Court Of Chancery, Tuesda...
LAW ,4RPORT. TheLORD-CRANCELLoft took' his seat- a half.past 11 this ornoing, baving been previoulsly occupiel in the Exchequer at Westanster, first in presidiol at a Court of AAsTq. awl3n VfasV,avds in l iWt%ing pleas of elror. 1eOBElOUSE AISD ARASIA5IS. Ir. HART moved, on the part of the defendants in this caure, that the vrit of scirefircias issued by the plaintiff shouxLt he (uashell, on the ground of irrLglilarity in the service. He stated, that the writ liad been sorved upon a brother of the defendants ; but whio was not in partnership with them, gor in any degree concerned in thesuit. Theservice was madeat l defentlants piaca ut inesa, but not at their place of abode. and the Sheriff' had returmied the writ itrarked sumtioned." 'The learned gentlefflan contenlded, that udler thie 51st (4eo. TIl. c. 124, (fil preventing vexatious ar. reSts), tite service ot' anu oriinal WYit st!.mYt bne p rmnal upon the de- tendansts whose appearance it vas inten(led to compel. ir. 11 EAT.D, fair the plaintiffs, argued, that the service was suffl- cleait, because, tlthough not personal, yet having been nma(le at the d.fet~ntlats place of business, the Court ought to presume that it had conte to their itatils. 'I'le LORD C11ANCELLOR said. ttat whenl defendants came to complain of tte irregular service of process, it was no less usual tItan 'easonable thDt they shotld setMoith tdeir actual dtwelling-places so as to prevent any fuitre inconvenience. The defendants in this case had not done so. He wished to know What liad been the practice be. fore the passing oftheact wlich had been quoted. Mr. Aio'r3TT, of the Petty Bag-i,ffi;e lgatdjt that tie invariable practice ior a century ptevious tQ ftre act of the 51st (Geo. I E. had been, tihat upon the Sherifft. slurning that he bad summoned the defendant, the plainR' appleie, if the (lefendant (1id( riot apj)cars to evnter an aPlreartnee for htm) and if hie did appear, 're was nmnnie. diately eh4ygea witlt the declarati(n. Tl.;c LOnD CrTAWCerLLOa vishhed that some iqujiry r.hould hb rudle as to cases in which tite point nmiv before the Court haad occUreed, and of which there rnust have been at least Rive hundred. fle desired timat it should be mentioned a2ain on Friday next. 3USI.VES3 OF TllE COtJTT. His Lordshin infornoed the Bar, that lid had bestowe.l on%ider-1 able attenlion upoY tte state of the business then beforc the Cotrt, -nd he hadl itranged the scales during and after the ttnnb so as to allew tltree days for the purnose of hearing miotionst on the other days he should take, in tl e order in which they stool, G-U the zld hankrupt petitions; and should then procced vith) the eause-paper unitil the lUth of August, beyondl wbich latter day lie had made up his mindl not to sct his foot in that Hall. AI r. I I E(r. D applied lor permission to bTing o rt appeal in the mnatter of a charitable institution, whlich didr not standI in the paper. His L,oinDsirp refused to grant the application. tIe complained of the frequ:nt practice of coutisel, who di(d not hesitate to interrupt tihe ortler which had becn laid down by the Cowrt fur siskisAing oi businesm, and of the time ivlich had been consumed since January ltst, in debating wat shouldI and wliat sltild not come on. lie was resolved that the arrangentent lie had na(le sltould not be broken through, at least dufing the period he ha.d menioned. mr. 1AI.D said, lie 1tuped his Lordship would enforce tIme amne regulation for a muchli longer period; anti so entirely convinced was be of its utility, that he would nlot pres8 his application, fsr which hie, however, had sone peculiar grounds, lest it should interfere whvith so wholesome a regul :tion. Some appeal cases, vhich were partly heard, occupied the remainder COURT OF CIIANflvR.V ',rqn&v . Trvrv 9.4