224 . THE GARDENERS’ CHRONICLE. [N® 14. 
Saeed 
shiak a . re 
of the 
Weld of Lub in the he gpg of as for life,” with lis thought a bill of interpleader correct, and 
to make it oniivahy useful. eyo many travellers remainder to his sons in tail male, emainder to the third 
almost ignorant of dra rawing,: and either attempt nothing, pers and every other the eld yrs of Edward Weld for - with remainder 
ble 
< home rude, foe wits ches ! The 
plished artist will call-in sometimes this auxiliary aid, 
ime i “a building or a lan 
Pp hi “ev 
seape, or when wearied pe ere Itiplicity t ¥ igus Weld jhe st with r peepaindene ne vibe tha + a 
: at " . at every person en jari-rpswanmgchs 0! reside at Ince 
details. One most important spvlenkions of the | and take and use the arms and name of Blundell. Mr. Blundell 
new most likely to prove generally interesting, | died in 1937, at which time, as well as at the date of the will, the 
is, undoubtedly, the taking of portraits. He made trial of | owner of Lulworth was the present “Joseph Weld, upon 
it last October, and found that the experiment readily. whom the late Thomas Cardinal Weld, pe Poaagng. ai ioe eita 
m to mt in | pri 
Sir M. Wood rae t devisee, and the motion to discharge the 
F zs dismi 
ral photo- | Mr. i 
$ tly 
graphic processes oe ow vd nown, Ww which a materially related to the Weld family, in giving his solicitors instructions 
different from each por , he considers it to be absolutely | for his will, detailed a short pedigree of the family to this effect— 
pest i tes inguish them by different tae ogy i : the first the Cardinal, secondly his brother Edward, to whom he 
h dix hen Lady Stourto: 
ip 
consequences. His —— could not anticipate an excess 
of jurisdiction, and he must therefore refuse the prohibition. 
inting: ther: i circum: 
or or engraving. _ The manner in which the dis esta Oe was | that there had beena brother, Edward Weld, between Thomas 
the Cardi an i died i 
o ‘ an 
c) 
trying p Sa ie bart: Edward were the person reall: meant in the » thi 
lest son of Joseph, the fature inheritor of Lulworth, would also 
TATTERSALL’S, Tuurspay.—Notwithstanding the absence of 
several subscribers at Croxton-park Races, the Dettitis we tole. 
a very short time, ere vir of of finding out ev h was | tak the Blundell estates ; a result, it was contended, which was 
© most itive. e of these papers was ig escape opposed to the manifest intention of the will of Mr. Blundell Scott’ 
candlelight. Ther le Tothio to be seen u Z | fo « create a new and distinct family for the perpetuation of ‘eat wo rennet a Sem a ae spaced “ 
: ns : Ss | his own name and the enjoyment of his own estates.—The se stable-—-Morning ee be Sax le, who rose-two 
al a vend aa . a points, but left iy others. as before. An advance of a couple of 
turning some time after, he took up the paper, and was | said it appeared to him a very simple one, and was quite within eae: in eae still all that requires any notice beyond (Se 
surprised to see upon it a a distinct picture. He v was ce certain the rule of evidence laid down in the case of ‘‘ Miller v. Freres 
i ecided 
1 .: 6h (8 Bing. 214). In his Honour’s opinion the case might be 9 to 1 agst Eringo (taken) 10 to 1 agst Joachim (taken) 
me 2 with the greatest facility. The sole question was, who was the 32 to I Ralph | 
fore ; and, therefore Cunt apart), the only arte or person described as “ Edward Weld, of Lulworth, in the county DERBY. P 
h Id be d hat the p had pectedly of Dorset?” for Se of determinin, Apes omg should ite Snot Fiery ee 2s daapetonet ie 
de itself b a ion. merely refer to the only proper evidence which could be given— E linge 
veloped | ea 7 = cir seed erat , Fortunately, he yiz., the state of the Weld family at the time of making the will, a hic sp paved ers Jot (a 9 iow » Meegi jan itakea} 
elie and the words he had used, rejecting altogether from his con- Tto 1 je (8 tol taken) | 1000 to20 Belgrave (taken) 
had been prepared, a atts enabled imme- | sideration anything that could be said to seme regard to tol rer Fe age 1000 to 20 nother. 2 een 
diately to as oy experiment The paper, as before, | the testator’s intention. He found these facts, about hich there dto 1 Coronation (taken) 1000 to 20. Metternich (taken) 
is 2 taken resented hard an thin, was no dispute—that Joseph Weld, Esq., of eek, had at the 1Bto 1 Eringo Aeakss) 1000 to 15 Gammon Box (taken) 
pice “ith y Says time at the will an elder brother living named Thomas mo he and tha at | ato 1 Knight of the Whistle | 1000 to 10 ‘Morning Star (cites 
e a brother named, Edward who had been brou up for 
cbr it iy candlelight, = had soon the satisfaction of | holy ordersin the Romigh church, but died at the age of 200r21,| Sito 1 Palsmon Sooo sates ap neni eae 
to appear, and all the details of it and that Joseph Weld had two sons, Edward Joseph the eldest, 25:0 1. ‘Marshal Soult burgh (taken) 
and Thomas (the plaintiff) the second, and that he also had a 25to 1 Prince Caradoc (t-ken) 12 to 1 agxt Kaighe of the 
come we one in the age In this experiment, the | gj i 30 to 1 Cameleon Marshal Soult 
sister, Lady Stourton. That being so, he then looked at the whole oa ie? Wahab 350 to 100‘ Resalie and 
paper was a moist s Hh with dry paper the | of the testator’s will, in doing which he merely followed ‘the ac- | 39 to 1 Galaor (taken) (taken) 
result was still more extraor ain ry- _The dry paper ap- knowl edged. mle seit wealaid down in “Miller v. Travers,” where | 4 to 1 Knightabridge (taken) 
for when | the words hi had used in his = atenton Free ales te ta 1 aget Lampoon (take) 
d used in his will, and that wo! which he ‘Alb tah aera comers 
Poop the camera after a ‘short time, as a minute or | not employed in the = could not be added. Now the will, after es pee Wn haw 
A _ But, neverthe- a devise of the estate in fee to trustees, directed that the MARK LANE, Frrpay, Arai 2.—We e had some runs of 
di estates were to be held trust to permit the second son of Essex eat up ’ alised about 
k nt fe Mr. Ed d Weld, % TE ath, naga f Dorset, take | Same tice ie on that oop, ae a mics hae fe trade was a 
wart of Lulw ie county 0: rst to > r 
and by a ane mical process it was yale © appe; ear in all its | the same for life, with remainder upon trust for the first and other | flat. e ions aber ‘rifling in oreign, and the 
The result of his experience “hitherto with this | sons of the ae Second son of the said Edward Weld successively, | Samerates were deman: ere was no alteration in the value 
is, that if properly prepared, it will keep | in and then upon trust for the third and every other | of either Barley, eans, or Oats. The duty on Wheat has 
three or four shanti, use at any ent, and | 802, upon gs ich not! arose; and for default of such issue ed to 23s. 8d. at which itis likely to 
vai 3 state hich ? upon trust for the first and other aed of each brother (except the | 4.4. g we ate seg OO 
dry sta oe is a great con- | eldest) of the said Edward Weld, im tail male; and for default of | “"**"’Nosfolk, Lincolnshire and 3 Yorkohite, . . . 581066. White 1 08 
venience. om ep nee — upon trust for poh opting second and other sons, ena |S Basle bee eee RS Sioa ing and distilling 33 to 88 Grind. piste! 
surprising than the appearance of the picture o1 Lady Stourton, wife of William Lord Stourton, one Lincolashire 4nd Vor ands 22 to 
the Biuake iaeiet picware OF | the sisters of thesaid Edward Weld, in tail male. There was no- enborteee ome hoo at a 0 aaa 
= a * | Stag snsteriod th Oe reve at the wit.onteny = ae EN Ve, apt bie tm ae < Biot 
WI ed. 4 of | upon the face of it that the testator had so framed it that the first Bis." Wwastgin, old and new *. a tose" Tick 
, until, in its strength of colour, sharpness of | devise was to take effect in ‘The will must be therefi Sea eran earner .- ress ajc =e5 Lenaped = 
outline, and general distin it has reached, in his in the same manner, in fimine, as if, where the tes. | Pe Wh = tS ep ae - 
Siaiit sib, Rk tak erg & tator spoke of Edward Weld, of Lulworth, he had described him WEEKLY IMPERIAL A 
perfect stat Mt mom Stops | as having an eldest brother, and as being himself the brother of Barley; Oats. 
further progress by w: it over with a fixing liquid, | Lady Stourton. Taking it therefore ‘that there was a devise for eet Sette 2 30 
This is washed off with water, the picture is then dried, Pome at Edward pice any pag ae elder Se ee 
. * rother, and who was himself the brother o! ly Sto: m, t nace j 
‘and the process is termine The picture is found to be | it was said it could not mean the second. son of Joseph Weld of wei 
ver sebogly fixed, and from it numerous copies may be | Lulworth, because he had a son named E' Joseph, and that . 
by the method | though he fer. ce Se ag called Edward, yet “3 more cone 
of superposition in sunshine. The original pic ture casions h name Edward Joseph. also s 
not readily become altered, or wear out by this aanéanee that though = might be _ true that ee ae of a ord ment 
be sufficient for some purposes of Edward Joseph, yet that 
to the sun; but in case it t doés $0 , as ha Ppe ens sometimes, | name of Edward given to him solely was not the aces GAZETTE OF THE WEEK. BE 
he finds that it may be in genctal readily revived. This re- | accurate description of him by name, and further that if he could INSOLVENTS.—F. Roberts and 0. Bovey lukeepere 3. Gaitick, carpe 
- p i. a Sees a aS , innkeeper—T. Garlick, 
vival, which is a most carious of the calotype | bet be the person, designated, he was unk desenated fly | Ue Greet Micre ENLANGHD J. bac, Dl’, teat bio 
* ae 0 o the descrip- BANK ‘CIE N > ‘3 PY 
process, not only restores the picture to its pristine | tion of having an eldest hernn and himself the brother of ‘Tocesbane coer road, oe W. Bowser, “Grocer, Philpot-lane, City—E 
strength, but frequently causes fresh details and minutiz | Lady Stourto was said that Joseph had an error BaNkRceicy Sv SUPERS ia Or W. Kemp, grocer, Eastcheap, City 
to appear in the picture, which had not appeared before, | &'¥°% to him inn of his Christian name, but he was | _ Ba NERUPTC Oey ema ee com Norzis, Lancasbisey 
at the bro i ont! or di lescribed as Weld of Lulworth, and that though it might be well | provisic ausien a4 
visible : ON eee to describe Edward Joseph as Edward for et here |» BANKRUPTS —W. Ambrose Bradford, 111, Long-sere, checsemopger 
( te that process having been the testator g a disposition of his estates, and ry | Sfizhtmans Ravetnoctersrew, bowboalien Ro Ha wera aot W grocer—J- 
soon). Further ——- on this shies and an accoun speaking of som e person w who was to be the stirps, and from whom | Long, Suiicy.” Gloucestershire, butcher. Robbins, Sica opieons  bnildebe= 
the chemical p' fo: the family was to arise. But his Honour thought the expression aylor, jun., Kingston-npon-Hull, Doat-builder —G- Pooley, Bixee 
ttf nnd “ ” nee ‘Woyke and J-Davies, Newton, Cheshire, i : 
which Mr. Talbor ite pacers to ode the Ro ‘Seca Weld of Lulworth, in the county of Dorset,” would of itself i Ine ok thie Ui 7: aston jaxta. Birminj 
: y chet wig have been a very sufficient description of the father, but that | Poiies, Mand an aT ger I. Baker, ST 
. of this discovery in making an error in the description. Therefore, the Court had ae Hi , BM » ronmonger—J. Lu » Gosport, Hampshises 
tanical drawings will immediately suggest itself to our | one side a sufficient description for some purposes, but not for | woollen draper—J. Robinson, Salford, ey mill B-Hardy 
: i i i ‘Threlfall, and J. Butterworth, . r, cotton-spinaers—W. H. 
ers. perso and, on the other side, two getch sccaars which by no | J ite cafordshire, manufacturer of mineral colours —R. ‘Cass, grocety Bo 
The Peculiar Food of Animals.—Some animals have | which two sek nedarigatin = on deeb ae pote Setar ples ex then: | SES ais! cette SMart ont Eaananel igo sree, Sa 
a - point as street, 5 E Ts an 
a partiality for, and feed voraciously on, vegetables poison- | lutely to leave in his Honour’s mind not ces - shadow of doubt. | lebone —¥. ‘R. Hayward, money-scrivener, Chapmemslage, W oe sh iohess 
us to others. Hogs devour Dandelion, and are the best | He had Seneht a gon A deal of the matter, and it appeared to him | Lonergan» merchant, King William strect, os nufacturets > 
eradicators of the weed in pasture-fields in spring, before Poa a me, rat hoy yiapk ty By sending tiie asttes tO | Seatiurnehine—W. South, Heteoad rictool er. Looe hag eye 
are ? é - > ~ t 
the latter are laid in merica they even seek | taking away foun: shecim sim of facts now. w. before him, ae ers, Great ad carer a R. G olden, and = Y¥. Clarkes 
attle-snake. Deer ountain | he thought the case would ce a primar So gm F Rinkdene: cached Ie ‘ers 
rel ; goats Dai sia orn. | tte Lord Chancelior and the House of Lords than by the judges | eige-tool-manuface ra broker, Willertom, wool-buyer, Swineshea@s 
1 RE <t the courts of law. If he had entertained any doubt, he would | Lizcolnshire—I- common-brewer, Kegworth, Leicester aealer EE 
apple, eich impunity. is poisonous to dogs | have refrained from expressing his opinion, and have sent it toa vScOTCH SB ERATIONS —R- Wilson, Glesgey siakeeper— W. CoB" 
and cats, and all animals Baek "blind. wae delight in | court oflaw; but as he thought it a very plain case, he felt he ra perp Nga a Nec bigging, cattle-denler. 
Ragwort, young. ts was only doing justice to the parties to declare his opinion. Fe crag ay era 9 rate 3 he lady of 
i Wilkinson v. Withum.—Mr. F. Piggott, for the plaintiff, moved BIRTHS Os th inst., in Chester-terrace, Regent’ oa 
iors ob chal ‘fn corn Een aaa seal Landa bet | ae, the defendant and his servants might be restrained from | fay egies ta sip eet Cir Par Bo Son 
cockchafer in corn-fields and ploughe but | taking away hay and manure from the plaintiff's farm. lady ot tre F.C. Finch, of male twins, oné Jilbers—On idan, ees 
‘the Cornish choug' e argc enemy to the grub, by | plaintiff, Thomas Scopton Wilkinson, in October 1837, agreed to | inst., Mrs. T. Boys, Abbey-place, St- John's-wood, 1a ea On the 
reason of the a) lenge of of his bill, and is more par- | 1e¢ to the defendant, Benjamin Witham, a farm consisting of 630 | at Dummer Rectory, Hants, y of the Rev. M. Caunters i Mra. Wt 
tiealar serviceable mt of tie Hie acres of land in Yorkshire, at the rent of 440. a year. The tenant | 27:5 me. 3 UNG sae, sae ae Se eet | Fislioo, 
y in gardens en mn account o C€S- | agreed to consume on the premises all the hay, grass, and fodder, | the 134: Esq., of Demerara, of a daughter- . 
he makes daily beneath the roots of cab- | and to bestow upon the meadow landall the manure which should | the ath inst» Mrs. Pike, of s danghter. ne , Jobe 
agile ‘without doing injury to the plants.—Indagator. be made upon the premises. The plaintiff had given notice to meee — A Se Mary, Newington cote is late Ex sh canting 
ee quit, and be conformity with that notice the defendant had given | Hay, Bea. of Canal sore, (> Nes SSS Scene, om Saturday, the 20 gegt 
up of the land, but remained im possession of te bam, Lieusenant JF Mr. 3. Weston, of 97, High Holbors, to Sea: Coen 
Ga. dwelling-house and buildings, which he was ed: to retain | daughter of Mr. A. Rowland, of Lewisham—On arene erg ost daughter 
House ov Loups.— Preston v: Melville.The Lord Chancellor | until the 12th of May next. He had sold some of the hay, and | Bloomsbury Samuel Sturgis, Rea Of Pe 
gave judgment in two causes under had threatened to sell more, and the plaintiff believed he would | “frep “Nt sunderland Mee in Baines-lane, Mr. Levies 
this name, deciding that DIED.—At Sanderiand, the } x We 
where there’ existed a.suit in the Court of Session, and one in the | C2!TY his threat into execution. The sale of the hay would be ener, aged "At Madeira, on the 12th inst., of consumptlons iy, aa 
Court of Chancery, the former court could not make an order ia injurious to the farm. Witnesses had sworn they had seen carts ett, Esq., of Upper rare a eer on the Hill, aged i erg 
respect of a fund paid into the latter court, although the suit loaded with hay, and the —— moving hay.—Lord Langdale | Boyd, Skinaes er es - celebrated 5 aot for ae arly 50 nae 
een the same parties. —Take the order for injuneti versaily tome rie The masters, desirous 
Vice-CHANcELLOR's CouRr.—Blundell v. Gladstone. —The | Court or CHANCERY- Foor Wood.—The Lord Chancellor i pe eee 
question in this case turned upon an alleged mistake ina name j delivered judgment in this cae ‘which: he said was a bill of in- jeet-streets 8 
im the will of the late Charles R. Biundeil, Esq., of Ince Blundell, | terpleader, filed by a tenan’ ant of the late Mr. Jam ee eee 
ene and involves the present right to the his heir-at-law, and also against his devisee under a paper pur. ‘Onna: i Chetee nary Gemmdsnose we the 
estates porting: to pass his real es Gaere ak. Advertisements Communications are 
dis —Soturdey, Aprils, 10H, 
ts 
y and Brass, Lombard-street, Fleet-sttt 
Frisia Uy ee SS aesern the City of London, and Publishet na niin 
of that gentleman. By bis will, w estates. There was ‘a. question whether a =e 
1834, Mr, Blundell left his estates in trust for “ position had been made, and the Master ieee 
4 
