ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY, DURING THE TIME OF LORD CHANCELLOR THURLOW, AND OF THE SEVERAL LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF THe great seal, AND LORD CHANCELLOR LOUGHBOROUGH, From 1778 to 1794. By WILLIAM BROWN, ESQ. OF THE INNER TEMPLE, BARRISTER AT LAW, FIFTH EDITION, WITH IMPORTANT CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS, From the Author's MS. Notes in his own Copy, intended for a further TOGETHER WITH OBSERVATIONS FROM THE SUBSEQUENT REPORTS ON THE CASES AND DECISIONS ON THE POINTS OF LAW TO THE PRESENT TIME. By ROBERT BELT, ESQ. OF THE INNER temple, BARRISTER AT LAW. 1 IN FOUR VOLUMES. VOL. II. LONDON: PRINTED BY A. STRAHAN, LAW-PRINTER TO HIS MAJESTY ; FOR HENRY BUTTERWORTH, LAW-BOOKSELler, AND R. MILLIKEN, DUBLIN. THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE SECOND VOLUME. THE following sheets contain the principal cases which have received adjudications in the court of Chancery during the last year. Several others, of considerable importance, were argued, but, not having received judgment, it was thought improper to make them part of this publication; but, as the Reporter intends, if life, health, and leisure shall permit him, to publish the cases of each succeeding year, somewhat before the subsequent Michaelmas Term, until he shall have completed, at least, another volume, of the same size with that he published last year, those cases which were not ripe for production now, will appear in the order in which they shall be finally determined: and, at the close of the volume, proper tables will be added to the whole. The Reporter feels himself bound to repeat his thanks to his friends who have favoured him with their assistance, and to express, though faintly, his sentiments of gratitude to the profession, for the favourable reception with which his former volume has been honoured. No. 2. PUMP-COURT, TEMPLE, 16 Oct. 1786. ERRATA, ADDENDA, &c. Pages 63, 64. To Cooper v. Forbes, add the following note: -"It was, however, "settled to the contrary in the important case of Clarke v. Blake, postea, 320. Quod vide, with the Editor's note, which refers to the "determination in C. P. 2 H. Bl. 399., and S. C. 2-Ves. jun. 673.” Under the title of the cause Cookson v. Ellison, insert (Reg. Lib. 1786. A. fol. 596.) 252. Ibid. (252.) 320. 342. After the last word of note (4) add (5), to which annex as follows: Clarke v. Blake. Let note (1) commence thus: "The M. R. had 7th line from bottom of note: - For "every" read “even. |