The Sun. — London, England, 1822-11-18 00:00:00

L -- . -,'; A• :re, '• I As , f — re---e . . , , ~,1 4- -..-'7"- - , t - -, •:« .4;.„ , -.47 -..47_4 1 , 12, •,_., ,,t 1. :„. 7. / () Z;...1.171110 Jya yr L! —.— , • ' * 'la 4: 4 r. T ~„,..,.. ~,,_, u, ..• , , . - ~...r A - ' ' .. i . * ..,z. .. . 1- # 0 7-./2 T 4. , "- 444. t. s\ '‘ 474,6_ NUAIDER 9433. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1822. PRICE SEVEN PENCE. , n , the ,erson• a ctor' rule to ttol No to bad Cou' ius et ,teres" w 01° ' ssigll' r , 11 1 7 arß pur e° ion; r the 140. Ol e 0 of' froi ll 06 c , ear , aro, i' 06 ° 6 tis /....: u. in" 1007 `t i" i(C .cti/j 1 01 ' ''''. pf iieut' .......-$:• itiN. • Plc TUA L L NG-Oile FICE, Oct. 29, 1822. I E - COMMISSIONERS for VICTUAL 4/,VG His MAJESTY'S IVAVY, 4c. .do hereby th ve 2 " i cei that on Tuesday, the 19th cf November next, a ~~ u'rllb e rea d y to rece i ve Tenders in writing (sealed up) 9,ta,, tr eat for th e supp l y ( o n separate Contracts) of all. suc h b e titi " of SEA PROVISIONS, ir&cluding RU M, as m a y , Qt d :: 4l "dedfor the use of His Majesty's Ships an d Vessels Q ` e Places under-mentioned, from& the dates expressed Cal k " g e „_ each till the 31st December, 1823, tz..— a:„l 4l , C arickfergus, Larne Harbour, Xin,„'"ewry 4- 81;, —(1 and Dublin , Ist January, 18 . 23. I .4 nd a Y %•e t ,° 44 etry and Loughswilly • 9th January._ J 823. tdi;ll!;leitliit Roads, and the Frith of 17thFebruary,128. , 4 3 4 . e, Conditions of the Contracts. may be seen at this Office, at b ui s a ,PPlying to the Secretary, to the-Postmaster -Genera at 11, 4‘ ,", and. to the Collectors of His Majesty's Customs spe-..."14t, Gal Londonderry Greenock, and ,Leith, re ctlyeiu Galway, , • g el !' Tende r must specify the price in words at length, and bi ttee rered before One o'Clock on the day a pp ointed, and P et ; o e accomp an i e d by a Letter, signed by two responsible te. , l igagitig to become bound w ith the Party en dr!,a .f The he e n; Penal Su of 50G/. for the due performance o Contracts. teh Qi ,,Perso n who makes te Tender, or some Person on his . Must attend to answer when called for. frieI,LLER CLIFTUN. PRIVATE TUITION. V ACANCY is NOW OPEN in the FA 4p,„MLY of a MARRIED CLERGYMAN, who prepares p , *v p rr,f, PILS for the UNIVERSITIES, or their respective t he ; many of them has:e I)e , e , n of thehighest rank. tt "nee from London is within I weive Miles. tell ,s directed - for the Rev. W. M., Mr. Reynolds, Boo k- Oxford-street, London. WOn Saturday be pnblishO, in Bvo., ERNER, a, TRAGEDY. —By the Right Hon. LORD BYRON. by John Murray, AlUemarle-street. . . ttp_ln a few Days will be published, in 4t0., FIRST VOLUME of a HISTORY of the late WAR in SPAIN an 4 PORTUGAL. pc • By ROBERT SOUTHEY, Esq. \ l uting for John Murray, Albertuirle-street. , will a few Days be ti blished,. in Fivo. price 9s. 641 V., t STIGESof ANCIENT MANNERS and cus'VOMS. discoverable in Modern Italy and Sicily. By the C o JOHN JAMES BLUNt, (."' of St. John's College, Cambridge, and late one of the Travelling Bachelors of that University. for John Murray, Albemarle -Street. In the Press, In Three Volumes, Beet., A, SECOND SERIES of CURIOSITIES of Ili o . LITEATURE, consisting of Researches in Literary, InAN)ltical, and Political History—of Critical and Philo 'M Inquiries—and of secret History; At 14 By J. DISRAELI, Esq. , latue time will be published, the Seventh Edition 9f the First Series. 'P rinting for John Murray, Albemarle—street. -..„, . .. ._ ... N I , A it oi l t Ik r r 1 "r n i r 0 f p r the ice 9s. X i'E DI T lON to ' SF -ile, - NGOLA and SENNAAR, under the Command , s , tri i Mlency Ismael Puha, `igertakell_l:MEßlCAN i : n the Serrice i p i f theNieero y . ü by order of his Highness e imumed Ali Paella, • Viceroy of Egypt. '''''.........._ litin ting for John Murray, Alhemnrle-street. FOR CORNS, .BUNIQNS, .ecc. 4 °I tRIS 9 S ROYAL BRUNSWICK. i C ORN PLASTER, prepared from a'Receipt belongaul~St late Ma'estv It is an excellent Remedy for an4 j g'vfng relief to those who have bard fleshy i 4 ces at th ' b -i ttom of their feet. withoot the least pain fc'°nteniencee, :not will prove a very useful ranaily Plaster Gehl,Vounds and Scalds, likewise for Bunions. Prepared Chemist to the Royal Family, Kensington. h ' ° •4, c4l, Bps at Is. and es. 9d. by Butlers, Chemis, 14 e Cude St. Paul's, and 220, Regent-street (near I ? t i 4t ßli g 3.l e Rooms), London: 20, Waterloo-place, Edin -%.,dici; 34 , Sackville-street, Dublin ; and by the principal '`; • ji ae Venders throughout the United Kingdom. l isl , ;: - Be careful to ask for " MORRIS'S BRUNSWICK Cowl and to observe the .Government Stamp has, the 4, Cheapside," engraved on it. • To 'F. TAYLOR, Esq. 11„ No, 9, New Bridge-street, London. 11'"IOURED SIR, k aG leave to inform you, that ever since the -1. 1790 , I had been afflicted with the Lues Venereal, t , .1 0 , • t %rit : , • Its - obstinately resisting every course of medicine ed by the most eminent of the faculty here, and u.n l-a sev .eralsevere courses of salivation, and twice dis 4714.tliernni the Hospital with little relie• f, would appear to to e lio , nest inveterate nature, In the spring of last year to had got to such a head, as nearly to put a period e „e4lstenee—l had a large ulcer on the crown of my head, i t :, 4 4, e ; a f_ ll arm, and my legs were broke out in a frightful . tw i t of my right was dreadfully painful, and had been in a ulceration for the last seven years ; my left had also 'rge n • much discoloured, and gave N th odes on it, was rely I: 4 4 t tr ,.„ eloyn e lt x ni e ) r ed i n i e c idi i r ating pain, particularly when warm in bed', in this lamentable state, I - d ire b me lVlr f hompson, (who received so f,, l l , ll ,tll 4 l h ur _e by t e hem Y her . to take tour Leake's Patent Pills, ti lo itlig',gn to do on the . 26th o.yla • in the course of a th _. began to receive benefit—in; little more than a tt.s 7 Ulcers on my bead.and armswere soundly healed— ttr, go 'r, the sores on my legs healed also ; leavin how oint.iderablediscolouratiou in the skin, and pain in . the htt u ( ne left which, by the blessing of God, and a little . 11,!Uod r ,, e . r _Icee4nce in your invaluable 11 . 1edicine, subsided ; dispersing, the skin regaining its natural bue,_and I - Na` pains gradually going (ll.—l thus became, I)) k u t tk lor i ceral advice and medicine, perfectly free from . all n n ‘y °l nPlaints—have recovered my former spirits a d am become'jolly and fat,. in which stnte having 6 t : I a rn , n 2any mouths, to the astonishment of all who knew tf l . A, Yon f"L a loss in what terms to express my gratitude, hut 44 4 r the good of other suffering mortals, to make -4 ; 4s e as public as possible, as I shall on every °Lea •ll ( king you will greatly oblige, Your grateful, obedient, very humble serva?t, ao qie s ei "se. High-street, Edinburgh.•lLEX . AILTRI‘ER ri,„ Witnesses to the above Cure:— Jot 'l 'l' s "n, No. 3, New Poultry Market, Edinburgh, I,brep ar hl'lntosh, Old Assembly Close, Edinburgh. Ah, ed ad sold by th e so le Proprietor, rtipmAs N - u n= ,n wer of the Royal College of Surgeons, a . t .er hi a s residefar, nt • New Bridge-street, London; whLic ? art ; . p „„nce of more than 40 years, in a practice paiti `ttpLent T - 4 "ed to the cure of Venereal Complaints and those I tte%, te i the Parts of Genesation )vith that inviolable tth; cases men wen of his profession should always observe in lit'uitu„ s ? he flatters himself . the advice- and assistance he at tee a dministers to persons taking this Medicine, will , A l aa41: (1, bY a discerning Public, as an advantage seldom a i nd void of all ambiguity. . (1 k ' g h Ot bis appointment, tor the conger ',once of those "sb distance at the Tovshop, No. WS, Oxfordlstreet; 4 4 41 1‘..b r .°,rougi is N o . 7, fish-street-hill; Mr: Baxter, Irel Per - `"ge, b m th ve t Dublin; and of son in every' ' TO ; '3 in e t Britain and t ai f ull 1, . considerable town ill-ea _ cfonly e s . 9d. each, stamped, and sealed up -k-- Plain 'directions, whereby persons, of either ieue t hemselves with ease, speed, secrecy, and safety: LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 16. THE PORTSMOUTH CAUSE. After a short conversation, it was decided that the further hearing of this case could not be proceeded in on Tuesday next, as had been previously arranged. CONTEMPT OF COURT. FARQUHARSON V, BALFOUR. • This was an application for the immediate committal of the defendant, a West India merchant, to the Fleet* Prison, for Contemt of Court, in neglecting to put in his answer to the plaintiff's bill. He appeared in the custody of the messenger. Mr. HART had been instructed by the defendant, early in the present term, to make a motion, the object of which would have been to have requested a reasonable delay, in order that the defendant might have been enabled to put in his answer. In consequence, however, of the pressure of business, he had not been enabled to follow his instruc tions so promptly as he otherwise should have done. But he would not have remained inactive, had he had the most remote idea that the plaintiff would have thus enkrced the process of the Court against his client. To his con cern and great surprise, however, the defendant vs yes terday brought up from his country seat in custody of this messenger. Now it so happened that the defendant could not put in his answer until certain documents necessary to it ar rived from the West Indies, and from peculiar contingencies connected with their transmission, they could not possibly arrive in this country before the ensuing March or April. For his part he could not conceive what necessity there was for dragging this Gentleman from the comforts of his family, to compel him to prepare his answer in the Fleet. He hoped his Lordship would think it right, from this statement, to resist an applica tion which he understood was about to be made for the de fendant's immediate committal. Mr. AGAR held that the defendant had placed himself in his present situation, solely by his determination not to put in his answer so long as he could avoid it. This bill was filed to redeem a very considerable property in the West Indies, and the defendant had received the mortgage-money. It was filed in January, 1819, and he had availed himself of all the indul gence and delays which the Court afforded. He had made special motions, founded on the absence of the necessary docu ments, by which the cause had been in this manner driven over from term to term for a period of four years. He had roise to the West Indies purposely for these documents, and had re turned without them ; lie now made this a pretence for further delay. He hoped his Lordship would not comply with the present application ; for to prove that delay alone was the de fendant's object, he had already put in three insufficient answers. The LORD CupTCELLOR could not interfere ; for if the former judgment of the Court were correct, this gentlemen could not put in a sufficient answer. Interference in this case would go to sanction a defiance of the authority of the Court altogether. He should therefore dismiss the application with costs ; for he thought in a matter where the bill had been-filed in 1819, and the answer had not been obtained atthe latter end of 1822. there was no claim to indulgence. The application was then dismissed with costs. This result being obtained, 11lr. PARKER (before the Vice-Chancellor) immediately made a motion that Mr. Balfour be committed to the custody of th-.lWarden of the Fleet Prison, for contempt of CoUrt. Mr. HART here again urged the Court to grant a few days in dulgence, as it was really, he said, the defendant's object to put in a satisfactory answer. The VICE-CHANCELLOR had no power to grant time, un less by the consent of the plaintiff. This was the first instance in his recollection of a similar request. The defendant was accordingly committed. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 16, CIIURCHER'S COLLEGE, PETERSFIELD. TUE ATTORNEY-GENEUAL V. U. JOLIFFE, ESQ., AND OTHERS. This was an information filed by his Majesty's Attornek. General against the defendants, Hilton Joliffe, Thomas Samuel Jolliffe, and Samuel Twyford, Esquires, the Rev. William John Jolliffe, the Rev. Charles Edward Twyford, John Twy ford Jolliffe, Esquire, and the Rev. Thomas Robert Jolliffe, Trustees of Churcher's College, Petersfield, praying the Court to, remove them from their offices as Trustees, and that other fit and proper persons, under the sanction of 'the Court, who are resident in, or in the immediate neighbourhood of the College and who are not the immediate relatives or connec tions of 2 the defendant Hilton Jolliffe, may be.appointed Trus tees in their stead ; and that the present Trustees may be com pelled to render an account ; and that the balance due from the late William Jolliffe may be paid .with interest, and the scholars may be hoarded and lodged within the College, ac cording to the founder's intention. Mr. HEALD, in the absence of Mr. WETHERELL, having mentioned the case, Mr. GLYNN opened - the pleadings. From the information it appeared that in 1722 Richard Churcher, 'of Petersfield, East India merchant, bequeathed 3,0001., Bank Stock, for establishing a College in the Borough of Peters field, consisting of a master and ten or twelve boys; as the tttis tees should judge most convenient, according to the annual.in come ; the boys to betaken out of, and belonging to, the Borough of Petersfield, of any age from 9 to 14, that were healthful boys, and whose parents could give security to the trustees to oblige their sons to be bound apprentices unto masters of ships that made their voyages unto the Bast' Indies, after they had been educated in the arts of writing, arithmetick, and the mathe maticks, chiefly that part as related to navigation, and after they had had their diet, clothing, and tutorage free at the bounty of the founder of this College, which was to be called by the name of Churdlter's College; and, in order to purchase an edifice capable of receiving a master and ten or twelve boys, and that the trustees might be enabled to perfect the College, and to give encouragement to the pupils whilst under tutorage, or, when bound apprentices, and for convenient clothing, he also gave 500/. for the erection of a proper edifice for the above purpose, and appointed seven trustees to manage the college, with powers to nominate their successors ; but to choose the boys from the children of the townsmen only ; and he di rected that the 3,0001. Bank Stock should remain in that Com pany, never to be changed for other security, but upon the greatest reason, and with the consent of all th‘ trustees : that out of the annual income arising from this fund, 401. per an num shonld be paid half-yearly to the master, 101. per annum for each boy's board, 40s: per annum for each boy's clothing, namely, waistcoats and breeches of such colours as the trustees please ; but the upper garment to be a blue gown, having on each a badge of metal with the arms of the East India Com pany on it ; with the addition of shoes, stockings, shirts, and blue caps ; and he directed that his silver tankard and his pic ture should remain as standards in the College for ever. The design of the Founder was at first carried into complete execution ; but in 1744, it was alleged, that the funds, from a ' change in the times, were inadequate, and that the Town's people would not send their children to sea, and, therefore, ftn. Act of Parliament was obtained by the Trustees, to deviate from the intention of the Founder and to enable them to bind the boys to other trades than that of mariners, and to reduce the number of scholars, ds long as they found the funds inadequate for the support of the number directed to be maintained by the Founder. Soon after this period, the offices of Trustees and Treasurer fell entirely into the hands of Mr. Jolliffe's family, and connexions. In 1802, 'Wm. Jolliffe, Esq. the father of the pre sent defendant, H. Jolliffe, and who was a trustee and the trea ' surer of the College, (having succeeded his father,Jelin Jolliffe, Esq.) died, leaving a balance to the amount of 1,6521. due to the charity, anti which 'now remains unpaid, notwithstanding there was an order given by the other trustees in 1803 to the present defendant to pay into the College account the balance due from his late father to this charity. It also appears from the information, that considerable sums of money had been expended out of the College funds for a large additional school room, and that other alterations had been made for the nccom modation of the private boarders for some of the masters, though for many years private boarders were not admitted. The information also states that the defendants had neglect ed their duty by not improving the funds of the College, and in not . giving the foundation boys those advantages the founder intended, and which the College income could afford ; for it appears that the defendants, until the filing of this information, were ignorant of the actual state and amount of the College funds and indome, for in 1818 - and, previously, they only drew on the Accountant-General for about 2901. a-year ' when the income of the College Was above 5001. a-year ; and that it likewise appears they suffered the sum of 1,5701. to _ accumulate and remain unproductive in the Accountant-Gene rat's ,Office, from 1306 to 1819, after this information'was filed, when bran &der of the Court it was invested in the Public Funds. It also appears, that in 1784 a Clergyman, Mr. Cookson, had been put into the possession of College, and allowed to reside in itfor about 13. years, and to receive the salary of 401. a-year, as the - Master of the College, though contrary to the founder's will, and that during this period the name at a Lay man, Mr. Steele, was entered and kept on the College-book as the actual master, though he quitted the school .and the town in 1786, having been allowed the salarrfor the two first years of that period. It also appears from the information, that the defendants had admitted boys on the charity, who were not, as required by the founder, children of the townsmen of Petersfield, and that the boys were not now boarded at the College, -but obliged, to live out, whilst the present school master had been allowed to take in private boarders, to whom every accommodation was giVen, without any benefit or ad -vantage whatever to the College, or the objeets of the Foun der's bounty; and that during \ the appointment of some of the defendants as Trustees, whilst Mr. Cookson'and !Mr. Trim mings were Masters of the College, it had beezlg.t. out in lodg ings•for the benefit of the Illasters-...ingoam6iifttalecs to Ladies who kept bOardin'g schools for girls, and even to some of the ' Trustees themselves who had taken. up their residences there. It is also alleged by the relators, that if the annual cash ba lances in the hands of the. late treasurer, William Jolliffe, Esq. and the defendant, H. Jolliffe' had been regularly invested, the funds of this charity would have been greatly augmented ; and it was further stated., that none, ' of the defendants, since their appointments, had ever attended any examination of the scholars, and that the funds of . the College were sufficient to board; clothe, and educate the boys, and execute all the inten tions of the benevolent founder. Mr. E. SliffutOw then reaclthe answers of the defendants to the information. Mr. Hilton Jolliffe there made a declaration, which, if true (the Learned.Couniel said), 'was highly credit able to him. He stated that his father did not leave him suffi cient assets to pay his debts; 'nevertheless be . (Hilton JoUiffe) was willing to.pay any allowance that the Court might find to be due from his father to the Charity. The answer. of the Trustee denied generally any wilful mismanagement of tic funds, and declared that they had never admitted, with their knowledge, any but- the sons of tpwnsmen. They declared that the funds the Institution.were inadequate to carry into effect the intention of the founder, and that the saint number of scholars could not be boarded as heretofore. Thti salary for the master was so small, that, no competent person could be ~ found who would undertake for it to instruct the boys. master of skill had therefore been permitted to take in private boarders, in order to make up a competency ; and the College boys had greatly benefited , by the change, in their education. The Tnisteess admitted having refused to chew Mr. Atche,son - and the other relators, who were inhabitants of the town, their accounts, as they conceived they *ere not bound to hew them, unless upon an order front the Court. The VICE-CHANCE L L OR said he would hear the arguments . upon the cause on 'Monday. Ire thought it necessary, how ever, to state,' that he' could only enter into an' inquiry as to the conduct of „the present trustees, an t i not as to any former management. It would be of much importance that it should be shewn whether'the father of 'the present defendant, Hilton JollitFe did or did not leave a sufficiency to pay the balance due from him to the charity. It was a serious charge against the defendant, H. Jolliffe e that lie had, as treasurer, omitted to ' hand over the proyerty in. his hands- as executor to the charity. It would also be important to show whether the funds really were or were not sufficient to fulfil_ all the intentions of the testator', He did not consider that 'the circumstance of allow ing the introduction of borders was sufficient to disqualify ;.the trustees, if it were proved that the other scholars had not been injured by it. 'His Honour directed the.particular attention of the parties to these points. I.(III.NDES.V. DITNCOMBF.. Mr. ST trAnT moved for an injunction against the defendant, who is a bookseller, to restrain him front pirating the copyright of the plaintiff in the songs, cliclusseA.& - e. of the popular dra matic entertainment called Gov Nein - zu LZlrdon'. These son , s• were written by a Mr. Moncrieff, who sold and assigned the Copyright in them to Mr: liowndts (the plaintiff) a bookseller in Bow.streat,. Covent-garden. .The..plaintiff had published thespsongs, and" derived great profit from the piiblication :, but the defendant had lately published a cheap edition of them, and thereby infringed the copyright of the plaintiff', and injured the sale of his publication. " This application fok an injunction was therefore necessary-to protect the' property of theplaintifi' in these songs. • , Mr. SPENCE, for the defendant, insisted that the ease was of' sucli a nature that the Court 'could not grant an injuction. He produced an affidavit, in which it was sworn that Mr. Elli ston, of Drury-lane Theatre, had declared that the copyright of these Songs belonged to him. Mr. ST vAryr produced an affidavit by the plaintiftand Mr. Moncrieff of the truth of the facts of his case, and: called upon the defendant to state whether the . copyright had ever been assigned to Mr. Elliston. The VICE-CHANCELLOR said he - cnild not grant an in- junction in this case, unless the affidavit of 'the defendant was satisfactorily answered. lie therefore directed the case to stand over till Friday next,• that there might be tune to file daiita in reply. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 16. THE KING V. BIRCH, RICE, WALKER, SEAN, AND OTIIRS. [Further 'Particulars.] This was an indictment for a riot. The defendants had suf fered judgment to go by default, and were this day brought up to receive the judgment of the Court. }Wm the affidavits put in on the part of the prosecution it appeared that there exists amongst tne ribband weavers of 'Coventry, of which body the defendants were worthy members, a' combination, or associa tion, for regulating the prices at which the journeymen were to be remunerated. This society had funds, and one of its rules was, that any journeyman -.who should presume to work for less wages than fixed by the society, or any master who should be known to pay lower wages, should be liable to the folloWing penalty, namely, to be placed on an ass, with his face towards the animal's tail, and in this degrading situation to be.paraded through all the principal streets of the town. A journeyman named Amos Carver had presumed to work under price, and became the object of the association's vengeance. ' He was taken per force from his residence, placed in the pre scribed position on the animal, and carried through all the streets of Coventry, accompanied by a numerous rabble ; and, as it appeared, the defendants were the parties actively em ployed in carrying the whole ceremony into effect. They had • since made their peace with Carver by giving him ,61., but the prosecutor had persisted in the prosecution. The facts being established by the, affidavits, the prisoners' Counsel addressed the Court in mitigation, and the SOLICI- T 0 R.GENE RAL in aggravation. Mr. Justice BAYLEY proceeded to pronounce the judgment of the Court, and in doing so commented in strong terms on the mischievous tendency of these combinations, all of which were illegal. He reminded the defendants, that had Carver received any personal hurt of which he had died within the year, they would every one of them have. been liable to be tried for mur der. As to their having made compensation to Carver, that might be satisfactory to the individual ; but public peace was public property, and Carver could have no power, to stop the prosecntion, which had been very .roperly persisted in. /The Court had taken all the favourable circumstances of the case into their consideration, and' given the defendants the advantage , of them—namely, that .since the transacting' now under inves• tigation, the association had not attempted to repeat the impro per conduct here. complained of. The defendants had also suf fered judgment to go by default, and some of them had already , suffered several months' imprisonment. The judgment of the Court, therefore, was, that each of the defendants should pay a fine of 201.'t0 the 'King, and enter into securities for five years, themselves in 401. and two sureties in '2Ol. each ; that nine of them should be imprisoned nine months; two seven months ; and dne six months, 'in Warwick-castle ; and that they should be further imprisoned till security was found and fine paid. • COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 16. CODE NAPOLEON. . CLOTIPET M4CARTHY. This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a.Gentleman re siding in the island of Mauritius, to recover from the defendant, who had held the office of Deputy Paymaster-General of the British forces in that Island, the sum of 5.0001. being the value of a house occupied by. the defendant, and while in his tenancy, dekroyed by fire. The action was founded on ajudgment given against the defendant in the Supreme Court of that Island ; find ing him liable for the loss by the 173 d Article of the Code-Napo leon (the existing law there), by which it was declared that the tenant of a house destroyed by fire should be liable for the value of that house, unlesslie could spew that the fire had arisen from public enemies, or unavoidable accident. The cause was tried en London, before Lord Chief Justice Dallas and a Special Jury, when the plaintiff recovered a.verdict for the full amount of his damages, subject-to a point reserved as to a variance be twine the foreign judgment stated in the declaration, and that proved in evidence. Mr. Serjeant LENS had, on.a former day in this term, moved for a rule to eet aside, the verdict, according to the reservation at the trial, when The Co tlßVintimated that the party intending to move had not complied with the rule of this Court, by furnishing the Chief Justice with notice of his intention. Mr. Serjeant LENS assured the Court that the point was im portant in its nature, on which The CEZEF JUSTICE promised to look into the case; and if he thought that justice required the suspension of the rule, it should be done. On this day he expressed his opinion, that the justice of the case had been satisfied by the verdict; and the party must therefOre take the consequence of his own ne gligence. No blame was imputable to the defendant for his conduct ;sand it was highly probable that . the Government, on examining into ti7e circumstances of the case,,might reimburse the loss he had suffered. . . ARCHES' • COURT, Nov. 16. CONTEMPT OF COURT. On the sitting of the Court this morning, a memorial was read, directed to Sir Jokier neon'. (Dean of the Arches), from a Lady named Barlee, at present confined in the jail of IpSwich. It stated that the memorialist had been a prisoner since June, 1821, in pursuance of an order of the Court, consequent on a monition, directing her to return to her husband, for the Pon-compliance with which - she had been declared in contempt of Court. She declared that it was impossible she could return, because she did not know where her husband resided, he having no fixed residence; and, that, in consequence of the treatment she had received, she found it impossible to live with him. In - the year 1815, a mutual separation had taken place, but she was subsequently seized, and imprisoned by him, and had afterward sworn the peace againSt him. She had been living separate from him ' previous ,to the institution of the suit against her._ She bad been et considerable heiress, but since her confine ment her husband did not allow her any maintenance, and she had merely the common gaol allowance. At the time of her imprisonment she had been labouring under a liver complaint, which'had been since materially increased, and she feared her continuance in that place would prove fatal, and she therefore prayed the merciful interposition of the Court. • This Memorial was accompanied with the recommendation of the Sheriff; and several or the Magistrates of the county of Suffolk, stating that the petition was fully entitled to the consi deration of the Court. Sir J. Nicola. said that this Memorial, together with the recommendation of the Sheriff and Magistrates of Suffolk, had given the Court an opportunity of publicly noticing the case of this unhapyy woman, and of informing those who were interested in her behalf, that, whilst the judge of this Court fully commiserated her condition, yet be had pot the power to afford relief in the manner claimed. Mrs. Barlee had been imprisoned for contempt, and an erroneous opinion seemed 'to prevail that contempt must be shown to the Court itself, and that the party might be released by . the Court. This was a great error. A contempt of Court' meant a refusal to perform some act which was in justice due to the other party—such as, refusal to put in an answer or to pay wits, and the releace was at the discretion of the other party. Persons married were compelled to lite together; and if either withdrew without a proper and lawful cause, he or she might be compelled to re turn. Cruelty, for instance, or the infidelity of one of the par ties would lee A lawful cause. But quelay and manifest danger Must be distinctly proved. The Come could' not eneter into dis putes about property, or listen to vain' and ill-founded alarms. It was - not sufficient to make a., charge of cruelty—it must be substantiated by evidence. In . this case Mrs. Berke had whthdrawn from her husband, and a suit had been instituted by him to compel her to return. She had pleaded cruelty, and sufficient time was allowed her to adduce her evidence, but no evidence was adduced. The Court was then compelled to close the cause, and order her return. A monition tq that effect had been issued, which, not being obeyed, the Court was repeatedly urged by the husband to pronounce Mrs. Barlee in contempt. Several letterS had been, very improperly, •ad dressed to the Judge of this Court and others by this lady, complaining of the treatment of her husband and the con conduct of the law agents, and accusing them of a con spiracy 'to deprive her of her property. The Judge could not act upon these letters in a matter pending before him, but they did indiCate such aberrations of mind as to induce Min to throw out a suggestion to the friends of the woman to examine whether any acts of insanity could be proved ; far insane persons, not being responsible for their conduct, could snot be guilty of contempt, No evidence of this kind was ad duced, and, after several applications ' the Count, carrying its forbearance to its full length, could no longer resist the applica tion of the husband to pronounce Mre. Bailee in contempt. The imprisonment had taken place. under the authority of the tem poral jurisdiction, nor could the Court now interfere, except on compliance with the monition, and unless it could be proved ,that she was in a state of mind whiCh rendered her in competent either to obey or disobey, the Court could take no step. Here, perhaps, the Court might stop, having stated that redress was not within its power. What he should add might be considered extra-judicial, and as aiming from an individual. But he felt it his duty to make these obServatione publicly. In' the first place, he should address (himself to the, consideration of the husband. This unhappy woman, 'during . an imprisonment of a year and a half, had been suffering considerably both in body and mind. What was the object of the husband ? not to obtain the corMbrt of her society -=not to defend his own charaCter, for his wife not having produced any evidence in support of her charges, he must be presumed innocent, and he would do well to consider whether he should not consent to her release. 'With respect to the wife, " the Court would recommend to her friends and legal advisers, to consider, whether, if Mrs. Barlee be in sound mind, she could not lie prevailed on to return to her husband, on his pointing out his bane fide residence. If, she were perfectly sane, and not obstinate, she might be assured she could return with perfect safety, and a guarantee for her security might be obtained. If after her return, her husband shOuld be guilty of cruelty, then she would be justified in withdrawing, and instituting a new suit of separation. But if she found tier alarms were unfounded, then she would see just grounds for remaining. If on the other hand, she was la bouring under mental deltieion, on that circumstance her friends might ground an application for her release, and the husband 'would have it in his power to contravene the fact. His next suggestion was to the Sheriff and Magistrates, who had acted so humanely in' forwarding'their recommendations, and he was in duced to make this suggestion partly from the memorial, and partly from a letter addressed to himself personally by the un happy woman. These gentlemen, and all who heard him, must be aware that this woman was not in the prison of this Court. She was under the authority and protection of the Sheriff and County Magistrates. The letter be had received from her stated that she had been deprived of clothes and food ; that the Magi strates had acted on the statements of the other side; that she was confined to the common gaol allowance ; that the grOsieSt abuses were going forward in the gaol ; that her hus band' was barbOured by the gaoler ; that she was kept in close confinement, 'and in order to prevent her from getting air at the window, a pistol was fired up at it on Christmas day ; that although she was an heiress, she was compelled to beg for food, which 'was a precarious subsistence; her person and property were not protected; that justice had al ways been denied her; that her duty to God and to herself farbade her returning to her hueband to be murdered ; and that it would have been mercy to have put her to death rather than have subjected her to legal torture. She further stated that she had been six weeks ' without shoes, and she called upon him, as a Member .of Parliament, to visit the gaol, as no femele should ever be treated in the manner she had been. Now this letter might all have been dictated by delusion, but still it was important that the matter should be investigated , by the Sheriff. All that she should.be subjected to was simple con finement within the jail, and no hardship or severity should be resorted to to compel her to comply with the monition. If the jailer had harboured her. husband, it would be well for the Sheriff and Magistrates to consider whether their interference would net be necessary. Haying said. thus much, he had only to hope that these observations would find their way to the pu de§ correctly. It was notin the power of the Court to grant the_ prayer of the present memorial. SAN - DER v. DAVIS, CLERIC. This was a criminal suit promoted against the defendant, who is licensed curate of the parish of Charlton, and of two chapels, in the county of Oxford, for immoral and indecent conduct. The allegation on the plaintiff's part charged, that the defendant was guilty of habital drunkenness, of using pre fane and obscene language on various occasions, of gross in decorum in the performance of his clerical duties, and alSo of conniving at and openly wittnessing the adultery of his wife.. In one of the articles it was stated, that the consequence of his ill character and behaviour, had been to bring scandal on the church, and to induce many of its zealous members to fre quent in preference the meeting houses of dissenters in that neighbourhood. - PIIILLIMORE read several of the affidavits, and sub mitted that the charges were clearly and fully established. The defendant appeared neither in person nor by counsel. — His Proctor, however, consented that the evidence should be taken as read. Dr. ADAM was heard chiefly on the point respecting the original authority of the Court, that being the Court of the Arch bishop, -but which, he maintained, was not excluded by the canon from a complete jurisdiction over such offences as were in this case imputed to the defendant. • Sir Jorm Nrcom., as Dean of the Arches, then pronounced hiS opinion on the case submitted to him. The Court of Arches had, beyond all doubt, the power of suspending clergymen -from their office and functions, upon evidence of great miscon duct, although this power was not to be so employed as to amount in fact to a right of privation. -lt was to the credit of the church that so few classeS were to be found, in which the infliction of punishment had been necessary. Taking, how ever, the case of Dixon_ and Harrison for his guide, he did think himself bound to visit this defendant with a sentence of suspension. That, to be sure, was a case of great enormity, though extenuated in a considerable degree ba the circumstance of a partial derangement of mind. The defendant was there suspended from all ecclesiastical functions for the period of two years ; at the end of which he was restored, on producing the certificates of two other clergymen, as to his recent propriety of conduct. With this case before him and looking at the nature of the eleventh article, he apprehended that be should shrink from his duty if he were to suspend this person for a less period than three years, which he' now did ; and, at the same time, directed, that before restoration to his office, he must produce testimonials of his 'intermediate good behaviour from three clergymen. A copy of the sentence was ordered to be sent to the Consis scut Court of the Bishop of Oxford. In the case of Hodgson and the Rev. T. Schultz, such addi tional articles as referred to the years 181 8, 1820, and 1821, were admitted, and others which carried hack the criminal charge to the year 1816, and introduced collateral circum stances, were rejected. Arthur Gifford, -a shoemaker, was enjoined to do penance, and pay the costs of a suit promoted against him for defamation. COMMERCIAL INTELLIGENCE. .amig/MWM••• The following letter has been received by the Chairman of the Ship Owneis' Society : Admiralty Office, Nov. 15, 1822. Sin—My Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty having received several representations as to. the inconvenience which the maritime trade of the country might suffer , if the law pro hibiting merchant vessels from using any of the colours appro priated to his - Majesty's ships were to be strictly enforced, with-. out the allowance of a reasonable time formakiug the necessary arrangements for altering the signals now in use amongst mer chant vessels, their Lordship* have been, in consequence, pleased. to sign a warrant which they trust will obviate any present in convenience, and will allow full time to the ship-owners to sub stitute other colours in lieu of pendants and the union jack. The use of the jack as a signal for a pilot wa.i already autho rised by their Lordships' wan - ant of the IGth of September last; but in order to hring the whole subject into one view, their Lordships have thought fit to repeat their permission in the new warrant, which will appear in the Gazette of to-morrow night, and of which I now enclose you a copy. I am, Sir, your very obedient servant, (Signed) J. W. CROKER. j. W. Buckle, Esq. Mark-lane. COPY OF WARRANT ENCLOSED BY THE • COMMISSIONERS FOR EXECUTING THE OFFICE OF LORD HIGH ADMIRAL. OF THE UNITED 'KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, S.C. &c. Whereas, by his Majesty's Royal Proclamation bearing date the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and one, and by "divers statutes now in force, his Majesty's subjects are prohibited from hoisting, carrying, or wearing in any of their ships or vemels, his Majesty's jack, commonly called the union jack, or any pendants, or such colours as are usually worn by his Majesty's ships, without particular warrant for their so doing, from his Ms jest or his High Admiral of Great Britain, or the Commissioners for executing the office of High Admiral for the time'being. And whereas, it has been represented to us that the union jack, hoisted at the top-mast head (or fore-top-mast head of vessels liming more than one mast), is a general and well Understood signal for a pilot, which it would be inexpedient at present to alter. 18 7 c do, therefore, by virtue of the power and authority vested in us, hereby warrant and authorize all his Majesty's subjects to hoist the union jack at the top-mast head of their ships or vessels, where there is but one mast, or at the fore-top-mast head where there are more than one mast, as a signal for a pilot, but strictly prohibiting the wearing or hoisting the said jack for any other purpose whatsoever, or longer than is neces sary for procuring a pilot. And whereas, the proper flags, which by the said proclama tion the ships and vessels of his Majesty's subjects are autho rised to wear, are not sufficient to enable them to make signals without the addition of some other colours ; we do further war rant and authorise all his Majesty's subjects to hoist on board their ships and vessels, by way of signal only, any colours (ex cept pendants and the union jack), provided such colours shall not be hoisted in the place where similar colours are usually worn in his Majesty's ships and vessels. And whereas, it has been represented to us that certainsignals have been heretofore established and agreed upon, and are now in use amongst his Majesty's subjects, wherein pendants and the union jack are employed, and that it would be inexpedient to prohibit the use of the said signals until reasonable time for substituting softie other description of colours in lieu of the pendants and union jack be allowed. We do further warrant and authorize all his Majesty's sub jects to hoist and use, for signals-only, pendants and the union jack until the Ist of January, 1824, and no longer ; upon and after which day no pendant is, under any pretence whatsoever, to be hoisted in the ships or vessels of any of his Majesty's sub, jects, nor the union jack, except only as before provided, as the signal of a pilot. Given under our hands and the seal of the office of Admiralty, this 15th day of November, 1822. (Signed) . MELVILLE. WM. JOHNSTONE HOPE. By command of their Lordships; (Signed) J. W. CROKER. ELECTION OF A POPE.—It is laid that an Arch duke of AUSTRIA, who is one of the present Cardinals, Wit be the next Rope. There are four different modes of electing the Supreme Pontiff; by inspiration, by compromise, by scru tiny, and by access. An election by inspiration is effacted..by several of the Cardinals calling aloud, as by a sudden impulse, the name of the person whom they wish to raise to the pontifical dignity. This method of resorting to the pretext of supernatural aid is seldom relied on, except when all human means have failed of success. It is called an election by compromise, when the Cardinals, not being able to determine on a proper person, agre e to submit the choice of a Pontiff to one or more of their own body, nominated for that purpose. In choos ing a Pope by scrutiny, the Cardinals each write their own name with that of the person whom they wish to recommend, on abil let or ticket ; which they afterwards place, with many ct.re.monies and genuflexions, in a large and highly ornamented chalice on the altar of the chapel in which, they assemble. The ticketi are then taken out by an officer appointed from their own body for that purpose, and the number is carefully compared with that of the persons present; after which if it appear that any one of the Cardinals has two-thirds of the votes in his favOur., he is declared to be canonically elected Pope. When, hey ever, after repeated trials, this does not occur, a new proceed ing takes place, which is called election by access, in which: any Cardinal may accede to the vote of another by an alt4a . tion of his ticket in a prescribed form. When, by these means, the choice of a Pontiff is effected, the tickets are prudently committed to the flames, to prevent all preteXt for further inquiry.