The Express.
London, England, 1859-06-10 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY

awfbar. the GAN the Jadal Wes a ....I ilarl bait. Imc..a4 aY
Ins a at,et taaaal.

Tea Azu,N.. 111,112111 of 3 .oro. hi, .1 X abled. twl.3"aas
cite oh Ilalf a ow*.

._ --- .... ....... .........
311 1,/V ../ *P.. 63 1•1*13,373*.**). 74 lib = I
Mr W. ••ll•lthimal ••••••••.a p. ple ~ $O, c• OIL Sm.* $
tiNNW*. AnuM•••• 3 sr.. 0131. Tog 111 . . . . i $
bees* Wee ile :--.* I * Oaaams ea: 4 las% Taoism. lad
Madam

-ltd." LA'S now. APpla. m 1 opt OlOsua
itthrtil : lOoh 1.• ..moo ootcpi rd
CAo,mott ora. moth. no wooer Po Popo

ASCOT RACES.
1111..inr to■ vas low. Ur? Cre, Lim Noting& 00 mbe.i
towniarv.... V O1!i Illatiwarmaa Acs .% IS
3 6 IS
I 6146 Nelms. -
! i fill..—^- ..... 1 t. P.
1,44.ri...

a

i i"!

idabi- The Kai
LNM . • I; I t rileir . . i iit
. 3 6 10
161603130
%es : 1 I 1:=. 4 61
Ilaniumn 4 I 4 Amine . •
=1: :6
_ Ii . Mufti i 1

~........
1 4 a
Menlo i 1 Many Mr*
. J T
ic"Zi.l.c;i• " 3 S. E • • 1 3
--, •• ••••••—• 1 ti 10.4..... w.. ! f.
..,...

i i
.iiiiiiii.7- 3 S
ilTsis i
a W 515:..."...... i 1
Matia.'S tbs. Sot ...... 1 7 • 6.01., sus Mrs .... - -
IV:MU/ i tiff,:

GOODWOOD, JULT 11.
Nearsamm PM eel ememeP Mate Tye WS est &Mit.
Ist 1 MO AV
.17?". ti.4ZW"'it.r.
t l.2:gartat" 4
4
I Weeeil beg* .. I
Mar."' •- - . '4• =a •: ,
ry 4
MT= i = . ....... 11 Nebuslemes.
el
b
. .. G. Mee ra
4 Uri genii •-•• • 3 . Werenbet .. 4
....
4. sawn.. ..:I'. 21 3: 0........: ""'
:.....J.ia
.. i: =rtia:::**: I irnell.::::::: I
.. .
44 ; 4 1 44•1I•1•4.
..... • •
.... .. ki.
. 3 • eilemae— •
. 4, fie......... . I.
...... .. 41 a I
1 . 3 I gage ire
!FE .... . , . :: %...., ..........; r...le•rele - ••••• •
....
.4=l.
Med 4
ill.pe ..
. 4 UM& 1' Zig 4
lima le TWl.lo•gebniellee bet lil ors sem
Tr' re la= b=inreeM MSl4lleelelp et OM
"Wereetmielereffp leftun
NOM nab.
lA+ Moped met le be jail fa
meg/ . W
mPez7b elm le geolte 103 oar. Tee
mimme • ~.••• el 3•4 VI; /zit Mg. PA •11,41‘
• t env sew go : pare
FILIV• Mebesafeem lib • Mee 1 out at the gala
sT4sifisp
feelmi:alletage MA Mb es sliegg=bet 1.10, tau M ga-
metal mellee les par* gels kr a umlaut Deed.
mei lee: ems Mee Yee rage en awe tba veinal 111,
_at re
Noel Wigkergetlie Mer as,. aluellogs...llol M
oth gamed
sTib:e
~....., I: i,.,f.=;.'..), t.i.4i.0a..1,,41
rs
Mlle es *larval of too laus. bete
07, Mem Tlb. at Ho or tows of Lb, above
Ogles lei epees 'Me
•
Maga
ab • bp
Me Ilfs.-•rere ... 11
Loewe
taiga it lege.. :.: __- -•
=
Ai=
bleteolo•4•36
buidl.l•44 nem

AP
Illpedis et 11111iir

. .
his saga • . • •
b tburrizrea... 3

olli.Or I
shar;i6i la:. I

—fi":l7.nircilli
Me Calm

us hair d UM

Oa aid* Qom%

les
Melbas
ell • 1111Prftem Oki
Due sea d Dr
Ilied•nr .... :. :11

aim
=l, ....
...
.
........

AV
▪ ::: : :
•
•
• 4
=me J

CRICUIT...-MAIITLCDONE Cirri AND 01110UND
UNivaiorn ON Oironn.—The 'mad mat* which is
regarded srth IM greatest intend by tha crickefnic world,
Afas c nanwrAni on annoy Mink, Oxford, an Thursday,
Jew 9, the M.C.C. Mang the unasact of Grandy,
Brampton. sal Clkut•roa, arw of the Fr.foosionals
geged at Lord's.. M.C.C. were the Am to defend the
with" sad alihoegla having • strong army of Atom
wen 'sly alio to neord 96 eons a. the Wald disk le
Wags, the bowling of the University bens of the inn
War. At the imaelasies of the day's play (hen-pastels
del ,eli) 311.C.C. had in tiler 2nl naives lost 3 whims
Ar 10 res.. The fall ;snag was the aeon,-31 C.C.. At
innings. 93; Ad Malay, with 3 wickets Awe, 10. UM-
veraUy, lat timings, M. The mach will be resumed to-day
(ht.ay.)

ROYAL LONDON YACIIT CLOG.—The secoad•elsa
cutter roof of tble club took piece yesterday ftr ra very bead-
ems Weer ve service, sad other lats.'. sad added sae
Irani more to those skeedy acquired by Mr. Lesolie Lifts,
wba, alt ougb couteediag nett .uyuwe in tousage,
and from ulacb abs wee eatoLed to receive ea elloveace of
Use, Ile:uly dietesord the wbole d..t opposed to bar. nil,
wee a mound prize, of IW. la specie, takes by the Mama ,
,ad a NNW, of 6/ , by the Oireey.

tutu inuillgout.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—JoNs 9.

APPEALS.
THE TUSLLCIIISO,I WILL CAIC.-JUDLIMINT.

Their lordehipe oat for the first time this morn to hear
April*, end delivered judgment in the tonowing msg.
Themes Roberts Thelloison, appellant, v. Abrebam
Wildey Roberts, Edward James Hairline, Charles Sabine
Augustus rbellusees, the Right Hon. Baron Rendlnhale,
and Arthur reellussoe, respondents.
The question in;thia ere arose on the well-knows will of
Peter Thalherr, of Broderoith, in the county of York,
which has acquired so greet a notoriety. The thee has been
before the house to its present form both an the session of
1858, and in February of the present year, and hes been
twice fully reported in the Lpresi. It will be only
necerary therefore briefly to mew that the todator, Peter
Thellamas, by hie will dated 2nd April, 1796, directed
that the rents and profits of all his large Landed
property, and any that might be purchased niter his
death by hie trustees, and all the reoidus of his personal pro-
perty, with the profite derived therefrom, should accumulate
during the lives of his three &One and of his rarer& living
et or born Is doe time after his death; and after the death
of the miniver of soth eons and grenehions, that an equal
parte ion should be made of the accumulated property tato
three lots, one of which should he conveyed to the "oldest
nude lineal descendent" of his eldest sou, with remainder to
the moor and other sons enceeseively of his eldest sue, with
remainder to the Mdset wale real descendant or descendents
of his two other sons; that another of the lots should be
given to the eldest male lintel damndest of his second eon,
with like retneieders over , and the third and remaining lot
to be ghee to the eldest mete lineal descendant of his third
eon. At the testate**. death he lett his three sons 'arriving
him, Peter lame (eftararesd• meted Baron Rendlesham),
George Woodford, and Cherie., end severe' grand-
er.. The lest surviving greadson who was living
at the death of the testator, and the lest
the persona indicated in the will at whose death the soca-
sedated wee to become divisible, died la February,
1866, rd the period for the parities of the property having
thee embed, a grades seer ea to who were entitled, a
"diet mete lineal descendents." The "male lineal de-
ere— "of George Se oodfeed, the testator's mooed ma,
Iterelai blame extinct, the prosody became divitibis in two
=sear of which was to go to the eldest male lineal
et the testatee's eldest son, Peter lease, and the
ether to the like theseedent of the testator's third win,
Cherie. The purr amtlant is the second sole survivicig
see of the testator's ina Charles Theliusecn, sad wee bolo in
the year 1101, and elehood es the eldest," in point of age,"
teal dooloodoso, we of the porticooo of the pro-
pel% an spirt the saspoedsal, Charles Babies
Angestee Thellems, who le '
bon ti
the
of Chutes
the leerter's OWN VIII woe born in the year 1822,
and who darer dr dirt mete lineal deeeneleat
Is pint of line. In .dieet the whole question involved le
whether male lima dessesdesee eldest in point of age, or
stab Basal descendant. eldest to the legal and technical
mar se being eldest is Ira ate the persons designated by
the Wester to inherit Si. • Butte were brought to
decide this mod of the Rollo decided that
Lord the mesa who snorts the deocrip-
doe in the will of dirt mil Basel descendent el the testa-
tor's 'ldiot son, PAIN nmtl is entitled to one of the
lota into which the wee divided ; end that Charles
Sabine Augustus asses is the person who answers the
description of eldest male lineal descendent of Charles Tri-
butes, his grandfather, end is entitled to the other lot; and
that Thomas Roberts Thellomon, the appellant, his uncle,
although a son of Charles Thellueson (but not his eldest),
who sos the father of Charles debit, Augusta., although he
fe now the eldest male lineal descendent of the said Charles
to point of years, is not ent,tled. The present
appeal wee then brought and argued before their
lordship, with the assistance of the common law
Jodie% • losiority of whom gave their opinion in favour
of tile desislas of the mart below, and maim" the appealing
r eldest male Need descendant in point of years.
larel Craaworth Dew moved their lordships that the diet-
don of the )dexter of the Rolls be affirmed, es he was of
oration that his homeer's decree, declaring in favour of the
grandma of Charles Tribunal, as being the eldest male
Basal dreender of the testator in point of line, end against
the der of Therm ILobarts Theliumon, the surviving but
met the alder sena Charles, although new the eldest male
descender la point of age, was right. The question wee
what ourreetion wee to be pot on the words " eldest male
bowl demeadast," and be wee of opinion that, both techni-
cally and looking to the context of the testator's will, the
words woo to be taken in the Dear of elder in line and
not in ape. This was the Intention of the testator, who mi.
deafly sherds preferesos for the elder breach of hie deem-
dere over the . He was pled that his opinion was
In conformity with that of a majority of the teemed judges
Wile heard the mead.
Lord Pt. Lemmas mid the-gentian as to who was to be
cosuidered the . elder male lineal descendant" of the tes-
tator depended on the riming stitched to the words by the
testator, who bed termed hie intention in technical twine,
which most be Mere ally construed. Bat whether the dis-
position of the will wee looked at in a popular or in a technical
view, the same conclusion must be arrived et—eamely, that
the weeds "eldest male lineal descendant" treat eldest In
pit of line and not in point of age. This was the only
construction which could be applied to the settlement of
safety, whirl, wan the object contemplated by the will, and
ell through the will the principle of the preference of the
line of primogeniture wail distinctly laid down. He con-
curred in opiate n that the decision of the court below was
correct, end mast be affirmed.
lord Wensleydale also conetund in thinking that the
word " eldest " applied not to yen., but to priority .f re-
cession, of primegriture, and of heritable blood.
Lord Brougham not hawing reed the whale of the argu-
ments, abstained hem taklag any pert in the decision of the
rum, further than te say that guided by so much of the ar-
gument. es he bad head, and by the opinions expressed by
the majority of the learned judges, he entirely agreed with
his noble end learned blade in the conclusion at which they
bed arrived.

The l.od Chancellor said, that having been mussel to
one of the appellants in the court bel .w, and having signed
the case for appeal, be had determined to take no
pat in the decision, =lees it had happened that these should
base lees ea equal division of *pinks animist his nobles:id
leavened friends, when, having heard all the ernansentss he
*sold bays been pawpaw dto state his opinion. Portamately,
se their lordships bad come to a essaairoons opinion, be ern
we obliged to take any part in the judgment of the
be; ; bet be only thought it right to rapists hie
resume for doing so. The decree of the court blow, dpelars
leg that the tame, eldest male lineal descendent," gybed
in the eldest in poise 1.4 line, and not In point of yams, was
dinned, aad the appeal distuiesed—the costs of all parties to
come out of the meats.

EQUITY COURTB.—Jums 9.
(Before VierChaacellor Sir U. T. }Linda*lay.)
DAVIS 9. lIITIFORD.-AN OLD SUIT.

This suit waseenueenoed no long ago se 1801,sad it related
to a sum of between 16,0001. mil 20,0001., the property of
=Fria.ll.LAtopr, er= oresor liamtw
la cowl. ldiga Colin„;
wee, whether; sad
lisparemairesideatilled with George Frederkk
Mole, a native ad Funafuti, la Germany, who wee a tine-
worker in the Royal Artillery, at Woolwich, and afterwards
enlisted in the East India Company's service, and blame aa
officer, and whose neat of kin the claimant claimed to be.
The Neater had reported is favour of their claim, end the
came now came on upon eareptieas to that report.
Mr. WG keno appeared for the crown ; Mr. Oiffud, Mr.
Glare, Mr. C. T. Simpson, and Mr. W. D. Lewis for the
other outing coacerned.
TheVire-Chanoellor said he conaidered the evidence ad-

th•t Tiot ii;;;; ;;A*
the other rircuastaucr• deposed te, sad that tbs claimants
bad eatal.liehed lttotr claim. The mete must eons oat of the
estate.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BILNCH.—Ants 9.

Sittings at Nisi Prins at Ciaildhall.—(Bstarts Mr. Justice
Rill ud Commas Jurits.)

LAVAVCIIIV V. LIIVERVON.-ALLIOID NEOLICIVICS Or AN

ATTOILN IT.

The declaration la this case stated that the plaintiff hawing
bass wrested on a cap's. at the snit of one Morro. K•wit.
&ugh on the 16th of March, 1&58, the defendant remind to
act as hie attatney, and to obtain his dint Large hem prison if
anper•edabl• ; that :he plaintiff was .opera &Able, but the cia-
Meant, by hie negligeww, did not take weps to obtain hie
die huge, the plaintiff was kept in custody, and bad to pay
1001. expense. to obian hie mimeo from prima. The asoond
count anted that the defendant, bting the plaintiff'. a.tonory,
had failed t 4 put in ball, although the plamt.ff had found two
.vale., andl to draw owtaia wicstrilies in favour of Jean
baptists Olrard, whereby the 'Attar was detained
in
&Landsat pleaded that he did not premise as all•ged,
Mat ha had not been 'aoudad as tke idaiatire attorney, that
the plaintiff was not supereedabis, nor was It the defendant's
duty to IMMO • writ of waparsedow, that th• plaintiff had not
found two tit and proper parsecs as stottlee.
The jory, atter a brief conmultstion, returned a verdict for
the defendant oe both comma.

COURT OP COMMON PLEA6.--JuNz 9.
@Wisp is Brea.--(Big lima Chief Jostles Cockburn,
sad Justine Williams, Wines. and Byles.)

THE 11111. Or •111RRMRl RT IP. SCOTT STD OTH

JUDGMENT.
This case, after wrap) ing the attention of the court for
nine d=ye, wee this day brought to • conclusion. The arm
was as ejectment to recover piemealon of Alton Towers sad
the lasoenw estate. of the Tallot 4mlly, the plaintiff con.
leadiag that they were hmenerably oowiected to the earldom
by s selidement roads by E.rl Gilbert is 1718, end carried
late eilbt4 by the 6 0.0. 1.. cap. 29. Oa lb. ethic bard, ft
Wm =Mended that Earl Offbert beings& Joan had so rever-
sion is the imitate In oussequrno of the operation of tbe penal
laws against catholic. which wars this la form, and woe Is-
om:Able of making the settlement of 1718. Founded upon this
view of the cam tha lam earl executed a diesatelHog deed,
which purported to cut off tit. entail, and afterwards by will
left the property to the isfant eon of the Duke of Norfolk,
ot whose behalf the defendants, who ere +ler:tutors of the
earl'. will, held It. It was romouredi In court that the
income from the land is between 40,0001. and 60,0001. a year,
sad the case derived additional fatarest from the Lethett
ars the &shin et the met depesied the goalies

EVENING, JUNE 10,

the property, whkh bas been for so many yr ars held by Ho-
man caliche., should now go into pr tert nit hand..
The Lord Chief Jostles paid that the case had occupied so
much time, and there tad been so touch light thrown upon
it by the learned counsel, that they were enabled to
oque to th.ir decui.n at once, without taking
time for further consideration ; and he thought
that they onghtnot amply en the ground of the great inte-
rests at stake to postpone judgment, and Pa by an apparent
hesitation give countenac,t to the eupgmiion that any
doubt existed in their minds, when in point of fact they felt
that there was none. The great qui &Hon ic the cause was
whether Earl Bertram, the lest earl, being 'event in tall In
poserseion, was competent to cut off the entail; and that
qua scion must depend upon the construction to be put upon
the 6 Oro. 1. cap. 29. The plaintiff contended that that
statute aided by the 6 and 7 Viet rendered the estates alto-
gether inalienable, and the defendants joined issue upon
that. But berme they came to that great battle ground the
defendants contended that the last earl, Bertram, was wined of
this estate under and by virtue of a settlement executed
the Duke of Shrewsbuty in 1700, which they
(egad to he a co-existing settlement. It was said that even
if the settlement of 1718 was the one under which the but
earl took, yet that by the acts for the relief of catholic& he was
liberated from any &ability to alien. Under this elate of
things the dot question which arose was whether Earl Gil-
bert was incapacitated by the lit James I. from taking the
aversion In fee, and could not therefore be • party to carving
• farther estate out of it; and then came the further question
whether the estate with which they were deal-
ing was in point of fact an estate carved out
of the residuary estate In fee of Earl Oil-
beet. As to the firet, he was of opinion that the effect of the
' statute was not to incapacitate Earl Gilbert from being •
party tot= settlement upon which the act of the Bth Geo. 1.,
cap. 29, was founded; and as to the second point,
it appusred to him very plain that although it wee true, as
war observed by Lord St. Leotards in the Howe of Lade,
that the estate in remainder introduced by this settlement for
the &a time Is favour of the heir make of the body of the
get Earl of Shrewskury, was en estate created at the expi-
, ratios of the estate in fee, that the estate wee an estate
calved out of the reversion of Gilbert, rat the estate with
which they had now to deal was not taken nut of the rever-
sion, but wee subatituted for that created by the settlement
of 1700. His lordship then at great length detailed hie
reasons for holding that Earl Bertram held under the settle-
ment of 1718, and the 6th Geo 11, cap, 29, and that the re-
striction on alienation was binding on all successive
tenants in tail. Further, that the restriction on
alienating without taking certain oaths imposed
by the 6th Geo. I, cap. 29, was applicable to Roman
esthetics and proteetants alike, and, tercet re, was not I
affected by the acts subsequently passed for the relief of
Hunan eatholimi from certain disabilities. Hie lordship said
that it seemed to him, therefore, that on these grounds they
had so alternative but to decide is favour of the plaintiff, and
to discharge ibis rule. And he bad less reluctance in doing
so because he felt wisest that that decision was conformable
with the juiitios and equity of the cass. He would not say that
theritwasafit olty oompact,if that espies don wasobreted to, but
he thought it was clear that there wee a parliamentary con-
tract in this eau. The Roman catholic tenants in tail who
took under the settlement of 1700 might have had their
estate at soy moment invaded and interfered with by the
protestant cent-of-kin. They desired to enjoy an
Immunity from that unhappy state of things, for
at that time of day men had not learned the great end salu-
tary lesson that they might woroblp the same God side by
aide, accordiog to their own loran of worship, in amity end
peace. At that time they did not foresee that the time
would come when those penal laws which had been framed
in the animosii of warfare, and the struggle for life and
death, for the exietenee of one religion or the other, would
become =necessary. Then, everybody looked to the con-
tinuance of thou laws. The Talbott. obtained immunity
through the intervention of the legislature, and to that was
annexed, as he read the statute, a condition of inalienability
attached to the estate, except under circumstance.
which were at that time most improbable— the
conversion of one of their successors at an early age to pro-
testantian. Under this private and special legislation the
Roman catholic proprietor enjoyed then estates during a
long series of yam, end but for the statute their interest
neght hare teen inlet feted with Ina maseermost disastrous
to themselves. Under these circumstances be could not
regret the conclusion he had arrived at, and which be trusted
be had coins to independently of any consideration, but
those which should influence his mind ea a judge. The con-
clusion he had arrived at wee that those who had had the
beoeflt of the 6 Cleo. 1., cap. 29, should pay the price; that
those who had had the uninterrupted eco.iyinent of the es-
tate should abide by the condition on which their interest la
that waste depended.
The other judges concurred.
Judgment for the plaintiff.

1859.

their lectore•raoro, Philpot-at.tet, Corumetekl-ro,d Haat.
They were of the lowest dwell! Von, pickpockets, and roughs.
The language wed WAS of the filthiest description. Hepburn
had denounced thepersors In the lectirwhall s whore., poly
waists whorry.ongerr, thitery, end infidels; and bad pub-
: hely *wed lalgusgr, relating to polygamy and the Mormon.,
which was too filthy fir the witnames to repeat. These pro-
ceedings had been going ow for some time and Hepburn had
become terror mid a pest to the neighbourhood.
. .

Inil;tieienneHe;brur—n was in the
promotion of the truths of the Gospel azainat this accursed
mildelity, and be hid bad the eye of God upon him, who
knew that hie conscience was clear and his motives pure. (A
laugh.) He wu pro:ceding to comment on the Mormon
doctrine, when
The itteeisiant-Judge said he wished to allow every latitude
to a perron who had not the aid of counsel in his defence,
but he could not permit religious topics to be entered upon
in a matter which was simply a question of breach of the
peace. The Mormon doctrine might be detestable, pro-
bsbly were; but in this country no religious sect could be
Interfered with in this way, and the evidince en to the pri-
soner's creating the riot was not questioned.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and recommended him
ho mercy on the ground that he was a misguided man.
The Aseistant-Judge said the prisoner might be a was-
Cia;dman in religious matter., and porsibly might think
as acting in the cause of true religious. Be that en it
might, It was clear that he had other objects In view, which
related to the hat going roond,when he had got these mobsto-
gather. He had already had one warning In being convicted
of the mine sort of offence In this court, and he then gave a
pledge that he would abstain from such conduct in future,
upon which he wee liberated. The sentence of the court
now was that ha be kept to hard labour for three moniha— a
very lenient sentence, which would be seriously considered
in aggravation of any future offence.
Hepburn said he had sworn an oath on the Bible to welch
against ilia Mormons, who once tried to get his wife away
from him, and by God's likening he had been ths means of
oaring hundreds from Salt Lake and eternal damnation.
That wu hi, minibus—he was the servant of God, and when
he had eufferd the "martyrdom" to which hie lordship had
condemned him, he should do again sa be had done beton..
Mr. Metcalfe mid he should not press the case against the
other defendants, Hepburn being the real delinquent; they
had done very wrong, no doubt, but this would be a warning
to them for the future. They were then discharged.