The Sun.
London, England, 1825-04-22 00:00:00

BARGANY CAUSE.

In prosecution of the hearing of this Appeal, there appeared
as the Counsel on each side the following Scots eminent Advo-
cates. For the Hon. Mrs. Fullarton, Bobert Forsyth, John
Tawse, and Patrick Robertson, Esqrs.: for the Respondent,
Sir Hew Dalrymple Hamilton, Bart., James Moncrielf, James
Keay, and John A. Murray, Esqrs. Mr. Forsyth appeared at
the Bar for the first time since he has been Advocate, now up-
wards of 32 years, and stated the case on the part of the Ap-
pellant with perspicuity and distinctness, in a speech of five
hours, giving a detailed statement of the facts of the case,
and f the procedure which has taken place in the Court
of Session ever since the first Institution of the action .
the part of the Appellant, Mrs. Fullarton. This he did with
acuteness. He then argued the case in point of law with-
ingenuity, and shewing throughout both research and ability.
He will be succeeded in his argument by Mr. Patrick
ROBERTSON ; and then Mr. Moicc RIEFF will argue the case
for the Respondent. The case itself, being one 'of the reduc-
tion of the title by which Sir Hew Dalrymple Hamilton Las
for so many years held and enjoyed the estate of Bargany, in
addition to North Berwick. Mrs. Fullarton's plea mainly is,
that she ought to have been the right heir to the property, site
alleging that the predecessor, to whom Sir Hew succeeded, by
an act or deed, altered the order of succession, and thereby
made it flow to Sir Hew, whereas, but for that act, it would
have naturally descended in an unvaried line to Mrs. Fullar-
ton. Hitherto the Court of Session have repeatedly decided in
favour of the Respondent, Sir Hew Dalrymple, that he is the
lawful heir, and that his predecessor did not act to create a for-
feiture of his ri;ht.

MISCELLANEOUS

The Marquis of CHANDOS, and others from the Commons,
brought up several Private Bills, which were read a first
time.

Mr. ADRIAN, from the Treasury, presented Accounts of the
quantity of Wines and Spirits bonded in the London Docks.—
Laid on the table.

/Ir. 'WATERS, from the Court of King's Bench, presented
certain Returns from that Court, and from the Court of Com,
mon Pleas and Exchequer, pursuant to the order of the House.
Laid on the table, and, on the motion of Earl GROSVENOR,
ordered to be printed.

- •
IRELAND.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL presented certain Papers, which he
moved should be referred to the Committee of Inquiry on the
State of Ireland.—Ordered.
CA T OLIC:S.
The LOAD CztAxcELLon-presented petitions .against the
Catholic Claims from the town of Stafford, and a parish hi the.
county of Lincoln.—Laid on the table.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL presented a petition to the same
effect from (we understood) some Protestant Dissenters at
llla rga t e

Lo-rd KING observed, that the Right Rev. Prelates opposite
were now very glad to obtain the support of the Dissenters.—
One who had been an ornament to their Bench had once said,
" that the Catholics were nearer and dearer far to them than
the Dissenters ;" but a great change had taken place, or they
had occasional approximations with one sect or the other, tns the
objects and feelings of the moment prevailed.
The petition was laid on the table, as well as a similar one
from Newton Bushel, presented by Lord Rol LE.
Lord KEN] ON presented a petition to the same effect from
the inhabitants of the parish of St. _Matthew, Bethnal-Green.
The Noble Lord said, that it had been unanimously-adopted
at a meeting of which due notice had been given, and that in
only two days it had received 2,000 signatures. Ile elso pre-
sented one from Hackney, in the county of illiddlesex.—Laid
on the table.

Lord HOLLAND presented a petition from certain Protes-
tants resident at Lewis, in the county of Sussex, in favour of
concessions to the Catholics. He could not say whether they
were Protestants of the Church of England, or to what class of
Dissenters they belonged, but it was certainly a great compli-
ment paid to Dissenters in general, to see how happy the Bev.
Bench opposite was to fight under the aegis of Non-conformists.
He admitted that the opinions of individuals were notto be con-
sidered as those of the body of which they formed a part. He
was not sufficiently acquainted with Dissenters to know what
was their prevailing feeling. Out of the three great congrega-
tions and denominations of Dissenters, he was not aware that a
single petition had yet proceeded against the Catholic Claims,
whilst every time that important question had been discussed,
he had been honoured by their entrusting him with a petition in
its favour. Bodies might certainly change their opinions, but
this ought not to be interred from the conduct or sentiments of
a few individuals.

The petition having been read and laid on the table ;
The Bishop of CHESTER said, that he had a singular pe-
tition to present. It was from the Minister and Congregation
of Protestant Dissenters, who celebrated divine service at the
Jewry-street, Chapel, in the City of London. They belonged
to one of the three great denominations of Dissenters, the In-
dependents. He admitted, however, that in all those sects
every. separate chapel and congregations were considered as
forming a separate and distinct church; and that the sentiments
expressed by one of those congregations were not to be re-
garded as those of the whole body. The petitions went to an
extent which would surprise their Lordships, and which'in fact
had surprised himself. The petitioners not only deprecated
the removal of still existing restrictions, but expressed them.
selves perfectly satisfied with the present order of things, even
so far as it pressed upon them. This was a most important
concession. They hoped that no alteration would be made in
those securities which fenced round the Established Church,
because they felt that as long as that church was in its strength,
the great cause of Protestanism would be secure and placed
on a rock. It was, no doubt to be expected, and they must ex-
pect themselves, that many of their own Body, would entertain
very different opinions, but lie believed that a great number of
Dissenters were alarmed at the danger which threatened the
Established Church, because any injury. done to it, must also
injure the cause of Protestantism, and because fiom no other
Church could they expect that large and liberal telere6on,
which, thanks to God, they enjoyed. These sentiments- might
appear extraordinary from his lips ; but, for some years he had
not been an inattentive observer of the body of Dissenters, and
he was convinced that he did them no more than justice in mak-
ing that declaration. He presented this petition with great sa--
tisfaction to their Lordships, not only becauge it showed that
Protestant Dissenters were alive to the interests of the Protes-
tant cause, but because it showed the existence of a spirit of
candour and ingenuousness amongst them which did not per-
mit them to have recourse to artifice, but led them, whilst they
felt compelled to differ from it, chiefly on points of discipline,
to acknowledge the value of the Established Church.

Earl GROSVENOR asked by how many the petition was
signed ?
The Bishop of CHESTER said, by the whole congregation,
which were not numerous.

Lord CALTHORPE reminded the Right Rev. Prelate and
their Lordships that there were many other Protestants,. warm
friends also to the Church of England, who with a view of
maintaining its integrity, entertained opinions directly the re-
verse of those of the petitioners. He was glad that justice was
at last done to Dissenters. They had rendered great services to
the cause of religion. By their zeal, their activity, and their ex-
ample, they had produced a beneficial re-action in the Church of
England; nay, they had contributed to the revival of religion in
that Church. He could not regret any circumstances which led
that Rev. Bench to speak of them in terms of respect and cordiali-
ty—terms the more acceptable, as they were somewhat new and
unusual. This lie did not mean to apply to the Right Rev.
Prelate who had presented the Petition, for lie had- always
spoken of the Dissenters with a degree of fairness and candour
highly creditable to him. Notwithstanding the evidence of a
few petitions, he ( Lord C.) did not believe that the great Body
of Dissenters were against concessions to the Catholics.
The Petition having been read and laid on the table,
The Bishop of CHESTER presented one against fresh con-
cessions to the Catholics from the Clergy of some Archdis-
conry, the name of which could not be heard. He took this
opportunity in his own name, and in that of his Reverend
Brethren, to disclaim the compliment which iiad been paid
them at the expence of their predecessors. I-le appealed to their
Lordships whether it had been the habit of any of those prede.
censors to speak disrespectfully of Dissenters ? It' there were,

an unusual flow of cordiality on the part of the Prelates of the
Established Church towards those who dissented from it, it was
because they perceived in the latter symptoms of growing can-
dour, he would not say attachment, towards the Church. Hard
must be his heart, and that of his Reverend Brethren, if, under
those circumstances, they were not to relent, and to extend the
right hand of fellowship to Dissenters.
Lord CALTHoRPz having explained, the Petition was laid
an the table.
Similar Petitions were then presented :
By the Bishop of BATH and WELLS, from the Parish of
Holleburne, in the County of Hants ; and from the Archdeacon
and Clergy of the Diocese of Rochester.
By the Bishop of GLOUCESTER, from the Rural Dean and
Deanry of Cirencester.
By Earl DARTMOUTH, from the towns of Darleston and
West Bromwich, in the County of Stafford.
By Viscount Di PLE r and WARD, from some place, the
name of which could not be heard.

By Lord COMBERMERE, from the Parish of Glenbury, in
the.county of Chester.
Earl DARNLEY had been reading the petition presented
by a Right Reverend Prelate opposite, from the Archdeacon
and Clergy of the Diocese of Rochester. He not only approved
'of the temperate language in which it was worded, but he fully
agreed with the prayer of it, for it prayed that their Lordships
would make-no other concessions to the Catholics than were
necessary for the preservation of the public peace, and in no
degree hazardous to the Civil and Religious Establishment of
this Realm. That was all that he required, and all that was
asked by the Catholics themselves.
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS was glad that the
Noble Eatl agreed with the prayer of that petition, and had
no doubt that if other Noble Lords had read the petitions of
the Clergy as attentively as that Noble Earl had done, they too
would have agreed to their prayer.
The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a Petition against the
Catholic Claims from the Inhabitants of the town and vicinity
of Nottingham, signed by upwards of 3,000 individuals.
Lord KING read a placard which had been posted in the
streets of Nottingham, in which the people were pressed on
their duty to their King, their Country, and their God, to sign
petitions against those Papists, who worshipped Gods and
Goddesses, and now wished to deliver up the State into the
hands of a foreign Head. It had brew said by a Right Rev.
Prelate a few days since, that petitions had been got up with-
out any means being taken of exciting the people. Were pla-
cards like that which he'llad read no means of excitement?

The Bishop of CHESTER had not said what the Noble
Lord attributed to him. All he had said was, that no public
meetings had been held on the subject, and that he had dis..
couraged them, as he did not conceive it proper that a question
involving religious feeling should be discussed at a public
meeting.
Lerd HOLLAND said that the motives of the Right Rev.
Prelate did him honour; but if it were improper to discuss a
question involving religious feeling at a public meeting, it
was also impossible to collect public opinion without public
meetings.
The Petition was then laid on the table, together with a si-
milar one from the borough of Daventry, also presented by the
Duke of NEWCASTLE.

Earl FITZ WILLIA3I presented a Petition in favour of the
Catholic Claims from the inhabitants of the city and borough
of Peterborough.
The Bishop of CHESTER asked by how many it was
signed ?
Earl FITZWILLIAM knew not exactly. He believed
about 128, but they were most respectable individuals.

Read and laid on the table.
EQUITABLE LOAN.
Lord HOLLAND presented a petition from the Traders,
Inhabitants, and Mechanics of London and Westmister, in
favour of the Equitable Loan Bill, and wished to guard against
being understood to express an opinion either way on the sub-
ject.—Laid on the table.
The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a similar petition,
most respectably signed, from the Traders and inhabitants of
New Sarum.—Laid on the table.