The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-22 00:00:00

BRITISH INSTITUTION.-(THIS DAY.)

We were this morning admitted to a private view of the paint-
ings of the late Sir Thomas Lawrence, the majority of which
consist of portraits of the most celebrated among the Royal,
military, and political characters of Europe. The first thing
that strikes the spectator, on looking at the portraits of the So-
vereigns, is their amazing meanness of expression. In spite of
the courtly graces which the late President knew so well how to
throw around his subjects, the Emperor Francis of Aus-
tria, the King Charles of France, and the King Frede-
rick of Prussia, look—the truth must out—like three rat-
catchers ! There is not the ghost of an expresssion visible in
their Royal physiognomies; whence we conclude that they are
striking likenesses. As regards our own gracious Monarch,
George IV., his natural grace and dignity of face and manner
are recalled vivedly to our minds, by the two ;portraits of him,
which are fixed at the head of the north room. Of these two
we prefer the smaller one, in which he is pourtrayed in the costume
of a private gentleman—and a more finished gentleman in look,
manner, and figure, was never yet made the subject of an artist's
pencil. The portrait of Prince Metternich, which, we understand,
is considered a correct likeness, gives but a faint idea of the acute-
ness, intelligence, and statesman-like qualities of the great Aus-
trian Minister. There is a self-sufficient look about him, which
reminds us not a little of a dancing-master. This, however, is
not the artist's fault. Pope Pius VIII. is admirable, indeed al-
most faultless, as a work of art, and we doubt not equally faithful
as a resemblance. The late Marquis of Londonderry is a picture
so well known, and so highly appreciated, that we need say little
more than that it conveys a spirited idea of the courteous and
gentlemanlike air of the original. Mr. Canning, too, is a capital
portrait, full of intelligence, fire, and, truth of expression.
But amongst this variety of portraits, our favourite picture in the
Exhibition, is, we confess, the Satan, which, in point of con-
ception, is the sublimest, and, in point of execution, is. the
happiest of any of the thousand and one paintings we have seen
on the same subject. The figure of the Arch Fiend—the wild and
inexplicable look of his eyes—the massive power of his forehead
—the mingled scorn, hatred and irony of his mouth, clearly
proves to us that had Sir Thomas Lawrence confined himself
to this loftiest branch of the art, he would have been the first
historical, instead of merely the first portrait painter of his age.
Strange, however, to say, during the time we remained at the
Exhibition (a full hour), not two persons thought it worth their
while to enter the room of which this sublime production forms
the chief ornament

PARLIAMENT.-(THIS DAY.)
HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The House met this morning for the purpose of hearing
Counsel, and taking. into consideration the case of Sir
Jonah Barrington. The SPEAKER to )k the Chair pre-
cisely at Twelve o'clock, at which time there were about
sixty members present.
The Order of the Day having been read Counsel were
ordered to be called in. •

The SPEAKER—Mr. Denman, for whom do you
appear ?
•

Mr. DENMAN—On behalf of Sir Jonah Barrington.

The SPEAKER—You may proceed.
Mr. DENMAN then commenced his address. He said,
thathe regretted that so short a time had been afforded to
search for precedents in cases like the present. In former
times the tenure of judicial affairs was at the pleasure of
tl,e Crown, but it was found that the greatest inconve-
nience arose,from that system, for the Judges instead of
dispensing justice were merely the servile officers of the State.
There had been since the independence of Judges had
been established but few complaints against those Learned
personages. The Learned Counsel then cited several cases
where charges had been made against Judges, and the House
refused to entertain them. He then went into an histo-
rical account of the change in the law respecting judicial
office, from the time of the Revolution to the Act of the
late King, which made the Judges independent of the
Crown. Since that period few instances had occurred
where proceedings of any kind had been instituted
against the individuals holding that high office.—
A few there most certainly had been, and amongst
those which resembled most the present were the
cases of Mr. Justice Johnson and the present Chief
Baron of Ireland, O'Grady, and the House refused to
entertain them. If, therefore, in both these cases, the
House had refused to proceed, it was much more incum-
bent upon them not to entertain the present proceeding.
The Learned Counsel then contended that the fact
of the original proceedings having been insti-
tuted without the knowledge, and carried on
in the absence of the party accused, was
amply sufficient to induce the ,House to abandon them,
being, as they were, utterly subversive of any acknow-
ledged principle of the British Constitution. He main-
tained that Sir Jonah Barrington could not be subjected
to this mode of proceeding, unless by some infraction of
the law.. In all eases proceedings like the present were
to be deprecated. The Learned Counsel concluded by
calling upon the House to reject the proceedings, and not
by adorting them raise in the public mind an impres-
sion that the Judges were removable at the pleasure of the
Crown.

Lord L. GOWER confessed after listening with great
attention to the arguments of the Learned Counsel, he
felt considerable difficulty in assenting to the proposition
he had laid down. There was a moat material distinction
between the cases alluded to by the Learned Gentleman, and
the present case, the ultimate abandonment of those proceed-
ings turning upon points very different to those which involved
the case now before the House. He thought if the House-
acceded to the proposition of the case going before a Jury,,
they would be surrendering up those privileges which had.
been exercised from time immemorial by the Hense. In
such a case where would be the use of the Act of the 13th
of William, it would be a total destruction of all,
the principles laid down in that Act, to say,
that the House should not take upon itself to act
till it had obtained the opinion of a Jury. He thought
the course that ought to be pursued was to' move
an humble address to his Majesty fur the removal of Sir
Jonah Barrington.

Sir ROBERT WILSON entirely concurred with the
arguments of the Learned Common Serjeant, considering
that the House was not a proper tribunal to take into
consideration cases like the present.
The SOLICITOR •GENERAL thought there never
was a case more clearly made out against any individual
than this was against Sir Jonah Barrington, there was not
a single point made out against him that had been rebutted
or shaken in any way by the evidence that had been
brought forward. It was clear that the money drawn out pro-
fessedly for legal purposes had been appropriated to his
own private beneti.. The House could not attend to the
wishes of individuals, but must adopt that course which
justice demanded, and nothing, as it appeared to him,
could follow these proceedings, but the infliction of a very
heavy punishment upon the individual who was the object
of them. If ever there was a case in which proceedings of a
harsh nature were loudly called far, it was the present
one ; and he (the Solicitor-General) was sure, had evi-
dence been produced clearly showing that the imputations
against Sir Jonah Barrington were unfounded, he should
have been one of the first to propose putting an end to
these proceeding.
Sir C. WETHERELL, who concurred in every part
with what had been stated by the Solicitor-General, was
addressing the House when our Reporter left.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
REECE V. TABRUM AND OTHERS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR disposed of this case in judg-
ment. The defendants, John Tabrum and Wil iam Hart,
were appointed trustees under the will of Mr. Johnson
Clarke, dated in the year 1813, amongst other propel ty,
of a mill, and certain premises in the county of Essex,
with directions to sell the same 'es soon as conveniently
they could, either by public auction or private sale,
for the best price that could be obtained, and to
apply the proceeds in a given way. Shortly before the
death of the testator he hail been offered 8,6001. for
the property in question with other property. It was
then considered to be worth 10,0001. He refused
to take the offer. The trustees put it up to sale by public
auction in 1818, (having been previously requested by a
Mr. Dutton, who had married a daughter of the testator,
not to take less for it than 7,0000 and all they could get
offered was 6,0001. Afterwards, by private contract,
they got the offer of 6,5001. which also they refused
to take. In 1823 it was again put up for sal.,
by public auction, and finally disposed of for 3,0001. and
a fraction. The bill charged the trustees with negligence
and improper .conduct in the management and disposal of
the property, and it prayed that they might be decreed
to be chargeable with the difference between the 6,5001.
(which might have been got), and the 3,0001. and a
fraction, (the amount actually got.) The trustees stated
by their answer that they had exercised their utmost dis.
cretion and best judgment ; that when the property
was first ',put up for sale, it was worth at least
7,000/. ; that it was let at 4001. a-year ; that
subsequently property of this description began to depre-
ciate in value, and regularly lowered in the market (al-
though hopes were entertained that it would rally) until
1823, when they were forced to sell, an important lease
having then expired. Immediately previously to the sale
a valuation of the property was made, and the amount of
that valuation was 3000/. His Lordship could not,
on the evidence before him, come to a conclusion that
there had been any negligent or improper conduct
on the part` of the defendants, so as to cause him to agree
with the judgment pronounced by the Vice-Chancellor in
the case, holding them responsible for the balance between
that which was obtained and that which might have been
got. At the same time, he did not feel that he ought
finally to part with the case, but thought it right to refer
it to the Master to inquire under what circumstances the
sale was made, under what circumstances the delay took
place, and to report specially.