264 ANNUAL RE 



place between the counsel on 

 both sides upon the details of tlie 

 property, and tlie proportion to 

 be aUottetl to Lady Brisco. 



Dr. Arnold and Dr. .Tenner, 

 for Lady Brisco, arj^ued in sup- 

 port of her claims to a provision, 

 during the dependence of the s\iit, 

 upon a liberal scale, suited to her 

 rank and station in society, and 

 endeavoured to vindicate her con- 

 duct in contracting the debts in 

 dispute. 



Dr. PhiUimore and Dr. Lush- 

 ington argued at some length 

 upon the extra^agance of Lady 

 Brisco with respect to these debts, 

 and the diminution of Sir Wastel 

 Briscc's income, owing to the 

 present depreciation of landed 

 property, and tlie heavy expenses 

 to which he had been exposed ; 

 from whence they inferred that 

 Lady Brisco, with her pin-money, 

 and what she had recei\ed from 

 Sir Wastel Brisco, having no en- 

 cumbrances, was richer than he 

 was with a larger property, fet- 

 tered as it was with such constant 

 and heavy demands — with the 

 maintenance also of his children, 

 and with the obligation of sup- 

 porting a dignity and appearance 

 suitable to his station in life. He 

 ■was, however, anxious to have 

 the question of alimony, pending 

 the suit, settled, as his common 

 law counsel advised him that, un- 

 til it was, he would be constantly 

 exposed to the debts Lady Brisco 

 so lavishly incurred ; but, under 

 the circumstances, they trusted 

 that the measure of the allowance 

 would be very small 5 and as Lad}' 

 Brisco had taken upon her to 

 prove what she had so palpably 

 failed in, with respect to his pro- 

 perty, the learned gentleman sug- 



GISTER, I8I6. 

 \ 



gested, whether it was not com- 

 petent to the Com t to condemn 

 lier in tlie costs of so luuisual a 

 proceeding. 



Sir William Scott remarked, 

 that the suit was originally for 

 adidtery against Sir Wastel Bris- 

 co, but it had now assumed the 

 shape of recriminatit)n against 

 the lady. The alleration of fa- 

 cidties in these cases ought always 

 to be given, and the question of 

 alimony disposed of in an eaily 

 stage of the proceeding, to pre- 

 vent the husband being unneces- 

 sarily harassed w ith suits and de- 

 mands for his wife's debts. He 

 then stated the progress of the 

 proceedings in the present in- 

 stance, and remarked, that though 

 it was usual to acquiesce in the 

 answers, particularly when re- 

 formed by Older of the Court, yet 

 it was undoubtedly open to the 

 wife to examine w itnesses, if she 

 thought proper : this, howe\ er, 

 was a riglit not to be exercised 

 wantonly, but with great caution 

 and tenderne.ss. It was never 

 necessary to enter into an inqui- 

 sitorial scrutiny of the husband's 

 property ; but it must be taken 

 upon a fair estimate. Here, how- 

 ever. Lady Brisco charged the 

 value of a jiarticular property at 

 2,0001. per annum, which Sir 

 Watsel set at 3.501. per annum : 

 so great a difference as this in- 

 duced the Comt to go into the 

 inquiry, upon the result of wliich, 

 it no\v turned out that Lady Bris- 

 co's valuation was enormous and 

 tmfounded in the extreme ; and 

 that e\ en Sir Wastel's was above 

 the real value. This was a mis- 

 representation which the Court 

 must consider had been imposed 

 upon Ladv Brisco, as it was un- 

 willing 



