The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1836.

wheel. The Noble Lord argues thus :—" The
country prospers, and we are the Government ; ergo.
we are the cause of the country's prosperity." Un-
fortunately for his reasoning, his Lordship asserts in
another part of his speech, in treating of agricultural
distress, " That it is not to any Government that the
depression of that most important interest can possibly
be imputed." Now, if Lord Gleneig asserts that
there may be distress which is not to be imputed to,
the Government, can he deny that there may be pros-
perity of which the Government is not the author ?
We tell his Lordship that there may be national pros-
perity independent of the Government, and that his
Majesty's Ministers have no more to do with our pre-
sent prosperity than Tenterden steeple with the Good-
win Sands. We tell him, moreover, that the nation
may thrive in spite of its Government of Destruc-
tives, and that it is enabled so to do in consequence of
the very " embarrassments and difficulties" with
which, as the Noble Lord•says, " that Government is
surrounded."—Morning Post.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 3.

lIJ THE MATTER OF THE SHREWSBURY GRAMMAR SCHOOL.
This was a petition of the Governor and Trustees of the
Shrewsbury Free Grammar School, praying that they may
be vested with the right of presentation to certain ecclesi-
astical preferments, hitherto held by the Corporation of the
City of Shrewsbury. The Corporation of Shrewsbury, con-
ceiving that the right of presentation vested in them under
the Act of Parliament was not subject to any charitable
use for the benefit of the school, have advertised their inte-
rest for sale, and the present petition was presented under
the provision of the 71st clause of the Act, for the purpose
of taking the opinion of the Court on that question.
Sir C. WETHERELL, in support of the petition, contended
that the right of nomination exercised by the Corporation
was not a pure right, divested of all controul, but that it
was a right to be taken in connection with the school, and
invested with a perfectly charitable character.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, on behalf of the new Corp°•
ration of Shrewsbury, contended that they were not seized
of the right of presentation as charitable trustees, and con-
sequently at full liberty to sell their rights under the 139th
clause of the late Act.
MY, JACOB followed on the same side.

Sir„ C. WriIiERELL replied.
The LORD effANCELLoA must take time to look atten-
tively into the Acts of Parliament referred to before he
pronounced his opinion.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Nor. 3.
PLEMINO V. HECTOR, M.P.
Mr. THESSIGER applied to the Court on the part of the
defendant, the Member, for a rule, calling on the plaintiff to
show cause why the verdict had for him should not be set
aside, or the damages reduced to nominal damages. It was
an action brought by the plaintiff, who is a wine-merchant,
to recover from the defendant, who was one of the members
of the Westminster Reform Club, a sum of 631. for wine
supplied to that establishment. The case was tried at the
last Assizes for the County of Stafford, before the Lord
Chief Baron, when plaintiff had a verdict. The club was
established in May, 1834. Soon after the time of its esta-
blishment, and before defendant became a member, plaintiff
began to supply wines for the use of the club. This was in
July, 1834, and Mr. Hector did not become a member till
April, 1835. The plea was the general issue, and the only
evidence given to establish the liability of defendant was the
rules and regulations of the club, which were put in. The
doctrine laid down at the trial by the Lord Chief Baron,
establishing the liability of defendant, was wider and more
extensive than had ever before been ceded in any case, and
would be attended with very alarming consequences to
members of clubs.

COURT—Take a rule to show cause—Rule granted.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Nov. 3.

Michael Ryan, M.D., and editor of the " London Medical
and Surgical Journal," whose case was reported yesterday,
came up again to-day, pursuant to adjournment. The case
stood over, in order that the Doctor might give up certain
books which had been deposited with Mr. Costello, the
surgeon, and also to insert in the schedule Mr. Wakley,
M.P., as a creditor.
Mr. COOKE informed the Court that he had a receipt,
signed on the part of Mr. Wakley, for 6/..55., for adver-
tisements inserted in the " Lancet." The receipt was
signed as of to-day.
Mr. Commissioner LAW supposed a friend of the
Doctor's had paid the money.
Mr. COOKE replied that that was the case. The libera-
tion of the Doctor was anxiously required by his friends.
The Doctor was then examined by Mr. WOODROFFE
respecting the Springfield estate in Ireland. He said he
believed there was a contingent interest in the property,
but it depended on the lives of many persons ; he expected
no benefit from that property. The Doctor was further
questioned on the same subject.
The COURT ordered the Doctor to make a statement in
his schedule of the property, and of his interest derivable
from that source.

The statement was accordingly made, and the books hav-
ing been given up, the Doctor prayed that his discharge
might issue instanter. He urged that a patient was se-
riously indisposed, and that his attendance was immediately
required.
The Learned COMMISSIONER granted the application,
and the Doctor was declared entitled to the benefit of the
Act, and ordered to be discharged forthwith.
Mr. WOODROFFE, on the part of Mr. Henderson, ap-
plied for the assigneeship.
Mr. Commissioner LAW said no assignee could be ap-
pointed without the account of Mr. Henderson being
audited.

The Doctor expressed his anxiety to investigate the
account. He doubted every item in it. lie believed in his
" heart and soul" he did not owe Henderson one shilling.
He had claimed 1,4001., and arrested him for 1,0001. It
was a most serious thing to him.
Mr. COOKE—Serious, indeed ! I wonder how the man
could have brought his conscience to swear to a debt.
Mr. WOODROFFE was free to admit that the Doctor
ought not to have been arrested.
After a lengthened discussion, the Learned COMMIS-
SIONER should recommend Mr. Henderson to go before an
examiner of the Court.
The Doctor was discharged accordingly.