Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Sidor ...
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
MR. WHITE. 1325
he should deliver up to them also the part of the house in which
he resided.
"The Committee accordingly entered into possession of the premises
of the Swedenborg Society again. Mr. White, however, gave notice
of appeal against the decision of the Vice-Chancellor.
"On January 4, another pretended Meeting of the Society was
held-of which a notice had been issued on December 5-to confirm
the proceedings of the previous meeting, and to turn out the Com
mittee, and appoint a new one. The principal members of this so
called new Committee were chiefly those partisans of Mr. White, who
had most distinguished themselves in the late unhappy proceedings.
"Notice also was given of still another ’ meeting of the Society’
to turn out the Trustees, who had been found a rather solid obstacle
in the way to the accomplishment of their purposes" (" Circular," &c.,
pp. 40-50).
On January 23, 1861 , an order was obtained by the Committee
of the Swedenborg Society from the Court of Chancery for Messrs.
White, Wilkinson, and Fryer to deposit all books, papers, and docu
ments in their possession in Court.
On February 5 and 6 the case of White v. Bayley was argued
in the Court of Common Pleas, Westminster, before the Lord Chief
Justice Erle and a special jury; where Mr. White set forth that "he,
the plaintiff, was possessed of a shop and premises, and certain books
and other property therein, and that the defendants broke and entered
his shop and premises and took possession of his goods." In the
second count he complains that "the defendants converted his property,
that is his goods and chattels, to their own use." After a most
searching cross-examination where all the facts of the case as reported
up to November 26, 1860, were clearly established, the Lord Chief
Justice declared that he was "of opinion that the plaintiff had not
proved in evidence any case to go to the jury, and held that the
plaintiff could not sue either in trespass or in trover." After hearing
the judgment of the Lord Chief-Justice Mr. White through his
lawyer moved for a new trial.
As Mr. Wilkinson still persisted in acting as the ostensible
secretary of the Swedenborg Society, and in that capacity counter
signed cheques to draw the funds of the Society from the Bank, an
injunction was granted by the Court of Chancery on March 18, to
restrain him and Mr. Fryer from interfering with the Society’s
moneys.
On Friday, April 19, Mr. White’s motion for a new trial came
up in the Court of Common Pleas, when it was decided by the
Court in Banco that the Lord Chief Justice in his decision of
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
