The Sun.
London, England, 1837-09-14 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL JUSTICE.

(From the Northampton Chronicle.)
• Our readers will recollect that scarcely a month has
elapsed since they viewed the grand procession headed by
the Marquis of Northampton, followed by the Magistrates,
the Clergy, and the members of various Masonic Lodges
in the county, when the stone of a new church, for the
parish of All Saints, was laid by the Noble Lord. For
some years appeals had been made stating the want of
church accommodation for the parishioners if All Saints,
and the necessity for the new building. By the aid of a
fund left by a benevolent lady, for erecting new churches,
and under the sanction of the Archbishop of Canterbury,
and other trustees, who advanced from this fund three
thousand pounds, the new church is in progress. We nom
call the attention of our readers to the report of a suit
brought in the Consistory Court, where it is proved that
the parishioners of All Saints are excluded from seats
in that church, while non-residents from the adjoining
parish church, which is half empty, are admitted, and
suffered by the churchwardens to occupy the beit and most
commodious seats there, when, perhaps, the necessity for a new
church will be questioned ; and we think that the members
of the Established Church are much indebted to the zeal-
' ous exertions of Mr. Becke, the promoter of the suit, a
staunch Churchman, and liberal Whig. They will, at the
same time, we apprehend, read with no little alarm, the
extraordinary decision of the Conservative ((were ?) Tory
Judge—his Eminence, as a divine and a politician, no doubt
is acknowledged by his party, but his learning as a Civi-
lian—(if Lord Stowell's judgment and soundness as a law-
yer be admitted)—will, we should think, be doubted. It
seems that Mr. Becke has occupied a large house in the
parish, at a proportionate rent, since Michaelmas, 1834 ;
that in Nov. 1834, he applied for seats to Mr. John Phipps,
the then Churchwarden, but had no answer to his communi-
cation ; that he afterwards, at an accidental meeting (we
pray our readers to bear this in mind), with Mr. Phipps,
was informed by him that there was a large pew in the south
aisle of the church, which was appropriated to the house,
and Mr. Phipps advised Mr. Becke to lay claim to it ; that
Mr. Becke having afterwards ascertained from his land-
lord, Mr. Whitworth, that the pew in question had be-
longed to another house situate in the Drapery, and which
was formerly in the occupation of the late Mr. Whitworth,
his father, both gentlemen (Mr. Whitworth and Mr.
Becke) waited on Mr. Phipps, and informed him he was in
error ; and moreover, that if the pew had been appropriated
to Mr. Becke's house, he would have objected to have sat
in it, it being a kind of accommodation pew, and occupied
by various persons (to the number of 12), some of whom
were non-residents. Mr. Phipps proposed (as it was sworn
both by Mr. Becke and Mr. Whitworth, and not contra-
dicted by Mr. Phipps) that the two former gentlemen should
go and view all the seats in the church, and if any suitable
vacant seats could be found, Mr. Becke was to have them.
No vacant scats were found, and it was then arranged be-
tween the parties that Mr. Becke should wait until a
small pew, or seats in a suitable pew (Mr. Becke's family
being himself, a brother, and a sister), became vacant.
This, it will be borne in mind, took place in November,
1834. It then appeared that application was made to the
then Churchwarden (Mr. Marshall), in June, 1835, for
seats in a pew called the Vicar's Pew, and which was then
occupied by Messrs. Scriven, attornics, and who are
parishioners of St. Giles, and a family of the name of Cham-
bers—that the latter were going to leave—that the seats
were promised to Mr. Becke, on condition ipiis paying Mr.
Scriven a certain rent for the sittings,-that Mr. Becke in-
stantly objected to such an illegal and extraordinary request,
but •expressed his willingness to pay the Vicar or the Church-
warden a proper sum when the Vicar's subscription was col-
lected. We must refer our readers to the report for the
full facts of the extraordinary part of the case ; suffice it
here to say, that because Mr. Becke would not pay Mr.
Scriven, he (Mr. Scriven) let the pew to some friends of
kis own, as the Churchwarden, Ilfr. Marshall (as was sworn
by Mr. Becke, and not contradicted by Mr. Marshall) in-
formed the promoter. This curious state of timings left Mr.
Becke without seats until January, 1836, when the seats
again became vacant by the Chambers'leaving. Application
upon application is then made by Mr. Becke's proctor to
the Churchwarden to scat his client. The consequences
of his refusal to do so are pointed out—a period of be-
tween two and three months is consumed in this nego-
tiation, and Mr. Marshall, the Churchwarden (as it was
sworn to by Mr. Becke, and not contradicted) having ac-
tually threatened to seat Mr. Becke in an arm chair in the
aisle of the church, the suit was then commenced. Mr.
Becke, who conducted his case in person, cited a decision
of Lord Stowell in Walter v. Gunner and another, in the
first volume of Dr. Haggard's Reports, where the Learned
Judge ruled that a Churchwarden was bound to seat a
parishioner in preference to all non-parishioners ; " and
that, for that purpose, the pews occupied by the non-
parishioners must be considered as vacant pews." It was
proved on the part of Mr. Becke, and not contradicted by
the Churchwardens, that about 20 pews were occupied by non-
residents. Mr. Bccke said he should waive his claim to the
Vicar's pew (the Rev. Gentleman having married since the suit
commenced, and his family now occupying the pew), and,
under all the circumstances, he felt bound to call on the
Judge to seat him in Mrs. Kerr's pew, she being, as the
Learned Gentleman observed, a relative of Messrs. Scriven,
and whose conduct was one principal reason for the origi-
nation of the suit. The Learned Gentleman produced the
decision of Lord Stowell, which was exactly in point as to
Mr. Becke's right to be seated in any pew most convenient
to himself, and which was occupied by a non-parishioner.
Mark, Readers, the judgment, and congratulate your-
selves
that you arc not sureties to the Consistory Court of
this Diocese.

Dr. Butler, in delivering judgment, said it was clearly
proved in his mind that proper seats had been offered to
Mr. Becke, and that Mr. Striven was a parishioner, and
that he should dismiss the suit and condemn Mr. Becke in
two-thirds of the cost.

Mr. Becke then asked the Learned Judge whether h^
would be pleased to decide on the most importmt part of
the case—viz., the promoter's right to be seated in one of
the non-residents' pews. The Judge first intimated that
this claim had not been made in the earlier stages of the
suit ; Luton Mr. Becke referring him to the first allejation
or pleadiny filed in the suit, it appeared that it was made
a claim, the Learned Judge (be it known) then intimated
he should not give judgment on this part of the case !

It is almost needless to state that Mr. Becke immme-
diatcly gave notice of appeal to the Consistory Court in
London. We rejoice, for many reasons, that the suit
has terminated in this way, as we understand from Mr.
Becke that he is advised by one of the most eminent civi-
lians (and who has advised Mr. Becke throughout the
case) that upon the facts admitted by the Churchwar-
dens, Mr. Becke, in the opinion of the civilian, will not
only be seated. but that the Churchwarden will be con-
demned in all the costs. We rejoice, therefore, that it
will go before the Superior Tribunal, and we trust that
this extraordinary decision will alone be a sufficient rea,on
for the Legislature abolishing the inferior Ecclesiastical
Tribunals, and which, our readers are aware, it. has for
some time been in the contemplation of her Majesty's pre-
sent Ministry to accomplish. We hope the report of this
trial will, by the medium of the Pres,,, be made generally
known, and we think that but one opinion will be formed
of the result.

Mr. Becke is a staunch Whig. Ho intimated in the
course of his address, that if his politics had been more
agreeable to certain parties, the suit would never have been
heard of.

THE MA RQUI S.—The highly respectable company
that meets nightly at a certain house in the Haymarket,
miss much the distinguished nobleman who was wont to
" stand treat" and be hail-fellow-well-met with all and each
of them. It is true the house in question is still patronised
by such of the set as honour the metropolis with their pre-
sence ; but the master spirit of the whole is absent. On
the news of his Lordship's " accident" reaching the house
in question, loud were the lamentations of his Lordship's
" friends," and greet their surprise that Bergen watchmen
should not resemble English pugilists, and consent to be
" knocked about," by his Lordship fora " con-si-de-ra-tiou."

This day is the anniversary of the burning of
Moscow, in 1812 ; and likewise the anniversary of the
death of three distinguiihed persons—Lord Bur Leigh, in
1603 ; Gen. \Voile, who was killed in 1759, which fur-
nished the melancholy subject of the hest picture painted
by Benjamin West,afterwards President of the Royal Aca-
demy ; and Charles James Fox, who died in 1806.

Hampton, the fool-hardy • crazed blockhead, whose
ascent from Lord's Cricket Ground and descent, God
knows where, in a parachute of his own making, was ad-
vertised, but did not take place—has written some unin-
telligible nonsense to the papers about the why and where-
fore he did not jeopardise his cal-ease, which it appears has
becomeso cumbersome to him. In this silly illiterate epistle
the man states his readiness to fulfil what. he calls his " con-
tract" with the public, being, as he says, fully confident of
success. Is money or notoriety, or arc both, the aim of
this person ? Is Mr. Hampton tired of his life ? If he be,
let him go hang himself, and not call upon the public to
pay for a silly suicidal exhibition in a parachute. We trust
that the good taste and feeling of Englishmen will not be
parties to a scheme for the perpetration of self-murder.
Will the British public countenance an experiment from
which, in any event, no good whatever can possibly proceed,
and which is likely to bo attended with a result similar to
that of which poor Cocking recently afforded a fatal ex-
ample ? Mr. Monck Mason, a gentleman who has devoted
much attention to aeronautical subjects, warned the late
Mr. Cocking, but in vain. Has he attempted to deter
Hampton from his silly suicidal scheme ?