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/ssactsengr0342 and id is 1 raw text is: BORRADAILE V. BRICKWOOD
of days on which they sat. There had, however, been a case on which Master
Spranger had required the commissioners to shew that they had sat extra hours. In
the present case he, the Master, had had no [58] guide, except the number of folios.
An objection was made to the number of folios containing Burr's evidence, but that
was with reference to a long account which had been inserted in his deposition.
To a question likewise put by the Court, the solicitor of the plaintiffs said that
no statement was made during taxation as to the number of days, but that the
calculation was by thirty folios.
THE LORD CHIEF BARON. The defendant ought to have objected to the certificate
at the time of taxation, if it did not contain the proper statement as to the time of
the commissioners' sitting. It is the duty of the commissioners not to take a docu-
ment such as this, and copy it into the deposition, but to examine the witness viva
voce as to each of the items. As the commissioners, however, have taken it as a
deposition, I must assume, under present circumstances, that they have done correctly.
With respect to the objection which has been raised relative to the costs of copies
furnished to the Court, I think this case differs from that of Bozon v. Williams. There
it does not appear that the papers were called for during the progress of the cause,
but after judgment had been delivered. In this case it was perfectly impossible to
give judgment without copies or originals; but I am sorry if I have been the occasion
of expense by adding to the length of the bill of costs. The petition must be dis-
missed, but, as I cannot say it was not proper to bring it before the Court, it must be
without costs.
Petition dismissed, without costs.
The ground of the petition presented by the plaintiffs was, that the Master had dis-
allowed a sum paid by the plaintiffs to some accountants for examining certain books
and accounts produced by the defendants. The petition [59] alleged that the deposi-
tions of the witnesses were read at the hearing of the cause, and were entered in the
decree as read, and that they established the inaccuracy of the defendant's statements
to the satisfaction of the Court.
Mr. Wigram, for the petitioners. The costs of an annuitant generally are not
costs in the cause; but there are some exceptions to the rule. In Tod v. Thompson
(not reported) a bill was filed by an accountant under a will against the executrix.
The answer sworn to by the executrix was false; she having taken her statement
from that of her daughter, who was residuary legatee. An accountant was employed,
and the Vice-Chancellor, upon a special application, allowed the costs of the accountant
as costs between the parties.
Mr. Wakefield, contrh. That was a special application, which shews that such a
practice is not usual. In cases of fraud there may be a special application that the
costs of an accountant may be made part of the decree; but that is entirely different
from the present case.
THE LORD CHIEF BARON. The charge for the accountants ought to have been
made part of the decree. It does not come under the general denomination of costs.
It would not have been costs without the special case of fraud. If fraud was to be
made out, it ought to have been brought forward before, and the special ground ought
to have formed part of the decree.
Petition dismissed, with costs.
[60] BORRADAILE AND ANOTHER v. BRICKWOOD. Nov. 19, 27, 1834.-Under the
stat. 2 & 3 Will. 4, e. 125, for granting relief to the West Indies, the commis-
sioners have no power to advance monies except upon such securities as shall
have priority over all other securities.-A mortgagor out of possession is not an
owner or person interested in the property, within the terms of the act, so as
to authorize the commissioners, without consent of the mortgagees, to advance
monies to him in respect of damage done by hurricanes to the mortgaged premises.
-Semble, that where the property has been already restored, the commissioners
have no power to advance money for the purpose of reimbursing the party who
has restored it.
[S. C. 4 L. J. Ex. Eq. 11.]
Michael White being seised in fee of two plantations in the island of St. Vincent,
-called Sharpe's and Petit Bordels, by several successive indentures of mortgage con-
lY.&C0. EX. 58.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0342&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)