Hayward & Pussey 3. Del. 88.403. Watter Hyle 2.6.2.891 Harpur & Hayes 2 D. F. VS. 549.

Peyton's Settlement. 30 Bear. 254.

CASES IN CHANCERY.

281

TAYLOR v. TABRUM.

THE Testator in this Cause, devised a Mill and other
Premises to the Defendants, Hart and Tabrum, in Trust
to sell the same as soon as conveniently might be after
his death.

1833: 24th July.

Plaintiff.
Amendment.

A Bill was filed
against two
Trustees, alleg-
ing that one of
them only had
acted in the

Trusts, and
seeking to
charge that
Trustee only
with a Breach
of Trust. The
Trustees, in

The Testator died in 1818. At that time the Mill
was let on a Lease (which expired at Michaelmas 1823),
at the Rent of 400l. per annum.
Soon after the Tes-
tator's death, the Trustees caused the Property to be
put up to Auction, and 6,000l. were then bid for it;
but it was not then sold, as one of the Parties interested
in the proceeds of the Sale, desired that it might not their Answer,
be sold for less than 7,000l. A few days after the admitted that
Auction, the Trustees were offered 6,6007. for the Pro-
perty, but they declined the offer; and, in 1823 they
sold it for 3,600 7.

they had both

acted in the

Trusts. The
Plaintiffs, how-
ever, did not

amend their

nevertheless

The Bill alleged that Hart had not acted in the Bill. Held,
execution of the Trusts of the Will, and prayed that that they were
Tabrum alone might be charged with the Loss arising entitled to
on the Sale. Hart and Tabrum put in a joint Answer,
admitting that they had jointly acted in the execution
of the Trusts and in the Sale of the Mill and Premises.

charge both the

Trustees with

the Loss occa-
sioned by the
Breach of
Trust.

Trustees. Costs.-Trustees, who were directed to sell an Estate as soon as conveniently might be after their Testator's death, refused, by the desire of one of the Parties interested, an offer of 6,600l. for the Estate; but they afterwards sold it for 3,600 l. The Court charged them with the Loss, but gave them their Costs, as their conduct had not been wilful or perverse.

1833.

TAYLOR

TABRUM.

The Plaintiffs, however, did not amend their Bill; and, on the hearing of the Cause, one question was whether they were entitled to charge Hart as well as Tabrum with the difference between 6,600l. and 3,600l., notwithstanding the Bill remained unaltered.

The Vice-Chancellor, on the authority of Attwood v. (a), held that the Plaintiffs were entitled to charge both the Trustees with the difference, although it would have been more proper if they had amended their Bill.

With respect to the Costs of the Trustees, His Honor said that, though there had been some misconduct in the Trustees, it had not been wilful or perverse, and therefore, they ought to have their Costs (b).

Sir E. Sugden and Mr. Wheatley appeared for the Plaintiffs, and, Sir C. Wetherell, Mr. Knight, Mr. Barber and Mr. Parker, for the Defendants.

(a) 1 Russ. 353. 2. lol 398

(b) See Tebbs v. Carpenter, 1 Madd. 290.

CAMPBELL v. HARDING.

1833: 30th July.

Practice. Feme Covert.

ON this Cause coming on for Further Directions, a married Lady, who was entitled to some of the Funds in the Cause, attended to consent to waive her Equity An Order for to a Settlement; and it was said that her consent might payment to the Husband, of be then taken, and the Order for payment of the Funds Money to to her Husband, be made part of the Order on Further Directions, there being the usual Affidavit that no Settlement had been executed.

which his Wife is entitled, cannot be inserted in the Order on Further Directions, but must be obtained by Petition, although the Wife con

But the Vice-Chancellor, after consulting the Registrar, said that the Order for payment of the Funds to the Husband, could not be included in the Order on Further Directions, but must be obtained by Petition. sents. His Honor, however, said that he would take the Lady's consent de bene esse.

1833: 27th, 29th & 30th July.

A. the Pro-
prietor of a
Newspaper, pre

HARMER v. WESTMACOTT.

IN 1827, W. D. Richards, who was the original ProPublic Policy. prietor of The Age Newspaper, being confined in the King's Bench Prison, and thinking it expedient that the name of the Proprietor should be changed, prevailed on S. Bowden, who was a journeyman printer on the Establishment, to allow himself to be represented to the Public as the Proprietor of the Paper, and to make and deliver an Affidavit to the same effect, to the Commissioners of Stamps (a). Afterwards Bowden, with Richards's privity, agreed to sell a Moiety of the Paper

vailed on B. to
make and de-
liver to the
Stamp-office, an
Affidavit that
he, B., was the
Proprietor of
the Paper.
B. afterwards
agreed to sell

the Paper to D.
A. having be-
come insolvent,
his Assignees
filed a Bill to
set aside the
Sale for Fraud.
Held, that as B.
had at 4.'s in-
stance, violated
the 38 Geo. 3,
c. 78, which
requires the
true Names

of the Proprie.

tors of News-
papers to be

inserted in the
Athdavit, his

Assignees were
not entitled to

the Relief asked.

(a) The 38 Geo. 3, c. 78, enacts, That no Person shall print or publish any Newspaper until an Affidavit or Affidavits made and signed as after-mentioned, shall be delivered to the Commissioners of Stamps, s. 1. That such Affidavit or Affidavits shall specify the real and true Names, Additions, Descriptions, and Places of Abode of all Persons who are intended to be the Printers and Publishers of the Newspaper, and of all the Proprietors of the same, if the number of such Proprietors, exclusive of the Printer and Publisher, does not exceed two: and in case the same shall exceed such number, then of two of such Proprietors, exclusive of the Printer and Publisher, and also the Amount of the proportional Shares of such Proprietors in the Property of the Newspaper, and likewise the true Description of the Building wherein such Paper is intended to be printed, and likewise the Title of such Paper, s. 2. That, where the number of such Proprietors exceeds two, the Names of two Proprie tors, the Amount of each of whose proportional Shares in the Property of the Newspaper shall not be less than the proportional Share of any other Proprietor, shall be specified in such Affidavit or Affidavits, s. 3. That an Affidavit or Affidavits of the like import shall be made, signed and given in like

to the Defendant Westmacott; and, subsequently, he agreed to sell the other Moiety to him.

manner, as often as any of the Printers, Publishers or Proprie. tors shall be changed,or shall change their places of Abode or their Printing House, Place or Office, and as often as the Title of the Paper shall be changed, s. 4. That if any Person shall knowingly and wilfully print or publish, or sell or deliver out any Newspaper, such Affidavit or Affidavits not having been duly signed, sworn and delivered, such Person shall forfeit 100l., s. 7. That if any Person making the Affidavit or Affidavits required by the Act, shall knowingly and wilfully insert therein the Name or Names, Addition or Additions, Place or Places of Abode of any Person as Proprietor, Printer or Publisher of any Newspaper, who is not a Proprietor, Printer or Publisher thereof, or shall omit to mention therein the Name or Names, Addition or Additions and Place or Places of Abode of any of the Proprietors, Printers r Publishers thereof, contrary to the true meaning of the Act, such Person shall be liable to the Pains and Penalties for wilful and corrupt Perjury, s. 8. That the Printer or Publisher shall deliver to the Commissioners of Stamps, to be kept by them, a Copy of every Newspaper printed or published by him, signed by him, with his Name and Place of Abode, under a Penalty of 100l.; and such Newspaper shall, on application made by any Person for that purpose, to the Commissioners, be produced in Evidencein any Proceeding civil or criminal, s. 17. That no Person other than a Commissioner or other Officer of the Stampoffice, shall supply any Person with Paper stamped for printing Newspapers, until the Persons supplying shall have given Security to deliver to the Commissioners an Account of the stamped Paper supplied, and to whom by Name; and thathe will not supply the same to any Printer, Publisher or Proprietor, not having a Certificate signed by such Commissioners or Officer, purporting that the Security required by Law has been given by the Printer or Proprietor of the News-. paper, s. 26. That every Person concerned in the printing or publishing of Newspapers not duly stamped, shall be