The Sun.
London, England, 1839-10-02 00:00:00

THE HOPS IN KENT.

MAIDSTONE.—During the last week the picking has
proceeded with comparatively little interruption from
the weather, In this immediate vicinity the crop turns
out to be decidedly short of last year, and this applies,
we believe, to the Golding plantation generally. In
the " Flower of Kent" garden, which was laid at nine
bags an acre, we understand the crop is now estimated
at a hundred tags, which would give five bags an acre ;
and in another almost equally celebrated piece the esti-
mate, since the picking began, has sunk from six to four.
On the other hand, on the level and low lands, where
the grape hops are cultivated, they come down more
abundantlyjin bushels, but at the same time weigh light.
The consequence, we should think, would be a brisk
demand and a good price for the superior sorts, of which
there will evidently be a deficiency.
FARLEIGII.—The hops in Farleigh come down very
much shorter than was anticipated, and it is very much
the same in the adjoining parishes.
TESTON, WATERINGBURY, and MEnEwonTx.---The
hops in this district come very short of the planters' ex-
pectation. Most of them thought of growing as many
as last year, but they are disappointed.
CHART, BOUGHTON, and SUTTON.—The hops come
down very short of what was expected in this district ;
in most of the grounds there is a less number of bushels,
which weigh very light. It is thought by most of the
planters that the duty will not exceed last year's.
THE WE A LD.—Hop-pieking has made considerable
progress during the past week, in consequence of the
very favourable state of the weather. In some instances
the crop exceeds that of last year ; in others it falls
short of it.—Maidstone Journal of Tuesday.

CHURCH-RATES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sia; In common with every Church-rate comba-
tant, whatever side he takes, I was utterly astonished
at Dr. Lushington's decision in the Stebbing case,
where he determined that the omission of property of
large amount from an assessment for Church-rate does
not invalidate the rate.

I had lately seen an opinion of this same Dr. Lush-
ington, in which he propounded an exactly opposite
doctrine ; and for the instruction of your readers, I
annex so much of that opinion as relates to the question
raised.

" Question. Whether, if complete evidence can be
given that, as respects the amount assessed on the par-
ties against whom the suit" (in the case submitted) " is
brought, such amount is, with reference to the assess-
ments of other parishioners, unequal and too high, the
Court will not upon such grounds declare the rate in-
valid ?

" Answer. If the parties sued can prove that persons
liable to be rated are omitted in the rate, or that they,
the parties sued, are assessed at a higher rate in pro-
portion or value than other persons rated, the rate is
invalid, and cannot be recovered ; but tenants of the
glebe are not liable to be rated.
" Question. Whether the omission of any one or
more of the parishioners or inhabitants by law liable to
be assessed is not of itself a sufficient ground for the
Court, on due proof of such omission, pronouncing
against the rate, and dismissing the suit with costs ?
‘‘ Answer. If as I have already said, any person he
omitted justly liable to be assessed, the suit must be
dismissed, provided the person omitted was liable for
any sum worth inserting. Ido not say a rate would be
invalidated when the omission was for such a sum as
sixpence, but almost any sum would be sufficient to in-
validate the rate, when there is an emission. In such
case, I think the party proceeded against would be en-
titled to costs.

(Signed) "S. LUSHINGTON.
" Great George-street, Feb. 10, 1838."
The italics stand as in the original, and I have not
given the whole case, because the questions and answers
are complete in themselves, and the remainder has no
bearing on the same points.
If, then, I understand the facts, they stand thus :--
The public attention has been fixed on the barbarous
proceedings and anomalous practice of the Ecclesiastical
Courts, and many persons like myself have determined
to bear all consequences rather than submit to tribunals
so iniquitously constituted. In the mean time, it is
discovered that the intricacies of Ecclesiastical law
may turn to the discomfiture of Ecclesiastical authori-
ties, and are as dangerous to their purposes as a cum-
brous flail in the hands of an awkward workman.
The exactors of Church-rates have been baffled in
their pursuit, and the Dissenters, with the opinion of
Dr. Lushington in their favour, and their " tried friend"
for an Ecclesiastical Judge, supposed they stood well in
the contest, when out comes the Stebbing decision,
and the tables are turned.

I have often and zealously endeavoured to divert my
fellow-sufferers from confidence in man, especially in the
professions of great men, to a course of vigorous self-
dependence in their efforts for religious freedom. Few
public men have paraded their professions more than
Dr. Lushington, and few have received greater credit ;
but as soon as a weapon has been found annoying to the
ecclesiastical extortioners, this " stanchest retainer" of
a much-professing, little-doing Ministry, steps in with
his judicial authority, to shatter the weapon, and palsy
the arm that wielded it. To effect this purpose, he
will even sacrifice his own consistency, and contravene
his own formal enunciation of the law. These be your
Gods, 0 Israel! Such of my fellow-countrymen as
abhor the Ecclesiastical Courts too much to be volun-
tary parties to any suits therein, will find nothing in this
transaction to mitigate their objections, although it is
probable the many who are willing to turn upon their
oppressors the arms of their own warfare will not be
discouraged by a decision of their friend, which their
worst foes will scarcely venture to confirm. It is for-
tunate the learned Knight does not yet preside over the
highest Court of Appeal.
Sir, your obedient servant,
Bungay, Sept. 30. JOHN CHILDS.

The Right Hon. George and Mrs. Dawson and
Mr. Henry Dawson have taken their departure for the
seat of Lord Lurgan.

THE Jaws.—ln the very midst of the turmoil
and confusion of the Crusades, a new power was evolv-
ing, which was about to become far more potent than
the sword. The poor Jews, driven from country to
country, seeking for rest and finding none, returned
like the dove to the ark, into their own invulnerable
patience and hope ; and yet, unknown to their tormen-
tors, they were performing a great service to the cause
of European civilisation. Whether or not they were
the inventors of bills of exchange is a question of little
moment ; we know that, moving disjointedly over the
surface of society, they became the chief bankers and
commercial agents of Europe, and paved the way for
funds and loans, and the dominion of capital. The
world owes them far more for this service than it can
yet fairly estimate ; and it appears to us that Pro-
vidence which educes good out of mans evil, has
made the separate existence of the Jews, and the cruel-
ties of Christians towards them—a separate existence
perpetuated by their own obstinacy, and cruelties com-
mitted in the ignorance of barbarism—a grand means
of advancing the civilisation of the world, of furthering
the social and intellectual progress of the human race.
And the condition of the Jews in some parts of the
Continent has been very considerably ameliorated. Na-
poleon made them citizens, placing them on the same
footing as other Frenchmen ; some German Powers
have also given them civil rights ; and in Holland they
flourish. There are supposed to be from 28,000 to
30,000 in Great Britain, of whom about about 18,000
are in London ; in France, 50,000 ; in Holland and
Belgium, 80,000 ; in Austria, Prussia, Italy, &c., they
number nearly a million ; in Russia and Poland up-
wards of half a million—while their numbers throughout
the East are unknown.—London Saturday Journal.

A Baronet who has, during several successive
Parliaments, represented a remote Welsh county, upon
Conservative principles, has so involved himself in pe-
cuniary difficulties that the entire of his estates will
shortly be brought to the hammer. The debts amount
to 440,000/.—Limerick Chronicle.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Arthur Hughes, who was remanded on Wednesday
last on a charge of having deserted his wife the morn-
ing of ilia marriage, was this morning again placed at
the bar.
The Loan AlAvoa, after eliciting some information
relative to the disgustingly profligate habits of some of
the parties connected with this case, told the complain-
ing wife (who had shown how soon some women can be
won) that he could not assist her in her object unless
she could produce further evidence relative to the al-
leged bigamy.—The prisoner was dismissed.
Thomas Laws, a young man in the employment of a
knacker or horse-boiler, was charged with having
treated a poor horse in the most cruel manner.
William Cornwall, City policeman, No. 57, stated
that at half-past five o'clock in the evening, as a fine
horse, for which he had been given to understand fifty
guineas bad been lately paid, was standing at the bot-
tom of Queen-street,the wheel of a waggon or cart got
entangled wjth its leg, and actually tore away the hoof,
which was seen immediately afterwards adhering to
the rest of the limb merely by an integument.. The
holler made no noise upon receiving the dreadful injury,
but several persons
,whose feelings were affected at the
spectacle, sent for a knacker to put the suffering
animal out of his pain. The defendant attended,
and with his pole-axe struck the horse on the
head and knocked it down. He then got a piece of a
stick and thrust it into the hole made by the pole-axe,
but the poor horse, after a struggle, succeeded in getting
upon his legs, and actually walked along the street with
the stick in his head, and upon three legs. A more
shocking sight, the policemen said, could not be seen.
At last, some coal-heavers, with a heavy blow on the
head, killed the horse.
The LORD MAYOR, and Alderman FAREBROTHER,
who sat to adjudicate with his Lordship on various
cases of assault, expressed much indignation upon hear-
ing the statement, and remarked upon the great impro-
priety of employing in such a business young men who
were not able to perform it properly, and who had
no feeling in their business."

James Gibbins said that the defendant was perfectly
competent to the task of killing the horse without sub-
jecting it to such agony, being 25 years of age, and ac-
tually in the habit of killing upon an average 20 horses
per week. He also said that the defendant had been
in his employment 10 years.
Witnesses said that for a considerable time the public
feeling was shocked by the sight.
The defendant was then adjudged to pay the penalty
of 40 shillings and costs ; and his master, who felt indig-
nant at the conduct of his servant, refused to pay the
fine, in consequence of which the defendant was sent to
Bridewell for 14 days.