Court Of Chancery, Saturd...
The Times, 1824-02-02T00:00:00

LAWl REPO)W. Tlhe LoAnD OHrAWCELLoth asked if the parties had any, c6im- munication to make in consequence of bis previous recommendation to them to accommnodate their disputes out of Court ? The ansvwer from both sides was asbefbre, that aU hopes of that kind were at an end. ilr. JAMNES suggested that MIr. HLarris must be made a party in the rause, before the event of his Lordslhip's judgtnent. Mr. HART said, that this application was sufficieritly late. He could not conceive the reason which the other party ha(d in allowing Nr. Harris to be left during the past proceedings out of the cause. He had seen Mr. Ilarris in the court this very moming. He pro- posed therefore that that gentleman should immediately appear in person, and instruct lis counsel. J his, however. was alleged to be a mistake, and that Mr. Harris ha not been in Court. Mr. ffArkrs, for the lessees, was urgent with the Court to haye Air. Harris made a party. The Loan CHANCELLOR directed that Ar. Harris should be served vith a subpw'na between this and Wednesday, at which time he would hear hIis coutnsel, and he would pronounce judgment on Thursda Y. GARRtItC v. CASIDEIt. In this case, which was a motion for trahsferringto Mrs. IPaine's account her share of the legacy which the late Peter (larrick took under the will of the late David Garrick ; and in which AMr. Bailey, the representative of the strviving trustee to Peter Garrick's will, a nutted that lie had obtained an order to pay the money out to him. Ar. RosE now read a letter fron Mr. Bailev, ofTering to let the fund in question stand in the books of the Aecountant-General as a fund in the cause. The LORD CHANCELrLOR said, that this concession on tle part of dIr. Bailey. which was very handsome, would materiaUy facili. tate lhis judgment: but it must be made in a more formnal way than by mnerely reading a letter, in order to its being of any avail in the proceedings of thie Court.-_Judgment on Wednesday morning. PETITIN0S IN TliE MATTER OF LORD PORTSMtOUTHt. ET-PARTE HENfRY FELLOWVES, AND EX-PARtTE NEWTON FELLOWES. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL presented the first of these petitions fron the committee of the person and estate of the lunatic, Praying for the payment of a stam 6f upwaris of 5,0001., arrears due under tie order fior confirming the ilaster's report upon the sum to be al- lowed for the maintenance of the lunatic, and the doe support of his eitablishment, which report recommended an allowarce of 7,5001. annuall? forthose purposes. Itappeared, thatonthefirst marriageof the Earl in 1799 he extecuted deeds which conveyed his whole property out of lils own dominion into the hands of trustees, who were at that time 31r. Hanson, Lord 0rantley, and Dr. Garnet. The term of Ehe'trust was 97 years, and thie two survivors were to elect a succes- sor for him who should depart, continuallv until the end of the term. Dr. Garnet died, and Newton Fello' es was admitted. Lord Grantley ras succeeded by hIis pephew ; and under this management had theeseatse been conducted, at the entire discietion of the triis- tees, who were at liberty to pull down and build up--to plant or clut down timber-without impeachment of waste. Tile petition prayed that the trustees should-be directed topay over the arrears before de. scribed, agreeably to the order of the Court. illr. HAt-c, for Mlr. Newton Felloires, was about to speak to th e Matter of the petition_ dIr. SUODEN, for Lord Grantle-, read an affidavit, in wlich his Lordship accounted for his non.compliance with the orler, by impguting to 31r. N. Fellovwes foi eutire approrufiation of tilec powe.s and uses ofth etrst co himnself duriD)g aconside'r.ble number osyears. MIr. BiCXERSFrT]i follow(Ld on tlle .same side, MAr. HART appeared on behalf of Mr. N. Fellowes, hi die first place, to assent to the petition of the comnmittee under certain condi- tions; aRd in the next place, to present a petition from 1Mr. N. Fei. loves, for the appointment of a receiver for the Irish estates which notion lie subsequenthl enlarged to a receiver for both the Wnglish and Irish estates. He greatlv regretted te introduction of acrimony and party squabbles of the tiustees into the matter of the lunacy ; and lie wontteredl by what construction of the rules of practice ant affidavit of one trustee, which went merely to impeach the conduct of another, had been ititroduced in a petition which lay merely be. tweeti the comlmitrte of the person of the lunatic, and the trus- tees of the estate. MThy lhad not Lord Grantley presented a peti- tion against Mr. IN. Felloves, it he had 5uch well-founded causes lor complaint ? On the part of lr. Newton Fellowes, he was pre- pared to accede to the or,er now moved for, aftet having explained some few circutiistaitces which! were recited in the affidavit of Air. N. Felluwes and which, thouglh very plain anti unquestiorable tacts, had led apparently to the affidavit of Lord G;antley. The Court miust have observed, that the uses of the trust-deed of 1799 wvere of a very large anti responsible natture, inatsnuch as the elitire care anitl preservations of the estate were left to the discretion of the trUstees. \Various expenses had been incuired in improving anid preservitig the estate, hvicii liad left cliarges in arrear to an amount So cotsider ble, tha-t the lunatic's estate was acttuallv not suffihietit to meet tlieti atnd to support him as weel t) that stvle attl dignity which were rrecomnienti-d in tile Mlaster's report. Acceding to the present muotioll of (le Solicitor-General, therefore, he had also to propose to thlc (Cltrt, thiat the Master should be directed to review his report, anid the or(der consequent upon it, with a view ivo adjusting the allowvance to the ltiiatic, more proportitnably witlh tlhe receipts payments, anti demands upon the estate. It was also verp desirable that the prayer ofthe petitioni for a receiver tbr the Irish estates shotit be granted. Ile apprehended that the best Msode oftoImng lt would be to direct a sort of ancillary ecommission to the Alaster in Ireland enabling him to appoint a proper trust for the care of the camaro; and to save the difficil vof receivin gtheusualre. cognizances, hisL.ordshiipniightdirect, as iiitliecaseof"Huartley,and H.rtlcty,"thtat tie surtties shouil confess certain jidirmnetits, soas to throw tie strictest po-.,ble fensce att(i protection arod di the property. .Mr. I gALls, on tte part of .M r. Hanson, strotigly objected to tlis niotioil for a receiver. For nearly 30 years the preperty, both in IrelanJ and England, hlid been titanaged with a degree of prudence anl, itegrity which took away all pretence tor complaint or dlitsa- tisfaction, anti there could be nlo necessity tor takiiig the-agency out of handA in wviich it had been so faithfully administeredL 'The Losnn C(mANeciLY.on recited the powers anti obligations of the trusi deed ot 1799, wvhich were of such a nature that they could never have been proposed to anti received by any iman in his right senses.ZDo nmu ch did they make against Lord Portsmoutil. As the powers conmitted to tihe trustees were most 'ample, it was their business to have sceni tiem executed fully andi faithfully, according to the dutties prescribed to then, front onie period to another. A commission of lutacy had been es- tablished againist this untbrtunate nobleman, and the Court had directed a sufficient allowance from the property held in trust to surround him with that sort of establishment the comforts and re. spectability of whioh his mind was still strong enough to enjoy. Looking upon all that had been done, from the signing Of that deed im 1799 dovti to the present timie, ought he to stop tte allowance or- dered by the Count, in orler to mneet charges of repairs anid altera. tions whfic shotilil have been discharged in due coarse, tinder the adnministration of the trust ? lie felt that he could not do that. Mir. HIIenry Fellowes the committee, teclared that he was supporting Lord Portsmoutl out of his own funds. He could not allow this to be, wehile the income of the estates was applied to pay oil charges which ought not to have gone into arrear. The preseit motion must be granted, and the order of the Court must be complied with * nor woulud he suffer the allowance for the lunatic's comitortable support to be postponed for any such payments. His Lordship was also of opinion, that the tnmstees must act together, anti that one coutld by no means, whether with the coinsent of the others or not, act with- oti them. If there were asy t atter of grievance betweeii the trustees upion this subject, the proper vay was, niot to file an affidavit imicidenrally in a cause Mwhic had nothing to do witd it, but to lire. sent a petition to the Court andimplead one another. He had not read over the petition fora receiver, and must therefore defer his judgment upon that point. rx T'HE 3EATTEil OF eIR GRF-GOY PAGE TyuRNt:R, A LIT- NATIC. Several petitions, whiich had been mentioned to the Court before, were now spoken to; butt nothing occurred in thlem more than the putting them off to another day. COURT OF CRANCERY. SATURDAY. JAV. 31. I CONST V. HARRIS.