The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-02-07 00:00:00

EXTENDED RULES OF THE FLEET.

Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN said he appeared before their Lord-
ships with a petition from some most respectable freemen of the
City of London, inhabitants of St. Bride's, St. Martin, Ludgate's
Without, and other wards, praying their Lordships to re.consider
an order of this Court. which has recently extended the rules of
the Fleet Prison. The Learned Sergeant said the petition was
signed by Sir Charles Price, a late Lord Mayor-31r. Aketerman
Waithman, and other individuals, of such character, as would not
trouble the Court on any frivolous occasion. The petitioners re.
spectfully stated, that they considered their privileges infringed by
this order, and their property deteriorated in value. Fraudulent
debtors would be opening shops in their neighbourhood to derive
profit from business, without rendering themselves liable to the
process of the Court, and thus the honest tradesman would be
obliged to sacrifice his connexion and property, to avoid the general
stigma. The Learned Uentleman said that Mr. Sergeant Wilde
had a simitir petition from the Corporation of the city.
The LORD CIIIES JUSTICE Said the Court would not now
trouble their Learned Brothers any further. The Corporation was
entitled to the greatest respect and attention, but the preseut was
matter much fitter for discussion in chambers than in open Court.
Their Lordships felt more particularly anxious to pay attention to
the desires of the city of London, from the disposition it had lately
manifested to forward the administration of justice.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN-0d former occasions, in the years
1735, 45, and 85, when petitions were presented from the prisoners
in the Fleet, there was notice sent to the Prothonotary, who investi-
gated the business referred to.
The Loan CntEr JUSTICE—I have had a great deal of dis-
cussion with some of the Aldermen, and for reasons which will be
stated to Counsel out of Court, it is better that the subject be dis-
cussed in Chambers. I have no doubt but that the reasons to which
I allude will immediately suggest themselves fo some of the (len.
tlemen who retain my Brother Rrilde. lam very glad this appli.
cation has been made, because it will lead, probably, to theibest
amendment of the city that has been proposed for sonic time.
In answer to a question as to when the Court would discuss the
subject,
The LORD CDIET JUSTICE said that it would be impossible to
undertake it before the return of the Judges from the Circuit ; but
that it should then have the earliest attention.

COURT OF ARCHES, BIONDAT, FED. 6.
(Before Sir Joint Nicuom., Kat.)
SAUNDERS r. DAVIS.

In this case, in which the Rer. Mr. Davis was suspended foe
three years from the discharge of his clerical functions in come-
quenee of a charge of gross misconduct,
Dr. Punt' mons appeared to object to the suspension being
removed, upon the ground that the sentence of the Court had not
been strictly complied with. The Court had ordered that when
the term of suspension was expired, Mr. Davis should produce a
certificate of his good conduct, signed by three neighbouring Cler-
gymen. Daring Michaelmas Term, 1843, and before the expira-
tion of the term of three years for which he had been suspended,
Mr. Davis appeared with his certificate, signed by three Clergy.
men. The Court then thought proper to reject the certificate, as the
term of suspension was not run out, and Mr. Davis now produced
the certificate offered by him during the last term, and another cer-
tificate signed only by one Clergyman, stating, that since the date
of the former certificate he had conducted himself with propriety,
Dr. Phillirnore submitted that the certificate of good conduct since
November, should have been signed by three Clergymen as well
as the certificate then produced.
Sir Jolts Nit:tutu. thought the certificate now put in was not
strictly conformable to the order of the Court, and as it had been
objected to, lie thought the Court was bound not to take off the
suspension until the sentence had been strictly complied with. It
would be more satisfactory too, had the certificate gone a little far-
ther, and nut only stated that Mr. Davis was personally known to
those who signed, but that they live in the same vicinity. Viider
all the circumstances, the certificate must go back.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, 310,4 DAY, FEL 6.
Jame. Cottle graa opposed by Mr. Lutwych, a leather-seller, on
Snow-hill, the holder of 4 bill of exchange, for 201. accepted by the
nsolvent.