The Express.
London, England, 1851-04-28 00:00:00

the presest, because in all these there is another court in
which the decision may be appealed againit, whereas the
sisiterial power is executed in a summary manner, and
wittiest say power of appeal.
The mart then rose, the further argument being ad-

Mint' of the statutes to which it would be his duty to refer.'
rl e first to which he would call attention was the 4th,
which war entitled " De officio Decant," sod in which was
th. following passage : " Statnimue et volume: ut Demists
qui pro tctnpore Wert, con onsnisolicitudine, pree+it central-
cos ireternique tninistros tee-lent • • • curet autem ut
dittos ~thee cum dec.'s) • celehrantur, ut COitchnkr• moor
Script). diebus hahaantur, ut pueri cunt fruetu instituantur,
st eleernosyme pauperibue distributantur. CI in univerwon
ter
eonereolita sibi munera, singuli fideli obeant. Preemie
Decant interes-e dcbet, ut gonna praocns fuerit, ho-
Weetam et enmpetentem familiam Mat. Paupenbua
.
proem frangat, qui in re ipaius conscientiam
ut esti et (mollies' in renni se exhi-
bcat." Under this statute Mr. Whist= was clearly
under the superintendence of the dean. The next statute
to which he should refer was the 26th, "De Puerto Gram-
maticia et eorum inforrnatorihus." By this statute the
founder ordained and appointed that there should be by t e
e.ection and nomination of the Dean, " Viginti pueri,
pauperes et amicorum ope destituti, de boniseeciedie nostror !
atque hoe puerto volumus impensie coeclesee
sorter all donee medinerem Latins Grammatice notitiam
adepti fuerint, et Latin? loqui, et Latent' grieve deree-
rint, tai rei dabitur quatuor =minim spatium." This
statute then directed that there should be ei head master i
wool undermaeter elected by the dean (or in his absence the !
vier-aeon) and chapter, and who, if negligent, might be
etoninta by them. The next statute to alibi% he should
refer was the 3.lth, " De Currigendia Execuibus ;" and
by that if any minor canon, clerk, or other minis-
ter, should be guilty of a light offence, ne should
fan rometed by the dean " Sin gravies fuerit delietum
(si juettim jud)cabitur) ab beim expellatur a quibw, fuerit
adnaissus.' That etoitute, therefore, clearly gave the dean
anti chapter the porn r Uo remove the master. The last
statute to which he would refer WWI the 35th, " De visite-
time teekeir," by whit h the bishop for the time being is
appointed visitor, and invested with full power and autho-
rite. to punish and reform all offenees, and to do all things
appertaining to the office of visitor, and to him all, as well
the draw we the canon+ and other miuietere of the church, in
respect to aU the foregoing matters, are enjoined to obey. It
is clear, therefore, that here iv a vitiator regularly appointed, '
and it low; been reeteanised as law from the earliest times,
that where then' is a visitor the only appeal is to him. The
authorities upon this subject were uniform from the ease of
" Phillip s. Bury" (eases Temp. Hardwick, 212, and
rejoined oleo 2 Tern Rep. 10, as an addition
to the case of The Queen r. The Bishop of Ely "),
down to the case of "'the Queen r. the Dean and Chapter
of Ch. ster" (rf ported in II Lou dotterial, Q.8.,4fe1), in 'which
a neitelamue had teen applied for to restore to the office at
(florist, r a lay clerk or .inging man of the cathedral church
of Chi -ter, from which lie hail been unjustly and without
rc...ooohle cause nllloVellhy the dean and chapter, to which
the il, an and eliaptcr made a return setting out the sta-
tute., by which it appeared that the bishop was the visitor,
awl the court he'd that he hod exclusive jurisdiction to in-
quiry pito and deternene the legality of the removal, and
that an upptal to hen was the only mode by which the
party nonmed Could seek for redress, awl that the dean and
chapter wen: not bowel in their return to the mandamus to
state the particular offence fur which the removal had
takiel place. It is null...sable to dietiuguish that case
fee. the present, so far as asserting the general priu-
triple that when de re it a visitor retort must he hail to him.
lint the n mouldier point is suggested by the second plea—
,. , that the visitor was in this 'see interested iu the Cause
of dionhuel. That emotions to this, that the complainant
writ, s a wandaboue lib I against the bishop. and then seeks
to esail liiinew If of that 10.1 to oust him of hie jurioliction
as e.t.a ; that is, that tleo bishop is to Ise disqualified, not
Is) any act of he emu, bet by an act of Mr Whiston him-
pelt. Ilt then referred to the judgment of Vice-Chancellor
Mram, when the neater was before him in which the
pond of the interval of the bishop was raised, but upon
which olke Viev•Clianeellor gave nu opinion, nut moldering
it role vont to the matter Lahore him.
Sir F. Tlse+iip.r (Mr. Itochtfurd Clarke with bim), contra.
f.ir, he commion+l his argument, wished to know
vole thee he was to understand that the special grounds el'
~morn r. whirls h col wit been in any way adverted to is
the argument on the other silk, %err uttaridoroal
Su V. Kelly 1.41i1 ll.' del not intend to rely upon any
snt,.ls t, Aunt al ground., hot should nay on the MUM
pr. 1 win. bhe hail argued, unless the court held that
th, y ...old go into the ogisivory of the cause of removal.
in which el•., slooultl of course' be prepared to argue that
that C. 10.• cat Syffit•to nt.
SO F. r .aid he would defer the question raised
ht tin- best pho. a. to whether the cause of tenured was a
I.ie fon one, sa4l womb! premed with that under the second
pha, 414 , the right of appeal to the dittos. (ho this puint
le vomit Admit that the leidoup was appointed the general
%tette ; 'and that it it was t.tahlisiwd that hr was visitor,
goose' his, the CAW was derided by the " Queen r. Than and
etaiarr ol Cluster," to which reference had been made on
the ether side. But the nal question was, whether the
h,-loop was not iu this matter, and if so, whether
he. petiole thou eat MA gone. This was the question raised
lq the comet plea, *huh, in substance, alleged that the
Ail hapt. r. being in receipt of gnatly-increased re-
v, woe. di t not make once-Vent allowance) for alimony to
the outlets., but still allowed 41. per annum to tour etu-
d. on. prone sing to the Unsvereity, and 21. 13e. Q. each to
my poor boy*, as ordained by the fouuder, while
the income of the dean, which was fired by
the Co llider at Post per en ......, was now ittereseeff to
newer& a 1,4001 , end that of the prebend. which WY
hovel at 201., was inereawd to 62W. 19.. 9,1., and that Mr.
Wineens thinking that the alimony of the scholars ought
to be inen-aeed rateably had repro witted this r. speetfully to
the dean and chapter, who refweal to inen-ase it, that he
wisoliecl to the Iti•lion, who ,-fused to enquire whether the
statutes had heeil plie,l with ur not, whereat...ll h.,
pulr-
bhthed the pamplil. t in ye stun, and the ph-a then set
soot several patteages Irma it, and among thou tlw fol-
low .-"Weus oy now prowled to the reinainiug cathe-
dral.. ef the Ut.r loom: 'lion, and our lint remark will he
thoot we gnat out 0.1411..41.i.51i0, the toys at l'anterloury too
moth. Soul: 1031, i• MAIO,II for the forty at Worcester,
1•114. are. 111 a sere- iolletO. !viewed of 2/. 134. 4.1., they get
only Iteateteh, for 2/. 2, W. it taken loon each boy and
given to the ...mid master, and fn• more is further
.;111.11,t,41,' or taken from them, and given to the head
ma-t•-r. The result of ahich is, that the head master has
bad a 11-.4 stqwiul than the second and that the
forty boys at Worcester. instead of being maintained at the
cost. and charges of thi church, get ris. 10d. each. And
yi t income of the late Dean of Worcester was raised
from leo!. to I,ISW. 11t. 9.1., and that of each prebendery
from 201. to GNI. 3 lit., Whits. the 21. 13.. 4.1 was and is
tot amen to do. toil Surely, then. the 40 boys of Wor-
n ster may join the 40 at Canterbury, and in the language
of the chapter. of England, urge the manifest injustice of
taking from one what I. his and giving it to another whose
it is net ; unless, indeed, they prefer the heathen mended,
mid quote their Cicero, and soy of the trunefere, or ' con-
veyanee..• by which they suffer, ' Quid aliud *et *his 41111,
crown.. albs dare aliens ' As for myself, I will not
venture to express what plain-dealing and plain-speaking
men will think and say of euch doing" by dignitarieS
oh the church : one of whom, having once combined
in hie own person the office% of Dean of Worcester
end Bishop od Itochteter has in the latter eaparite, been
formally called upon, .to lie is by a solemn obligation m-
yosin .1, to enhore the Awry:ince of statutes identical with
thole Iv leek he hail as Ili-an of a cathedral hmiself neglected
to maintain, C.CII though • 61 within oath was adniinietered
to him on his atlinienon. binding him to maintain these
statutes to the utmost of hie power.' Neglect, indeed,
whitoli might well provoke that indignant remark on the
conduct of deans and prebendaries made by the ltishop of
London loefore the Mew of Lords, in wiener to obetva-
tines on tho obligation, of the episcopal oath, and
which as his lordship said, were • eepreeved in
Language calculated to tit upon some of the bi-
shops en imputation of little less than ptrjury.' I feel,
to.. that the authors of those waited and unworthy de- INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT—S.trutto.tv.
like. which I base cuutlibincel sseverely but vintevely would „ ,
thei olves demn, if not punish them in others ; while Ix uz JOHN ti'OODKOFF.--ra ...ttOSS ..ASE Or FRAIN).
them advocate., if any there be, can only say of them, This ineolvent, who had been in partnership with one
.• ere
magi. germ defundi powunt." (See the pamphlet, George Itieloarti Dann, in Orford-street, as boot and shoe
4th eel., p. 113.) The plea then alleged that the objeet of makers was "P,l"ett, by Mr. Nichols fur a M. Jean
the mother was to charge the bishop of Rochester directly Petit, a whole•sal •1' such boot and shoe manufacturer at
with the snalpreetic.e. at Worcester, as the dean of that ~...Lyorts. The insolvent and his partner Dann got from Mr.
place, and with knowledge of the malpractice, at Ho- seated, the agent of the opposing ere r, ea) ut gout
dto ••'" /. • Is
in three months, which goods shortly afterwards cheap-
Chester, cuff that for this, which the dean and chapter
aseerted to be a scandalous libel against the...data and au Erased from the shop in Oxford-street. The insolvent said
other deans and chapters. and against the Bishop of ""en had taken the proceeds, and when he was seen he
Rochester, they rynentel Mr. Win...ton. The question made a similer charge against the insolvent. When the
is whether as the charge is removing for a libel insolvent was arrested he was smoking a cigar and drinking
or the ,p. there it not etwariedhy law brandy and water with Daan. and the latter made his
a qualification on hit general eiritoreol power, no. escape. The insolvent admitted that he was with Dann,
pending that power when he is himself interested'. No but said he was may drinking tea. The firm hail been in-
Judo, when libelled, would think of acting upon the Md. traduced to Mr Davies by his town traveller, Macklin, who
of an action (or the libel, and it is not correct unasserted on I had been transported for fourteen years for robbing Mr.
Da . ,
the other side, that Mr. Whiston has made the bishop a ; ries A reference was required and a good character
party to this, it is the Dean and Chapter who has-e done so, was Fiveu by a person to whom the insolvent afterwards
by saying that one of the causes of remosal is, that the athnltt'd to M". Davie' a portion of the proceeds arising
p.omphlet is a libel ou the bishop. It cannot be for a nto.. Ifrom the sale of the goods had gone to pay a debt they
'Went doubted that interest will suspend the tiaitorial power. °wed'
•• The I.lyean e. Bishop of Ely: (.:*fenn Report.. 33n); Mr. Davies mentioned • propoeff that the insolvent made
Mr. !cutlet. Buller say..—•• A visitor cannot be a juitrumiw
histo hint, by which he could be paid, and that washy giving
own cause, unless such power is exprowly given • "the firm" a character to wholesale houses, by which goods
A founder may indeed make him so, but such an authority could be obtained, and Mr. Davies could be paid out of the
is not to be implied; la. cannot visit himself."t may, proceeds. Mr. Davies indignantly refused such an offer.
indeed. be much doubted whether a found, r could give such
a power. and there is strung The insolvent. in his domination, denied nearly every
dictum to that effect in • word given by Mr. Davies. He alleged that his partner.
• 114 y r savage" •11 hurt 8-lit • •'d tha Dann, had absconded, taking with him nearly all the pro
s o where l. " t an ,
Act of Parliament made against natural nand. , as that • i ccedlaof the goods obtained from the opposing creditors. He
man judge 14 hie own ease, is roil (or • underwent a rigid examination, and made some admissions
Jura nature suet ininiumbilia, and they are loges respecting some bills of exchange, which contradicted his
Icons." The question, therefore, comes to this what is • former statement, and satisfied the Commissioner that he
a personal interest. This matter was ttoneidereel in the ! was equally guilty with Dann.
clarets c. the Bishop of Chester " strange, 797 and • Mr. Commissioner Phillips, after an investigation of
reported also in Bantardidee, 52), wherethe visftotiar several hour', held that there had been a grow making away
power of the B.shop was held to be *wended over the with the property obtained Irons the opposing creditor. It
Manchester College during the time that h, held the war- was a very bad caw of fraud and conspiracy. Ile, there-
denehip of the college in commendant ; and an act of part fore, pronounced against the insolvent a judgment of
Lament, 2 Glee. 11., e. was pawed to enable the King to act twelve calendar munths for making away with property.
as wieder. In the cases of '• Brooks r. Earl of Riven and the insolvent was conveyed to Whitten:es-street prison
(Hardier, 504) and " Wood r. the Mayor and Corponttan to undergo the paniahmetet.
of London (Holt, AS), the principle was tarried further • !
foe three it was held that if the Tinton had any interest he -
could not act even by deputy, and that will remove the sr- " ACCORDING TO COCKER."—(R the many thou-
guineut which might otherwise have been raised, that the sands to whom this phrase is familiar, who his seen the
Bishop ben might act by his: chancellor. It has been work, as orignuilly issued by the author, which furnishes
that the presence of one intormed judge among many will the origin of the expression Dibdin, the bibliographer,
reader the romedings void, even though there is uo proof bad never wen any edition printed in the 17th century,
that the jaftes have acted partiall_y. The Queen r. the and mentions the 32nd edition as the earliest he had met
Commissioners foe Paving the Town of Chelteuhana " with. The first addition of Cocker's Arithmetic," •
MIL 467) where the jodgmeat in an appeal decided duodecimo volume. "printed for Thomas Paesenster on
by magistrates aims of wheat were partners intermted in Lend= Bridge. I1178,'• was sold by auction 011 Saturday
houses the assails of which were soressed to the rate was by 16805. Puttick and BinfiC4 Mime* • collection of
held to be void. Lad so ia " The Queue r. forties@ of curious books and MSS. is me copy in the British
Hens" (6 Q. 8., 7M), eves tkough it was proved that there Museum and en the authority el the onstioneer's catalogue
wee • majority without the interested limy. So in - The , but sae ether espy is knows. Ilene active competition
Queen e. Aberdare Canal Company" (14 Jurist, 435), and mese mewl the curios. fur the peommion of the quaint
O Grand Junction Coast Company v. DWl's" (12 Berm, 1 Utak etieine pettees. Width odd he 111. les. me IMO
IT) which letter me is raw la propels WWII& the Hew Ids WN• W allsgslieli 4.10/ LW, white Lam'
Mae *UM 11114111110, 1111Iivel,Se WON POI%

BAIL COURT:ISATUWAT.
IMMO is Las.-llesia Ya Jena ("witness.
Tax 4:11.1ill 111. Jajess 01Jar1T AND JURY JOIINSOX.—

TER Loscios Dour Conraar.
Janus Garrett and John Johnson, two servants' in the
employ of the London Dock Company, who hail pleaded
guilty to robbing their employers, were brought up in cus-
tody to receive the judgment of the court. James Garrett
pleaded guilty to two indictments which charged him with
stealing on the 21st of December seven bags of pepper,
the property of the London Dock Company ; and also
with stealing on the 27th of February, 1817, one hogsheiul
of sugar, and one bag of pepper, and also one cwt. of pep-
per. The prisoner John Johnson pleaded guilty to stealing
on the 21st of December, 1812, 20011 is. of coffee.
On being asked what they had to say why sentence
should not be passed upon them, the prisoner Johnson said
that he had been in custody since the Gth of December,
1850; that be at once pleaded guilty when charged with
the felony, and had made all the reparation in his power
by giving the London Duck Company every information
and assistance in his power, to enable them to discover the
various felonies that had been committed upon them. He
had a wife and four children entirely dependent upon him
for support, and he begged to throw himself upon the mer-
ciful consideration of the court.
The prisoner Garrett said that he had been in custody
since the 29th of last November, and he hoped his lordship
would deal mercifully with him.
Mr. Justice Coleridge, in passing sentence, said—You,
John Johnson and James Garrett, have to receive the sen-
tence of the court for felonies in respect of which you have
pleaded guilty. There are two indictments which charge
you, James Garrett, with stealing pepper and other
different things, the property of the London Dock
Company, and one indictment which charges you,
John Johnson, with stealing a quantity of coffee also
the property of the London Dock Company. Both of you
were in situations of trust and confidence. The property
was stolen from the docks, and was the property of the
London Dock Company. The great quantity of property
placed in the hands of the Dock Company makes it abso-
lutely neceseary for them to repose trust in the persons
I employed by them with respect to the custody and delivery
of the property. Whether greater care might be used by
the Dock Company, or some better plan adopted by which
the superintendence of the subordinate officers might be ren-
dered more effectual, I really am unable to say. I can easily
believe, from the largeness of the concern and the immense
quantity of goods deposited in the London Docks,
it must be almost impossible to prevent great frauds
and felonies from being committed, unless, on the
one hand, they can rely upon the honesty of
their servants, or, failing that, that the severity of the
law will restrain bad and wicked men from the commis-
sion of crime. Considering these circumstances, and con-
sidering how necessary it is that property should he pro-
tected, and the great quantity of property in the London
Docks, and the frequent commission of crime which may
be anticipated as a result, it is impossible to look at this
ere or to deal with it as an ordinary case of stealing.
It Y absolutely necessary to apportion the amount of pu-
' nianlaent to the facility with which the crime may be
onoilnitted, and the temptation which exists to commit it,
nod also the trust and confidenee reposed in the persons
who break the law,• and regard must also be hail to thc
yoke and amount of the property. I cannot but think
that persons filling your situations must have been in
Moe degree removed beyond the ordinary temptation to
osnamit crime. The respectable appean of one of ou
(Johnson), and the manner in whricahce you are aide
in expreas yourself, leads one to the belief that you obtained
year situation by having a good character, and that your
esayloyers believed that you were acting according to that
wad character which you did not deserve. The court have
when into consideration the imprisonment you have already
dared, and the assistance you have rendered in di/cover-
lets the robberies which have been committed on the Lun-
dell Dock, and from what passed in this court yesterday, I
have reason to believe what you have stated was true. His
lordship then proceeded to observe that he hoped the sen-
tence he was about to pass would have the effect of protect-
ing dock corm:amis.% and would keep their servants from
committing felonies. His lordship then sentenced the pri-
soner, John Johnson, to be confined and kept to hard labour
in the Middlesex House of Correction for the space of nine
calendar months, and the prisoner James Garrett to be im-
prisoned iu the same prison for four calendar months upon
each of the indictments to which he had pleaded guilty,
and to be kept to hard labour.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—SATuaDAT:

grrTIFIMI to P.m*. —ll.real Lois Caw Jrwries !Ram, Ma.
Jtmi Ica Csarwu.t., ML Jvrtica WILLIAM. WI. Ya. Jr•TsCI. TALL.

'rum EsAcratc Tzt.zolunt C . T. BEILIT.-•-

-
JUDGMENT.
This was an action which had been brought some time
ago by Messrs. Cooke and Wheatstone, as the assignees of
the original patent for communicating telegraphic messages
by means of electricity, against Moors. Brett and Little for
an infringement of their patent. The plaintiffs had ob-
tained a patent fur f' an invention for certain improvements
in giving signals and sounding aliirums in distant places by
means of an eleztrie current transmitted through metallic
circuits." At the trial the verdict was found fur the plain-
tiffs. A rule was then applied for to show rause why the
verdict should not be set aside, and a new trial had, on the
ground that, inasmuch as it was necessary in Cooke and
%Vheatstone's patent to have two wires tar Pend a message,
in order to complete the circuit of the electric current,
whilst in the patent of Messrs. Brett and Little only one
wire was used, the earth being used as a conductor to re-
turn the current, the patents were wholly unlike each
other, and therefore no infringement had taken place,
and the method of the defendants was really a new in-
vention.
Mr. Justice Croawell now delivered the judgment of the
court, which was to the effect that, as both patents were
for transmitting the electric current, and by that means
delivering messages, they were both, in fact, the same in-
vention, although they differed slightly with regard to the
agents used. The court were of opinion that the defendants
had infringed the patent of Messrs. Cooke and Wheatstone,
and therefore the verdict which had been found in their
favour ought not to be interfered with. The rule for the
new trial must, therefore, be discharged.
f Buie discharged accordingly.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—SATuRDAy.
Bayou w. Commietossa GOCLIVI4I4.
IN KB Neon AND NNALIK—Tun REIGATE AND DORK-
ING BANK.
There was a dividend meeting to-day in the ease of Ju-
-1 'mph Nash and Thomas Neale, bankers, of Reigate and
Dorking. All the disputed claims on the estate being now
eided, the assignees are engaged in realising the assets.
A dividend of Els. Ga. in the pound has already la-en paid ;
and a further dividend of 31. was ordered to be made at this
meeting. This will not be a final dividend.
APFLICATION FOR lIKTURN OF STAMF DUTY.
His Honour, referring to an application of this kind.
made a few days ago by Mr. Buchanan, wherein a consi-
derable period had been suffered to elapse between the
spoiling of the stamp and the application for the return of
duty, said that he had re-considered :the subject, and
did not think that he could make any order, the party hav-
ing caused the stamp to be filled up, then changed his mind,
and allowed a lung period toelapse before making this appli-
cation.

Gentle Breese
Ca!m

Partially Cloudy
Partially Cloudy
Partially Cloudy
Cloudier

Gntle Breeze
Calm

Fizi-7.77-amtay
Cloudkal

oenZe Breese
(Slur

icrusilly Coady
Partially Cloudy
et•aill!iro

Llght Aire
Gentle Breese
Gentle i'ireese
OesUe Breese
Genie bniarm
Oriesie Breese
Gentle Breese
Gentle Breese
Gentle Breese
Strew Breese
Oast* itreolai

Partially Cloudy
Partially Cloudy
Overcast,

Pintail, Cloudy
Partially Cloudy
Partially Cloudy
!Isla

Partially Cloudy