The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-20 00:00:00

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

TRUEMAN AND ANOTHER V. LODER.
This was an action brought by the plaintiffs to re-
cover the amount of one thousand casks Y. C. Tallow,
which it was alleged the defendant had contracted to
furnish the plaintiffs with. The tallow was sold by a
broker named Woolner, who was authorised to do so
by a Mr. Higginbotham, acting, as Woolner believed,
as the agent of the defendant. In the bought note de-
livered to the plaintiff, no name appeared as the seller.
It was simply " bangle:, for Trueman and Cook," and
was signed " Benjamin Woolner, Broker." The case
was tried before Lord Denman at the London Sittings
after last Term, and the Jury found a verdict " That
the contract was made by Woolner, supposing that he
had Higginbotham's authority to make it for the de-
fendant, but that Higginbotham intended that it should
be made for himself' A verdict was then entered for
the plaintiff, with leave to enter a verdict for the de-
fendants.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was beard on a former
day against the rule, which bad been obtained to set
aside the verdict.

Sir Frederick Pollock, Mr. Creswell and Mr.
Richards were now beard in support of the rule. The
arguments turned principally upon the usage and custom
of merchants of the city of London, and the point relied
upon was that no contract appeared on the face of the
bought and sold notes, which could be considered binding
upon the defendant, Loder, and that the deficiency could
not be supplied by parole evidence.
The COURT, after hearing the arguments, which oc-
cupied the greater part of the day, took time to consider
its decision.

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

IN THE MATTER OF THE BAIL OF JOHN ALEXANDER

WILMOT.

Mr. V. LEE, in this case, attended for the purpose of
opposing the bail, on the ground that the notice of bail
had not been accompanied by the original affidavit, or a
copy thereof ; and also that where the residence of the
proposed bail was numbered, the number ought to have
been stated. This was requisite, in order that proper
inquiries might .be made as to the sufficiency of the bail.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE said that the parties were
now before the Court.
Mr. LEE said it would affect the costs.
Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE would leave them to the
Master.

Mr. Barber, of 81, Cheapside, and Mr. Pickles, of
7, Lad-lane, after having been examined at some length
by Mr. Lee, as to their having sufficient property, and
their not being indemnified by Mr. Lewis, the attorney,
were accepted.

THE QUEEN V. MARSHALL.
Mr. CLARK moved that an information in the nature
,of a quo warranto be directed to Abraham Goldsbo-
rough Marshall, calling upon him to show by what
authority he exercises the office of a Town Councillor
of Louth, in Lincolnshire. The affidavits stated that
at the late election there were six candidates for three
vacancies, created by councillors going out in rota-
tion, and that three of the candidates were de-
clared duly elected. The affidavits further stated,
that an inspection of the voting papers had twice taken
place, and that it turned out that Mr. Marshall ought
not to have been returned, another person having been
duly elected by a majority of votes. It also appeared
that Mr. Marshall had taken upon himself the office of
councillor, and acted in that capacity.
His LORDSFIIP granted a rule.

THE'QATEEN V. HANCOCK.
Mr. CROWDER moved for a mandamus against Mr.
Hancock, the Alderman for the north-west ward of the
borough of Poole, commanding him to publish within
twelve hours after the notice of the writ, the name of a
person who was chosen town councillor on the 15th Nov.
last. It appeared that on the Ist Nov., there were six
vacancies in the Council, and that one of the candidates
was unable to qualify himself. The other vacancies
were filled up, and a new election for the single vacancy
took place on the 15th Nov., when a person named
13inney was elected by a majority of 21. According to
the 35th clause of the Act, it was the duty of the pre-
siding officer to publish the list of the persons elected,
within two days after the election, but Mr. Hancock,
on being applied to, refused to make any publication.
There was a matter of considerable importance to come
before the Council on Friday next, and he therefore
moved for a mandamus, to compel the Alderman to do
what he was required to do by the Act.
His LORDSHIP granted the mandamus, absolute in
the first instance.

COPY OF A LETTER FROM THE
NIARQUIS OF LANSDOWNE TO THE BISHOP
OF EXETER.

London, Nov. 19, 1839.

My Lord,—My attention has been called to some.
passages of a charge recently published by your Lord-
ship as delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Exe-
ter, commenting upon expressions of mine contained in
the report of a speech I made in the House of Lords
this year, on the subject of public education.
Your Lordship has selected for quotation some words
contained in a paragraph which relates solely to the
inspection of schools, the manifest purport of which
is, that some provision to secure efficient inspection
as to the training of children in habits of order,
cleanliness, discipline, and industry is of equal im-
portance, or, in other words, no less necessary, than
that relating to religious instruction (which it was pro-
posed to confide to ecclesiastical authority) as founded
on those high truths which it is the duty and the privi-
lege of the Church to inculcate.

From the circumstance of your having directed the
word " equal" to be printed in italics, as well as from a
subsequent sentence in your charge, your Lordship
appears to have drawn the inference, or intended it
should be drawn by others, that I was desirous of im-
pressing upon my hearers that religious instruction was
not an object of paramount importance to every other
in general education.

I had no such intention, and I deny that inference.

Had you done me the honour at the same time to
have adverted to my having previously stated, in the
printed correspondence then under discussion, that a
system of religious instruction forms " the most solid
inundation" on which public education can be placed,
it would have been impossible for your Lordship to
have inferred that in urging the importance of providing
by inspection for " the order, cleanliness, discipline, and
industry of the schools," concurrently with that of re-
ligious instruction, confided to the clergy, I could mean
to weigh one in the balance as opposed to the other, or
to imply more than that all these objects are necessary
adjuncts, none of which can be excluded in a complete
system of education without danger to the other.
I must also be permitted to express my regret that
your Lordship, having subsequently referred to a state-
ment of mine, that this country, in the scale of secular
education, was inferior to the central States of Europe,
for the purpose of confronting that statement with the
somewhat bold and startling assertion that " on the Con-
tinent a principle of economy is the only motive for so-
briety," which you quote from the " Appendix to Foreign
Report, from J. C. Symons, Esq., a gentleman selected
by the Government for his commission on account. of his
very extensive experience and knowledge of the state
of our people," your Lordship has accidentally omitted
fro state that the language thus quoted is not that of the
author of the report, but is, on the contrary, in the
same document to which it appears that yotw Lord-
ship's attention has been particula ditteuted, expressly
disphlicned by that gentleman, whom your Lordshi.
has justly described as peculiarly entitled tc, gtediv
and late,' by him to proceed frm
person entirely
unknown to tun,
I have not thought it necessary on this occasion to
trouble your Lordship with any further remarks than
were unavoidably necessary to remove misapprehension
where I was myself concerned,
46 honour, &c.
LANSDOWN,
The Right Rev, the Lord Bishop of Exeter.

Princess Belgiojoso, accompanied by the
quis di Lita, took their departurt) Yesseyday morning
from 1111vart's Hotel, for liiontharripton, wlmre the
Princess and suite will embark for 1-14vrei