The Sun.
London, England, 1822-07-08 00:00:00

Quarters ended. Quarters ended.
REVENUE, DISTINGUISHING THE CONSOLI- r--- A... ~ Year ended , , Year ended
DATED FUND, THE ANNUAL DUTIES, AND 10th October; sth January, sth April, sth July, sth July, 10th October, sth January, sth April, sth July, sth July,
THE WAR TAXES. 1820. • 1821. 1021. 1821. 1321. 1821. 1822. 1822. 1322. . 1822.
Custom s - - - - - - - 1,107A1 1,885,415 1,792,576 801,934 5,587,840 1,251,781 1,515,105 1,983,208 1,119,496 5,869,590
Excise - - - - - - - - 6,852,907 5,656,602 5090,931 5,694,226 23,294,746 7,039,890 5,368,664 5,856,79 a 6,268,738 24,534,090
• ,
Stamps - _ _ _ _ - _ 1,581,204 1,535,474 1,467,799 L 518,493 6,102,970 1,625,220 1,497,123 1,582 346 1,500,716 6,205,410
Post Office - - - - - - - 375,000 321,000 350,000 318,000 1,364,000 342,000 308,000 320,000 355,000 1,325,000
Assessed Taxes - - - - - - 760,576 2,333,674 842,531 2,328;040 6,264,821 793,532 2,292,708 822,672 2,192,521 6,111,433
Land Taxes - - - - - - 174,522 427,582 137427 445,366' 1,184,897 207,481 473,1100 152,999 474.749 1,308,229
Miscellaneous '- - - - - _ 71,642 114,187 57,573 64,972 308,374 61,222 119,696 56,463 99,451 336,832
Unappropriated War Duties - . - _ 14,314 2,605 981 8,172 26,072 17,881 7,200 1,461 2,966 20,508
-
Total Consolidated Fund - - 10,938,166 12,276;539 9,739,818 11,179,203 44,133,726 11 339,007 11,581,501 10,7115,947 12,013,637 45,720,092
• - ANNUAL DITTIES TO PAY OFF BILLS. , -
Customs- - _ . . 1,562,762 232,244 112,700 1,096,765 3,004,471 1,21,327 971,791 112,670 826,612 3,130,400
2J3 06° 298,119 - - 591,201
Excise - - . - - - . _ 112,770 15,448 - - • 128,218 ' ''' - - - - ,
Pensions, &c. .. .. or no . . ..... ..•
-
...
Total Annual Dudes - . 1,675-,532 217 6 112,700 1,096,765 3,132,689
~4° - 3,462,409 1,269,910 ^ 112,670 826,612 3,771,601
,
12,901,416 • 12,851,411 10,893,617 12,840,249 49,491,693
Permanent and Annual Duties 12,613,698 12,524,231 9,852,518 12,276,968 47,266,415
WAR TAXES. - 844,231 721,006 - - 1,540,260
Excise - - - - - - - - 588,264 543,687 610,659 604,584 2,451,194 323,123 - - - 323,123
Customs-Annual Duties-Sugar . - - - - - - -
Total War Taxes - - - 586,264 643,687 616,059 604,584 2,451,194' 1,139,377 724,0'J6 - - 1,863,383
'
Total Revenue, distinguishing the Con- . 14 040 793 13,575,417 10,398,617 12,840,219 51,353,076
' solidated Fund, the Annual Duties, ' 13,199,962 137 7 " 167 918 10,469,177 I°7 8807. . 55° 49) ) , , 717 609 .
and War Taxes • . - -
*
REVENUE, DISTINGUISHING. THE CUSTOMS '
AND EXCISE. 2.814.231 2,486,896 2095878 1,916.108 9,373,113
Total Produce of Customs, as particularized above 2,670,683 2,117,659 1,901,276 1,898,699 - 8,592,317 -
Total Produce of Excise, as ditto ditto. 7,552,021 6,315,737 5,707,590 6,298,810 25,874,158 81413'226 6,390,789 5,856,798 6,268,738 26'665'551
Stamps Post-Office, Assessed Property, and
3,047,336 4,697,732 2,945,941 4, ,
625403 15,316,412
Land Taxes, Miscellaneous, and unappro. 2,977,258 4,734,522 2,856,311 4,683,043 15,°517 134
'''
priated Duties and Pensions:Bx. ditto
Total Revenue, distinguishing the Cus- 1 ' 14,010,793 13,575,417 10,898,617 12,840,249 51,05,076
13,199,962 13,167,918 10,469,177 12,880,552 49,717,609
toms and Excise
Deduct the Receipt upon Property and onap, 1
14,314 -- '
2,60 981 8,172 26,072 17,831 7,200 1,461 2,966 29,508
priated War Duties .. .. . .. ; ,
• ,
Total Revenue, exclusive of Property 1 - ' 14,022,912 13,568,217 10,897,156 12,837,283 51,325,568
13,185,648 13,10,313 10,463,196 12,872, , 380 49,691 537
and unappropriated War Duties • i
- - _

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT'OPiCH4NCERY, JULY 6.

THE DUKE OF BEDVORDrd.THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Mr. SHADWELL said, he had to move, in a cause in which
the Duke of Bedford was plaintiff, and the trustees of the Bri-
tish Museum defendants, that an order made by the Vice-
Chancellor might be discharged, and that an injunction might
be granted to restrain the defendants from erecting certain build-
ings intended to he attached to the British Museum. The Learned
Counsel 'stated, that 'in the year 1669, Rachel Vaughan was
seized of a mansion-house called Southampton-house, and after-
wards Bedford-house, in the parish of St. Giles, and a parcel
of ground called Long-field and. Baber's-field, adjoining the
gardens of Southanipton.house ; that, being so seized, she exe-
cuted indentures of July, 1669, which were expressly made in
Russell. By
se indentures
e a marriageurbesetwsheeen
roheurvseelyfeadndtoLotrdhe
EarlNVill ofiain
Northumberland, the Earl of Ailesbury, and Sir Richard Ver-
non, the property in question upon trust, not•for Lord William
Russell; but as
_she should appoint: At a subsequent period,
i
upon the death of the Earl of Northumberland, -Sir Phillip
Warwick was appointed a trustee in his room, and then an in-
strument was executed, upon which the whole of the present
question would turn. It was between the trustees of the one part,
and Ralph, Montague on the other part.; and •it witnessed, that
in consideration of 2,6101., paid bb}' Ralph Montague, the trus-
tees conveyed, and Lady tachel Vaughan confirmed, to Ralph
Montague, the 'mansion-house anti garden,-with the fields ad-
! joining, to hold to hint and his heirs, at a yearly rent 0f,5/. In
consideration of this conveyance, Ralph MOntae'me cove-
nanted with Lady Rachel Vaughan, that in case he erected
any building, he would erect a fair and large house fit for a
4m-illy, and that he would not make any public way to the north-
, ward, or erect any building beyond the outermost wall of South-
ampton house ; he also covenanted, that if lie should erect any
buildings on the north end of the ground, or should extend
thein:beyond Southampton-house, with the exception of a small
summer-house, or banquetin,g-house, in the garden, he would
forfeit and pay 31- a-day as long as such erections should, re-
main, and until the place was restored to the same condition it
was in before. Upon the execution of this conveyance Ralph
Montague took possession of the ground, and erected a build-
ing which did not extend beyond Southampton-house; That
house was afterwards destroyed by fire, and another erected on
its site, which was confined within the very same limits.—
The house built the second time was the house which is now
called the British Museum. This building was enjoyed by the
family of Ralph Montague till the year 1753, when an Act of
Parliathent passed in the 26th'year of George IL, the object of
which was the preservation of, the curiosities, collected by Sir
Hans Sloane. By that act, the Lord Chancellor, and certain
other persons,were formed into a Corporation to carry the inten-
tions of the Legislature into effect ; and it was enacted, that they
should have succession for ever, as trustees of the British Mu-
seum. Upon the passing of this act, the mansion-house was
conveyed to the trustees, and they had been in possession ever
since, and had paid the yearly rent charge of 51. to the present
Duke of Bedford and his ancestors. The Learned Counsel then
stated that, in the year 1890, the house called Southampton
or Bedford-House, was pulled down, and a range of mag-
nificent houses built upon that and the adjoining ground,
and these houses overlooked the 'British Museum and gar-
dens. The trustees of the British Museum had recently
given notice to the Duke of Bedford, that they intended to
erect various buildings beyond the line where Southampton'
House stood, • for the purpose of having them inhabited by
the statues of certain ancient heroes and 'heroines, gods and
goddesses- there assembled and congregated by the laborious
efforts of Lord Elgin and other industrious and 'persevering an-
tiquariaris: The-complaint of the Duke of Bedford. was, that
these pantheons or buildings would extend beyond the north
line of Southampton-house, obstruct the view of his tenants,
and greatly depreciate the value of his property on the spot
and in•thevicinity ; and he therefore prayed that the defend-
ants might not be allowed to erect any buildings except such
as were within the meaning and scope of the original grant to.
Ralph Montague. An application upon this subject had been
made to the Vice-Chancellor for an'lnjunction ; but he declined
interfering till it should be • determinul whether the original
covenant on the part of Ralph Montague was a covenant
running with the land ; for unless such was its effect, no relief
could be granted. The question had stood over in order to
ascertain whether any mode could he adopted by which it
might be settled. His Honour had directed a case to be made
for the opinion of the Common Pleas, but' the parties not con-
ceiving that course would be effectual, had never drawn up
the order of the Vice-Chancellor. They were desirous of having
the matter determined by the opinion of the Lord Chancellor,
•and with that view hadbrought forward the present application.
The Learned Counsel proceeded to, argue at length in support of
the injunction. He was followed by Ar. Littledale, Mr. Aber-
crombie, and Mr. Cullen, who contended against the right of
the trustee's to enlarge the line of their buildings beyond the
• • limits pointed out and defined by the conveyance, through the
.1 medium of which it had come into their possession.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL resisted the motion. He ob-
served that the Duke of Bedford ought to.have brought an ac-
tion at law; but admitting that he was entitled to come into a
court of equity, the Court could grant him no relief. The
question was, what was the situation and intention of the parties
at the time of their entering into the contract? Montague-house
was at that time free from all buildings, and did not obstruct
the view from Southampton-house ; but when the proprietors
of Southampton-house had pulled it down and erected build-
ings on the spot, and surrounded Montague-house with them,
he contended that they could not come into a court Of
equity to restrain the trttstees from proceeding with their pro-
-
jected works.' .•
Mr. WETHERELL and Mr. PULLEN supported the same
line of argument, and insisted that the alteration made by the
Duke of Bedford in the state of the property, amply justified