The Sun.
London, England, 1825-11-23 00:00:00

FEATHERS.

Capital Feathers - Is. 4d., Is. 6d., and is Pd. per
Best t•rey Goose - - 2s. and 2s. 6d.
Excellent White Goose - 3s.
Real White Dantzic - Ss. 3d., and Ss. 6d.
Hudson Bay, Mecklenbers•, &c.
All.the shore Feathers are warranted to be sweet, clean,
and free from any smell, as they are stored by a new process,
and not sold in that undress'd state titi hiCh is tilf, often the
ease.—Bed Ticks sold at prime cost to purchasers of Feathers.
BEDDING. a. d. s. d.
Feather Beds, from 5 0 to 3 3 0
Best Grey Goose Beda - ' 310 otos 10 0
Best White Dantzic Beds 4 10 oto 6 10 0
Full size. Bed, bordered and welted Tick, only 8 10 0
Flock Bed and Bolster - • - 015 oto 1 4 0
MAT TRESSES.

Mattresses - - - 0 10 oto 1 8 0
Real Horse Hair, Wool Ditto, made in the Fiend) style,
equally cheap.
___

Palliagge

0 14 oto 1 4 0

BEDSTEADS—A great variety of Bedsteads always on
hand, with curious French and other Fancy taittage Tops;
also elegant Four-post in Honduras and Spanish Mahogany.
'BEDSTEADS with FURNITI7I:ES—Four-post with Mo-
rem and Chintz Fornitur,s, foil draperies, fringed, remark-
ably altar)! Tent, Waterloo, French, and other curious
shapes, equally cheap, and fea y for inspection.—Bedsteads,
with or without Furnitnre, made to any size, and Bedding
to ht them.

A large assortment of Blankets. Counterpanes, and Mar-
seilles Quilts—Brussels, Kidderminster, and Venetian Car-
peting, made up and laid down to any'dimensions.—Feather
Beds dressed.-0141 Mattresses re-made and (Aired of the
Moth by a new process.—Shipping, Ht•tels, %shoals, Lodg-
ing Houses, and,l he Trade, supplied on very low terms, for
present Cash Only as also at his Manufactory, No. 22,
Queen's buildings, Brampton, (below Sloane-street, and di-
rectly opposite the half-mile stone from Ilvde.Park Corner.)
C-. 3. Please to obserye the name of SLATER.

ECONOMY AND ELEGANCE.
itBR Err, TAILOR, and WOOLLEN
• DRA PER, No. 31, GRACECHURCH-STREET,
'Makes every description of Cloathing full 35 per Cent. lower
than any other House in London.
R. B. begs leave most rt-spectfullk to return his sincere thanks
to the Public for the very liberal ;rid extensive patronage he
has experienced since his commencing on the above Premises;
from the advantages he possesses of purchasing every A rticle for
Ready Money, and from his established and invariable prin-
ciple of doing Business tbr a very small Profit ; he feels assured it
is the most advantageous method as well to himsellas the Public.
R. B. pledges himself to make every Article equal in Pit and
Workmanship to any that can be produced by the first-rate
Tailors at the West End.

_
Brief Sketch of the Prices.
Superfine Black and Blue Coats £2 15 0 to 4'3 5 0
Extra Saxony Wool ditto . .:310 .0 315 0
Superfine medley-coloured Frock okt.
Great Coats • • V 2 IC 0— 3 8 0
Ditto with Silk . . . 3 3 0 4 0 0

Quilting and Valencia Waistcoats .-0 : 7 6 0:13 0
Black and Buff Kerseymere ditto .' 0 10 U 0 14 0
Saxpny Mixed Milled Kerseymere
Trousers • . . ' . I's ' 0 1 10' ' 0
Black and Blue ditto . . . 1 8 0 1 14 0
Best Double-tnillecl Kerseymereßreeches 1 5 o'--- • 1 10 0
A suit of Livery, complete . . . . 414 6
Milled Water-proof Riding and ChaisC COats equally Cheap.
An assortment of.Carplet and Plaid Boat Cloaks, Witney
Wrappers, &c. kept Ready made.
s** Export Orders executed at 2k per Cent.upnn the Cost Prices.

To T. TAYLOR, Esq,
No. 9, New Bridgelstieet, London

HotiouttEn bra, • . .
IBEG leave to inform you, that ever since the
• year 1790, 1 had been afflicted with the I.neS'l'eikereal,
which, from its obstinately resisting eyeryckkurse of medicine
prescribed by the most eminent of the faculty hertl, and un-
derzning.severalvvvv courses of salivalion, and twice dis-
charged from tbr Hospital with little relief, wadd appeal to
be of the most inveterate nature. springy- of last vtar
my aisorder bad gut to such a head. as nerdy toput a period
to my existence—l had a large tticet' on thy einkwn of inv head,
one on each arm, and my legs wet c. hrn.e tint in a frightful
manner ;my right. was dread ftilly p;;Mfol, and hal hero a
state of ulceration for the last seven years; my- left had also
two large nodes on it, was vet's much di,c,,lokir..d, and gave
me Such. excruciating pain; partieularly•when:Warlll 111
as nearly to deprive me of rest ; iu this I vientable state, I
was recommended by Mr. J. Thumpoik, (who veeeivrd so
great a cure by them here), to take your Leahy's Patent Pills,
which I began to do on the 46th 0. 51:fy in the coarse of a
fortnight I- began to receive hetiell,i-z-or iiitle 111011.! than a
Month the ulcers on my head and arms wet e sonoilly heated—
soon after, the sores tits my legs -healed also ;•feaving; how-
ever, considerable discolotiration in the slain, and pain in the
'bone of the. eft, which, by the blk s‘Angbf an.! at little
longer pet severance in your invaluable Medicine, sal4sided ;
the nodes dispersing, the Ain 'reOining its natural line, and
the nocturnal pains gradually going thus fire:sate, by
y.,ur liberal advice and medicine, 'perfectly free'fiaint all my
former complaints—have rccorered Inv:former spirits and
'strength, and ant become jolly and fat, in which slate having
continued many months„to the,astonistimtint kkE:all who knew
me, I am at a loss in what terms to express my gratitude, but
beg you, fur the good of- other stiffering; mortals, to make
this my case as public as possible, as I shall on every occa-
sion ; in so doing'yon win greatly 01)1;0. '
your grateful, obedient , very humblosereant ,
Mt'llKElt
Swan's Close, High-street, Edinlyorgh.
ktitesses to the above Cure:—

John,No.;3; New., Ppilltry..\-lailfer; F.dinburgh,
John Itligntosli, Old Assembly (lose, Edinburgh.
Prepared and sold by PR sole Proprietor, TILi/MAti TAY-
I.Olt, Member of the. Royal College of at his
hntise, Nti.'9, New Itiage-s"tieet, W7111:1C, Ater a
onist:nt residence of.more than 4q.yrars,,iii a practice. parti-
cularly
ntiliireted to the cure
to the
tbe Pz.irts,ol with that, illviol4ble
secrecy which men profession shmild always olyierve in
such cases, he Hatters; Itilltstlf • the .ziciv-ice-,iidet aiAstiinee be
gratuitottsly administers to persons
be wittemcd, bra thseern,ing-Putilic;
attainakile,. and raid of all ain‘bignity„
Also !too: ileoryit.s,h,p
to,r; those
living at a '
Nfr. I)i:4)6ioughs, No. 7; "Fiefi-strut-hill ;
ss,putb-bridge, Edinburgh ; Mt. Callwel
person in ertyv cousiilerable town in Great itt itain and
Ireland, in boxes of , it a'rtford, and sealed up
with frill and plain dirt ctions, -eh( rely pers.,tis, ~1 either
sex filly cute il:cmselres wiTh vilsr,sperd.srcreer,

• Mr. TRESLOVE expressed the readiness of the assignees to
acquiesce in any decision of his Lordship upon the case.
The LOUD CliaticEi.Lon said that he would undertake to
lecide, since the parties wished it, but not witt a great deal of
pleasure, as Mr. Montagu had suggested. In remarking, as
lie had done, that questions of bankruptcy were not well tried
by an issue sent to the courts of law, he by no means ever in-
tended it to be understood that a jury was not a tribunal greatly
to be preferred to his individual judgment in most cases. Ile
thought that the Counsel should so far accommodate him and
the suitors of the Court as to have the hearing fixed in some
day of the Christmas vacation.
It was subsequently agreed that the argument should be li-
mited to one CounSal on each side, and those to be considered
as retained merely
,to perfect the'Court in the recollection of
the facts scattered through very voluminous papers, which had
been before used in the cause.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 22.
BRITISH' PROPFRTY AV!) FHCNCU LAW.
HILL V. P.EARDON AND DEVERI.:I:X.

The. Ina,eurnents in this case were restnrol to-day. It ap-
peared from the pleadings .and from the statements of Coun-
sel, that the subjects in dispute arose out of transactions
which began many years ago. A Mr. and Mrs. Fanning
quitted Ireland in the year 1776, and went to France, where
they fixed their residence. They purchased landed property of
great extent in the department of La Sarthe, and by the.docu-
merits" which secured the transfer of the property, it appeared
that the conveyance was made to the husband and wife en -
contrnunante, and as a proof that the interest of the wife was
considerable, it was stated that 'Mrs. Fanning wits described
by the title of La haute et fres, puissante Dame, &c., Marie
Theodosie Frangoise Butler. Mr. and Mrs. Fanning remained
in possession of this property for several years, and during that
period they had two children—a son and a daughter. In the
year 1788 Mrs. Fanning died, and Mr. Fanning retained the
dominion over the property. The troubles of the revolution
commencing soon afterwards, the British family of Fanning
became objects of suspicion, and at length, in the year 179,
Mr. Fanning, accompanied by his son and daughter, found it
necessary to quit France, and they came to England. By
virtue of an edict, passed by the National Convention, the con-
fiscation of his property followed this step, and it was altogether
seized upon by the Government. A large portion of it was
immediately sold, and fell into the hands of various purchasers.
The Government, however, chose to retain one part of it; and
this never having been alienated, formed the subject of the
present suit. • It consisted of 168 hectaires of tiraber land, and
was preserved for the use of the nation, on account of its being
extremely valuable. The son anti daughter of Mr. Fanning
died intestate, the latter in.lBol, and the former in 1794, leaving
their father then alive. He returned to France in 1802, and
died in 1806; hiiiing first niaile a will, by Which he bequeathed
one-third of all his property to certain charitable institutions in.
Ireland, and appointed James Devereux, Esq., his residuary
legatee and joint executor, with Dr. Walsh. This will was duly
proved by Mr. Devereux, who immediately proceeded to act in
his capacity of executor.
By oneof the articles in the treaty of the Allied Powers with
France, and by a law subsequently passed in pursuance of the
treaty, it was provided, that all the sequestrated property of
emigrants which had not been alienated should be restored, or
that a proportionate indemnity should be given to the represen-
tatives of the emigrants. Mr. Devereux accordingly preferred
his claim to the Commissioners,appointed under the law, and
after it had been duly investigated, a sum of 700,000 francs and
upwards was awarded to him on account of the property of the
late Mr. Fanning. A part only of this sum had been actually
paid, and the remainder was put in a course of liquidation in
the manner thought proper by the commissioners.
The present suit was instituted by a person claiming to be
entitled through the children of the late Mr. Fanning' to the
property belonging to him and his wife. The ground of this
claim was, that the property, front the circumstances under
which it had been purchased, was in the nature of an entailed
estate, and that it could never ascend in succession ; that
therefore the father, the testator, could never have inherited or
acquired any right in it, and that consequently his disposition
of it by will must have been invalid. In support of this view
of the case, the article 1201 of the Code Civil, which enacts
Lorsque le testateur aura legue la chose d'autrui, le legs sera
soit gut la testateur ait Conan, au nen, ne lui appar-
tedoit pas, was chiefly relied on—a principle of universal jus-
tice which must regulate testamentary dispositions in every
-community.
Mr. GARRETT, on behalf of the ,Commissioners of Cha-
ritable Donations and Bequests in Ireland, appeared for the
purpose of receiving the share which had been bequeated by
'the testator for the benefit of charities. The defendants were
Mr. Dovereux and Mr. Reardon, to whom Mr. Devereux had
given a charge upon the indemnity awarded to him for monies
advanced.

Mr. Haie, who was Counsel for the defendants, was pre-
pared to deny the Sufficiency of the proofs offered by the plain.
tiffs, that the property had been entailed in the manner assert.
ed. He urged that from the nature of the estate, as well as
from the provisions of the French law, it was impossible that
the contrary conclusion. could be rrrived at. The opinions of
two eminent French lawyers which established this position,
were read by the Counsel ; hut The point chiefly relied upon
was, that the case being one which depended wholly upon
the laws and customs of France, was without the jurisdic-
tion of the Court. The question as to whether the testator
Mr. Fanning, had or had not a right to dispose, after the
death of his children without issue and intestate, of the pro-
perty which he and his wife had held en eommunante, was
one which could never be ascertained by the rules adopt-
ed by the English jurisprudence. The award of money
being to represent, or in the place of that property, must be sub-
ject to the same conelusions ; and thus it was argued that part
of the case stood wholly beyond the reach of the Court. Pith
this, then, fell the right of the parties instituting the suit, and
none of the plaintiff . excepting the Commissioners of Cha-
ritable Bequests, heitniade out a case which entitled them to
any relief. As far as the dispositions of thut part of the pro-
perty which the testator 'had directed to he applied in Great
Britain, whether for giliaritable purposes or Otherwise, the or.
ders of the Court would, of course, be to be obeyed. But Mr.
Devereux had already proved his right to this property under
the will of Mr. Fanning. He had preferred hiselaim before the
Commissioners, under an Act of the ;i9th of the late King, which
was passed to regulate the claims of British subjects who i I
held property in France. In the course of that investigation 'ad*
the circumstaneea of the family of Fanning had been detailed,but
the Commissioners decided that Mr. Fanning was a naturalised
French subject, and that therefore he was not included in the
Act of Parliament referred to. Against thls decision Mr. De-
vereux
appealed to the Privy Council, who decreed in his favour,
and the cause being jhua sent back again to the Commissioners,
it was decided by than with a reference to the law of France.—
That law was in support•of the claim of Mr. Devereux, and
made the elder Mr. Fanning the representative of whatever in-
terest his children 4piel taken. The Cornmissionerm then pro,
nounced him entitle i to the amount of indemnity before men-
tioned. It was obsekved also, that but for the exertions which
Mr. Levereux had made, the property would have been wholly
lost, because the
.time limited by the Act of Parliament -bad
nearly expired, and would have expired before-the parties now
claiming could have, taken any proceeding.. - •
'the SoLiciTon-GENERAL contended, that although Mr.
Devereux had obtained possession of the property, he was only •
to be regarded in the light of a trustee, and that the Court had
power to compel him to refund to the plaintiff's the sums which
had been awarded to bins. Ile denied that tie decision of the
Privy Council did any more than to ascertain and confirm the
legal rights of Mr. Fanning, and that the queszion of the distri-

After Mr. HART had replied,
The VIC'E..CIIANCELLOR said, he had listened with great
attention to the elaborate discussion which this case had un-
dergone, not only on account of its novelty, but of its impor-
tance; and he confessed that, after reading the convention and
the Act of Parliament, he was not prepared to say, frstrrany
thing that had been advanced, that this Court had any juris-
diction whatever. It was not his presen: luten.ion to enter at
length into the argument of Counsel, and he sOuld merely state
hittopinion, that no bill could. be maintained in this case.—
The property in question had never been. vested in the plaint
tiffs ; it had been created by the convention and by the Act of
Parliament 59th Geo. 111., which had been referred to; and
consequently every person claiming it, must prose such claim
under those conventions and Act of Parliament. It had been
all along contended that the plaintiff has rights of property,
bilt for the reasons stated they could only.be made out through
those public acts. The argument had been, that the decision
of the Privy Council ought not to have extended to the rights
of individuals : but the act expressly showed in the 15th sec- ;
tion, that it was the purpose of the Legislature to withhold ;
from the commissioners the conclusive. power of trying who I
was. entitled to the
.property claimed before them, because an
appeal to a court of equity was in such cases pointed out. Ile
would therefore, without further going into particulars, only
say that the principle was as he had stated it, and that the ar-
gument as to the competency of the commissioners was repelled
by this act. He would look through the act of Parliament
and the conventions with more attention than he had yet been
able to devote to them, fin' the purpose of meeting all the
points which had been put, and would deliver his opinion
more fully on a future day. In the mean time that opinion was
that the Court had no jurisdiction.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, N0v.22.

BUCKINGHAM v. BANK/A

This case stood over in consequence of the inability of the
plaintiff to establish the publication of the libel on which it is
founded, and which he discovered at a late stage of the pro-
ceedings. It was postponed, and a commission granted to ex-
amine a witness in India, on condition that the plaintiff would
during the interval pay the expences of two of the witnesses to
support the defendant's pleas of justification who have been
brought from Egypt to England.
Mr. GURNEY now moved to amend the rule for postponing
the trial, and also for a report of the Master as to the expences
of the witnesses. By mistake the rule had been drawn up for
the sittings after Trinity Term instead of this term, contrary. to
the memorandum signed by Mr. Brougham and himself. The
defendant also wished for a further allowance for his witnesses.
The Court granted a rule to shew cause.

IN THE SIATTER OF CLARKE AND PLI24MER.

It may be remembered that in Easter Term an application
was made by Mr. Storks against Clarke, an attorney, Thotpas
431immer the father, and John Plimmer the son, and a rule
granted to show cause why Clarke should not be struck off the
Rolls for allowing the Plimmers to practice in his name, and
Why they should not be committed for so practising. The
case arose in a remote part of Staffordshire, where Thomas
Plimrner resided. It was alleged that a poor man of the place
being sued for a trifling debt, John Plimmer, who was clerk
to an attorney in London, undertook ins defence, and put in a
plea of misnomer. The rase was suffered to go to trial, when
Clarke, whose name had been used, appeared and assisted in
the proceedings; and, in the result, the client was fixed with
the dest and costs to the amount of nearly CO!. The .ease was
referred to the Master, who now reported that the rule ought
to he made absolute against Clarke and John Plimmer, but
discharged without costs against Thomas Plirnmer, who had
merely advanced money to serve his son, without any criminal.
participation in the design.
Mr. CHITTY said the rule bad never been served on John
Pliniiner. and therefore he had no opportunity of opposing it.
The COURT then ordered the rule to be absolute against
Clarke, and discharged as to the Plimmers.

COURT OF COM3ION PLEAS, N0v.22.

CONTEMPT OF COURT.-THORPE ESQ. V. GISBORNE.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff for the keep of
race horses, and was tried before the Lord Chief Justice, at
Westminster, in Easter Terns, and the verdict was for the de-
fendant. Mr. Sergeant WILDE in the course of the present
term, obtained a rule trim', calling upon Captain John Hunter
to show cause why an attachment should not issue from the
Court against him for contempt ? The contempt complained
of was, his not attending at the trial of the'cause. The affula-
vita stated that ihe individual in question was duly subpoenaed,
on the race course at Epsom, on the 17th of Nay, and that
when the man gave bins the subpoena, he handed it to a third
person, who said, 44 why this is a subpoena to attend on the
Derby day." It was also sworn that a sovereign and a shilling
Were offered him, which he refused, saying, " D-n your money,
I would not attend for one hundred pounds," and requested the
person to say he had not seen him.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN this day showed cause against the
rubs upon the affidavits of the applicant, and contended that the
witness had not been duly subpoenaed, that the original writ
was not shown to ltim, that the person making one of the affi-
davits had only sworn that he caused the witness to be duly
subpoenaed, whereas the man who did serve him, if served at
all, had made no affidavit. He also put in art affidavit of Mr.
Hunter, stating that a person 'of loose character, an idle at-
tender of races, did give him a paper which he returned to him
without reading, and denying that he offered him any money
with the subpoena, or that he, deponent, used the offensive
words sworn to, or any to that effect. ime Learned Counsel
also stated that a John Hunter was examined at the trial of the
cause, and argued that the parties ought to have come to the
Court in the following term.
Mr. Sergeant N't't LDE wits heard in support of the rule, and
contended that a grosser contempt was never brought before
the Court, and that the individual was attempting to get rid of
it by quibbles, and to draw the attention of the Court from the
contempt in attempting to gei the person serving its process to
say be had not smn him ; and argued that the affidavits con-
tained sufficient proof of the facts, and that the affidavit of the
agent, who had sworn that he "reused him to be duly served,"
was sufficient.

Cm Er jI: ST ICE—That parr is what I disapprove of. He
could know nothing shout it. _ _

Mr. Serweant NVit.m: was further heard in support of the
rule.

Tile Cm vt- JusTlev said he was sorry that this matter was
brought hetlife the I ,ourt in the imperfect manner it wAs. The
affidavits were not complete, but a grosser contempt never
occurred ; and had the affidavits b-en correct, the t2ourt would
have taught this arcntletuan what •it was to-tamper with's& person
servinA the procc.s of the Court. The Learned Judge adverted
to the iroperfec: mode of serving, by not shewing the original
process ; that had it at all come out that the party com-
plained of had admitted th•►t he knew it was a process of the
Court, that would have been enough. If the service had been_
regular, there were facts enough for the Court to have shewn
him that the 1001. he hod talked of would lave been nothing._
in all cases of contempt; the service must be distinctly and
clearly made out. The rule must be discharged, but most cer-
tainly without costs.
31r. Justice tot coincided with the Chief Justice, and in
very strong terms reprobated the conduct of the in ividual.
The other Judges assented, and the rule was discharged with-
out costs.

.111-C('01!IIT intimated, that in future all motions for con-
tempt mu;t be made tri the Term following its taking place.

ROLLS' COURT, DUBLIN.

LONGI,I£.I.D SIR 1111EY, ADMINISTRATOTI OE
.Joirm. Al;

DENIIAM JEPlisoN, ESQ.

. ,
Thi, t tile's to perpetuate the testimony of one
Robert Reeves, anal the case came on before- the .11 Avt Eli of
the Ilot.Ls to be ..tr,rtted on demurrer.
Q'eoNN :LL. in support of the demurrer. The hill
stated that the La: 1i ht Hon. John Lord Longueville u'as, in

the year 1790, a member of his Majesty's Most Horn-Privy
Council in Ireland, and also a Member of the House of Om-
: mons in Ireland; that the tosyn, of Mallow, in the county of
Cork, was a borough which sent two Members to the Irieb*Pler-
• t liament; that Denham Jephson, then of Alallow Caetk, was a -
person of great property and influence in the slid borough, and
bad for several years represented in in Parliament, and was en-
abled, by means of his property, to procure the retufri of'inem-
hers- for the same; that he uniformly appointed the Seneschal .
of the manor, who was to preside at the election, and to. Oi-
llect the votes of the electors. That said Denham Jeplison,
in the year 1790, became desirous of converting his :influende
in., he -boivirgh toil's'. min . pecuniary advantage, and elid, 4n-
-1 constitutionally and illegally,' pro„pose. to Richard lennirtield :
I to selt him his influence,. and be did enter into it corrsipt
and illegal contract to Sell his influence in said -tOkti for a- gross
i sum of money. This agreement was subsequently reduced to
writing, and commenced as follows :—" Agreement between
1 the flonourable Richard Longfield and Denham Jeph-
-1 high[
sari, Esq.—Mr. Jephson is to receive of Mr. Longfiel4;-000/.,
' and Mr. Longfield is to procure a pension of Mr. JeTilisbn of
6001. per annum (being the amount of his father's pension ),
within three years after the next general election, or pay to Mr. '
Jephson a further sum of 3,000/. ; Mr. Jephson in return is to
thtow all his influence at Mallow into Mr. Longfield, and is to
appoint a Seneschal of Mr. Longfield's nomination as often as
called upon, for the purpose. of presiding at elections, and is
to give Mr. Longfield all -the assistance in his power, at all
times, to secure the representation of the borough of Mallow ;
and Mr. Jephson agrees to pay the sore of 400/.. or half the ex-
perice'tel a petition, if any is preferred at the ensuing election by ' ,
Sir Jas. Cotter or Anthony Jephson, as candidates ; and Mr.
Jephson further agrees that, as this is a mere honourable trans-
action, every thing is to be done at both sides that the . panics,
as men of honourand integrity, can do, to carry into effect this
agreement, for to accomplish the intents and purposes of each
party, and to secure their respective objects—namely, money
and pension to Mr. Jephson, and the representation of Mallow
to Mr. Longfield.',"The agreement then went on to state,
that it was to be carried- into effect by Mr. Longfield execut
ing two Ponds to Air. Jephson, each conditioned for the pay-
ment of 3,0001. with interest, and that those bonds were to
be deposited in the hands of the Hight Honourable David La_
touche, as a mutual trustee for both parties; and if it shall
appear to the said trustee that Mr. Jephson has fairly
-unequivocally, and honourably peformed his part of the agree-
ment,' the.brinds are to lie given up to Mr. Jephson When they
are respectively due, in order that Mr. Jephson may enforce
payment of them ; but if it shall appear to the said trustee
that Mr. Jephson has failed in the performance of his part
of this agreement, then the bonds are to be cancelled. And
in case Mr. Longfield shall procure the pension of 600:. a.
year for Alit-. Jephson within the space before-mentioned, then
the ' last.mentioned bond is to remain in the hands of Mr.
Latouche, as a security only to Mr. Jephson, for said pension
during the life of Mr. Jephson, but the amount thereof is not
to be paid to or recovered by Mr. Jephson, unless he shall-be
deprived of said pension, in which case the said bond is to be.
given up to 'Mr. Jephson, on his being deprived of said pen-
sion, in order that he may enforce payment of said principal
stint of 3,000/. and the interest. from the day of his being de-
prived of said pension. The bill went on to state, that said
Richard Longfield, on the 16th of March. 1790, for the com-
plained illegal consideration in said agreement mentioned, exe-
cuted two bonds, each conditioned for the payment of 3,0001.,
which bonds were witnessed by Robert Reeves, his law
agent. That in evidence of the illegal controul, said Richard
Longfield, by reason of his influence with the Irish Go-
vernment, procured for the said Denham Jephson a pen-
sion for his life of 600/. per annum ; and thereupon one of the
bonds were given up to be, cancelled ; the other bond was
depositated in the hands of the Right Honourable David La-
touch, where it remained for upwards of twenty years ; and the
said 'Milani Longfield, having been created Baron Longue-
ville, -and afterwards Lord Viscount Loneueville, died on the
23d of May, 1811. Mr. Jephson died in 1814, and admi-
nistration was granted to the defendant, Sir John Aubrey
and others. These executors, in the year 1817, applied for and'
obtained the bond from Mr. Latouche, and they made appli-
cation for payment of the same to the representative of lord
Longueville, which having been refused, an action in debt on
said bond was commenced in the Court of Exchequer, and a
declaration filed in Michaelmas Term, 1023. Several pleas
were filed to this declaration, which put in issue the corrupt
and illegal contract in bar of plaintiff"s demand ; but the ad-
ministrators did not go to trial on the issue bond. The bill
further stated, that said Reeves is the only witness surviving
who is able to prove several of the facts connected with such
corrupt and illegal agreement; that he is as venty-two years of
age, and of infirm health, and the plaintiff: are in danger of
losing the benefit of his testimony. The bill, therefore,.
prayed that the evidence of said Reeves may be taken and per..
petuated, so as to be used on any trial that may afterwards.
take place between the parties. To that bill the present de-
murrer was filed, stating that the said bill contained a state-
ment of fraud and maintenance, as to disentitle the-persons
guilty thereof, and their representatives, from any relief in a
court of equity; and that the matters contained in. the said bill
were not fit or suitable to be discussed in. tfrat-court. Mr.
O'Connell, in support of the demurrer, contended, in thefirst
place, that the party might have had the benefit of the evi-
dence of Mr. Reeves without going into that court, because
it was their fault that the suit at law was still pending.—ln
the next place, the transaction stated in the, bill was a gzoss
' and illegal transaction, clearly punishable:ty indictment ;-_e
it was a gross conspiracy on the pact of the individuals who
were parties to the corrupt agreement—the one by means of
corrupt influence, and an undue controul over a public officer,,
contracting to insure for the other a seat in Parliament, and
the other undertaking to procure, as a consideration for that
corrupt influence, a pension of 6001. a year frornaliegovern-
ment of the day. It would be no tact in the case whether
the person who stipulated to receive that pension, and who ac-
tually did receive it as the fruit of that corrupt agreement, hap-
pened to be poor cr rich ; it, however, turned out that he was
a man of great fortune and consideration. The party here were
purl delzeto, and the transaction was of a nature so unconsti-
tutional, so marked with turpitude and corruption, as to render
it unfit to be discussed in that Court. The facts of the present
case being of a public nature, and infinitely more strong than
any case of turpitude in private life. Yet Lord Eldon, in
Birr's case, said that the parties, being purl delicto, he would
not entertain the case one way or the other. The circum-
stances of Birr's case were these :—The defendant (Bin-) be-
ing desirous to marry a lady of independent fortune, ap-
plied to the plaintiff to procure him a wife of that
description. The plaintiff promised to do co, and in further-
ance of the scheme, he gave several expensive entertain-
ments, and invited to those entertainments several ladies of
fortune. That the defendant met those ladies at such entertain-
ments, the expence of which he promised to defray, and. that it
appeared front the letters of the defendant himself, that he
Might, if he wished, have married any of these women. Lord
Eldon dismissed the case out of Court, as unfit for further dis-
cussion. The Learned Gentleman concluded, on the authority
of the above case, that inasmuch as the parties to the agreement
were -mutually criminal, on grounds of public principle, the
Court would grant no relief.
Mr. Dante:l.lEl.l. was heard at some length on the other side :
he contended, on the authority of ruled cases, that Courts o:
Equity, even where there were corrupt transactions, hod given
relief.

The further discussion of the question was postponed.

•J 011.%? NA SouTitcorr.—The conventicle where
the infatuated disciples of this impostor meet and hold forth,
situated in Duke-street, Devonport, was on Sunday after-
noon last, beset by crowds of persons of both sexes, to the
number of many hundreds, they having' been induced
attend there in consequence of its being proclaimed by the
Town Crier, on the Saturday preceding, " that the cradle
which had been made expressly for' the young Shiloh,
Was to be exhibited by the High Priest, 2manuel Eli, at
the Tabernacle, Duke-street ;" this, it appeared, was the
trick of some wag, as no cradle was produced, nor the least
notke alluding to it, mentioned ; most of those collected, re-
mained till the
.afternoon's service of these ignorant foiaties
was over, and on the " elders" retiring tore it homes through
the crowds, reniimber of boys present hooted them ; rha perse-
cution they bore as patiently as the emblem mey as'ume could
h:.ve done—the ass, on which holy beast, ene of their articles of
belief states, they are 'o be conveyed to the New J, russhm.
We would ask if there be not a fiels here fill. our NI issiunary
societies ? Tall: of instructing the Afrirans —WI at Pagan's
[relief can be more gross or where can be a gre:itcr.perversi( n
of the human ut.derstatoling than is here ,xhibited ? Yet, tijs
is England, enlightened England, in the nineteenth century ;
a land cf Bibles, Missionary Societies, &c.—(Devonetirc Free-
Auldcr.) •