HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0662 and id is 1 raw text is: CORNWAL V. WILSON
bond as the annuity, was founded on a marriage brokage agreement ; he had, there-
fore, filed his supplemental bill, to avail himself of such paper, and for a discovery
touching the same, to which the Defendant had put in a demurrer and answer, and
had demurred to the whole relief, and not to any part of the discovery. And he stated
that the cause of demurrer assigned was, that the Plaintiff ought not, by the rules of
the Court, to ex-[213]-bibit a supplemental bill, in the nature of a bill of review, without
leave for that purpose, and making the usual deposit; and that Defendant had
obtained an Order that the demurrer should be set down for argument at the same
time with the original cause upon the equity reserved. The Plaintiff then stated, that
he had given notice of motion for a new trial, but was advised that the demurrer was
necessary to be argued before either that motion, or the cause, should come on upon
the equity reserved, inasmuch as the discovery made by the Defendant in her answer
might be very material on that motion, and probably put an end to the dispute. He
therefore prayed, and obtained an Order that the demurrer might come on to be
argued shortly. Reg. Lib. 1754, A. fol. 160.
No further entry appears relative to this demurrer : but it appears that the several
matters in question were afterwards accommodated. As to such a demurrer, vide
the note to p. 504 of the rep.
Upon the cause coming on (June 7, 1755) upon the equity reserved, the Court,
upon hearing read the postea, and an agreement entered into between the parties,
decreed, by consent of all parties, that the Plaintiff Bennet should forthwith pay to
the Defendant £600 ; and should also pay to her £50 per annum for her life, to com-
mence from Lady-day then last, and should advance to her £100 on the said annuity;
and assign to her a bond debt of £50 due to him from her brother : and, as to all other
matters, the bill was to stand dismissed, without costs on either side. Reg. Lib. 1754,
A. fol. 398.
[214] Hall v. Potter, cited p. 507, is in Show. P. C. 76.
As to the point of confirmation of improper contracts, &c., vide in Morse v. Royal,
12 Ves. 355, et per Lord Thurlow, 0., in 1 Ves. jun. 220.
I. 509.-CORNWAL versus WILSON, July 23, 1750. (Reg. Lib. 1749, A. fol. 611.)-
The bill alleged, that after the arrival of the ship, the Defendant unloaded the hemp
as his own, and afterwards put it on board another ship and sent it to Portsmouth, where
he delivered it according to his contracts with Government. The Defendant insisted,
he disposed of it as agent to the Plaintiffs, and not on his own account ; and denied
he delivered it at Portsmouth to make good any contract of his own. He nevertheless
admitted, that he caused part thereof to be sent to Portsmouth on board another ship,
to be delivered to the Commissioners of the Navy, on a contract made with them by
R. C. The Defendant said he tried to sell the hemp in London, on the Plaintiff's
account, but could only sell a small part at a low price.
The Court declared, That the Defendant by the acts done by him, after the hemp
in question was brought into the port of London, and by the sale and disposition
thereof, and sending the same to Portsmouth on a new risque, had taken the said hemp
upon himself, and ought [215] to account to the Plaintiffs for the same, according to
the price of 14 and a half rix-dollars, per ship's pound; being the price at which the
Plaintiff bought the same at Riga.-Jt was therefore referred to the Master to take
an account of all dealings and transactions between them relating thereto. R. L.
I. 511.-WILLIAvSON versus CODRINGTON, July 21, 1750. (Reg. Lib. 1749, B. fol.
577.)-The father expressed to bind himself, his heirs, executors, administrators,
and assigns.
Besides what is mentioned in the report p. 512, as to the bill, it stated, that various
negroes and their issue, were removed from this plantation to others by Sir William,
where they were afterwards wholly used, and employed for his benefit. An account
as to them was also prayed, and it was decreed accordingly, vide post.
The answer alleged, that the Plaintiff and his brother, after having been maintained
in England at the expence of Sir William for a considerable time, returned to Antigua,
from which time Sir William not only supported, but from time to time made a large
and ample provision for them, in order to advance and settle them in the world, and
expended upon them more than the value of the plantation and premises in the trust
[216] deed : and the Defendant stated she was not only induced to believe that such
VES. SEN. SUPP. 213.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0662&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)