The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-06 00:00:00

LONDON. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER (i, 1839.

TOHN THOROGOOD has been confined in
“ the Common Gaol of Chelmsford since the 16th of
January last, for not paying a Church. rate of ss. 6d.
In consequence of his long confinement, his business has re-
ceived so much injury, that his friends propose a public sub-
scription, for the purpose of saving his affairs from utter ruin,
and as a testimony to hint and to the country that they sympa-
thize in his sufferings, and honour the principle of religious
liberty, which is violated in his person.
Subscriptions to be paid, in London, to Roger Lee, Esq.,
Treasurer, Clapham Common, and on his account at :Messrs.
Rogers and Co., bankers, 29, Clement's-lane ; to Mr. Robert
Besley, 15, Northampton-square ; and Mr. James Dinnis, 62,
Paternoster-row.
In the Country—To John Copland, Esq., Chelmsford ;
Joseph Sturge, Esq., Birmingham ; Sheppard Ray, Esq.,
Ipswich ; and Mr. John Childs, Ilungaf,
It will be obvious to the Provincial Press, that it is impos-
sible to send Advertisements beyond the Metropolis ; but the
promoters of this Subscription confidently rely upon its sym-
pathy to make the case known, and that it will urge persons
throughout the country to undertake the trouble of conducting
Local Subscriptions, and sending the lists and amounts to any
of the above parties.
£ s. d.
Messrs. Wells and Perry, Chelmsford
The Lord Petre 2 0 0
Messrs. W. and T. Johns, Chelmsford
Mr. Thomas Marriage, Springfield
0. Pritchard, Esq., M.D. Chelmsford
Mr. James Christy, Broomfield 1 0 0
Mr. G. Wood, Chelmsford
Mr. John Copland, jun., Chelmsford
Mr. Charles Gray, Chelmsford 1 0 0
Mr. James Fenton, Chelmsford
Mr. B. Dixon, Wickham
Mr. T. Hodges, Chelmsford
G. Rogers, Esq., Margaretting
Mr. J. Marriage, jun., Chelmsford ........... 1 1 0
Mr. J. D. Piper, Witham 1 0 0
Mr. T. Hodges. jun., Waltham
C E. Branfill, Esq., Upminster
Friends at Walthamstow 5 0 0
Mr. Edward Thomas, Bristol

Mr. Alfred Darby, Coalbrookdale
_ _

Mr. Butler, Chililerditch

1 0 0

Mr. Ransom, Ipswich 1 0 0
Mr. A. Barnard, Stebbing
Mr. Ridley, Felsted
With Sixty-seven small subscriptions
Roger Lee, Esq
11.'"B. Sanderson, Esq.
Captain Harwood, R. N., Gloucester
Joseph Sturge, Esq., Birmingham 5 0 0
Charles Stttrge, Esq., do.
Sheppard Ray, Esq., Ipswich ,
R. G. Ranson, Esq., do.
Mr. J. Conder, do.
Mr. Charles Childs, Bungay
Mr. Robert, Beiley
Mr. John Childs

COLONIZATION OF NEW ZEALAND.
At a PUBLIC MEETING held at the MANSION-
HOUSE, DUBLIN, on Saturday the 2d of November, 1839,
in pursuance of a requisition to the Lord Mayor, for the pur-
pose of promoting the improvement of Ireland by means of
Emigration to the New Zealand Settlements,
The Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR in the Chair.
Moved by the Rev. Dr. WILSON ; Seconded by JosErn

CAID, Esq.
Resolved—l. That, in the present state of Ireland, it is
highly expedient to promote Emigration as a means of reliev-
ing the destitution of the labouring people, and of improving
the condition of all classes of society.
Moved by the Rev. Dr. DICKINSON (in the absence of the
Archbishop of Dublin, being a Lord Justice) ; seconded by
JOHN A NSTER, Esq., LL.D.
2. Resolved—That in the opinion of this meeting, it is un-
justifiable to induce intending Emigrants to take up their abode
in the midst of the vice and immorality which notoriously pre-
vail in the Penal Colonies, but that such persons should be en-
couraged to settle in countries where they will be likely not only
to thrive in fortune, but to lead good lives, and bring up their
children in virtuous habits.

After heariu„; a statement made by Mr. WARD, Secretary to
the New Zealand Land Company of London,
Moved by PATRICK H. FITZGERALD, EN. ; seconded by

ROBERT BARELIE, Esq. :

Resolved-3. That New Zealand appears to offer all the re-
quisite advantages of a desirable Emigration Field ; and that
this Meeting approves the system of Colonization pursued by
the New Zealand Land Company of London.
Moved by Pizza. BATLY,Esq.; seconded by the Rev. JoHN

WEST :-

4. That, a Committee' in Dublin be appointed, to be called
" The New Zealand Committee of Ireland," to correspond
with and further the objects of the Company in London, and to
receive applications from all persons in Ireland desirous of pro-
ceeding to or obtaining information respecting the New Zea-
land Settlements; the Committee to consist of the following
gentlemen, with power to add to their numbers, viz.:
The Lord Mayor.
The Lord Archbishop of Dublin.
The Provost of Trinity College, Dublin.
David C. Latouche, Esq.
The Rev. Dr. Dickinson.
The O'Connor Don, M.P.
Cornelius O'Brien, Esq., M.P.
George Hoyte, Esq., Alderman.
Patrick H. Fitzgerald, Esq.
Joseph Kincaid. Esq,
W. H. Carroll, Esq., Secretary.
Signed on behalf of the Meeting,
NICHOLAS W. BRADY, Lord Mayor.
The Lord Mayor having left the Chair, and the Rev. Dr.
Wilson having taken the same,
Moved by Jomx WAsD, Esq. , Seconded by the Rev. Dr.
Drcic INSOIr
Resolved—That the best thanks of this Meeting be offered to
the Lord Mayor for his kindness in granting the use of the
Mansion-house, and for his conduct in the Chair this (lay.

CAFE INCREASE OF INCOME BY
THE PURCHASE OF LIFE ANNUITIES.
The Tables exemplifying the increase to be secured by a
small oloposit of Capital, are now issuing gratis at the Royal
Union Office for granting Annuities, established 1824, at Lan-
ouster-place, Strand.

Letters must be postage free ; and the Tables being printed
en single sheets, will go by Post as a Single Letter.

FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZEVrE

WHITEHALL, Nov. 2, 1839.

The Queen has been pleased to direct letters patent to be
passed under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, constituting and appointing the Right
Honourable William Viscount Melbourne ; the Right Honour-
able Francis Thornhill Baring; Robert Steuart, Esq. ; John
Parker, Esq. ; Thomas Wyse, Esq. ; and Henry Tufnell,
Esq. ; her Majesty's Commissioners for executing the offices
of Treasurer of the Exchequer of Great Britain and Lord
High Treasurer of Ireland.

Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Lanarkshire.
Sir Thomas Edward Colebrooke, Bart., to be Deputy Lieu-
tenant, October 26.
Patrick Robert Graham, Esq., to be ditto, October 26.
John Graham, Esq., to be ditto, October 29.
Commission by the Lord-Lieutenant of Norfolk.
Norfolk Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry.—T. Boyd, gent., to be
Cornet, vice Ives, resigned, August 26.

The following places of worship have been licensed for ti.e
solemnization of marriages :
Sheppard's Barton Chapel, Frome Selwood, Somersetshire.
The Baptist Meeting house, Luton, Bedfordshire.
Copthorne Chapel, North Petherwyn, Cornwall.
The Independent Chapel, Penybryn, in Wrexham, Denbighshire.

G. C. Poole, grocer, Lyme-Regis, Dorsetshire,
Nov. 27, at
eleven, at the Bull Inn, Bridport, Dorsetshire.
M. E. Gillespie and W. J. Hall, common-brewers, Chester-
le-street, Durham, Nov. 27, at eleven, at the Bankrupt Com-
mission-room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
J. and W. Green, earthenware manufacturers, Swinton,
near Rotherham, Yorkshire, Nov. 28, at one, at the Town-
hall, Sheffield.
J. Scholfield and J. Clough, bankers, Selby, Yorkshire,
Nov. '27, at twelve, at the George Inn, Selby.
J. and J. Broad, iron-manufacturers, Spring-vale Iron-
works, Sed2,ley, Staffordshire, Nov. 28, at twelve, at the Swan
Hotel, Wolverhampton. Staffordshire.
L. M. Bennitt, milliner, Slierborne, Dorsetshire, Nov. 28,
at one, at the Antelope Inn, Dorchester.
J. Loveridge, cabinet-maker, Bridport, Dorsetshire, Nov.
26, at two, at the Bull Inn, Bridport.
W. Moore, innkeeper, Newark-upon-Trent, Nov. 30, at
twelve, at the Castle and Falcon Inn, Newark-upon-Trent.
C. Hall, engraver, Hanley, Stoke-upon-Trent, Staffordshire,
Nov. 27, at twelve, at the Albion Inn, Hanley.
J. Kelsey, grocer, Lydney, Gloucestershire, Nov. 27, at
two, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol.
W. Coates, grocer, Leeds, Dee. 3, at twelve, at the Court-
house. Leeds.
H. Wakley, jun., R. Wakley, and W. Wakley, hardware-
men, Bridgewater, Somersetshire, Nov. 30, at two, at the
Commercial-rooms, Bristol.
CERTIFICATES.—Nov. 26.
J. M. Henderson, wine-merchant, Liverpool.
J. and J. J. Ashley, bankers, Regent-street, Westminster.
J. Boyd, ironmonger, Welbeek-street, Marylebone.
J. Marrow and T. Frodsham, common brewers, Thatto-heath,
within Sutton, near Present, Lancashire.
H. Bates, miller, East Peckham, Kent.
T. Brown, grocer, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.
F. J. Hiller, builder, Dover.
M. Davies and M. Jones, grocers, Taunton, Somersetshire.
J. Till, earthenware manufacturer, New-hill, Derbyshire.
PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
G. and T. Rudd, builders, Northampton-street, Islington.
S. Watkins and J. Rugg, tailors, Cork-street, Burlington-
gardens.
W. Harper and T. Sutcliffe, dyers, Luddenfoot, near Hali-
fax, Yorkshire.
T. Preston, jun., and F. Richardson, dealers in cotton,
Manchester.
W. 11. Maddison and R. Read, farmers, Herringfieet, Suffolk.
A. and H. Clark, plumbers' Frome, Somersetshire.
R. Battersby and T. W. Mackford, general merchants, Li-
verpool.
G. Keating and J. Brown, catholic printers, Duke-street,
G rosvenor-square.
P. Cochran and L. Pearson, dealers in foreign and British
quills, Liverpool.
J. Major, jun., and R. L. Amott, tanners, Cheltenham,
Gloucestershire.
J., J., and J. Lees, J. Jones, sen., J, Jones, jun.,W. Jones,
J. Ogden, J. Worthington, C. Walmesley, J. Marslaud, J.
Ogden, and W. Booth, coal miners, Oldham, Lancashire.
S. Robinson and C. Armitage, cotton-spinners, Dukinfield,
Cheshire.
J. Norris and W. Sleddon, chain cable manufacturers, Li-
verpool.
E., T., and W. Speakman, T. Caldwell, L. Watson, and J.
Speakman, coal-proprietors, Windle, Staffordshire (as far as
regards E., T. 8., and W. Speakman.)
A., J., and H. Bannerman, and J. S. Grafton.
J. Hutton, C. Other, W. Ware, and I. Fisher, bankers,
Richmond, Yorkshire.
J. Wagener mid F. Rackham, sugar-refiners, Ellen-street,
St. George's East.
J. Staples and J. Collyer, plumbers, Southampton.
J. Messenger and J. Rushton, cotton manufacturers, Pres-
ton, Lancashire.
J. Leeming and J. B. Smith, Manchester (so far only as re-
gards the exclusive right or privilege of making or manufactur-
in, a certain machine, called Smith's patent self-acting mule.)
'T. Howard and J. Joplin, wine merchants, Liverpool.
R. Ford and H. Thomas, attorneys, Shrewsbury, Shropshire.
P. Clark, J. Callum, and A. Woodrow, wholesale bobinet
warehousemen, Glasgow.
J. Callum and A. Woodrow, straw hat manufacturers,
Glasgow.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nor. 5.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. WILSON.

This case came before the Court upon the peti-
tion of Sir Thomas Marrion Wilson, the Lord of the
Manor of Hampstead, praying that the sum of 4,0501.,
which he claimed as a fine, might be paid to him by
the relators, the trustees of the Hampstead Charity,
and that the injunction which had been obtained re-
straining him from proceeding to take out execution
under the verdict he had obtained at law, might be dis-
solved. The., short facts of the case, which have
several times been brought before the public, appeared
to be as follows :—ln the year 1698, the Earl of
Gainsborough, the then Lord of the Manor of Hamp-
stead, granted six acres of Hampstead-heath, on which
was a most valuable mineral spring, to Sir Thomas
Lane and several other persons, in trust for the
benefit of the poor of that district, upon the
condition that the sum of five shillings should
be paid yearly to the Lord of the Manor with
the usual service, and that upon the admission of new
lives, a fine of 301. should be paid to the Lord. At
the time of making this grant the Earl of Gainsborough
was a minor ; and a doubt was entertained as to its
validity ; that doubt had, however, been long since re-
moved, and it was now admitted that the grant was valid.
In consequence, however, of the Earl of Gainsborough
being a minor, a deed was executed at the same time
us the grant, by which the purposes of that instrument
were declared. In 1713, proceedings were instituted
in the Courts, relative to the charity property ; and in
the month of April, 1729, Lord King who was then
Chancellor, pronounced a decree, establishing- the charity
founded by the Earl of Gainsborough, and laying down
certain rules for regulating the fines to be taken by
the Lord of the Manor upon the admission of new lives.
By that decree it was provided that upon the trustees
of the charity, who, were originally fourteen, being re-
duced to nine, new ones were to be appointed, and a
certain fine was to be paid to the Lord. That decree
had been upheld by Lord Lyndhurst and Lord Brougham ;
but the trustees considering the fine demanded in the
present instance by the Lord as too exorbitant, and not
founded upon the principles of the decree of Lord King,
refused to pay it, and proceedings were instituted in the
Courts of Common Law to recover it. Those pro-
ceedings were decided in favour of the Lord, and then
an injunction was obtained against him, which it was
now sought to dissolve, restraining him from proceeding
on the judgment he had obtained.
Mr. COOPER, who appeared on behalf of the present
Lord of the Manor, went at considerable length into
the facts of the case, and did not conclude his address
till four o'clock.
The LORD CHANCELLOR postponed the further ar-
guments till to-morrow (this day.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nor. 5.
RUCCO V. PEARCE.

Sir F. POLLOCK moved in this case for a rule to show
cause why the verdict for the defendant should not be set
aside and a new trial had, on the ground of its being
contrary to evidence. The case was tried before Lord
Denman at the sittings after last term, and the circum-
stances were as follow :—The plaintiff was a foreigner
and member of the College of Surgeons of London, and
the action was brought by him against a gentleman of
fortune named Pearce, to recover a sum of 2001. by vir-
tue of a certain agreement entered into between the par-
ties. In 1835 the plaintiff attended Miss Sarah
Pearce, one of the defendant's daughters, and in 1838
he was called upon to attend Miss Caroline, another
daughter, who was consumptive, and recommended a
visit to the warmer climate of France. It was agreed
that Dr. Rucco was to attend the family to Pau for a
period of seven months, and that he was to receive a sum
of 4001. for his services and attendance-2001. to be paid
in advance, and the remainder at, the termination of his
engagement. The family arrived at Pau in October, and
the young lady died on the :18th December. The
plaintiff soon afterwards left Pau and returned to Lon-
don. The defendant to the action had pleaded
first non assumpsit—secondly, that the plaintiff
had not performed his part of the agreement, but had
refused and neglected to attend and advise Miss Caro-
line Pearce—thirdly, that the plaintiff had left Pau
before the expiration of the seven months without the
consent of the defendant—fourthly, that the climate of
Pau did not agree with the plaintiff, and in conside-
ration of his being allowed to return to England he had
given up all claim to the remainder of the money—and
fifthly, that the plaintiff had acted immorally while
residing with the defendant. The Learned Counsel,
after referring to the evidence which had been given in
the case, contended that all these pleas could not be
true, and therefore the verdict must be set aside.
CoLurotr,dopbsEerNvmedAstilatin pronouncing the opinion of the
the difficulties of the case had
been much increased by the absurd practice of intro-
ducing several grounds of defence, some of which were
pnloetaosr: when
the
evidence given at the trial was takenously false, when the defendant had a good ground
of defence. It was very doubtful whether the verdict
could stand for the defendant upon the 3d and sth
into consideration, and that the Court was of opinion
that there should be a rule for a new trial, unless the
defendant agreed to a verdict being entered for the
plaintiff on these two issues.

COURT OFCIVI3I-1"OM1114 9 ..:A,S, Nov. 5.
GRAND SURREY CANAL COMPANY U. HALL.
Mr. THESSIGER said this was an action for trespass
against the defendant for breaking and enuring on a
bridge belonging to the plaintiffs. The defendant
pleaded a right of public way. By the Act of the
Company they were to erect and to maintain bridges, &c.,
for the owners of land taken by them. In 1804 they,
purchasing land of a gentleman named Rose, built a
bridge for the use of his family and tenants.
In 1822 a new Church having been built, there
was great traffic over the bridge, which ix as not certainly
interfered with, till 1832, when that traffic had injured
the bridge, and a small toll was imposed, to keep it in
repair, always making an exception of Mr. Rose's te-
nants. In 1837 objections were first raised to the toll,
and opposition excited against it. Lord Denman, who
tried the case, told
,the Jury that though the Company
might originally have erected the bridge under com-

pulsion of their Act, for the use of Mr. Rose's
tenants alone—yet that if they had allowed to grow up
in the public mind an impression that they meant the
bridge for the public use, that was, in fact, a declaration
to the public. The Learned Counsel insisted that this
was erroneous, because the point was, whether or not
the Company had "intended" to make the bridge pub-
lic—and that this intention was to be gleaned from
their Act, of which in the eye of the law the public
were deemed cognizant. On this ground he moved for
a rule to show cause why there should not be a new
trial, on the ground of misdirection—(the verdict having
been for defendant.) —Rule nisi granted.