Vice-Chancellor's Court, ...
tians, and ,iang oP e qu re n uicn t. We ?UNKFTT V. Lo~nn GEOB0E ,CAVEwSu. .We have received a note front the silicliOr to the vl1antiffin thig case, which vras shorly noticed in.Tlw .Tfmet of Weinesday last tequesting us- to insert the-foUowing, tatemert:. .i.lhfswai b'il fied by the plaintiff. yraytng h;?t"pgseisiou6`f;ccoWn'estates of Which the w4o1'the qltsnmste IeRatee, sqnder awmiil of $It W'i1plulm Lowter$, miht .e.diveedupto Er, 0n4 i~a aq accunt CI 't e rents abdproflte might b~cnder& i6 her'by qte eferdmit. The detendant put sn a plea, stating hht n recovery hact becn suffcred by those under wham he claimed, and canteading that he was not bound to give any further answver to the billf After argument before the Vie,anelr the plea wvas ordexed. to stand for an answer. _VLMORANCELW;i oR:4 C.OtTU. FTiim.v ?.Y,- jIt