The Sun.
London, England, 1838-11-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1838.

wish of all was, that absolution must be denied to such sinners 1
who disregard their most important duty.' To the annexed
question, Whether such sinners ought to be publicly refused
admission to the Communion, if they should presume, with
perverse hearts, to appear with other believers at the table
of the Lord to join in that solemnity ?' We answer, the Ri-
tual of our diocese decides in the same words as the Romish
Ritual---' But unworthy persons are to be rejected, such as
persons excommunicated or under the ban of the Church, Nho
are notoriously infamous, such as prostitutes, men who live in
concubinage, and other such open sinners, if their penitence is
not proved, and if they have not first made satisfaction for the
public scandal.' Now, as that ritual directs how those who have
the care of souls are to act, and as it is clear that those parents
whose sons and daughters are educated in any other than the
Roman Catholic religion with their consent, whereas they might
prevent it if they thought fit, arej ustly reckoned among notorious
and scandalous sinners, since they oppose what has been, at
all times end in all places, the principle and practice of the
Catholic Church. They too are to be denied both absolution
and participation in the holy communion. And should they
presume publicly to appear at the Lord's table, they are
nevertheless to be rejected, unless they have previously
given public satisfaction, and the scandal is done away
with, as far as practicable." Hitherto the inhabitants
of the principality of 03naburg, both Protestants and
Catholics have been on good terms with each other, though
mixed marriages have not been considered as desirable by
either party. In the country in particular, a truly Christian
spirit of toleration has prevailed. But how shall it continue if
hatred and contempt of heretics is to be thus disseminated?
The well-known expression of a statesman, high in office, on
this occasion, is not uninteresting, as it seems to promise the
approval of such proceedings of the clergy, " because the
Catholics have behaved ren,arkably well with respect to the
Constitution." The clergy, it is true, protested in 1833 against
the moderate restriction of that influence (in Chap. V. ); and
Messrs. Klenze and Sermes are Catholics, but among us the
Catholic peasantry have especially distinguished themselves by
earnest and judicious attachment, free from all clerical influence,
to the Constitution of 1833 ; and King Ernest Augustus,
the head of the strict Protestant party in England, would
certainly not desire, fur the sake of the Constitution, to be.
come the advocate of Romish curia in Germany. The rest
of the episcopal circular is so far interesting, as it certifies
the success of the efforts to promote the study of divinity,
in the Collegio Germanico, under the direction of the Jesuits,
STOCKIIOLM, OCT. 23.—The Statistidning of to-day no-
tices officially the acts of pillage and robbery committed by
the inhabitants of the Livonian island of Osel, on the coasts,
and even in the interior of Gothland ; and adds, that appli-
cation having been made by our Ambassador to the Russian
Government for a strict inquiry, and punishment of the guilty,
the Russian Department for Foreign Affairs answered, that
the Government having received previous information of
these excesses, had already ordered, and would further pro-
secute, a strict investigation. About a hundred inhabitants
have been proved to be concerned in these robberies, and
iron, and barrels of tar, &c., which they had stolen, have been
seized.

DUTCH FUNDS.—AMSTERDAM, OCT. 30.
Money. Bills.
actual Debt, 2,', per Cent
Ditto, ditto 5 per cent.
,i:. ort ,yridic, 44 per cent 95 95
Ditto, ditto, 31/ per cent 7914 79, -
Commercial Company, 4 • per cent l7! !-, 17211
Ditto (1832 and 1833) 5 per cent.
Loan 18341 1; er cent.. 101)4 101%
Ditto 1937, 5 per cent.
Exchange on London, One month l2 12
Two months
BELGIAN 1 UNDS—BausseLo, OCT. 30
Actual Debt, 21,. per Cent.
Rothschild's Loan, 5 per Cent. lO2
Loan of Thirty Millions, 4 per Cent 93
3 per Cent. fs
Loan of City, 1832, 4 per Cent 97
Society of Commerce, 4,,,,per Cent l5O
Bank at Belgium, 5 per Cent l4O
National Society
—Brussels Papers, Oct. 30.
HAMBURG BORSEN HALLE, Om 27.
Bills. Money.
Austrian MetrViques, 5 per cent.
Di.- o ditto 3 per ccnt.
Ditto ditto 2 per cent
Ditto Bank Shares
1440 1439
Anglo-Russian Loan lOBl4 its
Russian 5 per cents. Metal.
Paper Inscription, 6 per cent l,'N 102
Russian Inscription, Hope and Co., 3d and 4th
Series
Ditto, Certificates
Portuguese Regency Bonds, 5 per cent —
Ditto, 3 per cent
Dutch 21,,, per Cents. 59% 52%
Ditto 5 per Cents 99% pg.si
Palish Bonds, 3 per cents.
New Tickets 154 153
Anglo-Danish Loan, 3 per cents ... 72 71%
Norwegian Loan of 1184, 4 per cents ...... ..... 102 101%
Si.anish, in piastres, 3 per Cent 5............ ....... ..
Cortes Loan, 5 per Cent —
Greek 4 per cents. 1833, guaranteed by France
—Hamburg Papers, Oct. -.7.
PRUSSIAN FUNDS.—.BERLIN, OCT. 25.
Bills. Money.
St. Schuld. Seh., 4 per cent lO3 102,4
Prussian Engiish Loan, 1830, 4 per cent 103)4 102%
Xxchange on London, three monr.is 6 2e)
—Prussian State Gazette, Ocr. 26.

CHANCERY COURT.-(TIIIS DAY.)

RICHARDSON V. THE BANK OF ENGLAND.

The arguments in this case, which were commenced yester-
day, were resumed to-day. The case came before the Court
upon appeal from the decision of the present Master of the
Rolls, directing Mr. Rees Goren Thomas, one of the partners
in the late banking firm of Sir James Esdaile and Co.. to pay
into Court a sum of upwards of 19,0001. The plaintiff; are
the personal representatives of the late Mr. William Esdaile,
who was one of the partners in the House of Esdaile and Co.
The other Members of that firm were Mr. Pascoe Grenfell,
Mr. Rees Goren Thomas and a gentleman, named Scott,
some time previous to the death of Mr. Wm. Esdaile, which
took place in October, 1837, the house of Esdaile and Co-
becoming embarrassed, and being already in debt to the Bank
of England to the extent of upwards of 80,000/., were obliged
to have recourse to further advances, and obtained from the
Bank of England and several of the private banking establish-
merns upwards of 120,000/. An arrangement was afterwards
entered into with the different members of the firm, in conse-
quence of which a deed was executed, by which they conveyed
all their estates and mercantile and other securities which they
possessed to trustees for the purpose of paying off the liabili-
ties of the firm. Under that deed inspectors had been ap-
pointed to carry out the objects it had in view, and by their
exertions the debt due to the Bank of England had been nearly
paid off, as well as some of the other creditors. In carrying
their object into effect, however the inspector found
it necessary to raise a further sum of 10,000/. out of the ge-
neral estate of Mr. William Eadaile, and notice to that
effect was given by them to the representatives of that gentle-
loan. Upon receiving that notice they objected to Mr. Wm.
Esdaile's estate being further charged, alleging that if the
matter was investigated it would be found that the estate of
that gentleman had already paid more than its share, and that
any further sums that might be required ought to be raised
out of the property of the other partners, and for the purpose
of effecting that object the plaintiffs filed their bill praying for
the declaration of the Court to that effect. Upon the case coming
before the Master of the Rolls, his Lordship made the
order which was now appealed from.
Mr. Wicaam was heard yesterday on behalf of the appel-
lant Mr. Rees Thomas.

Nit. REYNOLDS followed on the same side to-day.
Mr. TINNEY, with whom was Mr. GOODE VE, was address-
ing the Court in support of the judgment below when our re-
porter left.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

CAMPBELL V. CHAPPEL.

Mr. KNIGHT BRUCE applied this morning ex parte, in this
case, for a special injunction to restrain the defendant from
publishing and selling one of the Hebrew Nbindies written
by Lord Byron, called " I saw thee weep." From the state-
ments of the Learned Counsel, which were supported by the
affidavit of the plaintiff, it appeared that Lord Byron
having given the copyright of the Hebrew Melodies to
A gentleman named Nathan, that individual set them
to music, and published each of them separa-ely. The right
of Mr. Nathan having been transferred to the plaintiff, he
c.:mtinued the sale of the works. Latterly, however, the s,l•
of the melody, " I saw thee weep," had considerately fallen off,
and upon inquiries it was discovered that the defendant was
publishing the same song, varying it only from the ori-
ginal by Lord Byron, in two words; in the second line
the word that was used for thine; and in the eighth
line the word that for each. The music, purporting to be
the composition of Mr. Hodgson, who keeps the Yorkshire
Stingo, instead of that of Mr. Nathan. Immediately upon
discovering the piracy, the plaintiff gave the defendants notice
to desist from publishing it ; and, in consequence of their re-
fusal to do so, the present application became necessary.
His HONOUR, without any hesitation, immediately granted
the injunction.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

TULLET V. ARMSTRONG.-JUDGMENT

In this case the plaintiff, claiming to be entitled to two an-
nuities granted to him by the defendant, William Armstrong,
and Augusta his wife, by his bill prayed that an account
might be taken of what was due to him for arrears
of an annuity, and that the same and future pay-
ments might be made to him out of the rents and profits
of copy hold and leasehold estates, comprised in certain inden-
tures dated 16th March, and 22d September, 1832. The bill
also prayed for aninquiry relating to an annuity granted by Arm-
strong and his wife; and that such annuity might be either
declared to be invalid, or, if a valid incumbrance on the
estate, that an account might be taken of what
was due in respect thereof, and for further relief. The case
was this :—Nathaniel Bradford, by his will, dated 27th of
March, 1820, gave to his daughter, Anne Bradford, and de-
fendant, William Gates,. his executrix and executor, all his
copyhold and leasehold estates, and all his residuary
estates, in trust for his wife, Anne Bradford, for her
life, and, after her death, in trust to his daughter,
Ann Bradford; and he gave to his daughter Ann, and his
granddaughter Margaret Augusta, a copyhold messuage and
appurtenances to hold equally between them, during their joint
and several lives, as tenants in common, in such nianner that
neither his daughter or granddaughter might anticipate, charge,
or sell, or dispose of the life estates so devised to them,
and so that no husband of the daughter or granddaughter
might acquire any right or controul over the lite-interest in
such estate, nor the same become liable to their debts, and
the receipt or receipts of the daughter and grand-
daughter were to be a good and sufficient dis-
charge. After the decease of the survivor there was
a gift over. The testator died in October, 1820,
leaving his wife, Ann Bradford, and Margaret Augusta
Tullet (now Margaret Armstrong) surviving. The whole of
his property became vested in his wife. Subject to that life
interest he gave a portion of it to his granddaughter, Marga-
ret Augusta, for her separate use, and he intended that the
interest he gave to her in a copybold mecsuage or pre-
mises should be vested in her without power of
anticipation. When the testator died, the granddaughter
was unmarried, and it was argued, first, that a, she was not
married at the time of the testator's death, vs hen the gift be-
came vested in her, the limitation to her separate use was not
effectual; and, secondly, if that limit ition could be restrained,
the restraint on it, forbidding her to dispose of it in
anticipation, was void, because it was not accompanied by a gift
over in the event of an attempt to alienate. On the 25th of
August, 1826, Ann Bradford, the daughter, made a will, by
which she devised to her trustees a certain messuage in
Church-street, Brighton, in trust to rec,,ive the rents
and pay the same to her niece, Margaret Augusta
Tuliet for her life, in such maner that the same might
not become liable to the debts of any husband she might have
On the 231 April, Margaret Augusta Tullet married the d—
fendant, William Armstrong. Two days afterwards Ann
Bradford made a codicil, by which she varied one devise in
her will, but in all other respects confirmed it. She died in the
month of October following. In January 1830 the widow of
Nathaniel Bradford, the first testator, died, and then the gift
under the two bills took effect in possession. In 1832 Mr.
and Mrs. Armstrong sold an annuity to the plaintiff for 300/.
and executed a conveyance of Mrs. Armstrong's life interest
to the plaintiff, to secure payment of the annuity. In January,
1835, Armstrong took the benefit of the Insolvent Debtors'
Act, and therefore the plaintiff filed his bill to enforce pay-
ment of the annuity. Mrs. Armstrong being married, it was
not denied the gift to her separate use would take effect, but
it was argued the restraint on alienation was inoperative, be-
cause there was no gift over, on an attempt to alienate.
His Lordship, after going through the authorities, said he
found himself embarrassed in coming to a decision on the sub-
ject, the authorities not being consistent ; and be should wish
to have the case re argued before the Lord Chancellor and
the Vice-Chancellor; but that course not having been ap-
proved of, he would state what his opinion was. He bad-con-
sidered all the cases he had been able to find on the subject,
and he was unable to find any authority, on any satisfactory
principle, for the proposition that a gift to a woman for her
separate use was nugatory if she chanced to be single at the
time the gift became vested in her, or for the proposition
that the restraint of alienation of the separate estate vested
in a woman was nugatory, if not accompanied by a gift
even on the attempt to alienate. To sanction either
of these propositions would, as it appeared to his Lord-
ship, defeat the object and purpose of the Court, when
it applied Its principles of equity to the separate estate
of -parried women. As this point had given rise to con-
siderable discussion, and as a decision pronounced by him
pould not settle a question of such importance, his Lordship
was desirous that the case should be brought before a
higher tribunal, without any unnecessary delay. It ap-
peared to him that property given to a woman for her
separate use, independent of any husband she might
have, might, under the authority of that Court, be en-
joyed by her during her coverture as a separate estate,
although the property originally became vested in her when
discovert ; that in respect of such estate, she was consi-
dered by the Court as a Jeme sole, alth ,ugh covert, and
her powere as such would be protected by the Court.
He was therefore of opinion that as to those estates, which by
the will of the testator, Nathaniel Bradford, and the testa-
trix, Ann Bradford, were given toehe defendant (Mrs. Arm-
strong) ile,
for her separate use, without power of t eation, the
plaintiff had acquired no right under his security. As to the
estates given by the will of Nathaniel Bradford to Mrs. Arm-
strong, for her separate use, without any clause to restrain alie-
nation, the plaintiff was entitled to the relief he prayed for,
nd the accounts and inquiries must be directed.
The mAsTE!t of the ROLLS also gave judgment iu " Scar-
borough v. Borman," and " Clarke p ,Jaques," where a simi-
lar point was raised, and censequently similar decisions fol-
lowed,