The Trustees of the British Museum v White
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 February 1828 |
| Date | 22 February 1828 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 424
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Prior proceedings with annotation, 2 Sim & S. 594
[289] Before Mr. Justice Park Feb. 20th, 1828. the teustees of the british museum v. white. (Held at Nisi Prius, that in a special jury cause the plaintiff's counsel cannot have a tales without the consent of the counsel for the defendant) [Prior proceedings with annotation, 2 Sim & S. 594 ] Issue from the Court of Chancery.-This was a special j ury cause ; and ten special jurors only appeared. (a) In the case of Garrett v. Handley, which was an action on a guarantie, the undertaking was to " make provision for the repayment," of a sum of money, " under," an " arrangement," then " going on, for settling " the borrower's " affairs." Abbott, C. J held, that some evidence must be given by the plaintiff, to shew that no provision had been made by the defendant. Vol. i. of these Reports, pp. 217 and 484. a CAB. ft P, 280. LEES V. WHITCOMB 425 Wilde, Serjt, for the plaintiffs, prayed a tales. Park, J.-Do the other side consent ? Because I do not think that a plaintiff has any Tight to have a tales without consent on the part of the defendant. I know that other Judges have a different opinion upon this subject , but I must act upon my own impressions Bosanquet, Serjt , for the defendant, gave his consent; and the cause proceeded. Wilde, Serjt., Coote, and Patteson, for the plaintiffs. Bosanquet, and Adams, Ser]ts , for the defendant. [Attormes-Bray & W., and Eogers & Sou.]
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 425
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Feb. 22nd, 1828. lees v. whitcomb (An agreement by which A. B. agrees " to remain with "CD for two years from the date of it, " for the purpose of learning " a particular business, will not support a declaration stating the consideration to be, that C. D. would " receive " A B " into his service." Semble, also, that such an agreement is not available, on the grounds of there being no mutuality, and no consideration appearing on the face of it.) Assumpsit -The first count of the declaration stated, that, at the time &c , Martha, the wife of the plaintiff, was, and from thence &c , a dress-maker and milliner, &c , and thereupon, on the 5th day of June, 1826, in consideration that the said plaintiff, at the special instance and request of the said defendant would receive the said [290] defendant into his house, and find and supply her with board and lodging, and cause her to be taught the trade and business of a dress-maker and milliner, by the said wife of the said plaintiff, she the said defendant agreed and undertook, and faithfully promised the said plaintiff to remain, and continue with the said wife of the said plaintiff for two years from the day and year aforesaid, for the purpose of learning the business of a dress-maker and milliner. It then averred that the plaintiff, confiding in the said promise of the said defendant, received her into his house, and that she remained in his house for a long time, to wit, from the day and year aforesaid, until the 14th day of April, 1827 ; and that during the time she so remained, he supplied her with board and lodging, and other necessaries, and caused her to be taught by his wife the trade and business of a dress-maker. Then came an averment that the plaintiff was ready and willing to have suffered the defendant to have continued for the remainder of the two years, and would have supplied her &c , and taught her &c ; but that the defendant did not, nor would, although often requested so to do, remain and continue with the said wife of the said plaintiff, or in his house, but wholly neglected and refused so to do ; and on the contrary, before the expiration of the said two years, to wit, on the haid 14th clay of April, without the licence and consent of the said plaintiff and his said wife, or either of them...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dreyfus Foundation Inc. v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
...5 & 6 Vict. c. 35, makes a special exemption in favor of the British "Museum, whereas by a decision given in the year 1826, Trustees of British Museum v. White, it had been settled that the British Museum is a charity within the statute of Elizabeth." 99 This argument was thus dealt with by......
-
Dreyfus Foundation Inc. v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
...in the present print. 1 139 L.T. 628. 1 21 T.C. 374. 1 3 T.C. 53. 1 21 T.C. 374. 1 13 T.C. 400. 1 [1900] 1 Q.B. 156. 1 13 T.C. 400. 2 2 Sim. & St. 594. 1 12 T.C. 358, at p. 1 2 T.C. 621. 1 [1931] 2 Ch. 122. 2 3 T.C. 53. 1 21 T.C. 374. 2 33 T.C. 259. 1See page 150 ante. 1 34 T.C. 207. 1See p......
-
The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation, Inc. v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
...in the present print. 1 139 L.T. 628. 1 21 T.C. 374. 1 3 T.C. 53. 1 21 T.C. 374. 1 13 T.C. 400. 1 [1900] 1 Q.B. 156. 1 13 T.C. 400. 2 2 Sim. & St. 594. 1 12 T.C. 358, at p. 1 2 T.C. 621. 1 [1931] 2 Ch. 122. 2 3 T.C. 53. 1 21 T.C. 374. 2 33 T.C. 259. 1See page 150 ante. 1 34 T.C. 207. 1See p......
-
Helena Housing Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners
...but not of charity." 30 Despite these doubts, in 1826 a devise to the British Museum was held to be for charitable purposes: Trustees of the British Museum v White (1826) 2 Sim & St 594, though the result was that the devise failed under the Mortmain Act 1736 whereas a legacy of personalty ......