The Sun.
London, England, 1855-11-22 00:00:00

LAW IkTTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Sittings in Banco, before Lord Campbell, Justice Cule-
ridge, Wightman, and Erie.)
THE CASE OF ARCHDEACON DENISON.

Sir Fitzroy Kelly moved fora rule to show cause why
a mandamus should not be issued, directed to the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, commanding him to require, by
writing under his hand, the Venerable Vats Archdeacon
of Taunton to either appear in person, or by his agent,
before him under the 3d and 4th Vic., chap. 86, and
proceed against him according to law. It appeared
that the archdeacon had been charged with having in
three sermons, two delivered in 1853, and one in 1854,
publicly preached and maintained doctrines which
were alleged to be contrary to the Articles of the Esta-
blished Church. Application was made in consequence,
by the Rev. Mr. Ditcher to the then Bishop of Bath
and Wells, to institute proceedings against the arch-
deacon, who declined doing soj in consequence of his
being the patron of the preferment held by the arch-
deacon, a provision to that effect being inserted. The
bishop having declined to proceed by issuing letter of
request, it remained for the archbishop of the province
or any person so complaining to institute a court of in-
quiry. That was done. The Court sat in January
last, at Cievedon, at which the archdeacon attended,
evidence was beard on oath, and the commissioners re-
ported to the Archbishop of Canterbury that there was
prima facie evidence for further proceedings against the
Archdeacon of Taunton. Since then nu further pro-
ceedings had been taken against the Archdeacon, not-
withstanding the Rev. J. Ditcher, the person complain-
ing, had exhibited articles against him and complied
with the act. Ile had applied to the Archbishop of
Canterbury to do so, but his Grace bad replied that he
considered no good purpose would be answered by his
proceeding further against the Archdeacon under the
9ch section. The question arising out of the applica-
tion was one of vast importance, and was whether after
a suit bad been actually instituted, and the law put in
motion under the provision of the act against a clergy-
man in holy orders charged with an ecclesiastical of-
fence, it was discretionary, and consequently within the
power of any Bishop or Archbishop, as the case might
be, to interpose and put his veto on any further pro-
ceedings being taken in respect of such offence.

Lord Campbell said it was an important question, and
he thought the learned counsel had stated sufficient to
show he was entitled to a rule.

Rule granted accordingly.

SCOTT V. THE CHURCHWARDENS OF ST. MARTINS IN-THE-

FIELDS.-• JUDGMENT.

This was an appeal from a conviction relative to the
rating of a house situated in Wellington-street, Strand,
occupied by the Working Meu's Educational Society,
established in 1852, and of which the Earl of Shaftesbury
is the President, and having for its object the elevation
of the adult population as regarded their phyeical, intel-
lectual, moral, and religious condition ; and the means
adopted for its accomplishment were by encouraging
popular literature, scientific lectures, the formation of
popular lending libraries and mutual instruction classes,
provision being made that the society should be free
from the party politics of the day, and from any sectarian
character.

Lord Campbell, in giving the judgment of the Court,
said the question to be decided in this case was whether
the " Working Men's Educational Union Society" as
described in the second annual report of that society,
was a society for the purposes of "Science, Literature,
and the Fine Arts," within the 6th and 7th Vic., chap.
36, so that the house occupied by the society was ex-
empt from rating to the relict of the poor. This was a
very laudable society ; but on looking at the objects of
the society, as stated in the second annual report, the
Court considered it did not come within the meaning of
the act. The society used science, literature, and the
fine arts as a part of the means for gaining their objects ;
but the direct object for which it was instituted could
not be connected with the direct promotion of science,
literature, and the fine arts, and, therefore, it did not
come within the exemption of the act.
Judgment for the respondents.

ROLLS COURT.
ABBOTP V. MIDDLETON.-JUDGMENT.

The Master of the Rolls gave judgment this morning
in this case, in which the principal question was as to
the construction of the will of General Carpenter. By
that will he gave an annuity to his widow, and upon
her decease the property set apart to secure that sum
was to become the property of his son George Carpenter,
then a Captain in the 31st Regitnent of Foot, and one
of the heroes of the Crimea. The principal question in
the case was whether, in the event of General Carpen-
ter's son dying before his mother, that property became
the property of his children upon the death of their
grandmother. The Master of the Rolls was clearly of
opinion that the intention of the testator was not to
leave his son's children destitute in case they should
have the misfortune of losing their father during the
lifetime of their grandmother, and decreed that they
took vested interest in the fund, subject to the rights of
the testator's widow.