The Sun.
London, England, 1822-11-26 00:00:00

[BRITISH PRESS.?

An articleof great interest at the present mo-
ment has appeared in the E toile.. It explains the
recent depression in the French Funds to have
originated in a rumour of the arrival of a courier
from. Madrid, with intelligence that the French
Ambassador had been grossly insulted ; to which
it was added, that the French Ministers had,
in cons'equence., held an extracirdinary• sittinff,
in which it was resolved to commence the
war without' delay, and that three officers
of high rank had received appointMents in the
army. To all these particulars it gives a distinct
and positive contradiction ; and further asserts,
that a rumour of war has not even- the ground of
any new. military movement to rest upon, for
during a month past no corps of troops has been
sent to reinforce the FrenCh army on the frontierS.
The tone of this article is decisive, and it is en-
titled to a more perfect reliance on its commu-
nications, when we consider the source from which
it, is derived. it affords no room to suppOse that
p n Aisposi tion whatever to commence hostilities
exists..on the 'part of the French Government.
The same journal states, that .so far was the
French -Ambassador, or any Foreign Minister,
from experiencing insult at Madrid, that a pro-
position made in the Cortes.for subjecting their
-residences to domiciliary visits was rejected, and
one of a totally opposite nature adopted in its
stead. •

[THE TIMES.]
The present aspect and character of the Pe-
ninsula is more than commonly interesting. It
has all. along appeared to us, that as the. Spa-
niards - have behaved towards their King and
his .brethren with a degree of maguanimous for-
bearance, for which there are not many examples
in history, so fresh proofs occur from day to day
of the predominance of this temperate spirit,

whenever a question comes before the Cortex of a
critical or irritating nature. When it was proposed
to demand-from the French branch of the House of
Bourbon a categorical answer on the 'subject of
peace or war, we doubt whether a second assembly
in Europe would have acted with the same discre=
tion as the Cortes, in rejecting at this time so
inflammatory but so seductive a proposal. Prac-
tically, and according to the plain spirit of the
law of nations, the French Government has done
a great deaf more than would justify—it has in
fact superseded the necessity -of such a question.
The existing, or late civil war in Catalonia, has
been fomented ;, the rebel troops have been '
equipped, and 'armed, and paid, and protected
beyond the Spanish frontier. Under these cir-
cumstances, the Cortes have furnished a signal
proof of self-command, equanimity, and, sagacity,
by suspending, at least, their assent to the
above-mentioned popular motion. But, added
to this display of their unwillingness to offer, or
even to accept the offered provocation, there are
also proofs throughout the country of a spirit
which may diminish the chances of war, by
exhibiting to an invader the certainty of a
formidable resistance. It is impossible to
read the accounts of military preparation by
the Constitutional Government, of the activity
with which its measures are executed, and of
the ardour with which they are seconded by the
nation, without feeling our hopes, not merely of
the issue of a conflict, but of the continuance of
peace, materially, augmented and confirmed. The
new levies are said to be proceeding rapidly; the
orders issued being most severe,and the public func-
tionaries being every where responsible for their
strict and immediate execution. The garrisons
and divisions of reserve are to be formed of these
recruits, incorporated with the troops not em-
ployed in field operations towards the frontier.

LAW INTaLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 25.

ROPER v. WILLIAMS AND OTLLERS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR, upon coming into Court, gave
judgment in this case. He had carefully read all the affidavits.
—The covenants in the indenture between the parties, in 1816,
were very ill drawn, if the object in view had been such as the
plaintiff stated it now. The buildings were to be 30 feet from
the road ; they were to be detached ; and they were to be of
the third rate of houses. It was further covenanted, that no
work should be done there which' could create a nuisance.—
Roper was himself placed under. no obligation to build on the
piece of land. which he purchased for 1101. Now, .in . such a
case, if there was not active diligence on the part of Roper to
prevent any departure from the covenants, a Courtof equity
would not interfere. The Obligation must have been ,enforced
against all the purchasers to coustitute a ground of interfer-
ence in a Court of equity. Against 'Williams the only remedy
that could be sought was by.an action at law. The buildings
erected were, in the Ist place, not 30 feet from the road; in, the.
2d place, they were not detached; and in the third place, they-
were of 6th, 2d, and 3d.rates. In 1818, a case ,was submitted
for the opinion of a Learned 'Counsel whom, he., now saw in
Court (Mr. Horne), and the opinion given then was, as-he
should have expected, from that Learned Gentleman; extremely
right and proper. It was, that.application ought to have been
made to a Court of equity the moment the foundation—the first
bricks—..were. Notice was ,served upon the defendant,
Bernaud, that the, plaintiff insisted upon the covenant. It was
stated that the building. was for. a public-house. A bill was
filed six months afterwards. This, then, insttch circumstances,
was not a case of equity. If an action at law should be brought
against Williams, it would be for the Jury to say what damagea
ought to be given. He thought the injunction ought to be
dissolved. It-ought to be generally, known that in all cases
application must be instantly, and promptly made, otherwise a
Court of Equity would not interfere. .

ATTOItNEY-GENERAL V.CLEMENVS.

Mr. KNIGIIT applied to the Court for leave to have this pe-
tition restored to the paper. It had foznaerly been ordered to
stand over.—Leave granted,, .

LEES v. AINSWORTIL—CONTEMPT.
Mr. HEALD said his Lordship had ordered that this case
should be again mentioned. • Affidavit was now made that the
defendant's father. had a large family, and could not, therefore,
settle a large fortune on this his youngest son. It was right
also to mention, that the bill to make the young lady a ward of
Court, had been filed in the name of the defendant's father, but
'without his knowledge. It had been done bythe solicitor, Mr.
Chippendale, in whose name the bill had first been drawn.
This might bolt, if not explained in this way, very like a trick;
hut the father knew nothing of it. The father of the defendant
had been sworn worth 40,000/. ; but out of respect for the
youngest,son, and considering that his two eldest children were
prOvided for, he settled estates on the defendant which were
sworn to be worth 8,000/. •
. .
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Let it go to the Master to ap-
prove of the settlement.
Mr. WINGFIELD mentioned that application had been made
to the Vice-Chancellor to strike the name out of the bill.

Mr. HEALD said, that was-as-he had explained it. There
was now an affidavit of bans if his Lordship wished to see that.
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Let the Master inquire whe-
ther they are properly married.
Mr. HEALD asked? whether they should be married again.
They kere disposed, if his Lordship wished it./
The LORD CHANCELLOR.--I think it is proper.
Mr. 'HEAD said, they would have been married according
to the act on the Monday foliowing the time of their marriage.