The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1824-11-24 00:00:00

n 1~ L Oise; but you called it in your count by the name of muni- Lef t Maydays ;to at all events, you should have sheen in pot counts but onedeed, which is at variance with the writ." His Leaped Friend did not seem to think that this decided any thing. He Mr. Sergeant Boaanquet) was of a different opinion. for, by the opinion nrenounced by the Chief Justice, it was manifest that the fatal objection to the writ was, net that a letter of attorney was rot a deed, hut that the cas: on the part of the plaintiff tailed in consequence of the omission in the count to denominate it so. and thereby to render it conformable to the writ. An applcauol to :wanner the writ was subsequently made, on the ground that a cleci. W error had crept .n:o the count; but this the Court refuted, with a eiminet le:time:on, that they refused it on account of the count of being conformable to the writ, and that the power of at torney ought so be mimed as a deed to render it available.. lie ben next to call their Lordship' attention to the case ut "Dodd v. Herbert Styles," Reports 449. That was an actiou brought under the statute of Elizehede The action was debt on bond to periorm award; there it was said that an arbitrament under had and seal was not a decd. All that was there established was, :bat thine might be an award without a stamp-deed. In amen: se teat ewe, Lord Ellenbormigh said, that he had only to prepare his award, and have it ready for the plaintiff, as soon as he did that ht beesmeJasctesgjfuits. But Mr. Justice lotirence on that case, which was reported in 4th East, said, th t questions similar to the resent have frequently been neitstell in this Court, and without de. sermintng whether an award was a deed according to the COMMICtion contendel fur, it might be made so by a deed-stamp, and having re ettorseto the customary fortes of constituting a deed. Suppose a person were to key a line, the uses of that tine were set forth by steed ; but here there was no contract, which it was so zealously en. esairoured to establish as essential to the perfect formation and co:atiavion of a deal. The next argument relied upon by his Ltanted Friend was, that although the form of letters of attorney to transfer stock seemed to comprise &distinct covenant with the Bank es: England, yet that the nature of the covenant was such as to ren der it nugatory. This was explained by alleging that this was es sential to the ch=artee of the power of attorney, was not in the Pam of a covenant. and was a way of expreaaig that the party confitmed all such acts as should be done by his attorney after his dsa:h. That a patty giving a power of attorney might bird him seer, he (31r. Sergeint Bosanquet) was ready to admit; but that weld not extend to his execuors, much lees to his administrators. :he cove tent was a built' fide one, entered into between the party makeig it and the hank. It conveyed authority for sale, and this as he before submitted, was ancillary to a :attract for sale. Having endeavoured to show that the word deed was strictly and ordinarily applicable to the instrument in respect of which the Fiona was convicted, he would proceed to the other proposition, telt the word bore that meaning on the construction of the Sta tutes of the 2d of Cleo 11. c. 2., 31 Geo. 11. c. 22, 78 and sb Geo. ill. The Learned Counsel procceeded to read the =Ste of the Ace, as above citedein the argumeut of the opposite eL It was said that the conviction failed, inasmuch as this Act enumerated the various elle:ices which were to become punish able by heavier penalties thin the law provided. In this velment thin the uttering a forged parser of attorney was not included or specified, but there wes a previous specific enactment toskmg such a offence a capital felony. To this he begged to reply, that there was a section or clause in the Act of the 2d Geo. IL continuatory of the provisions or the Statute of Bth Mos. I. in which the penalty for utte:ing forged powers of attorney was specifiel. It would no:, he presumed. be con. uaded that the ear:native provisions of one Act of Parliament were to be rendered inoperative, because they had been generally intierporated into another Act ; nor would it be contended, that it wet necessary to specify all the particular eases of offence to which the dat Ac: provieed a remedy, as they were necessarily in tik:eat and meant by that part of the Act of '2 George 11., which eontlimni the Bth of Geor;e I. The 31st of George 11. was en acted principally for the purpose of extending the protection of tae Legislature to extend to the forging of any letter it attorney which related to the transfer of foods or stock, established since the passing of the. Bth of George I. The further statutes which pro. sndsd against forgery were, the 411th of George 111 , the 4th of George I I 1., and the 32d of George III.; of these, the first con s:stalks the most part of de re-enactment of the previous sta. MOB, with additional provisions fee 'weenier offences; the second was inindoced at the termination of the Bank chatter ; it renewed tee provisions of the previous Acts to the Bank, end extended them to the capital stook of bodies politic and corporate, to be hereafter established by Parliament. The third of these Acts, namely, the 32d of Gem,. 111. was introduced to meet a particular offer es, namely, that of a man having &genuine power of attorney who negleeteu to adjust it. In consequence of this neglect, ha was obliged to forge the signatures of the two subscribing Mtnesses; and it was to meet this peculiar case that the Act was hr.:night into Parliament, which subjected this offence to its penalty of transportation ter seven . years. The case was one which referred to manien's wages, and tne Art was very necessary, in order that the party who gave the power of attorney might have ths benefit of a lento file testimony, and that the tame of the Act of Parliament should be complied with, which required that there should be two real eubsenbing witnesses. The Learned Gentle. men having leerily adverted to the other acts of forgery 'eluded to by his Learned Friend, which were nut in his flosanqnces) opinion, very applicable to the immediate question before the consideration of the Court, proceeded to address their Lordships on what had been invariably the practice for years in eases of this kind, on which several comic bans 10. , k place, which were followed by subsequent execution. In almost all of the indictments, the power of attorney had been dertiatinmed a dtcd. it IMO almost invariably been introduced tin der that term in all the efficient counts of the indictment. The first C.: se which he found rectrded was one in 1796, and there, in two counts, this term was iutroduced as he had de-cribed. In the eases art the King v. Weetun and the King v. Copland, counts to a similar effect were introduced. They were convicted and exe gited. Another ease occurred in DIOS : it was that of Mary Ann Berle. She was tried on four comes; the offence was precisely the sante as die present. The indictment contained four counts, one of steal was ter litrgieg a certain deed with attempt to deified the Mae: of England. There was a difference between that case and the present, that the power of attorney of which she was eon. rented, and on which conviction she was executed, contained no covenant vs the present did. In 1816 and 1817 J. Boyce, and in lb/7 31..1. Jebb, were tried, and underwent the penalty of the bier nazi:viler imlictineos, preferred in the same way, for similar ofenc:". The King v. Wait, which was one well known to their Leidship, and which turned chiefly on the competency toga wit ness, was among die many cases which were to be found to sus tain the propriety of the point in discussion before their Lordships, although the Learned Counsel who on that occasion argued the use on the part of the party convicted, did not rely upon any die tiection between a piece of attorney and a deed, but that the deed sfas ono such a one as was contemplated or intended by the sta tute under which the indictment had been drawn up. It was dies argued that it was requisite that a deed should be re. voiced Ity a deer,. Time instrument created an authority to be, peeked by parole; but this argument was not available, for it not onfrequeittly occurren, :hat estates created by deed were revocable by paw. t. The next case he would call their Lordships' attention to, hid one on which he would mainly rely, was that of the King w. Lyunt. That related :o the forging of an instrument, which was regularly executed, for seamen's wage., as a deed, and he was tried on an indictment framed under the 24 Geo. 11. There was a spe ctres Act applicable to this case, and it was contended that the con viction under the 2,1 of Gen. 11. and it was objected by his Coun. :el. that it should have been tried under the specific Act that pro vided a reitedy for the offence, and not tinder the 2rl of Geo. 11. which red not include his particular case, but provided remedy for other esses of forgery. Mr. Justice BATLEY said, that he was one of the few Judges who set upon thst ease: the question for the Judges' decision there was, weether the 2d of lien. It. was controlled by any subsequent sueute as far as regarded the prisoner's ease ; and the second point was, whether, it:controlled by any subsequent statute, that statute VOA the 26:h of Geo. 111.:• Mr. Baron Graham was the only Judge who was of opinion that it was controlled by . ant' subsequent statute, and he only doubted it. He (Mr. Justice Bayley) and Mr. Baron iliraliam were the only two Judges who were of opinion, Pat if controlled by any, it was by the 26th of Geo. 111., which was euppmed to have made a specific enactment for the particular ire. The Learned Judge here mentioned the names of the other tut Judges who dissented from them. The name of a single Judge new upon the Bench was not amongst the names he enumerated. The Learned Counsel proceeded to continent on this case which rte considered a forcible confirmation of the position he at fine laid down, ilea the affirmative words of former statutes were not af. tatted or weakened by suhsequent enactments, which were but a 1110136T0110011 of them, whit certain additional movismet which it may_ hate been found eepetn , it to introduce. Mr. Justice Pima wished to remind his Learned Brother of a MU of earlti. date than of those be had cited. It was the CIAO of tispbiu Ptingk, wi, was tried in I;i'7, bet . reChiefJusti‘T Thorn man. lie ( r.Justice Parks happened to li , its possession of the returned Cuii Javico's notes upon it. The I.:diet:neat agah:et her was for meting a forged letter knowing it to be f•irged. There were teed coons in the indictment. and in six of the counts this instemm.at was described rs " a forged deed, purporting to be a Sever of attorney." From the notes in hi' , 1NP3,11,1441 it Linieared teat the Late bad beeu submitted before 3lr. Jurttcel:ool.% 31 r. Justice Grose, amid the Chief Baron, and that the term of the is. extritent Led been approved of by them. Di r. eee ;t.ant 11(..SANUU ET resumed, and recapitulated the arms meats he teut previously addressed to the Court, that there was nothing i.ttu:ai , tent in the power of attorney being also a tired: that the preamilik el the statute of Geo. /1. acceding to which the indictment was drawn op., warranted the conviction, and that the =misfit.: practice on which convictions had taken piece, supported tee legaley of the form in which the indictment had been pre pared, d the ieveral counts introduced. Mr. Beet u zaioa resew reply.—lle felt that lie met his Learned Frieed on unequal terms. as he scented to have advantages of pre peraion oa the question to be discussed. which he (Mr. Broderick, did not possess. He was therefore obliged to n ply as circumstances im4phteartse. Loon elftEr JUSTICE—As you seem to think you rise to reply under icon means et preparation possessed by the leaned Sergeant, and feel called upon to answer as tie comatarees might arise, the Court, if you should think proper, rill give you an opportunity of preparation, and hear )tau in reply to-morrow, at ten o'clock, as it is necessary we should meet early. Mr. Siagcent /knee 4.IUST assured his Learned friend that he did not p ossess any undue advantage; lie only received the pc , listen weak hot been presented in Council, and that was not sent him mail late yesterday. Mr. lineonsitca disclaimed any invidious suggestion, as to any am= of preparation, that were not perfectly fair and proper. The Cousr renewed the oiler to lie. Broderick to postpone hearing_him in reply uutil to-morrow. Mr. 111101:1EltICK replied lie was too tensible of the duty h e mod his carat, Dot to avail himself of this indulgent offa. L.4W INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, TVESDAT, Nov. 23. The Court was this day crowded to excess to hear the decision IN Till MATTER 01 TOE REV. ALEXANDER ELETCHER. The Sottorrow.GLetnak was heard in continuance. The novelty of a case. lie insisted, was no argument against its reception or freshness in that Court. If this were so the eases he hail cited yes terday of Lady Howard and the Hammersmith Chapel, and Mr. Colman and the theatres would not be heard. There were various cues of patents in the same situation. A novel case was merely one, the major proportion of which hail never beihre come wider the cognizance of the Court. Example was nut a necessary ingredient in enabling the Court to come to a decision. II e would refer brictly to the subject, and he would feel himself justified, by its novelty, to one • few illustrations. As to the propositions advanced by Mr. Ilart, they would, if admitted, go the length of destroying all the jurisdiction of the ('ours. This jurisdiction, in the case before the Court, was fully admitted. This was decided in the cases of the Attorney-General and Fowler, and the Attorney-General and Pear son. It was well known that such interference formed the essence and characteristic of this Court; and as to the assertion that there was no jurisdiction here over the manner in which a person dis charged his pastoral duties---- The Loan t:/IANCELLos—There is here no such complaint. There was no difficulty in this part of the case. It was clear that persons were severely punishable in another Court it' they pre vented a pastor from ascending his pulpit and preaching. The only question was, as to his jurisdiction. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL—When he heard the arguments of the gentlemen opposite, he thought it right to look into the law in the subject, and he not only found that there was a right ofju rtsdiction over a chapel, but even over a pulpit and reading-desk. This right came under the cognizance of the common law ; and so far from its being time shadowy right as represented by .Ir. Hart. not tangible to an injunction; so tar from this being the ease that the right to a pulpy or desk is made the subject of an ejectment. It had been already tried and decided in the reign of James I. It is reported in Salkeld, in the case of llolinphed and Brewster. The executor of one brought an ejectment; and it was argued by the Attorney-General of that day that the plaintiff had no right to a possesslon. He was entitled to a right of entry for the purpose of preaching ; that no declaration could be tiled by him as tenant in possession, but that he could enter a special plea, claiming entry to preach. There was nut a similar instance since the time of James I. Therefore, when the gentlemen opposite said there was no authority over the pastor, they should recellect that the l'ourt of King's Bench granted to Dr. llolingshed, though lie did not claim the freehold, to right of entry. THU was recognized by the common still more properly would it fall under the jurisdiction of a Court of Equity, where these tender and incorporeal rights are more frequently discussed. Ile would rot extend his observations to the time of this suspension ; he would merely state that .Ir. Fletcher had bound himself by deed to be visitul by the Scotch Synod. Reasoning by analogy, he has placed himself in a similar predica ment and situation with those other institutions who choose their own Judges. and submit to their own visiters. It was a matter of perfect indifference to him whether the subject was nested of as a matter of trust or covenant within the jurisdiction of the Court, or a mere matter of conscience on the part of the 31inister. He would contend, that Mr. Fletcher, under the deed, was situated as any ' individual of a college would he who was subject to visitors. As to his being ignorant of the conditions of the deed, the affidavit of Mr. Elmsly proved Isis knowledge in the view he took of the case. There was one passage to which he would advert. The Loan CHANCELLOR—Taking it for granted that Mr. Fletcher is bound by the deed, is he not entitled as well to the beneits of it as to the obligation ; and lie much questioned whether he could free him from the obligation, though lie may be palpably I wrong. The SOLICITORGINEIIAL contended the case was made out by his own affidavit. The Lou, Cii ANCELLUR—M r. Fletcher's affit!avit is the best you have. 'Toe SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought so too. There were how ever other affidavits, all ch went to prove his personal submission to the Synod. The whole question was, whether he was bound by the trust which he accepted, and it was clear by every legal and conscientious principle that he was. He is himself a witness, and proves by his own testimony his own submission. ( Ilere the Learned Gentleman read the appointment of Mr. Fletcher: it stated that the general body gave a call to that gentleman.) lie was called by those to whom he was under subjection. This Mr. Fletcher him self publicly admitted. Ile declared that he was a member of this church; that he felt firmly persuaded and convinced that this es tablishment was the only right one. This he acknowledged. This was the gentleman who made this declaration (not certainly on his civil with), that he was a member of this institution ; that he owed it his allegiance and subjection. Ile did not state it upon his civil oath, but by an unequivocal pledge given in the face of the congre gation. Ile declared this church to be his grand judicatory. Ile admitted in facie rerksia that it had authority over hint. He did not make the declaration on his civil oath, but by a pledge which was held in that respectable body equivalent to an oatn. Arid now he (the Solicitor-General) was told the gentleman knew nothing of this body. He could prove it by many of his congregation, but he did not want these supplemental helps. The deed itself proved all. ile not only made this pledge, but he required it from all others who were admitted to the chapel. It was requisite that all those who were admitted to the congregation should niake the pledge of submission, and it was the duty of Mr. Fletcher to exact it. He did require it; and lie now wishes to throw of his subjec tion ; to repudiate this church; and his l'ounsel assert, according to their instructions, or perhaps to their invention, that he never bound himself to submit to the discipline or rule of this Synod. This was monstrous—this wes intolerable—this was not consistent with his exertions in the pulpit. These were, lie heard, eloquent and keened. It was admitted upon all hand.: that he had discharged all his duties as a gentleman and a scholar. Thus, therefore, Mr. Fletcher, it was evident, trout affidavits, was nut only bound to subjection higbelf, but he required the same from all those who became met of his congregation. Does he, in any part of his affidavit, deny his submission ? does lie deny toe making of these pledges?—No such thing. He apologised for taking up the time of the Court, but he would read a part of the original documents. Before the deed of trust was engrossed it was read by 31r.NV ilks, at a meeting of the congregation, and approved of by the 'tee. Gent. ; and he now comes forward to say that he looked upon it as of too tyrannical a nature to be obeyed. To this obedience he was bound though all the rides and institutions of the Synod were expressed is e Ise, and embodied in this document; and though he now complains, he read the deed to his congregation for the purpose of giving it validity and weight. slr. Fletcher was not in the %tete of a man taken by utonishinent or surmise. Ile had prescience ; he had pre-knowledge ; he was a member of other congregations before he became the pastor of 3loortields ; he was well acquainted with all the consequences of being subject to the grand judicatory of Scotland. The Scotch, he knew, were eminent for their meta physical knowledge; but lie believed the idea of having till the congregation bound and the pastor free; to have the deed an obli gation quoad the congregation, and none at all quued the pastor, was too metaphysical even fur therm Ile contended the defence was a libel on 51r. Fletcher; • contemptible equivocation, full of scandalous subterfuges; • rejection of the plain meaning of words. Such was his opinion of the notion that the pastor was not bound, and the congregation were, by the deed. The LORD CHANCELLOR-1f one of the congregation was guilty of a breach of promise of marriage, could the Synod drive hint front church fellowship? This was a question which was not answered. _ The SOLICITOR.GENERAL could not just then answer the question ; but his friend, Mr. Ilart, when he spoke of Algiers and Morocco, forgot that the members of the two Universities were go. serried in the same way. The LORti CHANCELLOR—As to the visitors of the Universities, the Court of King's Bench would make them perform their duty ; and If it was clear that the visitors were wrong, a new trial would be granted. Ile recollected one case, in which lie could not be mis. taken, as he was employed in it : the object was, to compel the Bishop of Lincoln to do a certain act. The question was asked, if the Bishop knew of the proceedings? an answer could not be given; and Lord 3lauslield said until this was answered, they could not decide. . . The Solite I TOR-Gt EitAL Whaled to impress upon his friend, klr. Hart, that the laws of some obscure and barbarous ports in the Mediterranean were those to which the members of the lllnlver sides were subject. There was no case which could be made out, of outrage, oppression, or error, which could authorise Mr. Fletcher to cast away his obligation, and throw ad his subjection to the in quisitorial power of the Synod. In the course of his argument, he looked upon the powers of the Synod as analogous to those pos sessed by the visitors of Corporations and Colleges. The resem blance wax not perhaps strict, but it was a fair analogr. Relying upon one of the prinapal :lumina of their own close, the question could Lot be said to be extended front the jurisdiction of the Court. Ile did not ask to have the darer of the Synod executed. The Synod was nothing here; it was nothing more in this Court than it was in Spain or Italy. Ile looked only to the deed; and this was as complete, as to the Synod, as it its entire code, its eor•pus, were comprised within its conditions. Mr. Fletcher, in his affidavit coo. cormeg the breach of promise of marriage, did not deny the powers of the Synod. Did he deny they possess the powers of suspension ? Did he deny that the power of suspension was as much in the Synod as that of appointing ? lie made no such denials; he merely said that be was excluded from the chapel, to the peat disquietude and uneasiness of the congregation, and to the injury of his own cal. runs, as he submits, in direct opposition to the rules and consti tution of the Burgher Associated Synod. Will he deny on his oath that he tendered the religious pledge to his congregation ? If he swore this, Mr. kletcher's character would be gone. His Court ed may argue the question lustily ; no language could be too strong fur them ; none could on this subject be too weak fur Mr. Fletcher. If these matter were denied on his oath by the reverend gentle man, he (the Solicitor-(leneral) would say, as a lawyer and a ;so '• Here are conflicting affidavits, let the balance incline in favour of Mr. Fletcher ;^ but there was no balance in the case. He blamed Mr. Fletcher for introducing the custruvcrsial word " submit," which hail no meaning whatever. The LORD Coactczt colt —Hoes aoy thing the Synod please amount to converse in conversation ? The Sot. tcyron.tlitu &Amt.—Mr. Fletcher. as an old member, should point out that the charge against him wit not nialverse. The LOUD (:eta\cEr.t.oa—lle isnot bound to negative it.. The SOL IC I T OnAlENEltat,—lt is 'won to alai a brooch of promiae amounts to eitalverae conversation. Thr LORD Cita sti.i:Lr.rin—A breach of any promise, or a breach of premise of marriage ? The Se Ivo it-GEN En at.—. There itt an affidavit that a breach of promise is considered, according to the ecclesisatic criterion of their church, as 'cottoning to bong malversc in conversation. This is sworn to; and if the person i•ttkwg this affidavit awese Abel!) THE BRITISH PRESS. he ought, and should he indicted for perjury. Uow was this business conducted? Mr. Fletcher, himself, brings it before the Synod, though he now denies the matter to he of an ecclesiastic nature. He never said to the alynod, You ars twisting and twining a civil with an ecclesiastic matter ; you have no cognizance here. He said no such thing ; he was himself the initiative of the affair. Ile makes his appeal to the Synod, that is to a body which he tells the Court has no competent jurisdiction ; and when this Synod. to which he appeals as to a Court, decides against him, he caste off their authority. and aflirnis the affisir is not within the reach or cireninfere lee of their jurisdiction. There are many cases existing at present in the Scotch Church, to winch the old English law bore a loving analogy. These laws or.ee brought offenders in this country within the pale of their authority. One was, if a per son was chiding, quarrelling, or brawling in • church during ser vice, it was lawful for the Ordinary to suspend him. This was law still, lie was nut transferring his argument from one church to another. This would lie at once bad law and bad logic. The argument was almost conclusive as to the old customs of both Churches. The assertion of the gentlemen op_ petite was, that the Court could not interfere ; it could not keep • layman nut of the Church. Ile 'hewed that tither layman or clergyman could be kept out, and the old pr.tcti'ze flowed in with the stream of his argument ; even the claim to a desk and pulpit were recognized by the inentnon Law ; still noire ought they to be admitted in Courts of I:quity, where this sort of possessory action cad alone be tried. As to the ecclesiastic law, a man, lie thought, maybe suspended without being heard. though he could not be deprived. - Here again he would argue from analogy : would not a person in this country be suspended if he did not appear ? lle cer tainly would. His personal presence was necessary ; and if a notice were necessary, which he would deny, hie. Fletcher him had it ? Does he deny he was convened? He canr.ot, for he was con. vened. Hoes he deny that the Synod has no pnwer to make an order in (threw= F This he does not, he cannot deny, for he well knows that universal law and reason are against him. He is there. fore bound, in every sense, by that order which he refuses to obey. A Clergyman can be suspended in England though lie possess the freehold, and the proper authority can fill tip the chasm. The right of suspension was included in the right of filling up the gap. In the course of his allotments upon this cause, there was no impediment placed in his way by his learned Friends : his road was perfectly smooth, as far as they were cone eerned ; it was not so with regard to the objections of his Lordship, though lie misted he would get over even these. His Lordship had nude an early objection to the deed, which stated that a Minister couhi rot be appointed without the con sent of the majority of the congregation. This he admitted to be true; but his proposition was, that this consent was not necessary to elect the intervening Ministers. Ile would look at this question as a lawyer, as a reasoner, and a logician, and he was ready to eihnit they had no right to elect perma nent clergy without such consent. Ity analogy the same case was here. In case of sequestration or absence, the proper authorities tnay appoint a Minister ; they could fill up the place of the absent, but they did not deprive. Such was the case before them. Mr. Fletcher was theoretically the hlinister ; lie held, to uses law phrase, in right of his old title. There was no legal appointment of intermediate Ministers; they were not called Ministers, they were merely ordered to go and preach ; there was nothing more. 'rimy had nu right to a salary, no rank or consideration as Minis ters ; they had a mere right of access to the chapel. to perform the duties upon thee,: grounds. Pc therefore hoped that the Court would see that this was within its jurisdiction, and grant the order for which he prayed. As to the objection arising frotn the proble matic injury that may be done to the property, it should also be re collected, that if judgment be passed only by decree, years may elapse, and complete ruin may be caused to the parties. The law, as laid down in the lords, would, he was sure, Le acted on in this use. That law would not suffer the dissidents, however numerous, to violate the original trust. There was some collusion—he would not use the wad offensively—he would drop the word altogether, and say there was a concert between Zilr. Fletcher and the trustees to take this chapel out of the original deed. hut he felt convinced this Court would grant his motion, and not suffer the parties to throw down the original decd. The LOAD Criasett.too—The question before the Court is not merely one of jurisdiction, but it must be also considered in reference to and as it regards the stage in which the subject is brought forward, and whether it comes under the notice of the Court, according to its admitted jurisdiction with regard to trust motions. He would not hazard the proposition, that unless this question was brought forward in this extraordinary way, unless it were brinight fors ard according to the regular mode of proceeding in the Court, this case would not sustain the order which was sought fi -. He would not say this now ; it was obvious from the nature of things that it would be a groan act of injustice to give an opinion on the filing of a bill, which should perhaps be contradicted on the issuing of a decree. There was no case exactly like this, either in reference to the , libject, the powers exercised by the Synod, or the covenant for the execution, and the time that the decree, if granted, should endare, namely, April, 1825. It will be obvious to all, that until the decree is granted the Court will not be deciding upon all the matters within its jurisdiction. To those who say. that if the injunction be not granted the suspension will expire bei're the decree is issued; and therefore the decree ought to be granted now, utile s the injustice of it were manifest and clear—in answer to ail:. objection, the Court would look at its other powers, anti act in this case as it did, for example, in the case of a tenant for life cutting down timber. If an injunction was ap. plied foe against this tenant, as having oo right to cut, and if he, the tenant, opposed the injunction, all the prate arising from the timber would be suspended in the interim, us no person could act for tenant for life atter his death. The Court would say, under these circumstances, let the timber be cut down and sold, and the ntuney lodged in Court. and it shall be given to the executor of the tenant for lite, if he die entitled to the receipt. There was another diffi culty in this case. The persons who came front Scotland to preach at this chapel were not, it was said, to receive any revenues from the chapel ; neither was it decided whether it was a charitable in stitution. Ile would grant, for the sake of the present argument, that the suspension did no: deprive Mr. Fletcher of his revenue; and if, as it was admitted, the successors received no salary, why should he interfere with the funds of the chapel ? In the case before him the suspension went to remove him from his duties, but not to deprive him of his revenue. The extent of this suspension would be to remove the Minister from his duties, though not from the benefits of them ; and the discharge of these arduous duties remained for the successor without revenue: this obstacle seas gotten rid of by arrangement ; but no arrangement could be made here; it was not possible to make it; the deed must be literally adhered to. If those successors refused to act without a salary, what was to be done ? He would therefore call upon all parties, if the Court deemed it necessary, to refuse this injunction, to consider and bear in mind the purposes for which the application was made. The Court was not called upon to pass a judgment upon these parties in a moral and religious point of view. From this it was relieved ;it was merely his duty to act to the beet of his judgment in regard to the evil rights ; it was not his panditl duty to view the circumstances submitted to the Court all connected with moral and religious conduct, with proper and temperate demeanor. This was not his painful duty. He would hot, therefore, state his opinions upon these matters, he would gladly pass them by. There were some other general judicial views which it was his duty to take. : t was known to all that there was an Act of Toleration in this country; by this Act all his 3lajesty's Justices and Magistrates were required to glee the benefit of the law to all Dissenters, provided they required nothing con trary to law. Ile adhered, in its fullest and most unlimited sense, to the law, as laid down by rite Lords in "the Attorney-General and Pearson." The principle there was, that when the majority were dissidents and wished to fly off; the minority may say, n You shall not fiy off with this property and apply it to other principles, except those mentioned in the deed." The dissidents, though the majority, had no power to change the deed, except they had a contract for the purpose. Al to the case in Bowe, they had a custom in Scotland. on which they set a high value, which was not known in this country—that if two persons claim a certain right, and neither does any act which gives him a claim, they can get to a Court for a deer, e to state who has the right. 'rite question was, who had a right to the management of the Burgher Synod ? The Lords gave no judgment, and he could never discover what became of the question. The &et question for hint was, what was the nature of the Synod, and what were the powers of the trustees ? At one period of the discussion lie w.:s inclined to think it abso lutely necessary to inquire how far the Synod was connected with she congregation, and how the Synud's decrees would be supported by the law of Scotland. Ile was now strongly of opinion that the inquiry was unnecessary t for no matter what the rules of the Synod may be, whether sanctioned by law or not. If they were not con trary to law, they should be observed according to the deed. Ile also was disposed to doubt whether Me. Fletcher was a party to the deed ; of that there could, however, be no doubt, when he con. sidereal his conduct before this unhappy controversy comment d. And whilst upon this subject, he could nut help declaring that there was no measure so necessary to maintain the peace and tran. quillity of the dissenting portion of the community than the greatest accuracy and correctness in the trust deeds under which they con structed their places of worship ; and be was astonished to fool this correctness was not more attended to; it would put an end to all unfortunate controversies. It would spate expense to the parties ; it would spare, be may say, the religious character of the country. By the deed, the quantum of salary wee left to the congregation. They could, if they pleased, place the Pastor in a must unplea sant situation. As to the powers alluded to in the deed, it required the experience of a long life to comprehend all those mentioned in the deed. It wins clear, that if a minister was suspended, he should at least be so aceneding to the conditions of the deed, and any of the congregation may say, we do not dissent from the sentence, but we haves right to see the settence passed according to the rules and iestitutions of the Synod. Of this Synod, he knew nothing, and as this suspension is admitted to be a' an end in April, the artier of the Coon would he merely a matter of costs, and not a mainlatory decree. He will not do, on an interlocutory decree, what he tray he obliged to retract upon better informatioti, if the matter came to a hearing. As to the property, he was not justified in in terfering ; there was no necesatty, as - he was informed that no reve nue was taken from the pester, nor was given to the preachers ; who came from Scotland. He would therefore leave this property to chance, if the matter should come to a hearing ; this may be be. Gore April, and then the Court would have it in its power to say that the suspension was right or wrong ; and if it were right, leave matters as they are. For these, and other reasons, it was the duty of the Court to refuse the injunction. This proceeding prevented no other right, it did not prevent the hearing of the cause. If any person thought that upon making this interlocutory order he judged uatevourably of any of the pantos concerned, he protested against the supposition. It was fit for hint in that chair to utter the senti ments of the individual man, but it was his rigbtand duty to speak Ins judicial sentiments ; and if the supposition to which lie alluded was funned, he protested against it. Ile had net made up his 'lliad shout the costa. lle would give ass opinion in a few days. VIOE-CIIANCELLOR'S COURT, Tt: E SDAT, Noe. 23. The Vece-CliswercLot was occupied the whole of the day in hearing arguments in causes of no public importance. COURT OF KINGS BENCH, TUMMY, N0v.23. WEBSTER R. MURDER. This was an action brought fur the infringement e• patent for percussion gun-lock. The Jury had found a verdict fur the plain tiff ; it the commencement of the Tern Mr. Brougham hail ob tsined a rule Nisi fur a new trial • and oo Friday last (see British P;rss of Saturday). Mr. F. Poll ock, Mr. Parke, and Mr. notch, showed cause against the rule, and Mr. Brougham was heard in vtippor• of it, but the Court rising, Naha argument was postponed to this day. Mr. litex now followed Mr. BRODGRAX. explaining to the Court the manner in which the defendant's lock differed from that specified in the plaintiff's patent; he contended that :he defendant's was .. great an iniKovenient on the patent one, as the patent one lite If was on the ~1,1 locks; ar.d therefore he trusted that the Court would grant a new trial. Besides, it was very evident that the Jury had been prejudiced against the defendant by reason of his adeertisentents, which were read at the trial. .The Lot:» Cu zEr JUSTICE—If tradesmen will puff their 'r acks, and there happen so be falsehoods in their puffs, they have no right to complain of others taking advantage of them, and turn ing them against themselves. Mr. 1111.x.—Such pufht mean no more than the words at the conclusion of a letter—" I ant your obetliznt humble servant." The Loan Clime Jur'. tcx—No, no, they are very different; you do not mean really to defend the practice, therefore don't at tempt it. Mr. Justice BAYLEY—The defendant surely dew not intend to come here and say that be has been irjured by his own misrepre sentations. _ . ➢lr. Hite. continued his argument, observing, that the invention of the defendant was one of great inger.uity, and such as was un known to the world before; besides waich, he contended that the plaintitra patent was void, as it claimed modes which it did not describe, and consequently the specification was bad. Chief Jestice !MOTT—The C.nirt is at present disposed to think that there ought to be a new the! on the point whether it was a new invention, that a bolt fur the purpose of keeping a revolving body on its axis, was not so generally known before, that the appli. cation of it to the machine then under consideration could be consi dered a novelty. At the trial perhaps the defendant might be pen. vidcd with further evidence, but for the benefit of that he must pay the costs of the last action. lie believed that the former Jury had been determined by the defendant's misrepresentation, which, at the trial, had been determined against himself. It' tradesmen would descend to such artifices, whatever might be said of them in other places, yet among grave men they could only be charac terised as contemptible for their meanness, and odious for their falsehood. Rule tie new trial niade absolute. THI: KING V. TUC VitOPRIZTORI OF TIM MOINIXO CHRONICLE. The AxxoawXY-Gxxiii•x --- a,,iied to the Court for an en. largement of the rule to show cause why a criminal information should not be tiled against the proprietor of the Miming Chronicle, fora libel on Mr. Kenrick, which appeared in that paper on the 7th of Augu.t. The grounds on which he made this application were, that the defendant had papers in the country which would enable him to show ramie on the merits, if he were allowed time to procure them. lie therefore requested that the rule might be enlarged till next term.. . . 31; . . Lis INEY assured the Court that there were rot the small est grounds for the application. The libels had appeared in the paper of the 7th of August. On the 9th the editor was applied to to give up the author, and he then said that he would not state who wrote the letter, but that the observations upon them were his own. Notice was then given that the proprietor would be pro ceeded against if he refused to declare who the author was. Under these circumstances, the defendant had full time to possess him self of any documents that he might consider necessary to his defence. Besides, he had often heard it Lid down in that Court by their Lordships, that where the editors of newspapers took upon themselves to insert libels, they should always have their justifica tion at hand. TIV2 LORD CHIEF JVIITICE—The Court certainly has often expressed that opinion. But how will Mr. Kenrick be injured by the enlargement of the rule Mr. tatx ET said that they would certainly be in a worse con dition, as the rule would then stand ia the peremptory paper. The Lour) Cm El JUSTICE—Then we will grant the rule on the understanding that it dues not go into the peremptory paper. Rule enlarged. The Court broke up at twelve o'clock, adjourning to the private chamber, to bear the arguments en'mlr. Fautitleroy's case. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, TUESDAY, Nov. 23. Vltava in Banco.) ILLC66 r. vrionic. This was an action brought to recover the amount of fifteen fat turkies sent by the plaintiff, • farmer, to the defendant, a poulterer at Leadenhall-market, on the 24th Iteannher 18'22. It was tried before the Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, at Guild hall, on Thursday last, and a nonsuit was entered. The declara tion contaiced a count for " goods sold and delivered," whereas the proof offered was, that the turkeys were sent fur sale on corn. mission. There was also a special count, but the plaintiflat the time did not open it. Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN—Sow moved for a rule to show cause why a new trial should not be had upon the payment of costs. The Cum, J car is E.—Thisca , e was before me previous to the trial, and I gave permission that the declaration might be amended, upon the condition that die defendant should demur. A consulta tion subsequently took place, and you proceeded to trial without amending your declaration, and had a nonsuit entered against you. I Under such circumstances, Ido not see how I can assist you. If I your client has any appetite to go on with the matter, lie must begin de novo. blr. Sergeant Vauc HAY—My Lord. I have no appetite but fur the fat turkies.—Rule refused. HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, No►. 23. THE SAN FERNANDA, ♦LIAS 11. VENTOROSO. ............ Sir C. Ituntssos moved for head-money to be granted for fifty-four men captured on board this ship u long back as De. comber, 1800. She had been eensidered a private ship of war, having a cargo of goods cn board ; and the question had been re served, on her condemnation, whether she was entitled to head money? Sir C. R. stated that the case had, through inadvertence, been omitted to be stated to the Court, aced cited several cases in support of his motion.—Motion granted. TII b APOLLO, Lord STOWELL said this was a case instituted by Mr. Daniel Tar Out againstlkilliam 'Ferment, of Belfast, and John Nesbitt, of Tokenhouse-yard, London. two co-partners in the vessel, Mr. Tarbut stating himself to be owner of three-eighths, the other I parties proprietors of five-eighths, and in which Mr. T. had prayed the ship to be distrained from going to sea, unless a sufficient in. was given to him that she would safely return d fr e o i: n ini a ty T o :y r:ti e ri gh t) ; was then about to make to India. The Court granted his prayer, and the security was entered into to that extent, and to that extent only, the citimated value of his shares being :WOOL. on the other side various proceedings have been taken, and a long account delivered, and various reasons assigned why payment should not be made on the bond, though the actual loss of the ship has taken place for which the bond had been granted ; his Lordship could not enter into the various proceedings in this ease: there has ucen too much redundant matter introduced into it ; but lie would refer at once to the question raised, whether the Court had jurisdiction to entertain the motion made in this Cafe, as upon the opinion the Court should form upon that question, the whole case must stand or fall. The practice of taking these steps for security, where one party dissented from the acts of another, were of considerable antiquity, and has been generally esteemed of thegreatest benefit to commere, and for that benefit, recognized by the general practice of law, and in the emphatic language used on a memorable occasion, was meant to provide, "that ships were made to plough the ocean, and not to rot in wharfs." The Court had the power to take the security for the safe return of the ship, on the prayer of Mr. Tarbat's petition. The bond was given for that purpose, and for that only; and this is the gist of the action. The hond is given for that purpose, and pro. vides no remedy for any Oilier mailer, save for the loss of the ship. In the course of the proceedings an attempt was made to induce the Court to extend its inquiries further. Allegations were made, supported by affidavits, and these were met spin by counter allega. Lions and counter-statements, which have enlarged the matter to a frightful extent. It has been said that the Commission of the Court gives foil authoir:y to investigate every matter consequent upon the granting of this bond. The Commission of the Court, however large its powers, is known to be limited in its operation by actual practice, and it nine; use re caution, lest it should step beyond the rounds prescriiml by it. Tile present enterprise is entirely of a novel nature, and no case adduced as prece. dent.. Connsel have only said, as a reason fur making their application, that there never was an instance in which an &milieu. tion was made to Courts of Law, and in which they have in terfeml with the Court of .kelionalty Why is it so ? but because this Court has kept within its ancient limits, and prevented the necessity of such an interference. The argument !night be tinkled to considerable weight if it could be shewn the Court had ever gone to the extent that they now wish it. Alice Roue further remarks, his Lordship, upon the whole, was of opiaion that the Court hail no jurisdiction left them, but to the extent granted by the bond. if the parties were aggrieved they must resort to another Cfnen. His Lordship then went into the circumstances of rile. Turbot's application to the Court of Chancery, and lie was of opinion that in doing so he had used no more than necessary caution. The suppression of some facts alluded to in former reports was not of a material consequence to the cause, as that Court had then stated when giving its final judg ment, and they did not reniatk upon their suppression. The question of coats was to be decided, which he should order to be paid to Mr. l'arbut, subject to tins reservation, that as Mr. Turbot had introduced various acts and matters not necessary, the Re gistrar should not include any of them; and his liuedalsip ob. served he would, in all future cases, take this mode of correcting the too general practice of introducing irrelevant matter into the proceedings of this Court. A beautiful brig, mounting fourteen guns, was but week launched into Loch Tay, at Milli'. She is the largest vessel that ever floated on the bosom of the lake, and is the property of Lord W.:mu-city. Pnr.rrN. lA t i aT T EL n i -N es 7,4 t 3 r A da ß v i a ) n E e N lelerly gend erm. • Li gave his name John Hall, was charged with privately steals„ certain number of a newspaper. t ium out of a public me:: room. The respectability of the accused, who possesses a very m e,. pendent property, together with the novelty of the charge 6e±.. attracted many persons to the of fi ce, all anx i ous to leans the re,,th. The complainant, Mr. Midiain Lunt. :4 proprietor of a well-regulated establishnient in tlerkenwell-green, generally ex t , by the name of " Lunt's Coif - v....house," but which is, in point L e fact, more deserving of the title of •• Literary Museum," al , addition to all the morning, etching, and weekly newspape r ,, 'ether with the various petio:lo7.l publications in liftman ad science, reviews, &c., there is a cl.oicelibeaty, and generally a el m , collection of readers. Aniongst the many frequenters of the rte ., was Mr. Ball, the accused, who having little else to do than to himself, daily continued to wade through at least one hundred twenty columns of the limes, Chronicle, Herold, British Conner, and Globe and Trnoelkr newspapers. toge t h er glance, en reaueent, at the Extarixer, swiday Tunes, 04 14 ., Life is boob'', Jugs Dull , Observer, and Pierce Rees content with the immense board of politics and fashion—of seem and outrage—of law and police—of muketa and maniaTe—aii all the other miscellanea to be found in the columns of a Load, newspaper, the greater pan of which he thus crammed eels brain, this determined news-hunter thought fit at various tees t pocket the well-read sheet, perhaps with the view of m0n00 0 4e.,. to himself alone the privilege of intellect ua l knowledge. 6, 4 d r i l a Times vanished, the next perhaps a Herald disappeared; nn ensuing there was no such a thing as a I've:. to be had, and Clo,. nicks evaporated like mists before the morning sun. subscribers, many of whom relish a newspaper much as,, than either tea, toast, or muffins, began to grumble irr aa their favourite prints were not forthcoming ; and the conseque ia , was, that the proprietor, sooncr than disappoint the subseribsa was obliged on such occasions, to endeavour to make good the de helmets ail his files by purchasing fresh copies or the eir'za numbers, which was not stove attended with great expense. La often with great trouble, as newspapers are (like all other this o , scarce in proportion to their value. To guard against depr e d,„, of this nature, a close watch was act on suspected individuals, sot at length, the old gentleman at the bar was surprised nth 11, whok Druids Press stuffed into one of his coal pickets. Wha t t sa r discovery was nude, the proprietor remonstrated with bin, N impropriety and unkindness of the act, but ro further promdinp were taken at that time ; in less than a month after, a /heal was intercepted in the same quarter, and this outrage being (heed of too gross a nature to pass unpunished, the party offendixia i , forbid the rooms ; however, he f oun d hi s way in once oat under a solemn promise of making his head the only deput e , for those tempting trifles; so long as this pledge was kept rm. late, all went on right, but as most men have sonic so an inordinate love fcr news proved poor Mr. Ball's mistonQ. Yesterday morning, afttr reading a Chronicle from the head tie imprint, lie very mechanically or methodically fobbed it; levet, a person whose patience was nearly exhausted in waiting tee is very paper, saw the transaction, and mischievously reported thaw. to Lunt, who, as in duty bound, brought the case befott Sergeant Sellon for adjudication. 1 he prisoner, in defence, did not deny the face, but endestreal to put in a plea, if not of justification, at least of mitigative. It saying, that after* newspaper was read, it was worth no menthe so much foul paper, and as such, he had taken it. Mr. Lunt denied that principle is tato, and added, that if my man in the world read 40 inveterately as he (Mr. Hall) did, cat value of newspapers never conk' be suhicieutly estimated. Several persons present spoke to Mr. Hall's general respecsibili:/ and worth of character. The Magistrate observed, that though Mr. tart, as them. prictor of a reading.ruom, had a right to Icok to these mitten. ic2 the intrinsic value was not so great as to call fur very ions proceedings. However, if Mr. Hall was ever again remitted e use the rooms, he (the Magistrate) would recommend him m bring nothing away but that which he hall got into his head. With this admonition, the ease was thaeharged, afar ezatir much merriment. MARKETS. [From the imams New Price Carreat, N0v.0.1 COTTON.—A revival in the Liverpool market has led :a ars ncwed demand for Co:ton here, and upwards of 12,001 bales ban changed hands : all descriptions hare participated in the dewed, but Pernams and Egyptians have had most attention, and are fully id per lb. hig her; the advances on India is generally about id. The following are the sales the week :—.1,01/0 Egyptians 'lid and good lair quality, 10d. a Bid-, duty paid; and in hoed, 5,510 Pernams, 11 id. ordinary, Ildi. a I lid. ; fan and good,' fee 124 40 Bourbons, 94 d. ordinary, to I Idi. good fair ; 2,5UU Strata. Sri. very ordinary, to 6id. a Gilt. good, and Gid. very good • 2,206/34.5. gals, s[d. very ordinary, and Sid. good ; 750 Madras,fl[d. fair. 6fl. good; 140 Orleans. n[cl. a 101 d. tuildling to fair; 2t' Boweda, lid. ordinary, to Sid. good fair. The 'renal from Wasps state there had been a brisk demand fur Cotton in that market let week ; the sales amounted to upwards of 1,700 bales, at an saran of id. to id. per lb. Errs:irons., Nor.S. . . I Our Cotton market became very lively on saturday, aviator brisk demand from the dealers and spothers, as well as from spar.' Woes. This inquiry has been kept up throughout the whole of tar week, and we quote an advance of id. per lb. in the prices (Ida." , man d.I per lb. in Braid, and id. per lb. in Egyptian Com. About 7,000 bags American, 1,000 Brazil, and 2.000 Eg►p ins, are calculated to have been taken on speculation. The total sale amount to 26,550 bags. SCGAR.—The Sugar market during . last week was study; there was no alteration whatever in the prices of Muscovaeles. fit Sugar market this forenoon was atet.dy, considerable purchases woe reported; there was no alteration whatever in the prices: geterily the market had a languid appearance. The purchases of Relned last week were considerable, particularly in the grocery dcsair. tions; fine crushed were scarce, and in request. Molasses, 265. 6J. There is some demand this morning for export to the Merthyr'. nears, chiefly for crushed ; low goods continue in steady reqant. Molrsses rather higher, free buyers at 265. 6d. In Foreign Supd the sales reported are quite inconsiderable. By public sale r. Friday, 90 chests Havannah Sugars were Dearly all takes in, Ira white, 38s. lid. and COFFEE.—The Coffee tnarket last week was very heavy; di quantity of St. Domingo brought teraanl to sale, with the cipated arrivals, occasioned a very dull market, bet the prices a net give way; ordinary sold 38s. and :ills. Berbice acd Pe. weans, of middling and finer descriptions, gave way tics per cwt.; there was r.o alteration in the prices of the onatcy qualities. Jamaica and all other Coffee fully supported the go vious currency ; the Market, however, was heavy. The intt:g sale this forenoon consisted of 7U casks !labia Coffee, s hich lot week rated so low. The whole went Mr at prices 2s. ut Ir the former currency; good middling, 'Ns. lid. and 915.; pis! to tins middling, 9ts. lid. a 935.; generally the Coffee market may be stated heavy, but no reduction in the prices, except in tine Denim. rare and Berbice, which are Bs. a 10s. lower on account of the arrivals, and having, from the late scarcity, rated higher than any other description of Coffee in this market. FRUIT.—On Wednesday two sales were brought forward; the first consisted of old Currants, the whole of which were taken is front 98s. a 102 s. ; the other, a very considerable one, of mina sorts, as follows :—Garoons in barrels 735.; Blooms in boxes *.; 3luscatels on bunches in boxes lows., halves IttOs. to 1035., gas ten 110 s. a 113 s. ; Malaga Figs taken in at its.; uts. was offered: for the common AI uscatels there were no offers; Prunes Ls. a Os. French Plumbs, quarter chests, Ms. a 78:11.; half chests, 531 : Imperial Plumbs in small boxes 120 s. a 1275. ; ditto in cartoon lulls. ; very little of the Span:sh Fruit offered at this sale xppesel to have been sold. A cargo of Currants was old last week, Ear at about 935. a Vs. ; Cephalonia 98a.; and another cargo isnown tap to the trade at 98, ; Pekin's' In boxes continue to rarer, , brik sale • Denies in baskets do not go off quite so finly. tO, Fruit generally there is a fair demand, but the quantity which t 4• tinues to be exposed to public sale, intimidates the haven fn'' corning forward to purchase more than sutficieot fur their Ken: demand. OlLS.—There is little doing in Fish Oil; it is anticipatni ilm heaviness will continue till a great proportion of the Oil ishoikd and brought to market ; there is no alteration in the earning. Linseed is rather lower ; Rape 10a. higher, and a considevels in crease in the demand for the Letter. HEMP, FLAX, AND TALLOW.—There is a oonsidendif increase in the demand for Tallow ; the new way to-day betBb 46 !' 33s a 355. 3d. free on board BM, 275. bid. a 28s. The reques.f,t Hemp has rather given way. In Flax there is no alinstioa ti; notice. RUM, BRANDY, and HOLLANDS—Then have hoes les purchases reported in Runt lately; the holders wait with souo anxiety for the event of the Government contragi today, as it !- regulate, in some measure, the future currency. Brandy contiv.r . to be held with great firmness, and to advance; parcels hntoe must now be quoted Its. Od. a Its. 10d. There are no sales of Ce• neva lately reported. The Government contract was taken tb's forenoon at Is. 3d. 3-3ths per gallon, all by one house. IRI SI I PROV IS lONS.—The Provision market is very fr•r and there is some appearance of a further iniprovar.ent- Tr' prices of Baron are maintained. The stocks of Butter an la! limited; Waterford has bold at 100 s. BIRTHS. At Tunbridge Wells, an the 21st insuot, the Hon. ]le. Mackenzie, of a son. Lately, at Logte House, N. 11., the lady of Charles Stuart II ay, C.H.C. of a sun. 31ARRIED. P On Thursday, the Illth inst. at Liverpool. P. 3 1 . Regrt. F.R.S., of Beaters-veva. to Mary, utly daughter oi Jowl! Hobson, Esq., of Liverpool. 1/IEII. On the 13th instant, at Chasm George Fred. Sch."le/ E I C . his 76th year, atter a long and ratntni On the 13th instant, atzer a lingering inners of three yam. sixty.four, the wife of Thomas rrtutluird„ Esq. 1t.A.1" 01 N4'. MOH WATER THIS DAY AT LONDON 11811► at _naming 10 min. after 4. I Afterna Itt I Pruned at THE BRIT Is E. 4 S ()Hire, by J. W.CAste s, 1111, Stand, sad publiebol by H. Catixo.ll, ewe riot. ; (il' ; i p' wil the Dit Tu