The Sun.
London, England, 1825-06-22 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, JuwE 21.
STRATHMORE s'. STRATHMORE.
This case, which came before the Court on demurrer, and
which had been partly argued, stood in the paper to-day for
further argument. It involved the question as to the legality of
bonds of resignation of spiritual benefices.
Mr. Wm. }Non °Ham was heard for the plaintiff; the heir-
at-law; and Messrs. HORNE, PEPYS, and BICKER/lETH,
in support of the several demurrers.
The Loan CHANCELLOR observed, that he had expected
to hear the decision of the House. of Lords on the subject of
bonds of resignation before this case was finally argued; but
the Judges, whose opinions had been desired, found the
.question so difficult that they wished for time to consider it.
The decision would not, therefore, be given this session. In
the case before the Judges the questions were, whether, us the
bond and presentation were near in date, the one was not given
in consideration of the, other; and whether, if such bond were
not void by statute, it were void at common law. Several
decisions in the Courts of Law, since the case of the " Bishop
of London Finch," kept up a distinction between gene-
ral and particular bonds of resignation. Now a question
arose, whether, if the presentation could be given to one son,
it might not be given to two sons, or to others. Did the
number create the distinction ? In the present case the con.
dition was, that if A B, or C D, was incapable of taking
orders, the clerk should resign ; but there was no condition
that one or the other should be presented. Then. should the
obligee not present, was this Court to require the presentee
to resign ? The case, his Lordship observed, was important,
both to the public and to the church. He should therefore
give no opinion as to the legality of these bonds till the decision
of the house of Lords was known. It had been argued for the
plaintiff (and his Lordship was bound to add, very well argued)
that the testator bad vested no trust in the trustees which could
be executed in the life-time of Lady Mary Price (the late Earl's
sister); and that therefore the presentations went to the heir at
law. It was difficult to give an opinion upon a case so put,
without involving the other question as to the bonds. Ills
Lordship would therefore consider the subject well for a few
days. His Lordship would decide whether the right of the
trustees was gone, or whether the legal part of the trust (sup-
posing the bond to be illegal) could not be executed.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JuxE 21.
TUB KING v. STEWART.
This was an indictment against Robert William Stewart, a
man of colour in the service of Mrs. Storer, a lady of fortune
residing at Purley, near Reading, for assaulting. Philip
Thompson, a black lad, who had been Mrs. Storer's slave in
Jamaica, and was brought by her to England. At the last
Berkshire Assizes the case came on for trial, when it was
sworn that upon some insolent expressions of the boy, the de-
fendant struck him, and afterwards locked him up for the night,
and brought him out to be flogged in the morning. 'lite
boy, however, escaped, and came to Reading;, where he told
Ilia story, and preferred his complaint. The gfendant in this
case was convicted ; but on another indictment, in which Mrs.
Storer her' elf was indicted with him, and was charged with
having ordered 'and witnessed the infliction of the severe flog-
ging, the Jury returned a verdict of acquittal.
Mr. JEnvis now, on the part of the defendant, moved for
judgment, and produced an affidavit, alleging that the conduct
of the boy was very provoking, and that he had preferred an.
ot:t.n. indictment at the Sessions for a previous assault, which
still remained to be tried. The Learned Counsel and Mr. ,
Gross urged the topics which this affidavit presented.
The CouRT, adverting to all the circumstances, sentenced
the defendant to pay a fine of 201., and to be imprisoned till
that'fine Should be paid.
The defendant began to remonstrate, but was stopped, and
obliged to withdraw.
The Con icy sat till half-past five o'clock, but no case of in-
terest was heard.
PREROGATIVE COURT, TUESDAY, JUNE 21.
There was an extra Court to-day, for the dispatch of bus!.
ness.
Nothing of public interest occurred, except that in the case of
ALLEN AND LOLtEY v. TIMS AND HOPE,
a testamentary cause involving considerable property, and
which the Judge yesterday, in an elaborate and definitive sen-
tence, decided in favour of the defendants, (executrix and
executor named in the last will, with two codicils, of Samuel
Atkins, late of Vauxhall, in the county of Surrey, Esq.),l
Sir J. Nictiota. stated, upon coming into Court, that be
might perhaps reconsider his judgment; and if he should be
disposed to open it again, he would give the defendants' Colin,
sel (Dr. Jenner and Dr. Phillimore) the opportunity of reply-
ing at length to the argument of the Counsel for the two lega-
tees, Allen and Loney.

AN UNNATURAL MOTHER.—Mary M4DOMlid
was charged with cruel treatment of her infant, which is not
yet three months old, by striking it with her clinched fist. The
complaint was laid at the office by a female who dwelt near her,
and who produced the child this morning, which seemed in a
very weak state. In reply to a question from the Magistrate,
the accused said her conduct was the effect of intoxication. The
mother herself did not appear to he above 17 years of age. She
had, she said, 12 months since, married an actor, who, when she
became pregnant, deserted her; and since then she had exist-
ed solely on charity.- The Magistrate inquired of her if she
had a father ? She said she had, but that since her mar-
riage he had turned his hack upon her. The accused's father
' was then sent for, and, on his approaching the table, the Ma-
gistrate inquired of him if lie was willing to yield protection to
his daughter, and sustenance to her child ? He peremptorily
refused so to do. " Nor assist in so far as you are able, as her
father ?"--" No ! I have lately married a second wife, and
.cannot assist the daughter ! "—" What ! " continued the Ma-
gistrate, s.‘ are you henpecked, Sir ? If you refuse to assist
this unfortunate girl, whose wrongs have driven her even to
contemn the duties of a mother, you are an .unfeeling and
hardenethwretch."—The father was
proof a g
terposition of the Magistrate ; and the daughter, upon her pro-
mising to take proper care of the child, was allowed to depart—
., ( Glagvio Free Press. ainst the kind in-