The Sun.
London, England, 1849-10-13 00:00:00

T 1:1 E 111 0

LONDON,-

)se "
She's a --- hypocrite; shes only shamming to Mr. Stills 'b ri ...........5ee55e...—..........---..------.......
friend has now ar-
collect a mob round the house. rt
" I told him not to rived at ace
Itt in stage, but has not gone far enough
and said—My
talk in that manner, as II felt satisfied his wife was to proceed furs/ .er with his case. I find on reference
dying, upon which the prisoner violently exclaimed , to 52 George. n
jt.., C. 155, an Act of Parliament passed
i provided.c
h there
" 'What the h-1 has that to do with you.; what do fcr the relic?! of 3,1 istsetnhters, and known by the name of
teect:nts a(tatitwihs
"That no ilongregation or assembly for religious
shall be present
coat, ordered me out of the room, or he would at
you want here ?" and starting up, and pulling off his the Toleration
tapsa
once show me the way out. I told him to sit down worship of re.
more than twent V. persons besides the immediate family
and keep quiet, or he might get himself into worse
and servants of ih e person in whose house or upon whose
trouble than he already was in, and he took my ad vice
premises such mee ding, congregation, or assembly shall
for a short time, when two other constables entered, be had) shall be permitted or allowed, unless and until
and one of them having been dispatched for a the place of such ;vesting, if the same shall not have
cab, his wife was lifted into it, and conveyed to the been duly certified aud registered under any former Act
hospital. I, in the meantime, took the prisoner into or Acts of Parliame 'nt relating to registering places of
custody to the station, on the road to which he ac- religious worship, sha 11 have been or shall be certified to
knowledged that he had kicked his wife, and said that the bishop of the die cese or to the archbishop of the
he had come home very much intoxicated, upon which archdeacunry, or to tile justices of the peace at the
general or quarter sessions of the peace for the county,
his wife made some remarks he did not like, and a g
riding, division, city, town, or place in which such meet-
quarrel ensued between them, followed by the vio-
*ng shall be held.'
lance :deposed to. The prisoner, however, was per-
N 1 Now this chapel, it appears, h'
as been registered in
fectly sober when I first saw him, and I put no
the court of the Archbishop of York ; and that brings
question to induce him to say what he did. my friend within the first portion of the Act of Par-
Some other facts of a similar nature were deposed if
liament. And the Act stopped there, there would
to by the wife of a neighbour, named Marling, who
no doubttobe a good registration. But the section
found the deceased lying upon the floor in excruciating
agony; and Mr. Charles Harper, house-surgeon to gor,sA d say, .
n all places of meeting which shall be so certified
the London Hospital, stated that the woman wasbe returned by
to the bishop or archdeacon's court shall
brought to that institution at half-past two in the such court once in each year to the
qua: ter-sessions of
morning, suffering from acute pain in the region of the county, riding, division, city, to sin, or place. and all
the abdomen. Witness examined her, but could find places of meeting which shall be se certified to the
no external marks or contusions of any kind, and she quarter sessions of the peace shall be also returned once
seemed going on very well till the next night, when in each year to the bishop or archdeacon ; and all
he was called to see her at three o'clock in the such places shalt be registered in the said bishop's or
chdeacon's court respectively, and rtcorded at the
morning, and found her dying. She survived till ar
said general or quarter sessions ;. the registrar or
three o'clock the next afternoon, when she
clerk of the peace whereof respectively is hereby re-
expired, and on a post mortem examination of the
quired toandrecord
register
body, he discovered extensive inflammation of the
bishop or registrar, or clerk of the peace to whom an
membrane covering the smaller intestines, which had such place of meeting shall be certified under this ActY
no doubt produced death ; but he could not positively i shall give a certificate thereof to such person or persons as
state the cause of the inflammation itself, which shall request or demand the same, for which there shall
might have been induced by either natural or mecha • be no greater fee nor reward taken than 23. 61, told
nical means, such as a violent kick on that part of the every person who shall knowingly permit or suffer any
person ; but this injury, if it were so, could not have such congregation or assembly as aforesaid to meet in
been long inflicted, as the inflammation was evidently any plae occu
ed pied
as aforesa by him, until the same shall
ti have
me
of recent origin, and all the rest of the organs were
been soccertifiid, shall forfeit for every
such congregation or assembly shall meet contrary to the
perfectly healthy.
When called upon for his defence, the prisoner said Provisions of the Act, a sum not exceeding 201, nor less
than 205., at the discretion of the justices who shall cJia•
that he had only this to state—that he owned he
vict for such offence."
did kick her as described, but the deceased was
So
that (continued Mr. Smith) it lies upon the Dis-
always in a very ailing state, and was frequently in
senters to see, once in each year, that the registration
tbe night obliged to get up and spit blood, or she
of their chapels
NS could have been choked by it. He displayed a care-
to the other—either from the court of the bishop of
leosness almost amounting to indifference throughout,
the diocese to the court of quarter sessions, or from
any i the court ofquarter sessions to that
/dr. ARNOLD having directed the depositions of the .
the diocese. If that be not done, the place is no longer
wits tesses to be taken by Mr. Vine the chief clerk,
a legalised place of worship. Divine worship may be
fully* committed the prisoner to Newgate for trial
performed in it ; but if it is not legally registered, the
upon the charge of murder. parties have no locus standi in court. My friend
i must prove that there has been a certificate from the
court of the archbishop to the court of quarter sessions;
and if he do not do that, he cannot proceed any further.
Mr. Marratt —I have shown all that is required,
and all that we can show. We have no authority,
jurisdiction, or power over those courts.
Mr. Fisher—Have you no power to register at
the quarter sessions?
Mr. Marratt—Yes ; but we should be exactly
in the same position as we are now. It would make
no diffisrence at all. It seems to me that Dissenters
have the opportunity of registering their chapels in
two or three different places, and then it is provided
that these several courts shall send an account of the
chapels registered in them from one court to the
other; so that if a chapel be registered at the quar-
ter sessions, it must be certified from thence to the
court of the bishop of the diocese ; and vice versa.
But under these circumstances I contend that we have
done all that we have to do, and all that we can do.
We are not the clerks of these courts, and have not
the means of compelling them to send the certificates
from one court to another.
Mr. Fisher —But you have power yourselves to
register at the quarter sessions.
Mr. Marratt—For some reason or other, it seems,
this chapel was registered in the court of the bishop
of the diocese. It is enough for me to prove that
they have registered the chapel, and it is for others to
certify from one to another court. And I contend
that it is not incumbent upon us to prove that the
return has been made. If it has not been made, we
cannot help it, and we have no means of compelling
others to make it. We have done all that the Act of
Parliament requres us to do • we have registered the
chapel in the court of the bishop of the diocese, and
surely we are not to be called upon to see that the
persons connected with that court make the necessary
returns of the chapels therein registered.
Mr. Jackson—But the question is whether you
are not liable to a penalty if it be not done, and
whether it is not your place to see it done.
Mr. Marratt—We are not required to do so. We
have done all that we can do in showing that the
chapel is registered in the proper court. And I
submit that I am now entitled to go on with the
case.
Mr. Fisher—l think it is necessary that you
should register every year at the quarter sessions.
You are bound to comply with the terms of the Act
of Parliament.
Mr. Marratt—Had we at this particular time
registered in the court of the bishop, and also in the
courts of quarter sessions at Wakefield and Doncaster,
and could not have proved that it had been duly
certified, we should have been just the same as at
present, and liable to the same objection.
Mr. Fisher—You can go now to the court of
quarter sessions at Doncaster and certify, and then
tor one year you will be protected against all dis-
turbances.
Mr. Marratt—l am very sure we have done all in
our power. And if those returns have not been made,
and have been neglected by the lathes of the clerks, or
other causes, it is hard that we are to be deprived of
redress for injuries received.
Mr. Jackson—lt is your duty to see, from time to
time, that the register is complete.
Mr. Smith—lt is not sufficient that a chapel should
be once registered, and no more; but it must be done
once a year.
The magistrates retired to consult on the point
, raised by Mr. Smith. In half an hour they returned
into court.
Mr. Fisher then said that the bench were unani-
mous in the judgment he was about to give ; but he
was happy to say it was one which would not deprive
Mr. Marratt of any remedy which his clients were
entitled to by law. The Act of Parliament respecting
registration was somewhat ambiguous ; and they
were not going to express a decided opinion as to
whether it were requisite to have an annual registry
at the quarter sessions. His own private opinion was
that all these Dissenting chapels ought to be registered
at the quarter sessions once a year. However, they
would not on this occasion bind over the parties to appear
at the session to answer the charge, nor would they
require the complaing parties to appear and prosecute.
Two courses were open to them. They could
prefer an indictment at the quarter sessions, and
proceed directly in the same manner as if the
parties had been bound over. If they got an indict-
ment, they could have a bench warrant, and bring
the defendants at once before the court, so that
the trial might proceed in due course. Then if they
found that registration was necessary, they would
save a large sum in expenses, and they could register
the chapel at the court of quarter sessions, which
would take place in the present month. They would
then be on safe ground, and in a position to indict any
offending parties with sure grounds of success. He
(Mr. Fisher) was the more inclined to think that re-
gistration was necessary, because he saw in Mr.
Archbold's book that the averment of registration at
the quarter sessions was an essential part of the form.
He had only one other observation to make, and in it
the bench were unanimous. They deeply lamented
that a respecteble body of Protestant Dissenters, who
were no doubt actuated by good motives, should have
come before the Court at all • and they hoped there
would be no repetition, either on one side or the
other, of the complaint. They earnestly recommended
the parties to select some proper person or persons, to
whom they should refer the case for settlement. Let
the trust deed also be submitted to the same person
or persons, who should reside at a distance, and he
unconnected with both psrties, and who should be at
liberty, should occasion require, to call in some legal
gentleman to explain the law of the case. He had no
doubt that in this case both parties were acting from ,
good motives; but it was to be hoped that they would
not again permit such exhibitions to take place as had
been partially witnessed on the present occasion. He
hoped, too, that what had taken place would have the
desired effect of preventing any similar occurrences in
future. _

DISTURBING A CONGREGATION.
(From the Doncaster Gazette).
PRIM P 3 v. KING AND OTHERS.—IMPORTANT CASE.
Mr. Afairratt was for the complainant; Mr. Smith
for the 'defendants. The case, which is one of im-
portanct in regard to the registration of Dissenting
chapels, had been adjourned on two former occasions,
the part ies not being ready for trial. After some
preliminary conversation, it was now agreed that Mr.
Marratt should open the case, and then rely upon the
decision . of the bench, if a point were raised as to the
legal reg istration of the chapel in question.
Mr. M trratt said—l have the honour to attend
here on behalf of the members of the congregation of
Protestant :Dissenters worshipping in the chapel in
Spring-gardens, in this town, who have preferred an
information against John King, of Rotherham,
printer ; iqark, Glossop, of Doncaster, shoemaker;
and I[arg ret King, of Doncaster, widow—the charge
against those parties being that they disturbed the
congregation during' the time of divine service. The
case has al ready been brought before the bench, and
adjourned mail we could complete certain searches
with respect to the proper registration of the chapel
in question. I had, when it was first brought
forward, searched in the office of the Clerk of the '
Peace for the West Riding at Wakefield, but was
prevented making a search in the office of the
Clerk of the Peace of Doncaster by the death of the
late Mr. Brooke. Since that adjournment I have
searched in that office and also in the court of the
Bishop of the diocese of York. And I find that the
requirement oE the Act of Parliament has been ful-
filled, which sitys that Dissenting places of worship
shall be so registered. I believe by the same Act of
Parliament something is required to be done by the
courts of the Bishop and of the quarter. sessions, over
which we have no control. But, however, that may
be, I shill show that this chapel was registered in
May, 1822, and I shall put in evidence to that effect.
The information now before the bench refers to two
distinct offences, one being committed on the 12th of
August and the other on the 2d of September last;
and if I should establish either of these cases I have
little doubt as to the decision of the bench on
a subject of so grave a character. I shall not,
however, dwell on the seriousness of the case,
because there are some matters which will
suggest themselves to the bench without any
observations of mine. As I said„before, the offences
were committed on the 12th of August, and the
2d of September, but the principal one was that com-
mitted on the latter day. On that day, which was
Sunday, the congregation were as usual engaged in
the performance of divine service, and the disturb-
ance took place about ten o'clock. It seemed that
they assembled at nine, that they began with singing
and prayer, then followed an examination of the chil-
dren as to their religious duties, then prayer again,
and subsequently the sermon. About ten o'clock,
when the congregation were singing, the parties in
the vestry and the whole of those in the chapel were
surprised by an incursion from the defendants, who
made the disturbance now complained of. It may be
necessary to state that the chapel is next door to a
house which was formerly occupied by Mr. King, who
was some years the minister of the chapel. For the
convenience of the resident minister, who bad been
usually allowed to reside in that house, a door had been
broken out in the wall which divides the house from
the vestry of the chapel. But within a very recent
period Mr. John King, one of the defendants, had
I thought fit, for some reason or reasons best known
to himself, to open an entrance by taking away the
door altogether, thus
.leaving nothing between the
passage of the house, now occupied by Mrs. King,
and the chapel vestry. And in consequence of this,
and to keep possession, the congregation have thought
fit, and have felt it their duty to keep a person al-
ways upon the premises. On this particular Sunday,
Mr. John King, his mother, and a person named
Mark Glossop, entered the vestry by this opening, in
the wa 11, and some observation was made by the
former to the effect that Mark was to take posses-
son, " Now, Mark, take possession." Fortunately
for them some persons in the vestry prevented the
taking possession. An attempt was made, but
they did not succeed in taking possession. The
disturbance, however, was such as rendered it quite
impossible to go on with divine service ; and one by
one the congregation left the chapel until the service
was completely broken up. If this be proved I shall
have established clearly that the congregation were
disturbed. From something which has fallen from
Mr. Smith I am led to infer that he will have two
grounds of defence. But those are matters with
which we have nothing to do. It is not for the bench
to decide what are the doctrines to be observed in
this chapel ; but whether this be so or not I am pre-
pared to prove that the doctrines now being preached
there are those upon which the chapel was originally
founded, I can show that no change whatever has taken
place in the doctrines held forth in that chapel. That
is one of the grounds of difference; and I would now
tell Mr. King, who is within the sound of my voice,
that he is very wrong if he supposes that on this
ground he can prove a title to the possession of the
chapel in his own right.
Mr. King—l never said so.
Mr. Marratt proceeded—lf I show that Mr. King
came in the manner I have described, and said to
Glossop " Now, Mark, take possession," what are we
to infer but that it was his object to take possession of
that chapel ? Or why should he thus interrupt the
performance of divine service in the place ? But if
he suppose that he will have possession of the chapel
by this means he is much mistaken. No, he has no
more right to go there and take possession, than he
has to go and take possession of the Doncaster parish
church, or even the cathedral at York. I will now
call the witnesses.
Mr. Fisher—Could you not refer this matter to
some competent person ?
Mr. Marratt—l think not, sir. I have a mass of
correspondence here on the subject. I am afraid I
could not under the circumstances.
Mr. Smith—My friend has been throwing out
some very . improper observations respecting Mr.
King, who is constituted one of the four trustees of
this chapel.
Mr. Marratt—One of them, Mr. Snow, in Baxter-
gate, called upon me to say that he is not one.
Mr. Smith—l hold a brief written by Mr. Snow,
and given to me by him as one of the trustees.
Mr. Collinson, the magistrates' clerk—We have
nothing to do with that. All we have to do with is the
disturbance. The trustees may be left out of the
chapel altogether, if it be proved that the chapel is
licensed.
Mr. Wm. Ibeson' clerk to Mr. Marratt, was called
by that gentleman and examined. Ile said he went
on Saturday last to make a search in the
the
chapel in
Court of the
Archbishop of York for the gist
Spring-gardens, in Doncaster. The
of
he clerk of A
Hudson, the proctor, was with him. This is
a
trueir.
extract from the book, and examined by witness._
[Extract put in].
By Mr. Smith—lt was last Saturday afternoon
when he searched. Did not search anywhere else.
Had not searched in the office of the clerk of the peace
at Doncaster.
Mr. Marratt then called his next witness—Miss.
Lucy Phillips.

Mr. Marratt assured the bench that all his clients
required was peace and quietness, and that their worship
should not be disturbed. If it had not been the case,
they would not have come there.
Mr. Smith said that as his friend had made that
statement, he must in justice to his clients say that
they were persons of very great respectability indeed,
and that they were the trustees under the deed prepared
by Mr. Baxter in 1842. And further, he would say
that it was an undeniable fact, that the parties who
had brought this charge against them had changed the
form of religious worship from that for which the
chapel was originally built.
Mr. Marratt—l deny that altogether.
Mr. Smith continued—lt was perfectly manifest,
and well known in Doncaster, that those persons had
changed the form of worship from poalo to adult
baptism. They now denied the doctrine of infant
baptism, which they said was anti-scriptural, and
contended that adult baptism was the only baptism
allowed by the Scriptures. Thus the place was per-
verted from its original intention. It was built by
subscription, and the trustees were bound to maintain
it according to the original form of worship. They
had a duty to discharge ; and as trustees they were
bound to see that the place was not occupied for any
purpose but that for which it was built, and that the
doctrines stated in the trust-deed should be main-