Star. — London, England, 1823-01-27 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CFIA NCF.RY, JANUARY 25. SIUTTER V. CHAUVELL, IN THE CASE OF THE LITTLE STA NMORE RECTORY. This bill was filed six years ago, and it was but recently - discovered by the plaintiff, that whereas he had in all the instruments described the benefice a; a donative, it was in fact a curacy. Leave was accordingly prayed to amend the bill, and thereby to take the benefit of an alternative issue for the plaiutiff,who vas entitled whether donative or Curacy. It had been argued on the other side, that the only issue tendered respected a donative, and that the de fendant must not lose the benefit of his plea which he had established hitherto against all the proceedings. A part of this plea was the statute of plenarty,which Would have no application if the bill were amended according to the motion. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that the plaintiff could get nothing by the amendment if it were allowed, as the defendant would maintain his plea on the do native as it now stood ; and if the instruments were to be altered throughout, calling the benefice by its proper title of curacy, the plea of the defendant would not apply, so that time would be an entirely new case. They had better try the effect of the plea as it stood. If they disliked that, they must begin again.with another bill ; or, if they chose, they might have a case, and he would obtain the opinionof some of the common law Judges, whether or not they could be allowed to clams the curacy under the, pending issue. • Mr. f!ART, for the defendant, accepted the offer of the Court, and the motion of amendment was dis missed with costs. ICE-CLUNCELLOWS COURT, JANUARY 25. THE COURIER NEWSPAPER-STEWART V. STUART. This ca e, it will be recollected, was argued at con side: able length betoie the recess, and the leading facts of the case 'stated. Mr. lit:Lt. and Mr. SIDEBOTTOM for the plaintiff; and Mr. AGAR and Mr. SUGDEN for Mr. I). Stuart, had been heard previous to the recess. Mr. WA =tut now argued on the part of the de fendant, Mr. Stuart, that the plaintiff could claim nothit:g under the assignment, being precluded by the deed o f 1808. Mr.llisur and Mr. PemnErt - roN appeared fur Mr. S:reet, and had nothing to offer in addition to what had been stated by the Counsel for Mr. Stuart. Mr. MARTIN (in the absence of his lea. er, Mr. [loans) stated that he was Counsel for Mr. Mudford. That gentleman, by his answer, did not contend for any new construction of the Aced of 1808, but ad vised the. Court that, in case of a decision favourable to the plaintiff on that deed, he had a lecoud objec tion which would defeat the plaintiff's claim. • Mr. lilirdford con:ended that, as a purchaser of three shares of the Paper prior to the plaintiff's purchase, lie had a right of preemption before the plaintiff, and was entitled td all the • notices set .forth in the' deed n t 1803. • Mr. I,lsit. wished for the productipn of any evi deuce of the existence of -rich an agreement with Mr. Mulford. That gentleman never. thought of !wearing in this suit until the suggestion of Mr. amid Stuart. The V;cs-CtiANctu.oit called on Mi. Martin to state hi, case. Mr. MARTIN proceeded to read from Mr. Mud fgrd's answer those carts which related to the pur chase td three shares of the Conlick Newspaper by him, and three other shares at the•same time by Mr. Walter Henry Watts. It appeared that, ahout the year 1817, Mr. &mart and Mr. Street entered into an agreement to sell these shares to these 'gentletrien. It was a joint alreement, and both weie to take the shares upon the same terms. This was antecedent to the transaction with the plaintiff. Mr. HoaNE now entered the Court, and being re quested to state his case by the Court, the Learned Counsel called on the Counsellor Mr. Street first to proceed with their case. Mr. HART declined either making any statement or speech. _ _ _ • Mr. lioaxs=-Then T will adopt the same course cannot follow the example of a more experi enced man. Mr. BELL then replied. He observed,. that the question between the parties was a very simple otte, and turned upon the construction oft two deeils The argument on the other side had, it was true, been very ingenious, but he conceived it had been. more ingenious than solid. Before enteting into the merits of the case, he alluded to a very inaccurate statement which had appeared in the Courier Newspaper, at the time when this question was first agitated. It was a statement in opposition to his (Mr. Bell's) ...speech, and, upon the principles laid down by Lor4 'lard wicke, he maintained that no man had a right to snake such "a statement. At least, this Court could exercise its controul over such statements, and he now protested against them. The VICE-CHANCELLOR.—Ynn may protest against them, but the Court cannot interfere, as Um matter is not judicially before it. Mr. IlEy. then proceeded with the case, and argued that this was not a bill for a specific performance of an agreement (as Mr. Agar had put it), but to assert a claim, and to compel a payment of money which had been withheld, because the plaintiff would not coilsent to a particular construction put upon a deed. The VicE-Cmtscrt.Lott said, he had entertained con•iderab'e doubts as to the power of interfvience in tlik case, by a Court of Equity. Ile had consulteLi the common lawyers, and he had learnt from them, that on account of the peculiar foim of these proceed ings, the question could not be sustained in a com mon Law Court. If, then, a Court of Equity was a fit tribunal, the question was, what the plaintiff had purchased, and what was the intention of the parties? fhis intention must be collected from the instruments. Mr. BELL continued.--With respect to the right of pre-emption, it was comparatively of link value,'and could only be exercised as a controtiling power to pre vent the introduction of objectionable persons into the concern. The VICE-CHANCELLOR said, that if he rightly un derstood the construction of the deed with respect to tte pre- emption, it Wit. this :—Mr. D. Stuart and 111`r. Street were both senior proprietors as to all ques tions against assignees. Mr. Daniel Stuart, as he NIMw understood it, was the senior proprietor as to pur chasers, and Mr. Street the next senior preprietor.-:= Mr. Street was senior proptimor of the shares from IS to 24; and therefor, had aright of pte-entptioa as to those before Mr. Daniel Stuart, and consequently before the plaintiff. - It was clear, therefore, that Mr• plaintur. - IC w _ Daniel Stuart and Mr. Street were both senior pror prietors with respect to the whole 24 shares ;but both could not have the option as to all the shares. They. neither of them wished to relinquish their rights, and• they agreed that one should lie senior proprietor as to one 12 shares, and the other as to the other 12 shares. if he was incorrect in this view of the subject, he should wish to be set right. • Mr. list.r. concluded his reply, by alluding to the claim of Mr. Mudford, and expressing his surprise that that Gentleman had not previously asserted his right of pre-emption. The VICE-CHANCELLOR believed he had in his re collection all the important facts of the case, and, there were two main questions to be considered. Ist, Whether this was a case upon which it became the duty of a Court of Equity to declare its opinion as to the right of pre-emption claimed by the plain tiff? 2d, If there were such a case, what was in that respect to be the judgment of a Court of Equity? As the case was argued so long ago as the 19th of November, he felt unwilling, without refreshing his memory, to give judgment on this important ques tion. He desired, therefore, that the papers might be handed to him, and he nfould in a very few days' endeavour to _give judgment. At present he con fessed he had a strong impression as to both the points lie had stated ; but he would not declare what that impression was without first reading the papers. Mr. ALAI called his Honour's attention to the prayer of the bill, which was for an injunction to restrain the defendants from assigning over, or dis-' posing of, their respective shares, otherwise than to the plaintiff. The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought that was a relief to which the plaintiff could not be- by possibility .en titled. On both side:, as it appeared to him, the question orpre-emption had been mistaken. He should read the papers carefully, because he was well aware this was a nice question, and, in fact, one which did not belong to this Court. But it happened that the relation in which the patties stood to each other made it impassible that, in point of form, the question could be entertained in a Court of Law. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JANUARY 23. COLGRAVE V. DIOS SANTOS. Mr.GURNEY moved for a Itule to shew cause why the verdict for .the plaintiff should nut be set 'aside,: and a nonsuit entered. This was an action to recover the value of fixtures appurtenant to a house in Essex, which the plaintiff sold to the4letendant, without de- manding any remuneration for the articles. At the trial the question raised was, whether the fixtures, consisting chiefly of grates and ranges, were parcel of die freehold, and therefore passed with the house to the purchaser, or whether they were to be re garded as personal chattels, forming the ground of a distinct claim, which might be the subject of an action of trover. The Jury then round a verdict for the plaintiff, under the direction of the Lard Chief Justice. 'who gave tire defendant leave to move for a nonsuit.—The Court granted a Role to shew cause. TUE KING V. MARTIN. Mr. WA Liman moved Tot a Rule to shew cause why Moses Martin, against whom an indictment for larceny had been found, should not he admitted to bail. He did not apply for a Ilab.eas Corpus in this case; as lre . thoughyahe Court would be of opinion that the circumstances rendered such) a preliminary needless. Mr. Martin, the defendant, who was a confectioner, had taken a quantity of his goods for sale to the shop of a person named Wh ite, and had an interview with his wife. Mrs. White became the purchaser of confectionary to the amount of 3/. but not having that sum in Mimi, she paid partly in money and partly in goods. In a month after, he called again, to seek for another order, when, to his astonishment, Mrs. White charged, him with having stolen twenty shillings from her at his last visit. This was a most singolar accusation, coming as it did' from a woman who, at thetiMe of the pretended theft had not money. enough to pay for the confectionary ' she had bought of him. She, however, took him to Union Hall, where the charge was heard and dis missed by the sitting Magistrate. Not satisfied with this decision, Mrs. White pt eferred • a bill 01 indict ment at the Surrey Sessions, which was found by the Grand Jury. At the Sessions Martin attended, with- Counsel ready to enter on his defence, but he was iufot med that an application would be made, on be half of the pmsec.utor, to poitpone the trial on the ground that a material witness was absent, and to cause hint, in the interval, to be committed to prison. He accordingly withdrew, and now applied to the Court to prevert hiM from being improperly ar rested and confined in prison on a most absurd and groundless charge. • Tire Count grinned a certiortin to remove the in• dictment, and a Rule to shew cause why Martin sl;ould not be admitted to bail. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JANUARY 23. ing 1 ths t the vessel was serf ou* iittred,rossl-pat7t of 30. effected. A Captago ense. navigator, who wazen the spot. - -.oostiaencleil tad/ Zankes this Olt ae Captain of the .4 not of yielto . ds !advice, for that if be , the Pico -A iratty Court, he should sustain'many- impoaitioart -and I.e also told him, after examin i ng the ship, that she might be repaired on the spot ;'and he added an offer, that he would in his own ship, then in the port, take the cargo on to England. The Captain, however, put her into the Vice-Admiralty Court, which decreed' her sale and that of the cargo. Yet, according to the' evidence of Capt. Manning. who brought his vessel to England after with a cargo (which shewed he did, not want one in the first instance) instead of being' broken up, the Lady Bankes Was repaired by those who purchased her, and was, when he left the Mau ritius with a new cargo on board, ready for a new ; voyage. It was under these circumstances that the Jury found the Owners liable for the act of the Cap tain, upon the same principle that the employers of any other carrier were bound by his acts. The Court were, however, ready to grant the rule, without say ing anything upon its' ultimate effect. Mr. Justice PARK—It has been only of late years understood, that a Captain could hypothecate his cargo. A great deal is to be said upon the extent to which he can bind his Owners. A luminous adjudi-. cation upon that subject has been given by the present Lord Stowell, in the Admiralty Court. Lard Chief Justice DALLAS sail, that the lumi nous review of that subject by the eminent Judge at the head of the Court of Admiralty of Great Britain, was not only an honour to that distinguished man, - but to the country to which he belonged. It Wid be-, come, in fact, a past of the Law of Nations, from the circumstance of the station which this, country held in the maritime scale of the world. HOWARD AND GIBBS'S BANKRUPTCY. Saturday being appointed by the Commissioners at their last meeting for the final examination of the bankrupts, when it was expected a full statement of their affairs would be laid before their creditors, a very numerous attendance of creditors took place. After a short time had been spent in receiving proofs of debts, Mr. Wittsc, who is Counsel for the as• signees, addressed the Commissioners. lie said the Commissioners were already aware of the multipli city and complication of the bankrupts accounts: ever since they had delivered in that statement by which they declared they were ,:etermined to abide, the assignees had been most diligent in their investi gation of the statement of the several accounts of the bankrupts with their creditors and debtors, which had been so delivered in, and Mr. Gibbs was in the course of giving the assignees every assistance and information which they desired. - With this informa tion and assistance, the assignees had made consi derable progress in the arduous duty they had un der taken ; but it would still take a considerable time before the whole of the accpunts could be so fully investigated as to enable the assignees to come to a certain conclusion on the statement delivered in by the bank' yids. (Ile Learned Gentleman hare inti mated that he did not think that less than two months would be ~tiflicient for the purpose. Mr. TALBOT GLAscoca, who attended for Mr. Stubbs, whO had just proved a debt of £9Th on the bankrupts' estate, objected to the delay. Ile said it WAS now two years since the first commission issue against the 'rarritrupts, and nearly a year and a ha: since the present commission issued ; and he knew that several of the creditors, who were his clients, were much dissatisfied at such a length of time being allowed to elapse without 'a dividend being made, or even the bankrupts having passed their final exami , nation. Ile knew that till the bankrupts passed their final examination, they could not be made to give up Ithe property in their possession. (The Commissioners started with surprise, and said that was not the llsv.) Mr. GLAt•COCK resumed: he came from Ireland— a bankrupt country, where bankruptcy was as well understood as in any part of the world ; and he knew that there it was quite a common practice for bank rupts to delay their final examination, that they might retain property in their haiTds, which could not he taken from them until theyhad passed that examination. Mr. Commissioner SEATON to Mr. Glascock . .— Pray, Sir, are there any assignees appointed to a baakrupt's estate in your country ?—( el langh). Mr. Commissioner TREBECK asked Mr. Glascock whether he had seen the statement delivered in by. the bankrupts ? Mr. Glascock admitted he had not. Mr. Taenecr pointed to a heap of written paper that lay on the table : anil . told Mr. Glascock that WAS the balance sheet delivered in by the bankrupts: ever since it had been presented, the assignees hack used their utmost diligence in its investigation; and their Counsel had jtist then declared they were re ceiving the utmost assistance from the bankrupt f ply whom it was prepared ; but it was still necessary that they should have a longer time allowed for ex amination before they could decide with certainty on its correctness. Atter some consultation, the Cons...._ pointed the It of April for the next meeting. DEVON QUARTER SESSION& !_ A CAPTAIN'S POWER OVER /113 CARGO. TORTURE TO EXTORT CONFESSION. Mr. Serjeant VAUGUAN moved for a rule to shew Robert Potter, an apprentice boy, was indicted for 'cause why the verdict obtained at Guildhall, before stealing some money, the property of a servant living the Lord Chief Justice, 'should not be set aside, with the same master, in the parish of Cotleigh, near and a new trial granted, in the case of the Lady Honiton. It was a case of suspicion only, as no mo- Bankes, bound from Calcutta to England, when the ney was found on the boy, nor was there any other lOwners were field liable for the loss upon the sale of fact to prove his being the thief. It appeared that, a cargo shipped for England. He contended, that after threats and other means had been resorted to, the Lord Chief Justice had misdirected the Jury; the parish constable, a mad orthe name of Burrows, for that, according to the evidence, the Captain was was sent for, who *as guilty or the following atro net liable, nor could the Owners, as the salt of the cious cruelty to extort a confession ::—He tied small ship and cargo had been effected by an order of the cords round the thumbs of the boy, by which be sus- Vice-Admiralty Court of the Mauritius. . pended him to a peg in the wall, with his toes just The LORD Clll Er JUSTICE said, that as the Court, touching the ground • sad whilst in this state, the owing to the importance of the question, were dig-•\ day betore Christma s-day, he poured cold water' posed to grant the Rule, he might be permitted to down the boy's sleeves at the wrist, so as to run over state the manner in which he had left the case to the his preson. Undet thii tortire he extoited some sort Jury.—This ship, the Lady Bankes, had taken in a 1 o 1 confession from the child, who was therenpon corn cargo in the East Indies, to be delivered in England ; mitted to prison ; but of course this could not avail in she put in, owing to the severity of the weather, to a Court of Justice, and there ivas no other evidence.' the Mauritius, and was met, as is• usual in other The boy wisinst i autly acquitted, and; in his turn, places, in the Isle of %%Tight for instance, by the boats was about to be the prosecutor, but the matter was of different merchants, who contended for her ma- I compromised by the constable pa) ins him i.:13. nagement. When the Captain got into the port, it was the general opinion, that had he remained at sea _ ..-.-..... ---.. eight hoes more, he would have risked the ship and . Through an oppsiti oon among the coaches, gigs, crew. fie was advised by the merchants to petitio i ece..between Southatieids and Sunderland, Maw Sunderland, the Vice-Admiralty Court. to otiker a sale, it appear., gers ate sometimes au—led inside fattens item I 1 , •.• UNIVERSITY INTELLIGEVCE. CAMBRIDGE, JANUARY 24. Saturday last, being Bachelors of Arts' Commencement, 6 4 following .213 Gentlemen were admitted vi that degree. King's College--Messes. Chapman, Hume, Maturin. Trinity College—Messrs. Airy, Allan, Andrew, Voileau, Batki g Chillers, Claridge, Drinkwater, Egremont, Field, I krill.% Head, Howlett, IMF, Kempson, Lloyd, lOrtrtertr:Mtthol.l , Moultrie, Myers, Park, Painter, Pearson, Petne, Peni4 Phelps, !'lace, Bennet', Bickatts, Romißy, Rothman, Sandys Spree, Strutt, J.. Sumner, Sutcliffe, Tate, Torrixtte, rptoe, Winning, Wrightson, Wyndatn, Yorke. St. Jnlsn's College—:Mesert. Armitstead, Bainbridge, Barbe e Flarrinvr, Benson; Birth, Birkett, Bond, Boultbee, B r i g h t ' Bryan, S. Brown, Cane, Clay, Clive, Collins, Collyer, Co opie, Crick, Fcwlis, Franklyn, Glover, Gray, I lamilton, Harkn eee , Harvey, Haynes, Hollway, Hooper, Hot Witch, Huwartv Ibbetson. Jackson, Jeffreys, Jones, Lane, LutWidge, Dl Maude, Alay, Milner, Nuans, Pearse, Pitman ?ruse, & t e tt Sealy, Seejeant, Skilton, F. G. Smith, C. A . Smith, & e; phenson, Stewart, Weshy, Wharton, White, Wilkine eß Willis, Wilson. St. Peter's College—Messrs. Batton, Fisher, Hodgson, Mo st : govaery, Osborn, Palmer, Whiteburst, Williams. Clare Hall—ideesta. Backbone., Chaplin, Findley, Firmia, Fog brooke, Pixell, Punnett, &maple ' Wing. Pembroke Hall —Messre. Blake, Bandley, Catiyon, Cheeky Currie, Doughty, Jordan, Simpson, Williams. Caine Colleg e — Messrs. Ayre, Beauclerk, 13ortoia, Cteln, Gray, Herring, Lewis, Salmon. Corpus Christi College—Mean. Breyer, Brett, Chesoutt, Dicken, Gay, °Wham, Jeckell, Leapingwell, Mack, Marsh, Moxon, Stewart. Queen's College—Messrs. Clowes, Gurney, Marshall, Mao; Mover*, Mudge, Nicholls, Piper, Sandy., Webster. Catharine 11.11—Mean. Green; Ilildyar, Knight, Poole, Richardson, Husby, Serjeantson, Taylor, E.WiLion, .Jesus College—Messrs. Bedell, Besoor, Carless, Maude. Christ CoUege—Messrs. Barker, Coils, Cubitt, Dodd, (bting. ton, Finton, Goggs, Ifalien, Heigham, Kerrich, King, M a y. son, Miller, Oxenden, Palling, PockWigton, Russoll, Su)Jdari. Magdalen College—Messrs. liagshawe, Flicks, daddy, Waring. Emmanuel College—Messrs. Biakiston, Cory, Dwarris, Clore, Harper, Ilopkins, Osborne, Pigots, non)ld, Wil, on . Sidney Sussex College—Messrs. llcigliarn Dine, Johnson. Downing College—Messrs. Gordon, Parker. About forty others passed the Examination who have not yet coniplcted the number of Terms required by the Statutes. Peter Mason, Esq. B.A. of St. jo;in's Coneze, is appointed Assistant-Master in the Royal Naval Colh•gt., rottsni.luth,in the room of the Rev. Jonathan Cape, M.A. of Tr:r.ity (Acre. The subject of we Suatonian Prize Poem for the iresent year is a Cornelius. At a Congregation on Wednesiay, the following Gentler es were admitted to degrees: MASTER* 0 P ACTS. The Rev. Thomas Airey, erTlinity College. 111 e. Rev. Frauds D. Lempriere, dituti HELORS ARTS. James Summcr, of Trinity College. Allan Fielding, of Corpus Christi College. OXFORD, JANUARY 2,5. Wednesday, the following Degrees were conferred: BACHELOR IN CIVIL LAW. Jerome William Knapp, Fellow of Sr. Juhu's College. MASTERS OF ♦RTS. George Fuller Thomas, Scholar of Worcester College. Richard William .10f, Fellow of Oriel College. Francis Bryans,-St. Edmund Hall. John Wrotttsley, Esq. Christ Church. Havilland Durand, Scholar of Pembroke College. EACH MORS Of ARTS. Evelyn Bazalgette, BaViol College. John Huyshe, Brasennose College. ECCLESIASTICAL PROMOTIONS. The Rev. R. Davies, ?LA. 'Vicar of Dixton, has been insti. toted, by the Bishop oti Gloucester, to the Rectory of Stanton, (nouceste rshire. • Thursday, the Rev. William Moggridge Stawell, Nf.A. was instituted, by the Rev. PfeCentor Bartlam. to the united Recto. ries of Filleigh and Ran Iluckland,-Doron. on thi. preseatanua of Earl Fortescue, Lord Lieutenant of Devon ; void by the death of the Rev. John Burgess Karslake. The Bishop of Futter has instituted the Rev. Charles Chi. chestet, B.D. to the Rectory of West Worlington, Devon, void by the cession of the Rev. Joseph Prost. Prust. Tuesday. the Rev. Archibald Bennie was uoinimously elected assistant and successor_ to the Rev. John M , Ltod, Chapel of Ease, North AU)ion-stieet, Gla go.v. On the ,l ltb inst. this Rev. Dr. Chalowni was unaninsoudy elected Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of St. Andrew's; and In has notified to the congregation of St. John's Ins acceptance of the office. Some time since he received tl5OO from a, Lady, to lay out in anx way ha thought proper. Of this suns he gave . 0 500 to the Rev. Dr. Burns, for the purpose of assistieg in the erection of a Chapel; £5OO to the Rev. Mr. Marshal ; and £5OO to Mr. 'Muir ; for the same laudable pur pose. He has also given £5OO out df his own pocket for aiding the erection of a Chapel in the parish of St. John, Glasgow. The Rev. Reginald Heber is appointed to (and has accepted) the vacant See of Calcutta. Mr. Heber goes to Insiia forthwith._ Jan. 17, at Belfast, the Lady of Captain Edward Priestley, of a daughter. MARRIED. Wednesday, the Rev. John Manley, of Wrotham, to Caro line Mary, eldest daughter of the Res. George Moore, Rector of Wrutbam, and Prebendary of Canterbury. At Chatham, the Rev. Henry Turmine, M.A. of Minster, Isle of Sheppy, to Miss Susannah Atkinson, of Chatham. Jan. 15, at ALl!don, the Rev. W. M'Connel, Dissentlug Mi nister of Preston, to Elizabeth, fourth daughter of Mrs. Nash, widow, of the former place. Tuesday, at Great Blaplested, the Rev. ,Henry John Earle, of High Ongar, to Charlotte, eldest daughter of the Rev. Jas. Sperling, of Monks Lodge. • Jan. 16; the Hee. James Rodger, Minister of Dunino, Flfe shire, to Jane, daughter of the Rev. Mr. Haldane, of Kingo}drum. At Berwick, tile Rev. Jahn Messenger, Curate of Bamburgh, to Sarah, only daughter of tilt late Mr. George Redpatb, of Berwick, surgeon. The Rev. Edward Freeman Parsons of Doddlreton., Che shire, to Frances "bleliicent„ youbgest daughter of Mr. Nixes, of Amtry, Warwickshire._ .• . The Rrv. Robert Middleton,.ll. 4. of Gwaynynog, Denbigh shire, to Louisa, second daughter of the late Sir George Wit ham Farmer, Batt. At Ecirhooton Chureb, the Rev. Francis Ellaby, to Min Frames Brooks, both of Edmonton. At Tulla, the Rev. 11. 8. Ilulett, Rector of Mount Shannon, county of Galway, to Eliza, daughter of the late It. Brew, Irk of Richmond, county of Clare. _ - Saturday, aged 75, the Rev. John Winter, 56 years Paster at the Independent Church at Newbory, Berks. . Jan. 16, the Rev. William Morgan, of Lanwenerth, Mon mouthshire. At Newry, the Rev. Dr. A. G. Malcom, Presbyterian Mi. Rider of Newry. ' Jan. 17, the Rev. Metbusalem Davies, of Aldenhans, Herts. Wednesday, aged 73, the Rev. R. Rigby, Vicar of St. MAO, Hetetley, and of Bishop Barton, Minister of Lechoniield. The Rev. Richard •Wan onMoor,Prebendary of Lands!, and Rector of Trevethlo, Monmouthshire. The Rev. John Syrup, aged 45, twenty years Vicar of Wet , Wagtails and Rfetaf of Alm. &lei% The Rev. T. Blackburn, LL.D. Warden of the Colieglattr Church, Manchester. At the Rectory HMI! of Ifulooford, Soda, the Rev. Heart Williams, M.A. Rector of that Prif.. Jan. 11, at Harlow Vicarage, Oher a short Mien, Qrc Dorothy, younwit daughter of the WM; Otan. Sanderson NOG Jan. 10 , at Margate, ;dm PVansea &yd s fart of hie* noydada. the once rep meted awns of the Litre sflueshapo— , Dim herself was highltasoseglkitolis listerearre. and hen been eensidered one of the i r p lis e tinfill of madam times. `Jan. 4, at Ash, out 144 John Laita, sheep sharer, aged 76. He Was token TMN ag how peed:ono tdr death, and signified his wish (which was put into effect) that be _might be attended to Me pew W aS bin Mohan Aar shearers, with ib shisataturanded funs *drink An, ONO Lby bow et Suktrare• • • r~~ i S la g! , 4.04 ••. /4,441.0 10;13 'l.• ,t ~