Excerpt from The Legal Observer, Digest, and Journal of Jurisprudence, Vol. 46: May to October, 1853
Bromley, were solicitors for all the parties in that transaction. They prepared the deed of declaration of trusts, and were paid their billof costs then incurred. It is said, and truly, that there was an irre °ty in associating the name of William romley, in the trust with the original trustees; but it was an irregularity in which the three female plaintiffs, w 0 were then unmarried, concurred, and therefore they cannot be the parties to complain of it. Some time afterwards, on the reduction of the rate of interest on the Navy 51. Per cents., it was arranged that the money should be sold out. And invested on mortgage in the name of William Bromley alone. That was a breach of trust. The money ought not to have been invested on mortgage at all, and then not in the name of one trustee alone. Two of the ladies were then married; and they and the respective husbands of the two married ladies concurred in giving the wer of attorney for the sale of the stock to illian Bromley alone. The stock was sold by him, and the money produced by that sale found its way to the credit of the partnershi account of the firm of William and Joseph arner Bromley, at their bankers, Messrs. Rogers, Towgood, 8: Co and that it is the foundation of the liabilit now sought to be enforced against Mr. Josep Warner Bromley. It is necessary to examine with some minuteness the grounds on which the law applicable to this case depends. The plaintiffs suggest two grounds z - lst, that the firm of William and Joseph Warner Broml undertook a duty in respect of this fund whic was not discharged; and that, therefore, Mr. Joseph Warner Bromley is now liable to the plaintifi's. The other ground is, that the mono came into their hands as trust money, whio they were bound to see to the application of; an obli tion from which they could discharge themes ves only by seeing to the due perform ance of the trust. Now, as to the first ground, the duty of the firm appears to me to have been to invest the money on mortgage securit in the name of William Bromley alone. E find that this duty was performed in the fol lowing way -ou the 31st of May, 1824, Mr. William Bromley represented that the money had been laid out on mortgage of freehold pro perty at Holloway, which, it was admitted was an untrue statement. The only excuse for the statement is, that Mr. William Bromley bad the means of making good that statement, in asmuch as he had freehold property at Hol ioway arising from transactions between him self and Mr. Burnard, which might have en abled him to make such a security.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.