The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-11-29 00:00:00

Mr. Gurney obtained the rale u to the former part of it.. princi-
pally on the suggestion that there had been some mistake in draw-
log op the former rule.
Mr. Justice LITT LEDA'. E, en being referred to, thought that,
according to his recollection, no mistake had been made, but that
the rule was drawn up according to the intention of the Court.
Mr. Ritouutuu and Mr. l mt., in shown,g cutlet aa to
the latter part of the rule, dwelt strongly on its hanultip, and said
that as soon as the witnesses bad been paid, they would, in all pro-
bability, leave the convey.
The Loan Catxr JUSTICE—I do not see any reason for alter-
ing the former rule.
alr. Gurney's nee liras therefore discharged.
CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

?MK KING V. THE MAGISTRATES OF ercks•
SCARLETT said that he would mention to the Court,
though he knew it was not quite regular on the last day of term,
that he had instructions to move for a criminal information aguinst
certain Magistrates of the county of Bucks. lie received his in-
it:unions very late on Satinlay.
Mr. Justice Baxter —When did the cause of this application
arise ?
Jar. SCARLETT—In September and October but. lie should
not pule his motion now : he only mentioned it to show that he
was acting with perfect good faith, that there might hereafter be
no pretence for any remarks as to delay in moving for this infor-
mation. lie should bring It before the Court at an early day next
term.

.....
The LORD CHIT:. JOSTICE—We will bear it in mind.
THE KING, ON THE PROSECDTION OF XL ERSKINE GRANT,

V. OLIWIELD.
The Comatow•Stworatur moved for a rule to show cense why
the defendant should not be strictly confined within the wells of the
Kings Bench prison. Mr. Oldfield, it will be recollected, way
some time ago convicted of keeping a gambling-house, and was
sentenced to imprisonment and a line, for the nonpayment of which
he is now in custody. 'fhe Learned Sergeant mt.ved on affidavits,
which stated that 11r. Oldfield had been seen several times out of
the prison ; that on one occasion he was seen at an auction in the
City; and that on these circumstances being mentioned to the
Marshal of the prison' he gave no satisfactory answer, but merely
replied, •• Never mind, we shall iie,tle it among ourselves." Ile
moved also that the Marshal should be called on to answer the
meters in the affidavits.

The Court granted the rle.
AIANDAMUS.
_

.....
Mr. TAUNTON moved for a writ of mandamus to ha directed
to the &news of the Borough of Doteiney, in Cornwall, to make
a Jury in an approaching Count Leet. He referred to the iVigan
cue, Strange 1207, and Lord Montagne, case 1 1111,1.113, the
latter of which, in particular, went much beyond the present appli-
cation.

The Court ranted a rule nisi.
This being the last day of term, the Court did not rile till after
seven o'clock.

COURT OF COMMONPLEAS, x1...-EsT MINSTER,
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21

nevtvileLL n. TUX Matto? OF LIXCOLII.
This was an action brought by the widow and ailutinlstratrix of
the late Prebend of South tinintham, in the cathedral church of
Salisbury, claiming the right of presentation to the Rectory of
Wells, as being an advowson appendant to the Prebendary of
Grantham. and which had become vacant in the lifetime of the
intestate. without having been presented to by him. On the pan of
the plaintiff it was contended, that by the death of the late Prebend
the right of presentation to the vacancy became severed from the
Prebendary, and was a personal chattel, to which hit, personal re_
preaentatives were consequently entitled. It was contended on the
other hand that the advowson was appended to the Prebendary as
an ecclesiastical trust, and did not pass to the heir or personal re-
' presentative, but went to the spiritual successor of the tat: Prebend.
The Counr this morning gave their judgment.
Mr. Justice GASELEE tir,t read his opinion, in the course of
which he entered very fully into the leaning of lay and spiritual
property, and as to the rights of the represea,tatives of spiritual
persons, from whence he deduced thst in this ease the right of pre.
sentation, which had vested in the late Prebend. beams, on the
vacancy of the Rectory, a personal etattel, and, rot being exercised
by him in his lifetime, necessarily descended to his peisunal repre.
sentatives; foe which reasons be thought judgment ought to be
entered for the plaintiff.
Ile. Justice Hunnouon observed that it often happened that
persons who reasoned on the same premises came to very different
conclusions. Such was the case with him and his learned Brjulier
Gaselee. He thought there was no analogy whatever between lay
and spiritual property ; so :hat the reasoning which was applicable
to the one did not at all hold good with respect to the other. This
was a qualified property, held by the Prebend in virtue of his spi.
ritual character. It wits evident by the words of the original dons.
non made by Bishop Uaborne, Earl of Dorset, and nephew to
iVilliam the Conqueror, that this advowson was never intended to
go to a lay individual, but was always to be held for the benefit of
the ecclesiastical body. He was quite satisfied judgment ought to
be entered for the defendant.

Justice PARK, in reading his judgment, entered very fully
into the original constitution of the Church, and showed that the
law which was applicable to the rights of lay patrons was very dif-
ferent from that which applied to spiritual patrons. He thought
that the present question must have occurred many times before,
although there was no instance of such a case mentioned is any of
the books. This circumstance was, in his mind, eonfirmikory of
the fact, that whenever the question had arisen it was always con-
sidered a point so clear and decided, that it did not admit cif argu-
ment, or call fur any rssieular notice. He was of opinion that y
Doom ma the late Mr. Renee..
mud trust, ceased, and the

died, his

mere per-

spiritual successor: Ile therefore thought that judgmentm;tKoe
entered for the defendant. la the course of his judgment the
Learned Judge noticed what he conceived to he et ruin anomalies
in the Church of England; among which his Lordship mentioned
the office of Archbishop, which was a dignity that had been intro.
duced in imitation of the Popish Legates, and treat length of time
had pow become incorporated in the forms of our Church Es.a-
blishment.

The LOAD CHIEF Jusvict gave his reasons at great length
for coinciding with the opinions of Mr..lurtice Perk and Mr. Jits.
tice Burrough. If the point were doubtful, his Lordship for one
felt that no court of justice ought to take away the power that wax
enjoyed by the eccicsiastic.si twtly in the appointment of learned
and pious persons to perform the vpiritual duties of the Church, and
vest it in (it might be) a female, an infant, or the creditors of an in.
solvent Prebend; but there was no doubt In his mind on the
subject.
Judgment was aesordingly entered for the defendant.

IN YT CARPENTER, GENT.
This ante, in which a rule had been granted, calling upon Mr.
Carpenter, who is an attorney of this Court, to answer the matters
contained in the affidavits tiled in the action of Carpenter v. Brooks
on the part of the defendant, when she made application to the
Court to be discharged front custody at the suit of the plaintiff, was
called on for bearing this morning; but this being the lai • day of
term, the Court considered a motion for striking an attorney oft the
rolls of the Court could not be conveniently heard, and therefore di-
rected the case to be entered on the peremptory paper for the second
day in nest term.