The Sun.
London, England, 1830-01-30 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We some time ago intimated our opinion,
that it would be time enough to discuss the
,mlicy of emancipating the Jews when the Jews
themselves petitioned for emancipation. If the
privileges of the Constitution are worth enjoy-
ing, they arc certainly worth asking for ; and it is
perhaps early enough to open the door when we
hear a knocking for admission. The descend-
ants of the chosen race arc not inactive when any
thing is to be gained on which they really set a
value. There is nothing stirring in 'Change-
alle) with which they remain unacquainted, or
in which they do not sympathize ; and let there
be the hint of an intended loan given in any
legitimate or safe quarter of the world, from
London to Pekin, and they are all in motion.
Our great stock-jobbing Leviathan, the other
day, would not let the French Ultras or Liberals
assist their own Government, but left the Lon-
don Stock Exchange to its own fate in the midst
of a hard winter, and hurried off to Paris to
contract for a loan rendered necessary by the as-
sistance which France lent to the A postolicals of
Spain, or the Greek Christians of the Morea.
Had the same zeal been displayed in endeavours
to secure an equality of civil and political privi-
leges to the Jewish sect or nation, there is oome
chance that we should have heard more or
the subject in the Parliamentary discussions of
last session. In making our former remarks on
this subject, we were far from thinking that the
reproach of religious indifference extended to the
whole body of the Jews in this country, and
we are happy now to have before us an evidence
to the contrary. We allude to a well-written
pamphlet, entitled Remarks on the Civil Dis-
abilities of British Jews. The question of
Jewish emancipation has always been rendered
complicated in this country by the double cha-
racter under which the Jews are considered,—as
a nation, and a religious sect. In the forther
they are viewed as aliens ; in the latter as here-
tics. The waters of baptism can only wash out
the former taint ; and subscription to the Thirty-
nine Articles is necessary to remove the other.
While a Swedenborgian or a Jumper, a Hindoo
or a Mussulman, by being born in England, are
considered natural-born subjects, the Jew,
though sprang from ancestors who have resided
in this country ever since the Conquest, is vul-
garly looked upon as a foreigner. He may ac-
cidentally have seen the light of day among us,
but still we cannot help regarding him as an alien.
His bounden duty was to have been born at Jeru-
salem, or in some other strange land beyond the
narrow seas; and if he has neglected it, he •
is not supposed entitled to take advantage of his
own wrong. This idea, we have no doubt, entered
at one time into the construction of our laws,
and still maintains its ground among the num-
ber of our prejudices. Hence the notion,which
has hitherto been general, that Jews could not
inherit, purchase, devise, or transmit landed
property. Had this people merely been consi-
dered as a body of men legally undistinguishable
from their brethren but by the profession of cer-
tain religious tenets, no reason can be con-
ceived why they should be disabled from the
enjoyment of any of those civil rights which
other Unitarians enjoy. The latter, though
called Christians by courtesy, have as few ar-
ticles in their creed as the adherents of the
Mosaic law and the. frequenters of the syna-
gogue. The writer of the pamphlet before us,
who seems well acquainted with the law, if not
himself a lawyer, scouts the idea that a Jew, if
a native of this country, can be considered as
an alien, or is disqualified from holding landed
property.
" It may be sufficient," says he, " on this sub-
ject to refer to the authorities on which I rely.
They are ample and: unimpeachable; there will
scarcely be found among my renders any who will
he disposed to contend against them,.—any who will
continue to maintain that Jews are aliens, and in-
capacitated from holding land, when they are in-
formed that early in the last century, eleven lawyers,
the most eminent of their age,—among whom were
a Solicitor-General, two ChieJustices, and a Chan-
cellor,*-unanimously pronounced those ideas ground-
less,—that in our own day, such men as the pre-
sent Solicitor-General, Mr. Butler, Mr. Preston,
and Mr. Humphreys, have declared themselves of
the same opinion,—and lastly, that the late Chief
Justice, Lord Ellenborough, gave a practical proof
of his concurrence in this belief, by purchasing with-
out hesitation of Mr. Benjamin Goldsnsid a valuable
freehold estate at Roehampton."
What, then, are the penalties to which the
Jews are confessedly liable, and from which the
more respectable portion of their race wish to be
relieved? The following enumeration of them
appears in the pamphlet to which we have al-
luded:—

" The Abjuration Oath, in consequence of its
containing this phrase (upon the faith of a Chris-
tian), may be employed, so. as to occasion the re-
jection of his vote at elections; for the same reason
it utterly incapacitates him from sitting in Parlia-
ment. In conjunction, perhaps, with the form re-
quired in taking the oaths, it disables him from
practising the law, whether as a barrister, attorney,
or notary, and from acting as schoolmaster, or even
as constable, unless so far as he is protected in any
of these employments by an annual indemnity bill;
which seems sufficient while it lasts, except in those
cases where it is usual that the oaths should be
taken before admission, and where it is strictly in-
sisted ,on, that the gospel should be employed in
administering them. By reason of the same phrase,
the declaration recently established renders it im-
possible for him to exercise any corporate office.—
The Abjuration Oath, the declaration, and possibly
the form of administering the oaths, combine to dis-
able him from holding places under Government.—
Here again he is partially relieved, but against the
effect of the first and third causes only by
the Bill of Indemnity. One instance has been
alluded to, in which a comparatively important in-
capacity of the Jews springs out of a source distinct
from any particular mode of administering the oaths,
and from the words upon the true faith of a Chris-
tian: An Act of Car. 11. requires persons teaching
youth in pris ate houses to procure from the Bishop
of the diocese a license, which would probably be
refused, unless to a member of the Church. From
this law, among others, Protestant Dissenters and
Catholics are now relieved. But those who are
neither Protestants nor Catholics remelt) subject to
its operation."
It is not a little remarkable that the repeal of
the Test and Corporation Acts in 1828, in-
tended for the relief of all Dissenters, has ac-
tually, in consequence of the declaration substi-
tuted in lieu of them, imposed additional penal-
ties on the Jews ; or, in other words, has de-
, prived them of privileges previously enjoyed.
Previously to that liberal measure, the law re-
quired that all members of the legal profession
should take the oath of abjuration within six
months after their admission,—that all persons
holding offices under Government should take
the same oaths, together with the sacrament of
the Lord's Supper; and that all corporate officers
should join the communion, and subscribe the
oaths of allegiance and supremacy, within the
same period of six months. But by the Indem-
nity Bill, passed every Session of Parliament,
those who had neglected to comply with the law
in this respect were exempted for the ensuing

year. front the penalties of their neglect, and
placed in the same situation as if he had com-
plied with the provisions of the statute. The
Jews, of course, if promoted to office, enjoyed
the benefit of those Bills of Indemnity. But
by the change of the law, and the substitu-
tion of the declaration " on the trite faith
or' a Christian," previous to entering on of-
fice, the Jews, who tatlllOt make that de-
claration, are met at the very threshold of office
or corporate rights, and prevented from entering.
There can be no doubt, therefore, that the re-
lief granted to other setts has been the occasion
of a new disqualification of the Jews ; that in the
mode of removing a mere stigma from the
former, a substantial injury has been inflicted on
the latter ; and that for the abolition of a gene-
ral grievance, which was rather imaginary than
real, a partial grievance has been substituted
which must be felt as a real hardship. This
unfortunate blow of accidental legislation—this
unexpected rebound of an ill-construeted Act of
Parliament--has naturally given great uneasi-
ness to that more respectable class of the
Hebrew religion, whose wiahos our author ex-
presses, and whose cause ht pleads. The remedy
which lie proposes is, first, to remove any doubts
that may exist as to the meaning of the Tolera-
tion Act, and the law of 1813; and secondly,
to permit natural-born subjects of the Jewish
persuasion to omit the words, " on the true
faith of a Christian," on taking the abjuration
oath, and subscribing the declaration of the 9th
of his present Majesty. Whether this propo-
sition, so simple in its announcement, and ap-
parently so innocent in its object, will be met
with that opposition and alarm which innovation
so often excites, we shall not at present stop to
inquire. It plain that the change would open
Parliament to the professors of the Jewish faith,
as well as admit them to all those offices which
Christian dissenters are now enabled to fill. And
though we are far from apprehending 'that, in
this case, the Hebrews would leave off stock-
jobbing for jobbing in the House of Commons,
or that the twenty-four Aldermen of the City
would at the next election be chosen from the
frequenters of the synagogue, we shall wait for a
more decided expression of solicitude on the part
of the Jews, before we shall think the subject
deserving of lengthened discussion. In the
mean time we must say that the author of the
pamphlet to which we have alluded, has done
justice to himself, to his race, and his subject.—
Times,

The Devil, it is generally allowed, sometimes
speaks the truth ; and truth, even when it comes
from the Devil, ought not to be neglected. In
Blackwood's Magazine for February, there is
an article headed " The Assembling of Parlia-
ment"—to the most of the principles of which
we are decidedly opposed. It, however, con-
lams some truths forcibly expressed, of which we
mean to avail ourselves. " The robbery of the
State Creditor (says the writer) will be. loudly
called for; public knavery will he extolled as a
pure and prolific source of -relief from taxation.
If it be pleaded that as the Government has
taken away the means of paving taxes, they
ought no longer to be demanded ; that the fund.
holders, by sanctioning the taking away of these
means have forfeited their claims, and that they
ought to be treated like the rest of the commu-
nity—an answer will not be readily discovered.
Thus one iniquity generates and sanctifies an-
other. Ministers will make a feeble resistance,
and probably the adjustment' may be deferred
until the Session of next year. In the present
one, it will, however, we imagine, be proved to
be a matter of right and justice, and remissions
of taxes will be made, which will cause a falling
off in the Revenue amply sufficient for making
it in the next a matter of necessity. In 1831,
if not sooner, the State will be solemnly declared
bankrupt; and as a dividend of ten shillings in
the pound would be far .from admitting of the
repeal called for of twenty millions of taxes,
we think the dividend will scarcely exceed
2s. Gd." The great problem which puzzles
the politicians of this country at the pre-
sent moment, is akin to one which is often
very distressing to children, namely, to have their
cake when they have eaten it. The war against
the Jacobins, following on the heels of the Ame-
rican war, has increased enormously our debt, and
enlarged our notions respecting establishments
so much that the burdens pressing on us have
become intolerable. We are in the situation of
a spendthrift, who, after wasting the greater part
of his means in riotous living, cannot reconcile
himself to the painful idea of depriving himself
of any of the indulgences to which lie has been
accustomed. Blackwood's panacea is Deprecia-
tion and Corn Laws—a panacea which has na-
turally enough taken possession of the Country
Gentlemen, who would fain make war without
feeling the inconveniences of it, and would have
high prices, whatever be the consequences. Let
us have Corn Laws, say they—no free trade, and
a depreciation. The question of free trade is re-
solved in one word. Foreigners will not give us
the produce of their labour for nothing: we must
give them in return the produce of our own
labour, for what else have we to give them in re-
turn for theirs ? If we take from them the pro-
duce of their labour, it is clear that we obtain
thereby more in return for our own labour than it
would otherwise yield, consequently that the
amount of all that man desires is increased
among us by the exchange. But the classes who
cry out for this panacea are monopolists and
debtors—who care not what becomes of the
people, provided their own wants be relieved. At
the Cumberland Meeting, of the proceedings at
which we this day give a further report, this plan
was very fairly exposed by Mr. Peter Dixon, who
observed, " Gentlemen, if the currency were
twain depreciated tomorrow, the farmers would
not be benefited; rents would rise ; competition
for farms would again take place, and speculators
would again compete with real capitalists—only
to put money into the pockets of the land-
holders." All violent changes are bad. We
pity the condition of many who :have suf-
fered from the fall of land involved in the
fall of prices, as we pitied many who, in the
mercantile world, were reduced from wealth to
bankruptcy by the fall in commodities. But
we cannot consent to any scheme for bolstering
up by artificial means any class of the commu-
nity at the expellee of the nation in general.
The depreciation of the currency does not make
the people richer or poorer—it is merely an al-
teration of the standard by which commodities
are measured to effect another distribution of the
property of the community—to take something
from John to give to James. It is sheer spo-
liation, disguise it as we will. No nation ever
yet was enriched by restrictions on trade—no
nation ever was benefitted by changes in the
value of the denomination of money. The
trick has been tried by almost every tyrant in
history. We observe in the Quarterly Journal
of Agriculture, No.B, a communication from
Sir John Sinclair, in which lie gives some in-

formation derived from Mr, Dickson, who for-
merly occupied a farm near Edinburgh, and has
for some time past cultivated a farm, called
Kidbrooke, near Blackheath, in Rent, and been
extensively engaged in advising landlords as to
letting land throughout the country. In a let-
ter to Sir John, Mr. Dickson says--" There is
great reason to apprehend that unless some im-
portant changes soon take place, the owners and.
occupiers of land will be reduced to a deplorable
state. I find, in most counties around Lonclo.n,
that the capital of the farmers is very greatly re-
duced vvithin the last four years ; for in numerous
instances many have paid their rents from capital,
and others from borrowed money. When farms
have come to be re-let, a respectable tenant can-
not be procured, unless at a reduction of fully
from 2 to 30 per cent. This is very generally
the case ; and at this next Michaelmas I know
of many proprietors who will have large tracts of
land given up to them." We may rest assured
that tenants will not long continue to pay rents
out of their capital; and that the landlords and
they will, like all other persons dependent on
each other, soon find what rent the one can
, ,
ar„ioro, to pay, and, consequently, what the other
ought to take. The sooner the delusion is
destroyed as to the chance of another deprecia-
tion, the better will it be for both landlords and
tenants. Let us renounce then all ideas of spolia-
tion of particular classes ; and having committed
the folly of contracting unnecessarily an enor-
mous national debt, let us submit to the burdens
and privations it imposes with all the patience we
can command. While, however, we say this,
there can be no question that we ought to re-
duce our expenditure to the lowest scale consis-
tent with good faith and prudence. A nation
like England has little to fear from enemies, and
the lower we reduce our expellees the sooner we
shall be able to 'surmount our difficulties. Some-

thing may be done to relieve us, too, in a judi-
cious imposition of taxes.
The Author of a series of ingenious Essays in
an Evening Paper observes, f°That it is an im-
portant principle, and one admitting of the strictest
demonstration, that taxes on vested property—on
the rent of land, houses, and on money on mortgage
and in the public funds, have no injurious influence
upon the production of wealth, or upon the national
prosperity; and that it is those taxes only which
fall upon the actively productive class which reduce
the rate of profit, and bring a country prematurely,
first to the stationary, and then to the declining
state."

And further, that " the main financial alteration
should be the imposition of a permanent and mode-
rate Property Tax, say to the extent of .5 per cent.,
upon the incomes derived from land, houses, funds,
mortgages, annuities, and every species of invest-
ment made for the purpose of obtaining a revenue
without directly engaging in the business of pro-
duction. The Act imposing this tax should contain
a provision, to the effect that individuals, having
fixed money charges upon dormant capital as above
described, should bear their due proportion of the
impost by a deduction of five per cent. from the
interest while they continued to receive it, and by a
like deduction from the principal when they called

it in. Such a provision would be an equitable and
necessary protection to landed and other property
charged with mortgages and settlements.
" The imposition of this Property-tax should be
accompanied by every practicable dimimution of the
public expenditure, and by a repeal, to the full amount
of the retrenchment and Property tax, of imposts
pressing upon the productive classes. No person
acquainted with the nature and causes of national
wealth will hesitate to admit, that these financial ar-
rangements would have a powerful tendency to remove
the predisposing causes of decline, to relieve existing
distress, and to promote permanent prosperity."
We believe there is but one opinuin in the
country as to the benefit which would be derived
from a Property-tax, in lieu of the existing taxes.
The Landholders and Fundholders would benefit
in the end ; for they have a deep interest in the
prosperity of the productive classes. This, too,
would reach our absentees—Morning Chronicle.
It has become a practice in the legal profes-
sion to decry the Court of Exchequer. The
small quantity of business in that Court affords
ample opportunity to small wits of making dull
jokes and pert sarcasms at the expense of the
Learned Barons who preside over that depart-
ment of the administration of the law. When
public prejudice runs strong in any direction,
reason has a difficult task to perform in endea-
vouring to resist it. Let us see who the Barons
of the Exchequer are, and what are the grounds
for impugning their capacity to discharge effec-
tively the high and sacred duty of dispensing
justice. At the head of the Court is the Chief
Baron, Alexander, who, although, before his

elevation to that office, more converzant, as a
Master of Chancery, with Equity practice than
the principles and administration of the Com-
mon Law, yet possesses that natural good sense
and soundness of judgment, which, united to a
rigid impartiality, afford a guarantee to the
public that, at all events, substantial justice will
characterise his decisions. If firmness of prin-
ciple, united to the utmost amenity of manners,
ought to make a Judge respected, the Chief
Baron ought to stand high i❑ the public
esteem. The next in order is Baron Gar-
row, one of the most acute and able advo-
cates that ever obtained distinction at the
English Bar. His fame as a criminal law-
yer, indeed, seems to be more remembered than
the reputation which he enjoyed for a long time
in civil practice ; yet who should speak lightly
of one who was, during several years, a success-
ful leader in the Court of King's Bench, and
the eloquent rival of the immortal Erskine ? It
is true he is now in the decline of life ; but age,
that has silvered his hairs, has not impaired the
vigour of his intellect. His judgment, like his
eye, is still clear and penetrating—his attention
to business prompt and active, and his reason-
ing powers untouched by the feebleness of years.
Baron Vaughan, who ranks next to him in se-
niority, has the advantage of great experience
and great practice in his profession. A polished
gentleman in manners, he was no less a popular
advocate, while for a long period a leader in the
Court of Common Pleas. His quickness,
sagacity, and judicious zeal for the inte-
rests of his client, were known and ap-
preciated by the suitors of that Court, where
his practice produced him celebrity and af-
fluence. We know that, since his elevation to the
Bench, lie has exerted himself with uncommon
assiduity, especially upon circuit, to discharge
his duties with effect, and to deserve the confi-
dence of the profession and the public. His
habits of business are not only active but inde-
fatigable, being early and late at his post, and
not allowing any considerations of personal con-
venience and comfort to interfere with the efficient
execution of his judicial functions. Baron Bol-
land has not had time to be much tried as a
Judge ; but we shall be greatly mistaken if his
conduct on the Bench will not give satisfaction.
He was an acute and skilful Sessional lawyer,
and had a fair proportion of respectable business
in the superior Courts ; where the mildness of
his disposition, and his steady integrity, ob-
tained him universal respect. Now, why is it

that Judges so well qualified to sustain the clia-
racter of a British Court of Justice, both for
purity and intelligence, should be exposed to
unpleasant observations, in consequence of the
comparatively small quantity of business trans-
acted in the Court of Exchequer ?
I hereason
is simple and obvious. The Judges. bear
th e
blame in the opinion of those who do not reflect
upon the matter, which is only attributable to
the constitution of the Court. Such a monopoly
has been established there that all the business
must pass through the hands of four attorneys,
we believe, and sixteen clerks in Court, to the
total exclusion of 8,000 or 9,000 regular attor-
neys and solicitors in England. It is not to be
wondered at that those excluded attorneys object
to commence their actions in a Court where they
must place the business in other hands. This
close-borough system of law must be throne
open—this monopoly of practice must be broken
down—or the Barons of the Exchequer, unless
when engaged on the circuits, will have com-
parative sinecures in the administration of justice.
But, besides the paucity of business in the Court
of Exchequer, there is a complaint of the slow-
ness with which the business is done. That is
accounted for by the difficulty of obtaining
Counsel of eminence to attend where their visits
must of necessity, like those of angels, be " few
and far between." It is too much the practice
with the attorneys to give their Exchequer briefs
to Barristers who have already more business
than they can well attend to in the Courts
of King's Bench and Common Pleas.
Such Barristers make the Court of Ex-
chequer wait upon their convenience ; and the
consequence is that the Barons are often obliged
to rise when there are a great many cases in the
paper, merely for want of Counsel to argue
them. We observe that the other day there
was not a single one of the Barristers, who held
briefs in the cases that stood in the paper, who
appeared in Court to attend to his client's busi-
ness, and the Barons were under the unpleasant
necessity of leaving the Bench without transact-
ing any business, but not before they had noticed
with some warmth the circumstance of the Court
being left, day after day, without Counsel to
carry on the business before it. How many
gentlemen of neglected and competent talent are
there at the Bar who would gladly undertake,
and faithfully execute, some part of the duties
which the favoured few neglect, or are unable,
from the multiplicity of their other engagements,
to perform ! We are glad to find that the Barons
have determined to strike every cause out of the
paper in which Counsel do not appear. We
hope such a resolution, rigidly enforced in this
as well as in the other Courts, will have the
effect of distributing business more generally
among the members of the profession, and that
thereby those delays may be prevented which
arise from the non-attendance of Counsel, and
which add greatly to the tediousness and ex-
pence of a system of justice sufficiently slow and
costly in itself.—Morning Herald.
We consider it our duty to inform the public,
and especially that part of it who have taken
so deep an interest in the Mo4-ning Journal, that
the proprietors of this paper have received notice
to appear before the Court of King's Bench on
Thursday next, the 4th instant, the very, day on
which Parliament meets, to receive the sentence
of the Court for the various constitutional articles
and alleged libels of which they have-been found
guilty ! It will be recollected that when the
proceedings which led to these convictions were
instituted by the Attorney-General, Sir James
Scarlett, he stated that they were advised by
the Croy n in order to administer a little whole-
some correction to the press. The wholesome
correction, it would appear, is confined to one
individual—to him who has dared in this free
country to express his opinions on public mea-
sures and public men—we mean Mr. Alexander.
He, it would appear, is the sole object whom the
law officers of the Crown wish to make a victim
to military tyranny and modern liberalism. It is
his ruin which has been contemplated by these
unconstitutioal proceedings. If this be not the
case why is the Standard spared—why is the
Age passed by—why is the Times passed by—
why is the Quarterly Review not prosecuted—
why is Blackwood's Magazine not visited with
the riaour of Scotch law ? These are questions
which Sir James Scarlett and the Executive

Government will be compelled to answer in
Parliament. The proceeding is invidious, per-
sonal, and oppressive. It evinces meanness, ma-
lignity, and despicable irritation. It is the
dying effort of despotism to trample upon private
opinions and public rights. It is the vengeance
of the detected hypocrite and the ferocious apos-
tate. It evinces the cold blood of the political
recreant, directed against him who has dared
be honest in the worst of times. lint let the law
take its course, and let those who thus abuse the

law stand by the consequences. The defendant
is prepared to suffer the judgment ; but let those
who have thus invoked the law beware its inno-
vations or its counteracting force. There is a
time for all things ; and we may safely predict,
judging of passing events, that Sir James Scarlett,
and even the Duke of Wellington, will bitterly
lament these prosecutions. We speak not the
words of prophecy, but we warn them to be pre-
pared for coming events, even . for those events
which have already cast their shadows before us.
—Morning Journal.
The late election of a President of the Royal
Academy is beginning to excite a sensation
which will not, we suspect, pass away without
producing a developement of some strange truths.
The election of Mr. Shee astonished every one,
and must, we.think, have astonished himself ;
for Mr. Shee is a sensible man, and must be
aware that there is as great a difference between
him and Wilkie as between a sign-painter and
himself. A Morning Paper states " that the
members of the Academy felt extremely indig-
nant at the appointment of Mr. Wilkie as prin-
cipal Portrait Painter to his Majesty on the very
eve of the election, which appeared to them
in the light of an attempt to overawe them ;"
and in consequence, of course, that they
secretly determined to show his Majesty that
they not only would not be overawed by him,
but that in order to prove their independence of
royal favour they would elect as President one
who was not only not the first in his line, but
who was in every respect so inferior to Wilkie
that the public should entertain no doubt on the
subject. Good. His Majesty, we believe,
who is unquestionably the most liberal pa-
tron of the fine arts in the present day,
cares as little about the twaddling resolutions
of the Royal Academicians as they do
respecting his wishes—or rather, we have
some reason to believe, entertains a thorough
contempt for the whole body ; but the
Academicians need not, therefore, like spoiled
children, have quarrelled with their bread and
butter, and thereby rendered themselves more
contemptible in his sight than they previously
were. We repeat it—The Royal Academy has

lone itself no honour by its choice. Portrait
painting is essentially a mechanical art, and had
the Academicians been desirous of electing the
first in this line, they ought to have sent one of
their brethren on a voyage to Canton, where they
would have found the art in perfection. Wilkie
has spurned the occupation, and gathered his
laurels from the great book of nature.—Morn-
hag Advertiser.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, JAN. 29.
LUSHINGTON V. SEWELL.

This was an appeal from a decision of Sir An-
thony Hart, when Vice-Chancellor in this country,
in a cause instituted for the purpose of settling va-
rious questions that arose upon the construction of
the will and codicils of the late M. G. Lewis, Esq.,
of literary celebrity. He devised his estate to
trustees, to be divided among his sisters, Lady
Lushington and Mrs. Sheddon, subject to certain
charges; and annexed a condition, that the persons
who should become entitled to the estates should
reside upon them for a period of three months in
every third year. This condition being an attempt
to create a perpetual obligation, was held to be bad.
The other questions under the will were disposed
of, with the exception of one, respecting which Sir
Anthony Hart gave judgment after lie had heard
the cause, and after he had quitted England. In
one of the codicils Mr. Lewis had expressed himself
in these terms,—" Whether I possess the whole or
only the half of Hordley at the time of my death, I
declare that the more or less shall make no diffe-
rence. In that case, I bequeath the whole of Hord-
ley to my youngest sister, and to her children after
her death; but I charge it with 15,000/. to be
equally divided between the children of my eldest
sister ; to which purpose, one half of the clear
profits of Hordley shall be devoted till the whole
15,0001. shall have been discharged." It appeared
that the testator had entered into a contract for the
purchase of the other half of the Hordley estate, to
which he thus referred, but that he died without
making a valid disposition of that moiety, which
therefore descended to the heir at law. The ques-
tion then arose whether the heir took that moiety
discharged of the 15,0001., or whether, although the
devise of the whole, as made by the testator, was
bad, yet that according to the doctrine of election
the charge would include the whole of the estate.
Sir Anthony Hart had decided the affirmative of the
latter point, and the soundness of that decision was
questioned by the present appeal.
The Lon]) CHANCELLOR having heard the argu-
ments of counsel to a conclusion, had no doubt that
the decision of the Vice-Chancellor was right, and
he therefore affirmed the decision.

COMM OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 29.
BURGE V. -.

This was an application involving a point of prac-
tice of considerable importance. A motion had
been made by Mr. COMYN to set aside a judgment
and execution for irregularity. The irregularity
complained of was, that common bail had been filed
" according to the statute" in the second term after
that in which the writ was returnable. The statute,
it appeared, was silent as to the time within which
common hail should be filed, and there was no dis•
tinct rule raid down in the books of practice. The
Court having yesterday directed the Master to in-
qu're as to the practice, that officer now reported
that from inquiries at the Common Bail office, he
found that common bail " according to the statute"
was frequently filed after the term next following
that in which the process was returnable, but that it
was considered irregular, and the attornies were told
that they did it at their peril.

The COURT, upon this report, decided that the
judgment NI as irregular, and ordered it and the exe-
cution to be set aside.

Mr. LANGSLOW, for the plaintiff, hoped the rule
would not be made absolute with costs; but on Mr.
Comyn hinting at an action, stating that the execu-
tion had been in the defendant's house since
December last, the Learned Counsel agreed to a sug-
gestion of the Court that the plaintiff should pay the
costs, the defendant undertaking to bring no action.