APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



287 



any thing personal in contradiction 

 to reaJ. The word meant property 

 acquired in general, and it was 

 only a secondary meaning which 

 confined that property to personal. 

 In the four decisions which were 

 to be found on this word, in East's 

 Reports, three held it to extend 

 to real, and only one confined it to 

 personal estate ; and by the lower 

 classes- of people particularly, it 

 was frequently used to signify real 

 estate. He quoted Cow p. 298, in 

 which, although the devise wys 

 of the residue of the testator's 

 " eiFects, both real and personal," 

 a good deal turned on the mean- 

 ing of the word effectSy which was 

 argued to mean only personal pro- 

 perty, and it was contended that 

 real effects meant only chattels ; 

 but Lord Mansfield denied that 

 the word effects was ex vi termini 

 so confined. The word had been 

 used to signify real property by 

 the legislature, who made it felony 

 in a bankrupt to conceal his mo- 

 nies or effects. This extended to 

 real property, although in a crimi- 

 nal case the most rigid construc- 

 tion would be put upon a word. 

 He cited 2 New, 221, 1 East, 33, 

 3 East, 516, in which the word 

 from the context received an oppo- 

 site construction, and 11 East, 290. 



Lord EUenborough. — In all 

 these cases there was context ; but 

 when all explanatory context is 

 absent, have you. any case where 

 the words effects perse isheld to ex- 

 tend to real estate ? 



Mr. Serjeant Bloseet admitted 

 he could carry it no further than 

 the dicta of Lord Mansfield, and 

 the intention in the will to pass 

 every thing, to which the most 

 extended sense would be given. 



Mr. Best, contra, was sto]>ped 

 by the Court. 



Lord EUenborough said, that 

 unfortunately there was here a 

 destitution of any thing that could 

 enlarge the word beyond its natu- 

 ral, ordinary, and obvious sense, 

 which was confined to personal 

 property. There was a great num- 

 ber of acts of parliament in which 

 the word extended to nothing but 

 personal property. If the heir at 

 law was not disinherited, he was 

 entitled. 



Mr. Justice Bayley, — In case 

 of doubt, ihe heir would be enti- 

 tled to judgment; and here the 

 word is equivocal. 



Rule to enter a nonsuit. 



LANCASTER ASSIZES, THURSDAY, 

 SEPT. S. 



Before Sir John Bayley and a Spe- 

 cial Jury. 

 Bootle, Esq. M. P. and Others 

 V. Blundell, Esq. — Sir W. Garrow 

 stated the case to the jury. It was 

 an issue out of the Court of Chan- 

 cery, and the plainlifFs were Wil- 

 brahani Bootle, Esq. a member of 

 parliament, and other persons, de- 

 visees of the late Mr. Henry Bluu'* 

 deli, of luce, near Liverpool, and 

 the defendant was Charles Blun- 

 dell, Esq. the son and heir of 

 Henry Blundell. The question to 

 be tried was, whether the late Mr. 

 Henry Blundell, at the time he 

 made his will in July 1809, and 

 his codicil in May 1810, was of 

 sound mind. That at both those 

 periods he was of sound mind, he 

 should show beyond all doubt. To 

 make the subject more intelligible 

 to the jury, the learned advocate t 



