Imatges de pÓgina

next Government sale at Calcutta,
each party knowing that the other
might use means to enhance or
depress such price. Held, that the
bidding at the sale by one of the
Plaintiffs, though done colourally,
and, as it appeared. only to enhance
the price, was no fraud on the De-
fendants, or upon the public, as he
bad a right in common with all the
world to bid at such sale, and was
nut precluded from recovering the
amount of such wager contracts, by
the fact, that such bidding tended
to bring about the event by which

the wager was to be won.
Held also, that employing agents at

such sale (all of whom were cogni-
zant that the object was to enhance
the price of opium sold) to bid,
there being no crimen falsi com-
mitted, did not constitute an illegal
conspiracy, or such frand as would

vitiate the wager contracts.
By the 6th Article of the Convention

between Great Britain and France,
the French Government had a
right to demand, out of the quanti-
ties sold at the Government sale,
300 chests of opium, at the average
rate of sale. Held, that no fraud
on the vendors was committed by
inducing the French Consul to
exercise that option in favour of
the Plaintiffs. (Doolubdass Pet-
tamberdass v. Ramlou Thackoorsey-
dass ]




is an

By the Statute of Wills (1 Vict., c.

26, s. 21), obliterations, interline-
ations, or other alterations in a
Will, after execution, are void, if
not affirmed in the margin, or
otherwise, by the signature of the
Testator, and the attestation of


circumstance of the
amount, or the name of a legatee,
being inserted in different ink,
and in a different handwriting,
does not alone constitute an oblite-
ration, interlineation, or other
alteration, within the meaning of
the Statute, nor does any pre-
sumption arise against a Will
being duly executed as it appears.
The case is different where there

erasure apparent on the
face of the Will, and that erasure
has been superinduced by other
writing. In such circumstances,
the onus probandi lies upon the
party who alleges such alteration
to have been done prior to execu-
tion, to prove by extrinsic evidence,
that the words were inserted be-
fore execution, and that they had

the sanction of the Testator.
In the absence of proof, that certain

words in a Will, written with a
different pen and in a different ink,
and in a different handwriting,
partly upon an erasure, were in-
serted prior to execution, so much
of such Will, consisting of the
inserted words, which constituted
& reversionary dispositiou, pro-
nounced against.


Seo “GRANT.”

patient, will view his conduct with the utmost jealousy. (Greville v. Tylee]




Where a Will is prepared and writ

ten by a medical man in attendance on a Testatrix, at that time dangerously ill, and without professional advice, by which he is made the principal object of the Testatrix's bounty, to the exclusion of her near relations, a Court of Justice, regarding the subsisting relation of a medical man and

London : Printed by Woodfall and Kinder, Angel Court, Skinner Street.

« AnteriorContinua »