The Sun.
London, England, 1822-07-04 00:00:00

[MORNING POST.]

We yesterdai shewed from the official state-
ments in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's
Budget the great diminution in the permanent
expences of the country this year, compared with
last year. We also shewed that the incidental
chrgeS were in the first place limited to the
present moment, and though swelling the total
amount of supply, for this year, actually pur-
chasing, as in the case of the 5 per cents. a large
perpetual revenue henceforth. Agreeably to our
promise we now proceed to the comparative Ways
and Means for 1821 and 1822. We shall here find
a large sum relinquished to directly relieve the
public, and next a deficiency, arising from in-
cidental receipts' applicable fast year but not in
the present, covered ; which deficiency, if the
expense had not been, so greatly reduced, taxes
must have been retained to meet, or it should be
otherwise piovided for. There is in the first
place Annual Taxes in 1821, 4,000,000/.; in

1822, owing to the remission of the Malt Duty,
3,000,0001. leaving 1,000,000/. The Tea Duties
and Lottery are the same in both years. • Old.
Stores in 1821 were 163,400/. ii 1522, 151,300/.
leaving.a difference of 12,4001. In 1821 there was
a surplus pecuniary indemnity, payable by France
of 500,000/. of which there is none this year. Next
is a difference between the two.years, of 4;5701.
in the repayments from the loans for Public
Works; and in 1821, there was a Surplus of
Ways and Means from 1820,amounting to 81,6301.
Lastly, there was in 18217-461,639/. of new
Capital lent by the Bank of Ireland; 83,580/.
of Un-reclaimed Dividends, and 82 interest'on
Land Tax. These sums, added together, make
a gross total of 2,143,801/., by which. the Ways
and Means of this year are less than those of last.
'W4 haire, however, to deduct from this a sum of
557,000/. payable at present by the East India
Company, leaving a nett difference of 1,586,8001.
We would here beg the attention of the Pub-
lic to a fact, with reference to this state-
ment of Income and our statement yesterday of
Expellee, " which appears to us of great import-
ance in proving our financial prosperity this year.
According to tbe statement of Expence, we have
for 1822 many extra and incidental charges not
occurring in 1821 ; in the statement of Income
we have for'lBB2 a gross reduction of Malt Tax
and Incidental Receipts compared with 1821 of
2,143,801/. ; and yet such is the state of our
resources, coupled with the -rigid economy
which has been pursued, that we have this
year a great addition of surplus, making a Sink-
ing Fund of upwards of five millions, notwith-
standing•the double disadvantage of an increase
of incidental charge, and a decrease of inciden-
tal income. If we now reflect that while our
FinanCes in the aggregate are thus flourishing, so
important a class as the Agricultural Interest has
been greatly distressed, and the rest of the com-
munity thereby injured, we may indeed antici-
pate ere long a state of public prosperity hitherto
unknown. MINCIRIIIIIIIIII.IIII3II/111

LAW,INTELLIGENCE.

COU/RT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 3.

The LORD CI4EF.JUSTICE sat at Prius, and tried
several causes of no public interest. At his rising, the Sit-
tings were adjourned till the 17th inst., but with an intimation
that no more causes will be taken until October. The interval
before the ' Circuits will be occupied entirely by the trial of
causes in London.

COURT OF PLEAS, JULY 3.

DOE, ON THE DEMISE OF LEECH, V. ETTERSHANK AND

AVIrOTHER.

_ .....
This was an action of ejectment to try the right of the Dean
and Chapter or-Westminster Abbey to a certain piece of. land
at Hampstead, which has been in the uninterrupted possession
of the lessOr.of the plaintiff for a period of 50 years ; but which
they claim as being part of a waste belonging to the manor of
Belseise ; or, should that not be found,to he so, then as theirs
by presumption, it lying between their freehold lands and the
road, and belonging to no other person or persons. When the
evidence was closed on both sides,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE charged the Jury, and laid it
down as his opinion, that although a quiet and uninterrupted
possession for 60 years was a good bar agaidst a claim on the
part of the Crown, and of 20 years against that of a common
individual, no lapse of time was of itself a Sufficient bar against
the church.. Here the Jury had three
,questions to decide :
The first was, whether Belseise was or was not a manor ; and
if it was then, secondly, was the land in question a part of the
waste belonging, to that manor ? supposing this was not
a part of such waste, then was the presumption arising from the
Situation of the land between the freehold lands of- the Dean
and Chapter and the road, ,of its belonging to them, unmet by
a stronger presumption to the contrary? With respect to the
:first of these points, evidence had been given to prove that the
other two were manors, with which this: was stated to have been
granted hy Henry VIIL-; but no court rolls were produced, or
other sufficient: proof given, to show, that Belseise was a manor.
Then as ththe right to be presumed from the situation of the
land,. he
.(the•Le4ned Judge) was of opinion, that the quiet
possession of fOr,fSet many years (in favour of which it was an
evellent inaxitif of law that every thing was to be presumed)
raised a still stronger, presumption in behalf of the plaintiff's
right. It Was,' hOwever, for the Jury to draw their own con-
19sions, and decide' ccordingly.
'The Jury, without hesitation, found for the
Da-
mages One shilling.