The Express.
London, England, 1849-08-04 00:00:00

RAW intelligence.

EQUITY COURTS.—YuTaDAT.
8117082 T,ca flsaneatsa winner.
WHISTON, Ctsaa, v. Tan DEAN AND CHAPTIM Or
Rocuastran —Caresser. Oaremaa &soots.
The Sukcitor-Ciesord having ',retied La this case, the
Vice-Chancellor obeerved that if the appellee:nest of the
plaintiff to the office of head master gave hint a right as tans
tat qua trust to all epos the dies and chapter r trader
for payment of the sticend attached to the office the circum-
stance that the defendants were an eeclesiariori corporatism
Woe sot edited! sufficient to deprive this court of jurisdiction.
The question of trust would depend upon the
Iseluage of tie statute creating the office; ano
thee gaieties would be whether the plaintiff had
been lawially displaced. Supposing a trust to have
bra crested, the goer would be bound to administer it, and
in der rmisiag that question the court would be governed
by its ordinary rules. Supposing there to be a unit, and
rat the bishop, bring visitor, had refused to Weiler, it did
not appear-cigar that the question whether the plaintiff had
been lawfully deprived of his office could te &tonere(' se •
question incidental to the administration of the trust.
Assuming the car to be sue of Sur, and that it was only
nrereary to determine the plaintiff's perinea r a
foundation upon which to recut* the trust, the
proper ware would be, either to retain the motion giv-
ing liberty to the plaintiff to proceed by action at law or
direct as Ism, or order the case to stand over to enable the
parties to try the right by mandamus. lf, on the other
hand, the ass came wnhia the sathority of hiegdalen Col-
lege (5 Day.), and other cases of that description, and the
jurisdiction were altogether with the visitor, the question
would arise whether this Court could interfere or not. It
was difficult to distinguish between the cue of college,.
where there were fellows and others rem iving atipeads
seder the statutes of the college, and cases like
the present, in which the founder had directed
in what manner the corporate body should act,
and bed appointed stipends to be paid by them to
lar officers for the performance of particular duties. '
roitiertll parrs* of the argument the schoolmaster, though
his duties were confessedly of a very high order, must be
considered as upon the same footing as subordinate officers,
and the founder must be considered as directing that there
should be certain funds, out of which certain tilos», as
whoolasseter, choristers, janitor, and others, should be paid
Unless, therefore, the janitor, on being discharged, amid
come to the ream and alleging a Wirt in his fir
voter, cell for a decreeepos that tooting, nei-
ther would that raise be open to the wetter.
His Honor then said be raid act Really diaper alba we
until he had referred to the authorities idled ea bosh sides,
sad to the statutes, the luggage ot whisk might be ma-
terial.

ARCHES COURT.-YzanDAT.
I. the report yesterday, "in re darkest," the harried
Judge i• eteesd to have NU that "he meg have desired the
elealiSOD of the Lord Chancellor." It Amid have beta
" of the eitatteellor of the dioosse."l

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.—YmazDAT.
Irmo Ma. Coinumersa ILaass.
Tan Dims
_UT BRUNSWICK 11. TEN &MUNK IN ZS

MATrusw FLINDZiI PRAWN!.
This issolvest, who had been proprietor of the Satirist
newspaper, applied to be (harkened, and was opposed ti
Mr. Cooke, oa the part of the Duke of Brunswick, ter ties
damages awarded is sa action ise libel. Mr. Birdie up
ported the application.
The reseed id tha action, "The Duke of Brunswick tr.
Peanut " was produced by John Herri.os, clerk to Mr.
Warnad, attorney for the plaintit. The writ was hawed
en the Ist Nov., 1847. and the canes wee tried at the 'Wisp
situ 'Frisky term, 1848, at Westminster, in the Court of
ellemee Beath. The jury gays I,f 001. damages, and the
essta bad been taxed at 2101. No part of the damages or
NSW had been paid, and the insolvent was tetrad in exece-
dem at the wit of the Doke. The libels were long, and
were easteined in nine shine of parchment. The record
was vary formidable in appearance, containing a number of
Mdah

Mr. Commissioner Harris remarked that it Will not nine-
airy to so Into the case; he should judge by the amount of
doors.
Mr. Cooks sold that aoreadiog to the established practice
of the coact in eases of libels the facts could not be intend
into.

Mr Simi' apprehended that I. this cue the court would
permit him to show that the insolvent had no control over
the Satirist during a part of the period comprised by the
libels. In fact a good deal of irrelevant matter was put in
the record for which the iasolvent was not responsible.
Mr. Cooke observed that the jury had considered all the
tams before they gavietheir verdict. He must protest against
any departure from the practice of the mart. The facts could
not be cone into in thh gout.
Mr. Bunk hoped the court would allow him to show that
there was no malice on the part of the insolvent.
The insolvent, in answer to Mr. Cooke, stated that he
had been proprietor of the Satirist. He had no interest in
the paper now. He sold his interest to Mr. Carroll, and
that permit had, he believed, nothing to do with it. Car-
roll had been a bankrupt. He (the insolvent) succeeded
Mr. Gregory, and to his knowledge Mr. Gregory was not
now proprietor of the limper. He (the insolvent) had no-
thing to give ape to his creditors.
In reply to his counsel (Mr. Simi') the insolvent said he
first became proprietor of the Satinet in February, 1841.
He was employed previously by Mr. Gregory to write for
the paper, sad also to manage the printing department.
Before February, 1841, he had no control over the paper.
Mr. Skate repeated that hie object was to show that there
was no stalks by the insolvent.
Mr. Cooke said the action was he a libel.
Mr. Commissioner Harris, after remarking that the writ
in the action was in 1847, a•k•d when the libels appeared ?
Mr Blois answered, is 1845 and 1848. Sorely, in a cue
of this description, when a judgment was prayed, it wa
essential to show degrees et malice.
The insolvent was farther examined by his counsel. He
stated that he remembered when Mr. Gregory, in 1845,
attempted the theatrical profession. The usual party who
wrote the theatrical nwices was sent He saw the copy
before it wee printed, and did not alter it. Subsequently,
when Mr. Gregory appeared at the Haymarket, the gentle-
man whom duty it was to review theatrical performances
attended. He sew the article written on that ormaion, and
only made some trivial alteration. He (the insolvent) pur-
chased of Gregory the copyright of the paper on the 18th
Feb , 1844, singe which time Gregory had not wricen articles
for It, neither adding or altering anything written for the

psPei
Mr.. Cooks addressed the mart. In ode!II like the present,
how der there WY malice wee not for the court to determine.

It wee a matter of history that his highness had been ex-
posed to violent ►nd malignant libels, and be had sought the
protection of the law. What the motives of the parties were
who bad lin,lled the duke it was not for the court to cowl-
der. Criminal inforeastio: a had been tiled, actions brought,
and the duke bad put biscuit into the box to be examined,
and no one had dared to put to him the charges they had
made against him in their malignity. In this ease the
duals, were sensually large, and the jury no doubt gave
them with the view to put an end to the libels against his
highness, sad ell the curt in this case had to say
war, what term of imprisonment the insolvent should
undergo for the large damages awarded against him.
The Duke of Brueswick bad incurred emit ex-
puce in protecting himself from the attacks made
on his character. Whether the parties thought that they
would extort WSW part ef the 15,0001. he had # xpended in has
vindication, he (Mr. Cooke) did not know. They had not
succeeded; and now his highness cum to this court to protect
him, and prayed the court to peacetime's a summary judg.
meet on the insolven'. The court had the power to rams .d
for two yeers in eases of libel, and, to his stied, there was no
reason why one day ot that term should he 1. awned in the
present instance. Thou who trafficked in libels should know
that poetise were not to be frightened into terms ; sod, there-
fore, he celled upon the court to give a very heavy juddmant
against #he party now b.fure the court.
Mr. Birnie, in cling to reply on the part of the insolvent,
differ d from his learoed friend in hi, view of the section
ender which his client was oppthed. There was a difference
is lthele and the ell.gr.es ot malice to be considered. The
learned counsel instanced a case in which a writer had
alluded •o a well-known female poetess, and Lord Denman
►ad decided that although no sulfas was intended, yet the
party should pay all the expenses. He apprehend d that
in this caw, in whin►. there was no malice, the Court
would give a different view to the clause than the one asked
by his hutted friend.
Mr. Cumallesioner Harris observed that the word
" malice" in the cause tad nothing to do with an action fur
libel. _ . .

Mr. Birnie was of opinintt that malice was the sml and
plaint of the provinna. The jury bad nut the power to
.zemme the insolvet.t as this Court bad, and his Honour
had heard the manner in which the insole, nt was re.ponsible
fee the theatricst notices vshien bad appeared. The Court
had beard that ert en the person who had been annected
wf h the Satirist appeared on it. stag* his performances were
reeiewed, and ie them there was no refere nee t, the Duke
of Htunnwielr. The cowardly attack to drive Mr Gregory
from the a age was enmesented upon in the paper, and yet
the ina•ly nt had b en in the record made to titer the mime
d►eds of then before he was connected with the paper,
and by "empties libel." the verdict had been given against
him;
Mr. Clenmaindesar Harris on reference to the record found
the words •' German prince."
Mr. Bi ate ena•eoded teat articles wit► which his client
hid aesthetes to d . had been " shovelled into the remard," and
as adop iv- libel pr vied.
Mr Cooke remarked that the in•;.lvent has tel the
ether and the jury believed it and give damage e.
Mr. sje,,Je ..4111thi 'e d hy pr caring auesost the d .ctrice of
ad•.ptive 1 bele, which was a• had se constru,ive treason.
Mr. C• mincsioner Harris deferred giviaz judgment until
Monday n• ut.—Jud‘ment lichened ammaiogty.