The Sun. — London, England, 1836-11-24 00:00:00

- - PRICES OF STLICKS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. 1 Bank Stock. 202 1% , India Stock 254% 3 per Cent. Red. 5614 % i Ditto Ponds 3 per Cent. C0n5......... 87 1 #4 7 % South Sea ,I nek --- 3% per Cent. - Ditto Red 941A1,4 % j New Ditto ---- New 3% er Cent 93,13%ii % , 3 per Cent. Annuities 1751... ----' New 3 per Cent --I E x ch. Bills, £l,OOO 53 5 pr'• Bank Long Annuitiesto expire Ditto 500 5 3' 5 pm. Jan. 5, 1800 l4 9 - 16 % Di tto Small Oct. 10, IASO l4 5-16 j Ditto Commercial ............ .....--. . par Jan. 5. 1860 -- Ditto Advertised ............ Pm- Jan. 5, 1e.80......., -Bank Stock for Account...-. •• --- Mlril 5, IRS') -- India Stock for Account ......... Jan. 5, 1870 -- Consols for Account...... 67 N,!,41,4 ommum pm. PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS Austrian Bonds ................... Belgian Bonds .................... THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. Peruvian Bonds Ditto Account Portuguese Bonds — Ditt o Accolint — Ditto New Bonds 49 814.% Ditto Accoucent. nt 49it S 3o i 9 S3II Ditto, :3 per Prussian Bonds — Russian Bonds, 1822 lO7 Ditto _Account .... I Ditto Metallic — , Spanish Bonds — Ditto Account . i Ditto Bonds, 1831 . Ditto Account t7,',4 IS 17Mit - , French, 5 per cent. .... ..... —f. —c. .1 --- 4 per cent. f —c. Ditto Account . ......... Brazilian Bonds . .................. Ditto Account Buenos Ayres Bonds Ditto Account Chillian Bonds Ditto Accoun t Columbian Bonds Ditto Account Columbian Bonds, !WI ...... Ditto Account ........ Danish Bonds .......... Ditto Account Greek Bonds Ditto Bonds, 1`2.5 Ditto Account Mexican Bonds, 5 per cent — Ditto Account Ditto, l per cent....... •••• Ditto Account Neapolitan ......................... 2 per cent.. —f. —c. Exchange —f Dutch, 9.4 per cent 9. Ai 3 Ditto Account Ditto, 5 per cent 99 1 ,E Y 2 Ditto Account PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK. Paid. P er Share, Cata Branca Mining C om p an y Dublin and Kilkenny Railwa y Company Eastern Counties Railway 1 0 3 /. Brighton (Cunds's) 3 1 3 4 London and Greenwich hallway Company 24 20 % s i :Manchester and Leeds Railwa Company M anches t e r South Union Rail ' Company 2 73 4 Provincial flank of Ireland 25 2 3,4 PRICES pRICEs OF IRISH STOCKS, DUBLIN, NOVEMBER 22. 3 per Cent. Consols ......... B7 IGrand Canal Deb,. 6 per cent. 87% Ditto Reduced — Ditto, 4 per cent — 3 1 4 per Cent. Stock 93% Hibernian Bank Ditto New, 18:30 - 3‘ . , , per Cent. Debentures 89% i National Insurance Co -- Bank Stock — I City Debentures, 4 per cent... Royal Canal Stock. — : Ballast Office Debentures, 4 G rand Canal Stock 26 4 per cent Arrived. Due. 0 America 0 n Rrazil 0 0 BanosAyres._ 0 Carthagena I Dublin... 0 Flanders MAILS. Arrived. Due. Arrived. Due, 0 France 1 0 Lisbon 0 I Guern.&Jersey 0 0 Malta 0 Hamburg 0 0 Mexico 1 0 Holland 0 Jamaica 0 0 Sweden 0 0 Leeward Islands 0 I Waterford 0 HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW. ...... 19 minutes after 3. I Evening ..... .35 minutes after 3. HAMBURGH, Nov. 15, 1826. OUR Friends, and all those who may have to write to us, are requested to be particular in directing, HEINE BROTHERS, in fIAtBURGH, and to observe, that a letter with one inclosure doubles the Postage only, but several enclosures would by far increase the same. Thus 10/., 201., or 3012; for instance, if remitted in One Bank of Eng land Note would only cause double Postage, but 101. remitted in two notes, would be liable to a much higher charge. It is there fore most advisable, for any Person having to remit Money to Ham burgh, to forward the amount in One Note; or having to receive Money from llamburgh, to receive the same in One Note, when ever possible. Of course remittances from Hamburgh to England, surpassing the usual amount of One Bank of England Nete, may rather be made in Bills of Exchange, on London. To save expenses that may as well be avoided, we request our Correspondents not to overlook these particulars. HEINE /BROTHERS. The publication of THE SUN NEWSPAPER commenced this day at 10 minutes past Three o'clock. c?... • • • - (-77 T-r L„, ) • LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING. NOVEMBER 24, 1636. The Paris Journals of Tuesday have just been re ceivcd. The following extracts from them include al they contain of any importance : PARIS, Nov. 22. TELEGRAPHIC DISPATCH. BAYONNE, Nov. 19, 7 P.m.—Gomez was on the 7th at Berstinga, appearing to he proceeding towards Cordova ; Hodil was on the 9th at Medelin ; he has been replaced by Narvaez, who is invested with the Command-in-Chief against Gomez, and who was at Navalmoral on the 10th. The firing against Bilboa was not yet opened. Espartero was expected to arrive on the 18th at Portugalettc, where he will find the English fleet. SECOND EDITION.—The order for setting at liberty Prince Polignac and M. Guernon de Ranville was signed yesterday. On leaving Ham, the Prince (as has been said) will go to London, and Sri. Ranville to his e,tate near Caen. Tho news from Madrid is limited to some account of the sitting of the Cortes on , the 12th.—La Pala-, Nov. 22. The war in Spain is essentially a way of principles. The strife is nominally between the partizans of Don CA rums, and the supporters of Donna ISABELLA 11. ; but in reality betwixt the principles of absolute and representative government. In the triumph of the QUEEN all impartial persons behold the downfall of the divine right principle of regal absolutism in Spain : whereas in the ascendancy of Don CARLOS they witness only the re-establishment of monarchical despotism. Had this not been the view of the ques tion taken by Great Britain, France, and Portugal, at the death of FERDINAND, we should never have heard of such a document as the quadruple treaty. It is not to be supposed that the people of England care one jot whether Don CARLOS or his Royal Niece sway the Spanish sceptre, as far as regards these illustrious per sonages individually. Ours is not a soil in which the divine right principle was ever allowed to strike deep its baneful roots. We have, therefore, no sympathy with either side, so far as relates to the mere possession of the Crown. Our sympathies are all in favour of the people—in favour of a Representative Government, and free and enlightened institutions. Of such a Government and of such institutions the QUEEN is the symbol, and therefore has England, in common with France and Portugal, guaranteed to her the right of wearing the regal diadem. It is ridicu lous to contend—as some shallow wiseacre in the Times of this morning has done—that the change s which have taken place in the internal Government of Spain render that treaty no longer binding. We ra ther suspect that this scribbler, who aspired to the place of an editor, but whose absurd communication is very properly labelled " From a Correspondent," neither read the treaty itself, nor knows the date of its ratification. Had he read the treaty he could not be guilty of assuming the right of Eng land to call that rebellion, which the QUEEN has sanctioned as an act of devotion to her person, her peopl e , and the Throne of her august daughter ; and did he know the date of the ra tification of that document, he could not be such a dolt as not to be sensible that neither of the High Con tracting Parties could anticipate the stability of an in ternal administration, then in an actual state of total subversion. Not only was an internal change antici pated, but England herself had suggested, and in some sort superintended such change, by means of her Am bassador at the Spanish Court. It is quite true that our Government was not prepared for the proclamation of the Constitution ; but as the excess was on the side of liberty, and as the Spaniards themselves only sought a tangible guarantee for their independence, the diffi culty ended with the QUEEN'S solemn recognition of that charter of freedom. The Constitution was in effect a declaration of the very principles of which the QUEEN was the representative, and for the maintenance of which the Quadruple Treaty was agreed to on the part of England, France, and Portugal. It' was, there fore, a confirmation, rather than abrogation, of that treaty. Instead of absolving England and France from the obligations it imposed, it tended to render them more binding. But it is useless to appeal to the equity of nations in opposition to proximate interests. We will there fore only regard the Spanish question as one involving, to a very great extent, the interests of Portugal and France. In both these kingdoms the reigning Sove reigns have to contend against the claims of rival aspirants to the regal dignity. As the Republican party were rather noisy in France at the commencement of the Constitutional struggle in Spain, the citizen- Sovereign covertly espoused the cause of Don CAR- Los. His MAJESTY trembled for the safety of his dynasty, and dreaded lest the triumph of the QUEEN would compel him to make certain concessions to the THE SUN., LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1836. to reduce taxation ; discountenance jobs and sinecures ; supply the poor with cheap and expeditious law ; with cheap and nutritious knowledge ; and a variety of other cheap and valuable articles, " too numerous" — as the trade placards say—" to mention within the limits of a band-bill" ? Above all, have they not been constant in their reprobation of the eight hun dred millions of debt with which the late war saddled all classes—the poor especially—of the community ; and equally loud in their anathemas against the mas sacre at Peterloo, where the poor were slaughtered by scores ? Really, when we come to number up all these acts of Conservative benevolence towards the productive classes, we are not so much surprised that a few Operatives should be in their favour, as that the great majority should be against them. But the dullness--to say nothing of the ingratitude—of human nature in the aggregate, is proverbial. Legislate in as liberal and enlightened a spirit as they may, and as they have ever done, still the Conservatives cannot persuade the mass of the working classes to recognise them as their benefactors. They will persist in think ing (the benighted wretches ! ) that Toryism is their natural enemy, even though Mr. BRIGHT CROSS takes such pains to convince them to the contrary. We have not yet heard to what extent the landlord is a sufferer by the late Operative blow-out at Chorley, but have some reason to believe that he has been vic timised to the amount of a dozen half-pint porter pots. It is not true, however, that he missed any silver spoons, for those in use were pewter. The Archbishop of Dublin has incurred the displea sure, and " something more," of the Tory Journalists, for prohibiting NOLAN, the notorious reviler of Ca tholicism and Catholics, from holding forth in any pulpit within the sphere of his jurisdiction. We con- gratulate Dr. WIIATELY on this additional testimony to his meritorious services in the cause of truth, peace, and charity, and we ardently wish that every bishop in Ireland would follow his example in discouraging every attempt to inflame sectarian prejudices and produce social disorder, whether such attempt proceed from the ignorant zeal of honest bigotry, or the calculating spe culations of the cold-hearted hypocrite, with whom that religion is ever the best which holds out the best prospect of worldly preferment. The assailants of Dr. WHATELY are compelled to resort for weapons to their usual magazine of misre presentation and calumny. They cannot allege that the Archbishop of Dublin has exceeded his autho rity in this case—has done anything that he was not fully warranted to do by the laws and canons of the Church. They must even confess that he has acted leniently—as was to be expected from his truly Christian character—towards the fire-and-faggot mis sionary of the Tories, who had transgressed those laws and canons by preaching in the Diocese of Dublin without the Diocesan's permission first had and ob tained, and had thereby incurred a penalty. This sea sonable interposition of the Archbishop's authority cannot be questioned on the ground of its illegality ; but, perhaps, it was an unusual exercise of eccle siastical jurisdiction ? Here they are met by the un pleasant fact, that it is far from being a rare practice in the Church of England, and that the much-bepraised Dr. MAGEE, Dr. WHATELY'S predecessor, and father of the Rev. Gentleman whose pulpit was to have been defiled by NOLAN, thought it his duty to guard the pulpit against the intrusion cf clergymen, of whose principles he did not - approve. Such being the case, the organs of the " ascend ancy" faction vent their rage against Dc. WHATELY'S motives. Nothing, say they, could have induced him to act as he has done, but a desire to promote the inte rests of the Catholic religion, and to sacrifice those of Protestantism. This is the cry which has been al ways raised against the best friends of the Pro testant cause—those who, being persuaded that Protestantism is agreeable to the word of God, will not use any weapons in i s defence which arc not only not sanctioned, but positively and emphatically for bidden by that word. Dr. WHATELEY has himself written, and written powerfully, against what he believes to he the errors of the Church of Rome ; but he has used argument, not invective. His appeals are to the law and the testimony, not to the evil passions of men. What is it that occasions so much animosity and rancour between the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, but the abuse in which many so-called Protestants and Pro testant clergymen too indulge towards the Catholic re ligion ? To revile a system of faith is surely not the way to recommend to its votaries the system of the reviler. On the contrary, it not only kindles the passions, and undermines the basis of social intercourse, but never fails to shut the heart against conviction. Let the O'SumAvANs, the NOLANS, and all such vaga bondizing scamps, whose trade is to disturb the pub lic peace by stirring up religious rancour, if their mouths cannot be altogether stopped, be confined to their own cribs. The Times, we perceive, is very angry that a charge of apoqacy should be brought against NOLAN, because he has forsaken his former religion. When a man re nounces either his religious or political opinions from in terested motives, such an one deserves, and, the Times knows well, receives the name of an " apostate." The Advices from Portugal received this morning are not of a later date than those referred to in this Journal of yesterday, namely, to the 16th inst. The publication of a Royal Decree suspending the ope ration of the 34th Article of the Charter, which declares that Secretaries of State are not eligible to be elected as Deputies to the Cortes, ex cited neither murmurs nor uneasiness. At Braga, a conspiracy in favour of Don MIGUEL has been dis covered, which has led to the imprisonment of several influential individuals. The QUEEN was in good health, and appeared daily in public, accompanied by Prince FERDINAND. brave men of July, whom he perfidiously robbed of those rights which he swore to maintain intact and in violable. The consequence has been that Don CAR LOS has latterly obtained some paltry advantages, which his partizans regard as the prelude to the utter destruction of the QUEEN'S cause. Now, we are firmly persuaded that the cause of the Pretender is as hopeless now as it was three years ago. We are quite confident that he will never ascend the Spanish Throne during the life-time of Donna ISABELLA 11. But assuming for an instant that he were to triumph, what would the result be to France ? We will answer this question openly, and without having re come to a figurative mode of expression. The im mediate result would be the downfall of the Orleans dynasty. The Royalists are already preparing for such an event. If Don CARLOS triumph, Louts PHILIPPE goes into exile. These events stand to each other in the relation of cause and effect. Here then is a bright prospect for the Citizen King. His sons, now failing to obtain the hand of Princesses, may then look forward to an alliance with Illyrian shepherdesses, if such nymphs are to be found in the neighbourhood of Goritz. The triumph of Don CARLOS, assuming it pos sible, would not be less fatal to the cause of freedom in Portugal than to the Orleans dynasty in France. The Holy Alliance would find in that Prince a proper in strument to prepare the way for the re-appearance of Don MIGUEL, who would then find little difficulty in paralyzing the efforts of a Government carried on by intrigue, and ignorant of the operation of the principles which alone can procure for it the support of the people. England too would suffer in her honour by such a catastrophe. The triumph of Don CARLOS would be regarded by Spain as a victory over Great Britain. It is the excess of folly to doubt this. But the partizans of the PRETENDER here have never paid any regard to the national honour. They delight in the humiliation of their country ; and they have ever done so, except on those occasions when England leagued herself against the rights of mankind. What we then would recommend to our Govern ment is a more active co-operation in favour of the QUEEN. We cannot conceal from ourselves that we are actually engaged in this struggle, and we certainly would fail to make the PRETENDER believe that the part which we have already taken has not ex ceeded that of a strict neutrality. From the waters of Spain our ships have fired upon his troops, and our armoury has been thrown open to supply his enemies with the instruments of his destruction. It is therefore our interest to unite with Spain in crushing him, and thus compel LOUIS PHILIPPE to adopt a more liberal policy, without exposing his Majesty to the certain deposition which his own blindness would bring upon him. The QUEEN'S cause must even tually triumph, and therefore in accelerating it we only deliver France from the Royalist conspiracies which are now rife in every pact of that kingdom. LOUIS PHILIPPE has no real supporters in France. The Republicans are his deadly enemies—and their enmity is just. The KING basely and infamously betrayed them. The Royalists are equally inveterate against him. They behold in him only an usurper—the son of a man v,liose wickedness drenched France in the best blood of her children. To whom then must he look for support ? The Doctrinaires '—the party which boasts that it professes no principle but ex pediency, and tests all political duty by interest alone. Why the very bond of this party is selfishness, and it glories in parading it. Is it then to be expected that the Doctrinaires—that men who, with the instiuctiveness of rats, are ever foremost in quitting the sinking side—would for once forego their main rule of action in favour of a Prince in whose gratitude they could not trust, and in whose promises they could place no confidence ? Impossible. We are fairly compromised in the Spanish question. This cannot be disputed. We have declared in fa vour of the QUEEN. This is equally incontestable. We therefore beseech our Government to take more active and efficient means to put down the insurgents. Why passively suffer England to bear the disgrace of even partial reverses in Spain ? We have the means of putting down Don CARLOS at our disposal—we have pledged the national faith that he shall not reign in Spain ; wherefore, then, look on unmoved, while blood is flowing in every direction ? Every day that the war continues, diminishes the moral influence of England on the Continent. An Operative Conservative Association dinner, which was prefaced by a procession consisting of a few score half-starved mechanics, bearing flags made out of the superannuated flaps of calico shirts ; and a dozen or two greasy musicians, with jaws as lank and hollow as the sides of their own fiddles, and of a most vulture like, carnivorous expros3ion of . eye, took place on Monday last in the manufacturing town of Choricv. The dinner was announced for an early hour, hut did not take place till five o'clock, in consequence of the majority of the procession halting to sniff up the sa voury fumes of every cook-shop they passed, greatly to the annoyance of their more dignified leaders, whose stomachs rumbled their dissatisfaction at such de lay in very audible terms. We do not learn that the shops were shut, which is surprising, considering the valuable nature of the stock con tained in many of them ; but we do happen to know that not a nose was seen in the streets through which the fragrant procession wound its way, but what was tightly grasped between its proprietor's thumb and ' fore-finger. By singular good luck, however, a brisk wind sprung up, shortly after the ragamuffins had reached their place of destination, which prevented the necessity of the inhabitants fumigating the town, as was originally intended. The speeches delivered at the dinner were worthy of those who made them, and of the audience to which they were addressed. A few of the more elaborate passages betokened a distant acquaintance with gram mar ; but by far the major portion of them belaboured poor PRISCIAN'S head so cruelly, that the sage could not have been worse treated had he fallen in with a party of rollicking " boys" at Donnybrook fair. The chief orator was a Mr. THOMAS BRIGHT CROSS, who threw off a frantic harangue, filled with abuse of Lord MELBOURNE, for having " by the most factious and unprincipled conspiracy that ever disgraced the conduct of public men, forced himself into his SO VEREIGN'S Councils, with an overwhelming majority of one House against him." This splendid burst of sarcasm clearly shows that Mr. CROSS IS as bright in intellect, as he is by name. We would advise him, however, in future, to rely less on invention and more on truth in his statements ; for the satire that is bot tomed on falsehood, however pungent and Juisuus like it , may b e , i s very apt to cover t h e sat i r i st w i t h ridicule, rather than the object satirized. Mr. BRIGHT CROSS—and a brighter cross never g littered in the h eavens before the eyes of a Ca emptied the vials of his wrath " %Vhig a nd s omet hi ng tholic Saint — having E, next went on to praise on Lord MELBOUR NE , themore" Ex-Chancellor, as being the noblest specimen of p o liti ca l huma nity now extant. On this the oper a ti ve Conser vatives cheered with all their might—and no wonder ; for if they have an atom of reflection left them, they cannot but see that it is to his L or d s hi p and those who act with him, that twhelymarearethe poor indebted for or all the blessings they enjoy. man's friends, if not the Tory party ? Have they not given him a Church for his own express benefit ? Have they not ever been foremost CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY. MASTER BROUGHAM. The LORD CHANCELLOR, upon taking his seat this morn ing, stated that on Monday last, as he was about to rise, he was addressed by a gentleman from the bar, stating that he was the Committee of a lunatic, and that, in communica tion with Master Brougham on the subject, he had not had that reception which he considered himself entitled to. The Master had very properly sent his Lordship the whole particulars of the case, which his Lordship thought most proper to be publicly stated, as it was of the utmost impor tance it should be known the committees of lunatics met with no impediments in their communications with the officers of the Court. From what the Master stated, there could be little or no doubt that the gentleman who made the ap plication to the Court was Captain Saumarez. The Mas ter stated that he found the last proceeding which took place in the lunacy, was in January, 1836, since which time no communication of any importance had taken place—no ap plication had been made since, either in public or private by Captain Saumarez. On Monday last, however, a gentleman came into his room, and began to address him, when he begged of him not to interrupt the case that was going on ; at the same time stating that if he wished to have any communication with him he might see him by calling again. The gentleman replied that he only wished to present him with a pamphlet, which he did. That pamphlet appeared to have been written by a Captain of the Royal Navy ; and had attached to it the initials R. S., which the Master believed to be those of Captain Saumarez. This was the only time he had seen the Captain, except during the discussion in the lunacy last year. Such were the statements of the Master of what had taken place, and his Lordship thought, therefore, that Captain Saumarez must be under some misapprehension as to the conduct of the Master. Mr. K. PARKER stated that he appeared for Captain Saumarez, who had instructed him to state that nothing was further from his intention than to offer the slightest insult to the Master, or to influence in the slightest degree the course he should adopt. He went to the Master to communicate with him, as he considered he had a right to do as a Committee of the Lunatic. He requested the Master's clerk to take in his card to the Master in order that he might see him, the clerk at that time stating that the Master was totally disengaged ; the Captain again re quested him to take in his card, which the clerk declined, again stating that the Master was disengaged, and he might see him if he went into his room, and the Captain then did so. Such were the circumstances under which Captain S. had presented himself to the Master, merely with the view of presenting him with the pamphlet, and not for the purpose of interfering with the decision in the lunacy. After which the Master's Clerk had told him he did not consider he was interrupting any other cause. The LORD CHANCELLOR was glad that Captain San marez had made the communication he had done, as he (the Lord Chancellor) felt sure there had been some mistake. The COURT then proceeded with the lunatic petition of ex-parte Lyon, the arguments in which appear likely to occupy the whole day. VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.) CONTEMPT.-MACCULLOCH V. WALKER. Mr. JACOBS appeared this morning in this case (in which .t will be recollected Mr. Walker was ordered to attend personally before his HOIkOUR, to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt in carrying of Miss Mac culloch, a ward of the Court), to request, on behalf of Mr. Walker, for further time for the purpose of enabling him to bring before the consideration of the Court a great number of circumstances, which he considered would give the case a very different complexion. Mr. KNIGHT trusted his Honour would not grant the application of his friend. Mr. Walker had been directed to attend the Court, and was bound to do so, before he could make any application to it. The VICE-CHANCELLOR observed that he certainly thought Mr. Walker ought to attend, in the first instance, out of common courtesy to the Court ; and if, upon his attending, he had stated that he wished further time, he would have given that application his best consideration ; but as he did not attend, however reluctantly he might do so, he must adopt that course which would satisfy the of fended dignity of the Court. Mr. KNIGHT—As he does not attend, and as I have affidavits verifying the substituted service, I mast press for a Committee. The course he has pursued I consider a direct insult to the Court. _ Mr. JAcoß—He appears here by Counsel to state to the Court that he is in possession of certain circumstances which he is desirous of bringing to its consideration. The VICE-CHANCELLOR—If he would appear personally that might alter the aspect of the case, but as he does not, he has put it out of my power to do any thing but that which will uphold the authority of the Court. I shall therefore make the order for his committal, and the rest of the petition must stand over. ROLLS' COURT.--(THIS DAY.) CROUCH V. HICKEN.—JUDGMENT• The plaintiff in this case represented himself to be the heir-at-law of John Spencer, the testator in the cause, and alleged that he was entitled to certain estates, but that not having possession of the title-deeds, he was unable to state what settlements were made by the anceltor of the testator. The plaintiff further stated that he intended to bring an action of ejectment ; and he, therefore, prayed the defendant might be called upon to make a full discovery touching all the matters in the bill mentioned ; that he might be re strained by the injunction of the Court from setting up any outstanding or other terms ; and for a commission to exa mine witnesses abroad. To so much of the bill as sought any discovery or relief on account of the alleged outstanding term, the defendant pleaded there was no such term existing, and to the rest of the bill he demurred, ore tenus, on the ground that the plaintiff had not shown he was entitled to the estates in question. His LORl:mutt , conceived, the plaintiff's title being a legal one, he ought to proceed at law, unless there was some im pediment to his being relieved without the assistance of this Court; and the plea and demurrer must therefore be allowed. The Court was occupied the remainder of the morning with " consents," among which was the following rather novel petition : BARRY V. GRONOW. Mr. STINTON said this was the petition of the plaintiff, praying for a reference to the Master to enquire and state to the Court whether a marriage which had been solemnized between him and a ward of Court was valid or not ; the trustees appeared and consented. Lord LANGDALE said he could not for one moment listen to such a petition. The plaintiff had been guilty of a grie vous offence against the Court, and at all events the peti tion ought to have been presented by the trustees, and not by a party who had committed a gross contempt of Court. KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY. (Sittings in Banco.) THE KING V. THE PROPRIETORS OF THE SATIRIST NEWSPAPER. In this case a rule nisi fora criminal information for an alleged libel on a gentleman named Digby, had been ob tained by the Attorney-General during the present term. Mr. THEISIGER (with whom was Mr. Kelly), now ap peared to show cause against the rule. On a former occa sion the rule had been discharged on an affidavit which had been used in showing cause, made by Thomas Shepherd, who had deposed that on one occasion, when playing at ecarte with the applicant, Simon Digby, at Shaftesbury terrace, Pimlico, Digby was detected in " palming" the Ki nd , confessed he had done so, and returned the money he had won from Shepherd. It appeared on that occasion that there was the oath of Digby on one aide, and the oath of Shepherd on the other, and the Court had thought fit to discharge the rule. He (Mr. Thessiger) was at a loss to know whether Mr. Digby now meant to assert that the affidavit of Shepherd's was an affidavit falsely got up, and not that of Shepherd, or whether Shepherd had drawn a false affidavit. Lord DINICAN—I apprehend the application is made on the former ground. Mr. THEssIGER--It was quite clear that the Court would never entertain a renewed application merely upon affidavits on which the rule had been discharged, because if the Court gave way in that manner, it would be constantly pestered with applications upon matters on which it had previously determined. Therefore he must presume that the ground on which the application was received was that the Court had been imposed upon. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that was not the ground on which the renewed application had been made. Lord DENMAN—It appeared from the affidavits that the applicant was an entire stranger to Shepherd. Mr. THESSIGER contended that it was contrary to all precedent when the rule had been disposed of upon cer tain affidavits, to interfere and open the rule again, even when it turned out that the person by whom the affidavit was made was a worthless person. The Court always de termined that if the party who swears last swears falsely, he may be indicted for perjury ; but the rule cannot be opened again. No injury could arise to Mr. Digby from such a course, because he could bring his action for libel, or could indict the party for perjury. The Learned Coun sel here read extracts from the affidavits of Messrs. Thomp son and Gregory, the proprietors of the Satirist News paper, for the purpose of shewing that the affidavit made by Shepherd was a bona fide one, that he hr.d voluntarily tendered himself to make it ; and they also denied a state ment made on the other side, that Shepherd bad been for merly in the employment of one of the defend:nits. Mr. KELLY was heard against the rule on behalf of So phia Sylvester Parvey, whose name was registered as one of SHIPPING.-(THIS DAY.) (FROM LLOYD'S.) DEAL, Nov. 23.—Wind N. to N. W., blowing Along. Arrived and remain the Tuscan, Stayer, from the south Seas ; Regalia, Marshall, and Stenerent, Arclay, from Quebec ; Factor, Price, from Cape Coast Castle ; Leader, M'Leod, from the Cape of Good Hope ; John Brooks, Adams, from Valparaiso ; and Brother's Friend, Waithe, from South Poole. Put back by adverse winds the Palestine, Sandford, for To bago; Marapossa, Grealy, for New York; Thomas and Al fred, Sargeant, for Jamaica; and Racer, Towgood, Falmouth. PORTSMOUTH, Nov. 23.—Wind N.N.W., squally.—Ar rived the Solarta Huslensen, Porsground, for Falmouth ; Eclipse, Russell, from Plymouth ; Aurora, —, from New castle ; Veluterea, Bernes, from Seaham ; and Ann, Harrison, from —. Put back his Majesty's ship Conway, for the East Indies ; Campbell, James, for Madeira ; Louisa Bailey, Head, for Demerara ; and Tulloch Castle, Briggs, for Jamaica. RAMSGATE, Nov. 23.—Wind N.W., blowing hard.—Ar rived the Mercurius, Funek, from Amsterdam ; Rose, Miller, from Yarmouth ; Rover, Mullinger, from Portsmouth; Po, Gage, from Yarmouth ; Eclipse, Cook, from Ipswich ; and Auguste Emma, Wayner, from Stettin. LIVERPOOL, Nov. 22.—Arrived, the Adventurer, Purley, from Quebec, after being on shore at Mills Vacking; Calcutta, Carey, from Honduras ; Georgina, Hill, from Arica—sailed the 24th of July, off the Falkland Islands spoke the Lama of Liverpool, to Lima ; Mary Ann, Bartlett, from Valparaiso ; Frances Barclay, Prowse, from ditto ; John Brooks, Adams, from Quebec ; Martha, Dunn, from Dubli n ; B r i an B oy l e , Atkinson, from ditto ; Prosperity, Grayson, from Glasgow ; Leeds Steamer, from Dublin, William Huskisson, from ditto ; and City of Glasgow, —, from Glasgow. Sailed— the Harriet, Wilson, for Maranham ; Letitia, Potts, for Gibraltar ; M ar y Hartlet, Prcsstman, for Malta ; and Porcu pine, Cook, for Constantinople. The Eagle, Williams, from Cork, bound to London, was towed into Margate with loss of masts. The Kingfisher, George, from London, bound to Busaorah, is dismasted at Ramsgate. The Wilhelmina Gesina, Baas, from Rio Janeiro, is wrecked on the Goodwin sands—crew saved. THE PAIGNION.—We have just seen a little pic ture book, under the somewhat abstruse title of the " Paig nion," which forms one of the most agreeable toys for children we have ever met with. The pictures, which are coloured, are twelve in number, and contain not less than sixty-five figures, which are placed in slits cut in the paper, and are remoreablo at pleasure. The hook is a capital one to occupy the attention of children on a social winter even ing, and prevent them setting themselves on fire by roasting chesnuts on the hob. the proprietors of the Satirist newspaper, and Mr. PRITCHARD on behalf of the publisher, who had been in cluded in the rule, but who now stated that for some time past he had not been in any way connected with that paper. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in support of the rule, ob served that there would be no security for private character of the present atrocious attempt of the Satirist newspaper was suffered to pass with impunity. A very useful fact had been brought out upon the other side, which was, that the statements upon which his Learned Friend, Mr. Thessiger, founded his application were made by the proprietors of the newspaper, while they hired a publisher to vend their slander at 20s. per week, and his name was registered at the Starep-office, with that of Sophia Syl vester Parvey, who it appears, his Learned Friend Mr. Kelly seemed to think, should not only escape with im punity, but that the Court was to pronounce an eulogium upon her spirited conduct in the cause of honour and mo rality. It was quite clear that in the present case the Court had been imposed upon by the affidavit of a person who was now pronounced by the other side to be a worthless cha racter. He would contend, that consistently with all pre cedent, their Lordships might make the present rule abso lute, for no precedent did exist—the circumstances were quite novel and extraordinary, and he sincerely hoped that such a one would never arise again. Their Lordships would recollect that from the time the slander appeared in the Satirist newspaper, the 29th of May, 1836, down to the present hour, no information had been given as to what authority or upon whose information it was published, and there was not only a general charge of swindling, but there were particular facts put forward of what had occurred when no other person was present but Shepherd. The COURT interrupted the Attorney-General, by ob serving that they were extremely jealous of doing anything which might be drawn into a precedent, but the present appeared to be a case of a very peculiar nature. Here was a person calumniated in the grossest manner as a noto rious swindler and scoundrel, for such words appeared upon the affidavits. He comes forward and vindicates himself successfully from the imputation, and then the application is met by a person calling himself Shepherd, who states that this person, the object of the libel, absolutely cheated him self at a private house ; and then it subsequently appears, upon further inquiry, that this Shepherd has fabricated the whole history of this transaction. That being made appa rent to the Court, they were now called upon to wake the rule, which had been discharged upon that feigned affidavit, absolute ; because the applicant had actually preferred an indictment for perjury against Shepherd, and Shepherd has disappeared. The circumstance of a person using the name of Shepherd having voluntarily come forward to substantiate the charge mad. in the newspaper only showed the statement had been originally made by the defendants without any autho rity. It seemed, therefore, to the Court, that the rule having been discharged upon an affidavit which they could not but believe to be false, that was ground enough for them to say that the party should be placed in the same situation in which he would have stood if that affidavit had not been made ; and in making that decision, the Court was of opi nion that they were not doing any thing that could be drawn into a precedent.—Rule absolute. THE ICING V. THE INHABITANTS OF ST. SAVIOUR'S, SOITHWARE. Sir F. POLLOCK had been instructed to move fora rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue, directed to the churchwardens, overseers of the poor, and inhabitants of the parish of St. Saviour's, Southwark, in the county of Surrey, and commanding them to make a rate, pursuant to the provisions of two statutes, one passed in the reign of Charles 11., and the other in the 6th year of the reign of George 111. He would merely trouble the Court with an outline of the circumstances, which were that so far back as the reign of Henry VIII., an Act was passed for uniting two parishes in Southwark, to be called the parish of St. Saviour. There was afterwards a conveyance of a church belonging to a monastery, together with the tithes belong ing to it to the See of Winchester, at that time in trust for certain purposes, which were to maintain a chapel, to endow a school, and to repair a church. Afterwards an Act was passed in the reign of Charles 11., to enable the parish ioners of St. Saviour's to make a rate for the maintenance of the Ministers and the repair of the Church, and after re citing the former Act it provided that " the Church being very great and chargeable to be maintained, and the reve nues of the rectory not amounting to more than 1001. per annum, be it enacted, that all the messuages, lands, and tenements of this parish should be ever after exonerated from all tithes belonging to said rectory ; and in Considera tion thereof it should be lawful for the churchwardens of the parish for the time being, and the overseers of the poor, calling together six or more of the inhabitants to assemble in vestry, and make a rate or assessment not exceeding 3501. in any one year, out of which each of the chap lains were to be paid 1001. ; and schoolmaster 301„ 201. for himself, and 10/. for an assistant." The 59th George 111., without repealing any of the provisions of the former Acts, enacts that it should be lawful to increase the amount of the rate so as to give 3001. to the chaplains, and these sums were paid from time to time down to the present year, in which year the vestry being called upon to make a rate assembled, and a poll having been taken the numbers were for postponing the rate, 350 ; for making the rate, 257 ; so that a majority of 93 were for enjoying their premises tithe free, without making any rate as an equivalent. Sir F. POLLOCK now moved for a rule nisi for a manda mus to compel them to make the rate, as it was one which did not depend upon the option of the parish, it being one of the conditions of the bargain by which they held the premises tithe free. The terms of the Act were that "it shall and may be lawful " for the parishioners to maks the rate, and that, he contended, made it imperative upon them to do so, inasmuch as the Court had so decided in the case of the metropolitan commissioners for lighting, where the words were, " it shall be lawful for them in their discretion. Under these circumstances, he submitted that he was en titled to the rule. CotraT—You may take a rule. BAIL COURT. (Before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE.) THE KING V. LANE. Mr. WATSON moved to make a rule absolute to admit the defendant to bail. He was committed to Hereford Gaol on the Coroner's warrant, charged with the manslaughter of John Yarnold. Mr. Watson now handed in the depo sitions taken before the Coroner, from which it appeared that on the 14th of September last, the defendant and the deceased, both very young men, met at Ledbury races, Herefordshire, where the deceased, who was a very quarrel some fellow, provoked the defendant to fight him. They fought two rounds, and then some persons interfered and parted them. After this the defendant left the race-course, when he was followed by the deceased, who again struck him, and they fought two other rounds, in the last of which the defendant fell heavily on the deceased, who was imme diately picked up by the bystanders and taken home, where he lingered until the 16th, when he expired. On a post mortem examination, it was found that his bladder had been ruptured, and that injury had caused his death. The de ceased shortly before he died admitted that he was to blame, and had provoked the defendant to fight him. The COIRT ordered the defendant to find bail, himself in 801., and four sureties in 201. each ; and in order to save the party expense, said that bail might be put in in the county. COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY. MELLIN V. TAYLOR. The LORD CHIEF JesTicE said that in this case a rule had been obtained in the beginning of this Term, but he had requested Mr. Cresswell (who applied for the rule to show cause why a new trial should not be granted), to suspend the rule until he should have had some communication with the Learned Judge before whom this case was tried. He bad communicated with that Learned person, and that Learned Judge had declared himself quite satisfied with the verdict of the Jury. His Lordship said that this Court therefore felt bound, as a matter of duty not to grant the rule.—Rule refused. EX-PARTE MACLEOD IN THE MATTER OF PELLERBY V. MACLEOD. Mr. Sergeant WILDE appeared to show cause against a rule which had been obtained by Mr. Platt on a former day, calling upon a gentleman, of the name of Robson, an attorney, to show cause why he should not be struck off the roll of attornies. He was satisfied that those who ap peared for this rule never contemplated the probability of making it absolute ; but it was applied for with the view of influencing the judgment of the Court in making the mo tion for a new trial. He believed that the Court would not have granted this rule had they accurately apprehended the position of the parties. The motion arose out of the cir cumstances of the case of Pellerby v. Macleod, which had been tried before the Lord Chief Justice of this Court at the last sittings. An action had been brought against a defendant, and a second action bad been brought by the same plaintiff against the son of the defendant, for not having appeared pursuant to a subpmna to give evidence against his father. In consequence of his absence the record was necessarily withdrawn, and the plaintiff was put to certain expenses ; and this action was brought against the witness to recover compensation for the expenses which had been . occasioned by his neglect. On the trial of the cause Mr. Robson, the plaintiff's attorney in the two actions, was the witness called to prove the case. He stated that the case having been set down for trial at Guildhall on . the 19th of February, was called on, and the witness had not then ar rived. The witness was called by the officers of the Court in the usual way, but he did not appear ; the record ceni was then withdrawn, the witness was ca lled u p on his subp offi nd i, the .uhricena wa. marked in the us ual way by the cers of the Court. The witness arrived gliortly atteer ththe r ecord was withdrawn, and an application was madat given was, that the case might be taken. The answer the case could net he taken that day, as the plain tiff and some of his witnesses had gone away, but that the plaintiff was quite willing to try the case on the d fofellowinan nd g day, if the defendant would consent. e et The would only consent to this upo n condition of having his costs paid to him. The plaintiff refused to accede to this demand. The case was tried at the following sittings: whveli the present defendant was called as a witness. His ei dence was most material, and a verdict was found for . the plaintiff for 4001. The plaintiff took no proceedings against the witness for the expenses caused by his neglecting to ap pear, but the defendant in the first action, the father of the witness, demanded payment of the cost s of the day for the to record having been withdrawn , whic h costs were paid him, and amounted to 271. An action was then brought against the witness for his non-appearance pursuant to his subpwna, and the demand clai med consisted of the 271. paid to the opposite party for costs of the day, together with the costs of t he plaintiff sing out of the record being withdrawn . The particulars of the demand, consisting of the expenses of the w anes!, the conduct money, refreshers to counse l, &c., were dFli vered to the defendant, and the defence and insinuation against Mr. Robson and his client was, that the record had in truth been withdrawn, not because the witness was not present, but because the plaintiff was not ready to proceed , and that this was a fraudulent attempt to saddle the wit ness with costs of the day, when the withdrawal of the record arose from considerations of his own convenience, and would have happened whether the witness was there or not. It was also attempted to be stated that in truth the witness had arrived before the record was withdrawn : se that there was in the affidavit an insinuation as if Robson had got the record withdrawn after the witness had arrived. The evidence of Mr. Robson went to state that he bad himself served the witness with a subpoena; that a conversa tion occurred between the witness and him, in which the witness, in answer to a question put to him, informed Mr. Robson that ho had been subpcened on the other side, and that he had received a guinea with his subpsene; on which Robson said that as he (witness) had r eceived a guinea in the case, he would not require another, and the witness said, " Certainly not." Mr. Robson thereupon gave the witness a shilling, and they separated. When the defendant found that the objection to the withdrawal of the record could not be supported, he then objected that a shilling with the subpoena was not a reasonable sum for the expenses of his attendance. The witness lived at Camberwell. Robson was examined with very con siderable severity with regard to the conversation he deposed to. He was also cross-examined as to the payment of the conduct money to the witnesses. The action was described as a pettifogging action, and Mr. Robson was described as a most unworthy person for bringing such an action, and the want of a substantial defence, as was often the case, was made up for by invective and iiiiinperation against the attorney. The action was one as properly brought and conducted as any that had ever appeared in a court of justice, It was stated on the part of the defendan t that the evidence of the witness Robson with respect to the conversation • between him and the defendan t t was altogether a fabrication ; that Robson came i court not having intended to give evidence of ant such conversation with the defendant, in which the de fendant stated that he received a guinea conduct money ; but that it arose altogether from his (Robson's) ingenuity and wickedness, in consequence of the Chief Justice ar pearing to think that the shilling with the subpoena was net, enough, and that, thereupon, be (Robson) turned round and gave evidence of the further payment. Ile case thus went to the Jury, the Lord Chief Justice summed up the 0 1 ' dence, leaving it to the Jury to say whether Robson was correct or not, aid stating tot if they discredited Robson in respect to the statements about the conduct money, that it was for them to consider how far his testimony could be relied upon with respect to the conversation w hen ha subpoenaed the defendant, and if they did not relY upon the statement of the conversation, the Court vva° of opinion that the one shilling tender w as not suf. cient, and the defendant would be entitled to a verdict. It was then left to the jury to decide whether they wou ld believe the witnesses for the defendant or Mr. Rob son. Th° jury credited Mr. Robson, and found a verdict f or the plaintiff. He was sure he would have the sanction of the Lord Chief-Justice's experience, that when an attack wa s made upon an attorney, the odds generally were again j him with a ury, as they conceived that an attornoy Pe r sessed a considerable advantage from the nature of his p ert r ° „" fession, and a jury was therefore disposed to hold v strict hand over the conduct of attorneys. This islas special jury. His Learned Friend Mr. Platt had mado a° vigorous a speech as had ever been made against an ator. ney, and yet the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff. The motion now made was to strike Mr. Robson off the rolls o n the ground of those very facts which a Jury bad alseady dislseliev thed. to The Learned Sergeant then proceeded at great leog refer to the evidence taken upon the former tria ls, and con tended that there was no ground whatever for the present motion. Mr. PLATT was called upon to support the rule, and was followed by Mr. WILSON on the same side. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE ms of opinion that the rule must be discharged. The rule called upon Mr. Robson , an officer of this Court, to answer to a very grave and 5 0 rious accusation, of having obtained money for private and corrupt purposes, by means of false and fictitious charge° of payments made in the progress of a cause, and with thin addition, that, in order to obtain this money, he put in aft' davits, for the purpose of making out a case before the pro thonotary. In proportion as a charge involved serious conse' quences, it ought to be supported by pregnant and eviden t proofs. He was of opinion that in the present case the proof fai l s by one infirmity, inasmuch as not a single pers on was brought forward to whom payments were imputed to have been made to deny such payments, though 10 or 11 we° stated to have received such payments. The very su bstancs, and f oun d a ti o n on which the rule was obtained, was that such evidence should be brought forward. There was n ° such evidence under all the circumstances. The rule mus t be discharged with costs. SHERIFFS' COURT-(THIS DA At the opening of the Court this morning, the lAcar n 7l Judg e (Arabin) addressed the Bar, and said he observe there was a case of nuisance set down for trial, which Ile considered himself incompetent to try, as the enquiry ou ght be carried before a superior Court. Supposing he was to 1 1 ° ° e c i the party against whom the verdict went might turn re Üb e and say the Court was incompetent to try ; and hence other party would be saddled with' heavy costs by a n e rt, litigation. Besides if perjury was committed in this Coue? how could it be assigned so as to bring the party to justic,' Mr. RYLAND said he appeared for the defendant , an the plaintiff, who was most likely aware of the irregularitif did not appear ; hence it would be a bard case upon tb: former if the cause was struck out : besides, what was be done with the writ ? • IA Mr. Sergeant AnAßlN—That I don't know. It is lig for me to state that I have no authority to try the eaus,„ Mr. RYLAND—I hope the Court will Wonsan the PO tiff—he will not be damnified by that. Mr. Sergeant ARABIN—If I have power to n onsul`,. have power to try. The cause is struck out. It " well for this decision to be made public. PREROGATIVE COURT.-THIS DO (Before Sir HERBERT JENNER.) IN THE GOODS OF JOHN DAY, DECEASED. ip In this case application was made to the Co urt to ohtslo an administration, pendente lite, of the effects of the The Mr. Day, the well-known blacking manufacturer. de. Court was informed, that as a codicil to the will of the ty, ceased, who had died worth a very consider able PrePe,/:,no was opposed, it was necessary to have an admirustrtll during the suit, to carry on the business an d other goal-- relative to the estate. d he Curt directed an aministratin to pass, e n " e lite, T to the executors named d under the o will, but with O W rity to tho extent of 30,00/. of t he The Court was occupy d during the remai nder morning in disposing of motions. KENSINGTON SESSIONS. ILLEGALLY PAWNING.—James Crabb, a hairdresser, ict: charged with having illegally pledged a clock and fen the bed, the property of his father. te ll The prisoner did not deny the cha r g e, and was seneet! to pay a fine of 20s. damages for the offence, in addition it 1/. 7s. 6d., the value of the prop ert y p ledged ; or, in ec tio defa•utt of payment, to be committe d to the House of Corr for two months. --_ THE FUNDS.—(THIS DAT.) ------- CITY; TWELVE O'CLOCZ,_O Consols opened this morning at 87 to 87ii ; for 03 January Account, 87,1. This being settling day i n Colv sols, the brokers and jobbers are chiefly occupied in g l " ranging their accounts. Spanish Active, 171 to 18 ; Portuguese, 49f to 6° ; Three per Cents., 30i 311 „ ---; Colombian, 211 Dutch, 521 i ; exchequer Bills, 3 to 5 prem. • India Bonds' 3 to 4 prem. ; Bank Stock, 2011 202 • India Stock, 254. .HAL:FP4ST WO.. e is going off well. The settling of the Consul Account, to the present tiro : chequer Bills, 5 3 5 they are carrying over their accounts at 3-16ths per COO The extreme fluctuation has been about 2f. ',II EP' Consols continue at 87* ; for the opening, SIR 4 ' . It appears to be a Bear account, salt. preal" Bank Stock, tures, 27 ; Dutch, 202 2011 • India Bonds, 2541. vy, In the Foreign Mar et Portuguese Stock is very be c a tlep . finrl m'oclerl to As], 42 ; Sioni4l 17:1 ; Divii'llid cl ' _ s,2 P i r 0:3.. ;.. India. Bonds, 5 3 5 THREff O'C.LO CIA Consols for the Opening, 1117 i 1.