The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-24 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1853.

Death has recently been busy among the Cele-
brities. It was only the other day that surgical
science was abruptly deprived of one of its most
distinguished votaries in the person of Mr.
BRANSBY COOPER, suddenly deceased at the
Athenaeum Club. In the same copy of our journal
which contained this melancholy intelligence, was
recorded the demise of one of the brightest examples
of valour afforded by the catalogue of the heroines
of Great Britain. Allusion is here made, of course,

to the dissolution of Lady SALE, the courageous
wife of that brave Sir ROBERT SALE, whose prowess
will henceforth add another glorious souvenir to
the annals of the various feats of arms wrought by
Englishmen in Hindostan. Scarcelybad a few hours
elapsed after the publication of the fact of these two
lamentable occurrences—occurrences inflicting a
heavy loss upon the skill and daring of the
present generation when it became our sor-
rowful duty to announce the disappearance
from among the number of our veteran
defenders of two men of deservedly en-
viable reputation. By the departure from life of
the gallant Lord SALTOUN, the military profession
of England was deprived of a noble survivor of a
race of warriors now almost extinct—men who
fought under the banners and shared in the
triumphs of WELLINGTON. By the removal from
amongst us of the gallant Sir GEORGE COCKBURN, i
the maritime profession almost at the same in-c
stant lost another of its eminent chieftains—an-
other of those illustrions sea-captains who have
now almost entirely disappeared—men who par-
ticipated in the blood-bought victories of our
immortal NELSON.
Apart from every other consideration, the share
taken by the last-mentioned officer in the convey-
ance of the Emperor NAPOLEON to St. Helena
cannot fail to preserve his memory on the scroll of
European history, and that, moreover, it is gra-
tifying to reflect, in a light for many reasons sin-
gularly favourable. The circumstance is worthy
at this moment of particular remembrance. The
conduct of Sir GEORGE COCKBURN at the period in
question must always be looked back to by his
fellow-countrymen with sentiments of almost
grateful admiration. For his personal bearing
upon that occasion, and under those peculiarly
trying circumstances, tended in some measure to
redeem by its
gated abasement'nofanimitY the otherwise unmiti-
gated
the one brio.ht the national character. It
shadow of the gleamsurrounding 'piercing the gloom and
Hence-
forth. in the record inodfing turpitude. Hence-
tivity, Sir GEORGE
mthat memorable cap-
fame may happily counterpoise honourable
Sir HUDSON Lowes deuradedl.
asent)l(ll honourable
sr
hope,repu-
to greatness of
tation. The one appreciated.
thkeeeping as
the extraordinary man entrusted
prisoner—the other testified
insults up
a, State
of his nature by heaping the pettiest baseness
fallen grandeur, and by adding the irritations ofupon
his vile and vulgar impertinence to the miseries i
what, in truth, were absolutelysublime misfortunes.
~.
The one, it is true, had been tutored to heroic actions
in the glorious throng of our naval achievements,
while the other had been accustomed to the mae,q,
mean and despicable views by association with
the lowliest of his species, as the leader for some
time, on the southern coast of Italy, of a gang of
cut-throat Neapolitans. A blundering effort has re-
cently been made to extenuate the proceedings of
Sir HUDSONLOWE towards the captive of St. Helena;
but that effort, if successful in any way, has
*only proved ineffectual in enhancing, if that can be
regarded as having been possible, our sense of the
baseness and criminality of the man eulogised. If
" possible," we say, because, to our mind the en-
deavour to darken the notoriety of LowE, would
be more extravagant an absurdity than that of
" gilding refined gold," of " painting the lily"—
more preposterous than an attempt to kill the
dead, or to blacken a black-a-moor. No posthu-
nnivercert'44 extenuation could be attempted,
.. h7eft9ll, 'o4444:lnstance,of Sir GEORGE
, ---,—tventracter,
: strw.r.._,_,__ .
1. unstilltA 4 tioni-, ),
(
e instant
-4`-;,, the int. Ant 4
.iis
whosc) repute remained
of his birth to
dissolution.
v the mari.kime proielsion, it is an His
its() rreismeemin-
\
ber wa4-Os rapid. as it was in. all. respects
a,bls #4
,74412* nominally enterinc, tho
Captains servant as early as the
honour-
navY as
le 12th
March, 17 of
81, he does not appear to have gone to
sea until five years afterwards, when in 1786 We
find him cruising on the home station on board
H. M. S. the Termagant. From that vessel he
Was removed to the Ariel in 1788, proceeding in
her to the East Indies, and returning home in
1791, on board the Princess ,Royal, hidiaman.

moioWlo

As midshipman he afterwards served in the Hebe,
and as master's-mate in the Romney, first in the
Channel and then in the Mediterranean. His
examination being successfully passed on the 3d
of June, 1791, he was thereupon in the following
year appointed acting-lieutenant in the Pearl, and
was subsequently confirmed in the beginning of
1793 in the Orestes. During that same year we
find him the ninth lieutenant of the Britannia (100
guns), and then the tenth lieutenant on board
the flag-ship the Victory (100 guns), off
Toulon, in which latter vessel he speedily
attains the rank of First Lieutenant, and
is then promoted before the expiration of October
to the command of the sloop Speedy. Immedi-
ately after this we come upon the catalogue of his
many brilliant achievements. His resolution in
maintaining the blockade of Genoa caused him to
be named, in the January of 1794, Acting Captain
of the Inconstant, and to be officially posted, as
early as the month ensuing, in the 32-gun frigate
the Meleager. His energetic co-operation with the
soldiers of Austria in Piedmont ; his hardihood
on the 31st of May, 1796, under the bat-
teries of Larma ; his share in the blockade of
Leghorn ; his capture, during the December
of that year, of the 40-gun ship, the Sabine ;
his defeat at the same time of the 34-gun ship
the Matilda ; his participation in the destruction
of the corvette L'Etonnant, and his seizure of the
privateer Maria ; his bringing out from under the
fire of two powerful batteries on Grand Canary
Island the French letter of marque the Marseil-
laise ; and, besides many other heroic deeds, his
valiant conduct during the great battle off Cape
St. Vincent--may be found honourably inscribed
upon the tablets of our naval history, by the
truthful, hand of JAMES, or by our other national
annalists. His career, up to the close of the last
war, was one of daring and valorous activity, as
since then, until shortly before his death in 1853,
it has been one marked to the last
hour by pro-
fessional zeal and political consistency. His glory
it was to have extorted by skill and courage the
applause of NELSON, and to have won by his
magnanimous courtesies the commendation of
NAPOLEON. Briefly—let it be remembered of Sir
GEORGE COCKBURN, now that he reposes in death,
that he was approved by NELSON for his gal-
lantry, and that NAPOLEON pronounced him to be
a gentleman.

Whatever opinions may be entertained as to the
legal effect of the limitations contained in the will
of JOHN WILLIAM, seventh Earl of BRIDGEWATER,
there will be a general feeling of satisfaction at
the final decision of the House of Lords, which
we published in extenso in our impression of Sa-
turday. Where so great a diversity of judgment
existed amongst the highest judicial authorities as
to the technical construction of the instrument,
where the Lord Chancellor and no less than nine
of the Judges were on one side, and four ex-
Chancellors, the Chief Baron, and Baron PLATT

on. the other, it would be highly presumptuous to
declare authoritatively as to the real effect of these
provisions, or whether the acquisition of the title
of Duke or Marquis of BRIDGEWATER could be
deemed a condition "precedent" or " subsequent"
to the enjoyment of the vast estates which passed
under the devise. But every person is competent
to form his own judgment as to the policy of such
a condition, which was unquestionably calculated
not only to exercise a very demoralising and inju-
rious influence over the happiness and independ-
ence of the successive legatees named in the be-
quest, but also to place our most gracious SOVE-
REIGN—the fountain of all honour in the United
Kingdom—in a very unpleasant position, being
coerced either to bestow a high dignity on a per-
son who might not have merited it, or possibly,
resenting the unwarrantable interference with the
Royal prerogative, to refuse a well-deserved
honour to a meritorious servant,. lest similar efforts
should be made by wealthy testators to secure
honours and dignities for the relative to whom
they were enabled to leave great riches. Had the
attempt been successful, there would unquestion-
ably have been a necessity for further legis-
lation to prohibit (as in the celebrated THEL-
LUSON case) a similar disposition in any fu-
ture case. The decision of the tribunal of

ultimate appeal has, however, happily removed
the difficulty, and bestowed the wide-spread do-
mains in accordance with the dictates of sound
common sense—and rendered substantial justice
to the parties concerned.

The facts of this very extraordinary case which
appeared at considerable length in our report of
the judgment of the House of Lords, may be
briefly stated in a form more intelligible to our
non-professional readers. FRANCIS the Third and
most celebrated Duke of BRIDGEWATER, whose
name will be remembered so long as the canal
system exists—by his will bequeathed his canal
property to his nephew, the Marquis of STAFFORD,
afterwards Duke of SUTHERLAND, with remainder
to his second son the present Earl of ELLESMERE,
by whom it is now enjoyed—but devised the
family estates and personal prop3rty, exceeding half
a million sterling,. to his cousin, General JOHN
WILLIAM EGERTON, the great grandson of JOHN,
third Earl of BRIDGEWATER, and grandnephew of
SCROOP first Duke of BRIDGEWATER, who suc-
ceeded as seventh Earl. This Nobleman had ever
evinced a morbid anxiety to retrieve the lost
honours of his house, and, being unable to achieve
his object during his lifetime, determined to make
the testamentary disposition of his immense pro-
perty the means of eventually accomplishing his
desire. With that view, and guided by the skil-
ful advice of the most acute real property lawyers,
ho framed the extraordinary will now under no-
tice, and which has just been set aside, so far as
the most important particular was croncerned.
The family of the testator consisted of one
brother, FRANCIS HENRY, subsequently eighth and
last Earl with whom the BRIDGEWATER titles ex-
pired, and two nieces, the daughters of his sister
Lady AMELIA HUME—one of whom was then
Countess of BROWNLOW, and the other wife
of Sir CHARLES LONG, afterwards Lord
FARNBOROUGH, a well-known and munifi-
cent benefactor to the National Gallery. As
neither Earl FRANCIS nor Lady LONG had,
or were likely to have, issue, the testator lCoaed
to his grandnephews, the two sons of Lady
BROWNLOW, as the parties through whom he
could exercise a species of moral coercion on his
SOVEREIGN. Accordingly, after bequeathing annui-
ties of 12,000/, a-year to his widow, 18,0001. per
annum to his brother FILINCIS, and 4,000/. to
Sir CHARLES LONG, and after his death to Lady
Lorro, with a further life interest to the latter
after the death of Earl Fitaxcis, the balance being
directed to accumulate, he gave the reversion of
his estates and the accumulated fund to Lord
Al-'°Rl), and his first and other sons in tail male,
tititutsdsault of such issue, to his brothel-,
that
over. ”..-bieENRY CC'S; with several remainders
unie-usb:
theondition was, however, annexed,
a certain Ulnae Party possession should, within
estate hereinbefore
Duke or M s.uceeed in acquiring the title of
gave utely void."
arcpu, of tp
GzwA TER, "the use and
baoldieeted. to be limited to the
heirs male of the
succeeded
diehto
dth.eec
estatejus.t
" cease and be absol Y"
if
such
rise to the protracted and
person should
This was the
terminated.
provision which
under the
texop,reditsAivleFolnitDigastuiocen
limitations of the will, but
died under
hav'n
acquired the title of Duke or Marquis of 13 1 g
W.A TER, and the question then arose wheth lert7.4-
estates, now producing nearly 80,0001. per arinum
.Ire
should go to his son, charged with a ;
.)0410 of
5,000/. per annum for his widow, or whether it
passed over to his brother, CHARLES HENIty Gus;
,or EGERTON, with a similar proviso as to the
acquisition of the coveted title by him, so that
it would ultimately become an inheritance so the
Gentlemen of the Long Robe—an illus'a-ation of
the class of suits exemplified by CHARLES DraKEzsrs
in JARNDYCE V. JARNDYCE. This destruction of
the estate has been averted by the final judgment
which, setting aside the former decision, has vested
the estate in the son of the late, the present Lord
ALFORD, a result which will be generally accept-
able to the community.
The decision of the veteran Lord LYNDHURST
exhibited the matter in the clearest light. There
were two points to be determined-Ist, Was the
provisQ.and condition precedent, or subsequent to

the vesting of the estate in Lord ALFORD ? and,
2dly, Was it contrary to public policy ? The ma-
jority of the Law Lords decided in favour of the
appellant on both points—Lords LYNDHURST,
BROUGHAM, TRURO, and ST. LEONA RDS holding
that it was a condition subsequent and against
public policy, in which views they were confirmed
by Chief Baron POLLOCK and Baron PLATT ; while
Lord CRANWIPRTII, Barons PARKE, ALDERSON,
and Justices CROMPTON, COLERIDGE, WILLIAMS,
CRESSWELL, WIGHTMAN, TALFOURD, and ERLE
thought differently—that it was a condition prece-
dent, and not against public policy. Where such
men differed, who shall venture to decide the con-
troversy ? To' an ordinary understanding there
seems to be sound foundation for the argument of
Lord LYNDHURST, that an estate could not " cease
and determine" unless it had previously existed,
and that, therefore, it must have been a condition
subsequent. If that was the case of the estate in
the first Lord ALFORD, the father of the claimant,
and then if the condition was contrary to pub-
lic policy, it would, according to all the prece-
dents, be absolutely null and void, the same as if
it never had been made. Now certainly it appears
to our minds as if nothing could be more mis-
chievous than to permit so great an inducement to
Parliamentary corruption—a condition so unfair,
and possibly annoying to the SOVEREIGN. If not
contrary to public policy, according to legal pre-
cedents it ought to be declared to be so, and
an Act of Parliament passed to prevent the re-
petition of similar experiments, in endeavouring
to extort the acquirement of titles of honour as
the condition of enjoying property under limita-
tions contained in any deed or will.