ItA1QUTS OF WEST3MEATH. This was an action against Lord lVestmeath to recover a debt in- curred by his lady, who is separated from him by deed. Before it was opened, the counsel on both sides agreed that it should be reter- red to afr. Alderson, who should, if necessars, raise on his award the legal question as to the operation of tle deed, for the opinion of Court. DOE, ON TEE DEM1SE OF ItUTHESIFORD, V. DOUGLAS AND OTHERtS. This was an action of ejectirent on the demise of the husband of AIrs. Rutherford, sister and heir at law of Air. Hall deceased, to recoverpossession of certain freehold premises situateinear Wapping, which the defendants claimed to hold under the will of the deceased. Mr. GURNEV, for the defendants, admitted the title of the lessor of the plaintiff as heir at law and claimed, therefore, to begin and establish the validity of the 'evise. The real question in the cause was, whether a will by which the testator's real property was dle- vised in trust to the defendants, was made by bim while in sound and disposing mind. He was a man of singular habits, living apart from his relations, and, partaking of a ptopensity usualy ascribed to old maids, bad an establishment of no less than twenty-four cats. The defendants were persons with whom helived in intimacy, and in whose society he sought for his chief gratiRication. In the summer of 1M2, Mr.WYest, an attorney of respectabilUty, was applied to forthe parpose of preparing a deed by which a prosision was to be made for lfr. Hall's housekeeper. On that occasion he was introdacedto AIr. Hall, then ill of a drousy, but quite able to transact business, and the deed was exectted, when some of those about him suggested to him the propriety of making Iiis Will. He refused to do it then, hut said his friend lr. Poole knew his mind, and M r. West left the room. On the following Monday, he was sent for again and pre, pare(I the skeleton ofthe will ftom a draught fuimished bv Mlr,Poole, to whom the testator referred as cognizant of hIis intentifos. 1Vith this paper he went to the bedside of Mlr. Hall; there he read over the whpole, item by item, and received from him distinct answers, sometimes approning. sometimes sugpesting alterations, and clearly proving that the testator was sound i mind though weak in body. From the draught so amended the will was prepared,giniag 1,0001. to Ir. Douglas, 1,0001. to Mr. Smith, 1,00Q1. to Arts. Rutherford (his sister), and the freeholds to lr. Poole; he was raised in his bed, niasle hs mark, and executed the will in the presence of Alr. West, of one of his clerks, and of two nurses: Afr. West, the clerk, and one of the nurses,attecsted it as witnesses. Itwould be shown that, at the tinse M lr. Hall well knew the efrect of his actions; that his disease wvas not of a nature calculated to destroy Isis intellects and that the dis- position was no new design, but that it was the settled purpose of his life to leave his property from his sister, who owed the legacv bequeathed to her to the suggestion of one of the defendants. losupport this case, Air. Thomas West, the attorney, was first called, wsho described his first interview with iMir. HaaU nearly as stated by the counsel. He said that all the propositions were dis- tinctly and loudly read to him by Dougtlas (to whom 1,0001. was left), and that he appeared to uuderstantl thenl, and dissented from some of them, whiph were modified according to his suggestions. l1e believed him competent to make a will, though at flrst he had hesitated on the subject, and only on consideration formed his opi- nion. The other wsitnesses who were present were then called; from whose examination it appeared that Mr. Hall was in a state of great bodil v weakness; that his hand was held while he made his uiark; ana that he vas scarcely able to articulate so as to be understood. Dr. Billing, the physician who attended him, stated that he had tapped him the day before ; that then he was in- coherent; and that he could not say whether lie was competent to make a will or not. At one time he was found by the physician la- bouring under the effects of liquor given by one of the nurses, and of which she appe,re6d to have partaken. It was stated that Mlr. Hall had repeatedly abused his sister, and declared that he would not leave her a fathing. At six o'clock JMr. SCAUtLETT rose for the plaintiff, and asked the jury whether they desired tahear him on such a case as the de- fendants, after hearing of the condition of this poor man, and seeing the miserable scrawl by which it was said that he had passed away his property. The jury consulted for a few m.inutes, and then informeed the learned counsel that they would not trouble him, as they were of opinion, on the case as it then stood, that Mr. Hal was not compe- tent to execute the will. They therefore fatnd a verdcict for the plaintiff'. Seveial females who appeared interested in. the case audibly ex- pressed their satisfaction at this result, but were checkled by the Lord ChicfJustice, who threatened to commit them if they were not silpt-__ COURT (IV IT\Tr4'R 'RP.N(.fl Y- 1 V THE KIYG V. T1IE INIHABITANTS OF 1IIDDLESEX.