The Sun.
London, England, 1825-12-28 00:00:00

COURT OF SESSION, EDIIIBURGII, DEC. v..

FINAL DECISION OF THE FIFE CAUSE.
By a verdict of a Jury, in March last, it was found that the !
Deed of Entail and Trust-Deed, which exchide the present !
Earl of Fife from a considerable part of his estates, amounting
to 20,0001. per annum, and accumulated rents since 184 were
NOT the deeds of the Grantee, the late Earl of Fife. This
verdict proceded upon the direction in law given from the
Bench, that if they, the Jury, weregiatisfied that one of,...the
witnesses neither saw the Grantee sign, nor heard him ackritlw-
ledge his subscription, they must find these were not the deeds '
of the Grantee. The defendants excepted to this direction, and
brought the cause into the Court of Law for opinion.
The question of law having been ably argued on both sides
of bar, the Judges gave their opinions upon Thursday last.
It was held unanimously, that it is well settled in our law, and
suppoted by our best authorities, as well as by a long series of
consistent decisions, that a deed is null if the witnesses, or one
of them, neither see the Grantee sign, nor hear him acknow-
ledge his subscription. And that, of consequence, it was a
right direction to the Jury, that if they were satisfied the late
Earl of Fife did not acknowledge his subscription to George
'Wilson, one of the instrumentary witnesses—it being admitted
that he (lid not see the Earl sign—they must find that these
were not the deeds of the late Earl of Fife.
The defenders also excepted to another point of the Lord
Chief Commissioner's charge, where he told the Jury that it
was his opinion " the acknowledgment must be clear and ex-
plicit, and that he had not found any case in which a virtual
acknowledgment or equipollent had been sustained." The
Judges were also unanimous in refusing this bill; upon a fair
consid&ation of the whole charge, it must be considered cor-
rect. Any opinion in regard to virtual acknoWledgment was
merely ()biter dictum, and not intended as a direction to the
Jury. • The fact ofaanowledgment had been left open for their
consideration in the concluding part of the passage objected to,
where it is said " that it was not necessary to carry the doctrine
so far in this case, as according to the evidence of the two wit-
" nesses, if they, the Jury, believed either of them, it did not ap-
pear that there was any acknowledgment either express or
The Judges in the Court of Session have found that the
direction, in law, was correct ; and that the verdict annulling
. the deeds stands good. The Bill of Exceptions was therefore
dismissed, and the Earl of Fife found entitled to expenses.
Counsel for Earl of Fife—Dean of Faculty, F. Jeffrey.
H. Cockburn, J. A. Murray, and George Robinson, Esqrs.
Advocates.
Counsel for Defendants—Thomas Thomson, J. Fullarton,
and James Monerieff, Esqrs. Advocates.

A en IsTivt As CA LL—The .distinguishing cha-
racter of Christianity is CHARITY, the bond of union between
our Author and the creature, between the latter and his.fellow.
being ; and if. we be indebted for existence and redemption,'
and worldly comforts, to the benevolence and unlimited affec-
tion of the DtviNur Y, there is not one of us upon whom there
is not an imperative call to be a redeemer in his turn. All men,
however separated by the artificial graduations in the social
family, originate in. a common mould and texture, and shall
meet in indiscriminate dissolution, and- while they remem-
ber their common attributes, let them never forget the
active principle of humanity, " Do as thoif wouldst have done
to the." The poor, the feeble, the aged, reach out their hands
i• an inclement season, for relief. The wants of their nature
are the calls of God upon thy charit;es. From the compe-
tence thou hest secured, from the affluence that surrounds thee, ,
give to human misery, what will not diminish but enhance thy
happiness—not to the healthy stroller, but to the sickly room-
keeper, not to the hypocritical pilgrim, but to modest and
cheerless poverty; not to him that challenges thy alms-, but
him that awaits thy kindness. Give crumbs from thy loaf,
the famishing will bless thee—and clothing from thy- ward-
robes—the naked will be comforted, -and thy apparel not dii•
minished. Relieve drooping and languishing penury from
thy wealth, and a thousand-fold shall thy store increase. The
keen delights of thy heart from the benefits thou conferrest,
are but a fore-taste of thy pleasures, of thy permanent happi-
ness in a better world.

WESTMINSTER IMPROVEMENT9.—The only two
houses which abutted on that ancient site called the Sanctuary,
At the upper end of Prince's-street, leading to Tothill-street,
are at length levelled with the ground. Workmen are also
now employed in preparing the foundation of the intended new
Parliamentary mews, by lining the excavations with lime, in
order to insure its ryness and durability. It is understood,
that in addition to the improvements thus proceeding in this
renowned part of the metropolis, there will presently be another
new square, facing the northern side of the Abbey, and cor-
responding in some degree with the fine enclosure which rune
parallel with the entrance to the Sessions-house. Westruins'
ar
will here assume, in consequence, an entirely new aspect. The
houses at present in Gardener's-lane, together with many now
standing in King-street, are likewise to be pulled down.

The FMENCII COURT of CASSATION Oil 'Friday
rejected the appeal of a person condemned to capital punish-
m.:nt by the Court of Assizes at Cantu', for having stolen the
sacred vases of a church. According to the declaration of the
Jury, his punishment was only to be bard labour for life, but I
the prisoner having already undergone ten years of the gallies
for another offence, the Court, looking at the 56th article of the
Criminal Code, sentenced him to death. The Court of Appeal
has confirmed this decision. The article of the French Code
referred to resembles our law which takes away, the benefit of
clergy on conviction for a second clergiable offence.
The CounT of ASSIZES at NANTes, on the
10th inst., tried a gendarme on a charge of murder, for having
killed one of his comrades in a duel. The only evidence against
the culprit was that of a mason who observed the combat at the
distance of 80 paces, and who swore that the deceased, in his
opinion, had received unfair play. The secondi of the'parties
being examined, declared that the rules of duelling had been
faithfully observed and the prisoner was acquitted. Thus com-
mon soldiers are allowed their " affairs of honour" in France,
without any fear of consequences from the tribunals.
.The Coutt ROYALE of • RouEs lately decided
a case of some interest to the liberties of the Subject. A Mayor
of a commune in the neighbourhood of that city, having heard
that a great number of robberies of hen-roosts had taken place
within his jurisdiction, and • being unable to detect the plun-
derers, thought of the notable expedient of making adomiciliary
visit at midnight to the house of such persons as he suspected.
Ile accordingly went -his round, accompanied by a gendarme
and .a constable, knocking at the doors of those whom he
wished to honour with his visit, and, leaving his escort without,
he entered under the pretext of obtaining evidence, but,. in fact,
to to detect the plundered poultry. None of the inhabitants
refused to open their doors, or to admit their magistrate ; but a
few days atter, one of them, not liking to he taken. for a thief,
and suspecting in his tarn that the Mayor's zeal had outrun his
discretion, preferred a complaint against him to the Royale Pr o-
cureur for violation of domicile. The Mayor was in consequence
brought before one of -the Civil Chambers of the Cour Royale,
sitting on correctional cases. his defence was, that his domi-
ciliary visits had not been of a vexatious nature, and that he
had used no violence in entering the houses of the persons
whom he suspected, they having opened them without offering
any resistance. The Court, however, refused to allow the in-
nocent or even laudable purposes of a public functionary so be
• pleaded in justification of a breach of law, but condemned the
Mayor to the minimunz of penalty (a fine of 16 francs) in con-
sideration of the palliating circumstances of the case. The
Principle on which the Judges proceeded in their decision was,
that wherever the house of a citizen is entered, except in cases
provided for in law, and without the requisite formalities, there
is violation of domicile.

FALL OF IlousEs.—Wednestlay afternoon a
dreadful occurrence took place in Nelson-street, Birmingham,
by the falling of two houses recently erected, in consequence
of which one person was killed, and four others more or less
injured. The houses had' been very slighly built, and about
nine weeks ago an arch, which had been run over a cellar, gave
way. The accident was repaired, and the building run up and
closed in. A few days since the same arch a second time gave
way and fell into the cellar. The building, however, was still
considered safe, and on Wednesday five persons were at work in
various parts of it; two of them in the cellar, cleaning and bring-
ing out the bricks, when about four in the afternoon the whole
building suddenly gave way and fell with a tremendous crash,
burying in its ruins all the persons on the premises. Four of the
men succeeded in making their way out without receiving any
material injury, but the other remained beneath the rubbish. A
number of persons immediately set to work to remove the mass
of timber and bricks by which the unfortunate man was over-
whelmed, but near an hour and a half had elapsed before he
could be found, and he was at that time quite dead. The name
of the deceased is Philip Haines. The buildings are entirely
destroyed, all the walls having fallen completely level with the
gfound.—(Birminghairt Journal.)