The Sun.
London, England, 1839-12-04 00:00:00

,sT-OFFICE REGULA L lONS.

r. d.

TWOPENNY AND THREEPENNY POST.

FUNERAL OF THE DAUGHTER
OF LORD BROUGHAM.

This morning, at half-past nine o'clock, the
mortal remains of the beloved daughter of Lord
Brougham, were interred in that part of Lincoln's Inn
which is enclosed and appointed for the burial of the
dead. The procession, which passed through the city,
consisted of the hearse drawn by four horses, three
mourning coaches also drawn by four horses, and six
noblemen's (among whom we noticed the Marquis of
Wellesley's) and gentlemen's carriages. Among those
present at and who followed the funeral, were Lord
Brougham, as chief mourner, the Right Hon. Lord
Denman, Chief Justice Tindal, Mr. Vizzard, barrister,
Mr. Miller, of the Bankruptcy Court, and Mr. Charles
Phillips, barrister. The deceased, who was in the 19th
year of her age, was the only child of his Lordship, and
is represented as having possessed a most amiable cud
affectionate disposition, and was deservedly beloved by
all who knew her.
This is the only instance on record of the interment
of a female in the burying-place of Lincoln's Inn.
Hitherto it has been reserved exclusively for the
resting-place of the Benchers of the Inn, but the Noble
and Learned Lord made an application for permission
to have his daughter laid here, accompanied by a state-
ment that it is his intention to be buried in the same
grave himself. A Special Meeting of the Council of
Benchers were called on Monday evening last, to take
the application into consideration. They unanimously
agreed that the privilege asked for should be granted,
and which has been regarded as a mark of the highest
respect and esteem in which Lord Brougham could
possibly be held by that learned body. Lord Erskine
applied to the same tribunal for liberty to have his lady
buried in the same place, but though he also was a
Bencher of Lincoln's Inn, that request was negatived.

CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY

WORD/WORTH V. WOOD.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment this morning
in this case, which was heard before his Lordship some
time since, upon appeal from the decision of the Master
of the Rolls. His Lordship ordered the judgment below
to be affirmed, but without costs.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL V. THE EARL OF STAMFORD,

The arguments of Mr. Jacob, following Sir Charles
Wetherell, on behalf of the Trustees of the Charity,
occupied his Lordship the whole morning.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY,)

CASBORNE V. BARSHAVV.

IMPORTANT POINT OF PRACTICE.—In this case an
issue was directed to be tried at law. On the trial a
verdict was found for the plaintiff. A new trial was
ordered at the bist Assizes. The time was fixed by the
Lord Chancellor on appeal, after bearing the plaintiff's
reasons for desiring to postpone the trial till a future
time. When the time for tr;al came the plaintiff, although
urged by the defendant to proceed, made default. For that
default the plaintiff stated no reason which deserved at-
tention, and the defendant i.herefore moved that the
issue might be taken pro confeiso against him.

The MASTER of the ROLLS this morning, in givin/
judgment, observed that many cases had occurred
which the plaintiff's default in proceeding to tri
at the time appointed, the Court had order( !
the issue to be taken pro confess° against hill..
unless he proceeded to trial at the next following Assiz,
and in which, on his neg;ecting so to do, the issue
been taken pro confesso absolutely, but it had been ;:
leged in support of the present motion, that the practi,
of this Court was to make the order absolute in t
first instance. No example of that sort had be
quoted, and his Lordship had not been able
find any printed authority on the subject. 'I
only order bearing on the point which had b►
found, was, after a search in the Registrar's books; •

a case which occurred in 1746, before Baron Clar
and three Masters, in the absence of the Lord eh::

cellar, and in which the party who had made defat
not opposing the motion, the order was made ab
lute in tho first instance, on affidavit of s,
vice. He (the Master of the Rolls) could li
consider that as an authority, and however much
might disapprove of the neglect of the plaintiff, I
Lordship did not think his default ought to be visit,
with a punishment of which he had bad no warning, :
no reason to anticipate. His Lordship was of opinio.i
that the defendant was entitled to an order that the issue
should be taken pro confesso, unless the plaintiff should
pr4c,ec4 to trial at the next Assizes, and was entitled to
:he costs of the motion. No other order could be
made.

HOARE V. wArrs.
The Court wet occupied the remainder of the day
with the further arguments of Counsel in this case.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Justice COLERIPGE and a Common Jury.)

LUCAS V. RANDALL.

Mr. HUMPHREYS stated the case. It was an action
brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation for the
loss and injury sustained by him by reason of the de-
fendant, who was a coach and cart wheelwright, smith,
and coach-spring maker, neglecting to teach him his
trade, The plaintiff had been apprenticed to him for
i.e years, and he merely employed him in going of
errands, and doing other work which had no relation
to his trade, and he was now unable to earn more than
a common labourer. The defendant pleaded that he
did teach him his trade, and, secondly, he pleaded that
the plaintiff was drunk and quarrelling with his fellow
apprentice. Now that was a most ungracious charge,
which arose out of these girgurnstances. In the second
year of his apprenticeship, some of the older hands
quarrelled with another boy, and was sent
gave him more liquor on ono occasion than was good
him—bhe
to prison for six days. That was all
for
eyrythhiernMg proper, but he thought it most unjustifiable to put
such a plea on the record AA a defence for not having,
fafiveh years, taught him his trade. The
e absented himself from his work ;
but ht
from his having been hurt by some tim-
tdhuirritni g
plea a
that
a termrt,v}sa
e s °obliged to go to the hospital for two or
jury would, under these tbherr,e e andw e
e bungks.
The
circum-
stances, give such damages as the plaintiff might be
considered justly entitled to.
putJatomethsand were for the term of five
The indentures were then put in and read, they were
dated October, 1831,
years.
employment
eTaPI usualia g
work i waso t itintt
from 1831 to 1833.- 1 saw the plaintiff there. He was
apprentice washing, clean
the defendant's. empio
tog, and 's g, Preparing work for the
en: of errandsßaster thought
dworkthat an other
proper.

_ .
Cross-examined... 4
never saw him tipsy. I
always willing to do what I bid him, Randall and
, Mr. R He was .
r had a little altercation, and I left him in actober 1833.
I mig;:t have been a little forward in liquor at theAIM
,8?
--(A laugh.) I have seen Lucas since, but !gave b_"
no conversation with him. T
& don't know that he is nor/
a horse-keeper or horse-jockey.
I bay!" worked at differ-
ent places since. Thr,:e years permanently
.at Mr. Ro-
binson's. Lucas told me he was working at Mr, Coop'
er's a dust yard in Westminster.
Daniel Armitage--II aro a lvielwright. I worked,
in 1836, with the defendant, and
~i.ocas was then in
his employment. That was in the last year of his ap-
prenticeship. He was employed at jobbing of different
sorts. It was not work fit for an advanced apprentice..
He was eleariag and boxing wheels, and putting in
rivets, which an apprentice ought to learn in a month.
ho m4ndall) pleased.
I spoke to his master to let bka-do other work, but the
answer was he should do what work

Th, Pos'-office Regulations come into
to- i:.,trow. We con;:ratulate our readers
and subjoin for their u,e a table, with
u:ar!ou of ihe rwc.s of posta(.e for any

sixtocu ounc:,.s. It has been fur-
nilted to us by a valued Correspondent, and places
the alterations in such a simple and clear point of
view, that he who runneth may read. One charge
seems to us most unaccountable. If a letter in the
slightest degree turns the balance above an ounce,
it will be charged four postages, that is sixteen

pence ; whereas, if it were divided into three letters,
the Post-office would have the trouble of delivering
three letters in place of one, weighing nearly half
an ounce more, and receive only one shilling.

UENERAL POST.
Rates of Postage to be Charged, on and after de .sih
December, 1839.

Weight not exceeding ounce, 0 4
ditto ditto 1 ditto 0 8
ditto ditto 2 ditto 1 4
ditto ditto 3 ditto 2 0
ditto ditto 4 ditto 2 8
ditto ditto 5 ditto 3 4
ditto ditto 6 ditto 4 0
ditto ditto 7 ditto 4 8
ditto ditto 8 ditto f 4
ditto ditto 9 ditto 6 0
ditto ditto 10 ditto 6 8
ditto ditto 11 ditto 7 4
ditto ditto 12 ditto 8 0
ditto ditto 13 ditto 8 8
ditto ditto 14 ditto 9 4
ditto ditto 15 ditto 10 0
ditto ditto 16 ditto 10 8
N.B.—All Litters exceeding ONE OUNCE to be pre-
paid, or ch.rged double postage.

Letters not exceeding Half an Ounce, if pre -paid,
will be charged One Penny. Letters exceeding that
weight, and not exceeding four ounces, will be charged
formerly. No letter wyighing more than four ounces
can be forwarded.