APPENDIX TO CHPvONICLE. 



253 



and this presumption was con- 

 firmed by evidence. The Court, 

 therefore, must pronounce for the 

 interest of the wdow, and decree 

 the administration to her ; but he 

 wished it at tlie same time to be 

 distinctly understood, tliat such a 

 decision could afford no precedent 

 in matrimonial cases where a 

 similar question might be raised. 

 Decision accordingly. 



Jury-Court, Edinburgh, Nov. 1. 

 — The Right Hon. James, Earl of 

 Fife, against the Trustees of the 

 deceased James, Earl of Fife, — 

 This important and extraordinary 

 case — viz. whether the wiU of the 

 late Earl, conveying certain es- 

 tates in Scotland to trustees, the 

 rents of which amount to 20,0001. 

 a year, were to accumulate for 

 the purpose of being invested in 

 other estates, for an indednite 

 period, ought to be reduced, on 

 account of certain informalities 

 when the deed was signed, and 

 the alleged blindness of the late 

 Earl — occupied the court suice 

 Tuesday morning till eight o'clock 

 last night. All the Judges were 

 present eveiy day, •viz. the Lord 

 Chief Commissioner, Lord Pit- 

 milly, and Lord Gillies. 



The following were the Gentle- 

 men of the Jury : — 



William Duulop, Esq. spiint 

 dealer in Edinburgh. 



.-\lexander Smith, Esq. banker 

 in Edinburgh. 



George Wauchope, Esq. mer- 

 chant in Lcith. 



William Trotter, Esq. uphol- 

 sterer in Edinburgh. 



James I'illans, Esq. merchant 

 in Leith. 



Sir John Hope, of Craighall, 

 Bart. 



Forbes Hunter Blair, Esq. 

 banker, Edinburgh. 



David Skining, Esq. farmer. 

 East Garleton. 



William Caldcr, Esq. merchant 

 in Eduiburgh. 



Andrew Bonar, Esq. banker in 

 Edinburgh. 



Alexander Charles Maitland 

 Gibson, of Cliftonhall, Esq. 



Sir John Dalrjmple, of Cous- 

 land, Bart. 



The Lord Advocate, in an 

 eloquent speech, which lasted 

 above two hours, opened the case 

 for the pursuer. A great number 

 of witnesses were then examined 

 for the pursuer, which occupied 

 the Court tiU-half-past ten on 

 Tuesday night, when they ad- 

 journed. 



On Wednesday the Court met 

 again a little after ten o'clock, 

 whenThomas Thompson, Esq. in a 

 very able speech, which lasted up- 

 wards of three hours, stated the 

 case for the defenders : the ex- 

 amination of the witnesses on that 

 side of the question then com- 

 menced, and did not finish till near 

 eleven o'clock at night, when the 

 Court again adjourned. 



Yesterday the Court met at the 

 usual hour, when John Clerk, 

 I'jsq. replied in a most able and 

 ingenious speech for the pursuer. 

 The Lord Chief Commis- 

 sioner, in a most luminous man- 

 ner, then summoned up the whole. 



The Jui-y, after being enclosed 

 for three hours, returned with 

 their verdict, which was read by 

 Sir John Dalr} mplc, their Chan- 

 cellor. 



The following are the issues 

 which were appointed to be tried, 

 with the verdict of the Jury there- 

 on :— 



l5t. A^'licther 



