The Sun.
London, England, 1849-12-07 00:00:00

the e, ar of e;raise given by the statutes xeired, hes
beesine ipso its( to secant. This opinioe of
the fluster erd fellows was carried out by the sejec!isee
of the petitioncee vole at a college meeting in Decem-
ber, le te; and he new submitted teat he was agelieved
by this act, inasmuch as according to the true construc-
tion of the statutes, the effect of the third chapter is
not as alleged to cause him to vacate his fellowship at
the expiration of the year, when the number of fellows
in hely orders was le Cluced bedew tee number required
by the statutes, but only to deprive him from that time
of the profits and E meluments of his fellowship until the
full number of fellows in holy orders was com-
Pleted. He therefore prayed a declaration seith
hie view of the effect of the statute. At the hear-
ing of the petitioner, it was contended on behalf
01 the petitioner, that according to the true construction
Mr. Geodwin had incurred ne ferei the; or, it he had,
that it was only a forfeiture of profi: and emoluments
from the time when the number of fellows became in-
seeipl, te up to the 10th of January, when the exigency
of the statute was fulfilled. Mr. Goodwin could not
take orders within the time specified, and the statutes
Could not have intended to exact en impoesibeity. The
intention of the petitioner was, that in construing the
words " Si autem anquis ex idis diessiessei it." the " dis-
cesseri,." meant the death of one of the fellows, end not
the viicwion of the living; and if that construction was
the true one, then the vacancy to affect the pi titioner
must be made by death. Much stress would, doubtiees,
be laid on the " a collegii emolumentis recedat,"
but the petitioner contended that this was not a reced•
mg from the fellowship itself, but from the emolu-
ments for a particular time, and among these, from
the enjeyment of rooms rent free, end other advan-
tages, and this view was, in a great measure, con-
firmed by the statutes themselves ; for although they
expressly said that a fellow was, under certain contin-
gencies, to forfeit his emoluments, nothing was said
about Hine up his place, an omission which, in such a
college cede, would not have been allowed it it was not
intended that, on the completion of the number of fel-
lows in holy orders, the lay-fellow was to be restored to
his place, or rather to his emoluments of place. The
ease of the petitioner was further confirmed by the fact
that the fellowship was not lost, if it could be held that
it was lost, through the operation of the statute, so much
as through the accidental arrangements of the bishop.
The time of the termination of the year of grace was the
10th of November, 1847. It the two junior fellows had
taken orders as they were qualified, and as they in.
tended, before that day, the otjection to Mr. Goodwin
Could not have arisen; but it happened, from the arrange-
ments of the bishop, that the ordination could not take
Place till the following January, and it watt from that
fact 'that the year expired without the completion
of the fellows. On behalf of the Master and
Fellows of the College, who opposed the petition, it was
Contended, that if the petitioner was permitted to put
such 4 construction on the statute, and to retain his lel-
-I:c"rshiP, the next lay fellow in a vacancy would do the
same, until there would be three dead bodies obstructing
the performance of all the clerical duties of the college.
It
had been said that the statutes of expulsion used very
ldifferent language from those enjoining resignation. To
be sure the latter did not order the fellow to bo kicked
°tit, but it deprived him of the right to have his name
,on the boards, and of all the benefits of his office. If a
43,, lore remained-in the college, he was bound to perform
.all the duties and obligations of a fellow, and yet here
Was a case of a person claiming to remain a fellow, and
tot w
perform any of the duties. The conclusion to which
the
_t
Court was asked to come on the meaning of the
!eteetes
was
an absurd one, injurious to the college, and
irreconcilable with the intentions of the founder. The
custom
the petitioner wished the Court to sanction
Was not the custom of any other college. It was an in-
te.rPeetation of the petitioner himself, which would be
in-jurious if it coule be established, but one for
""iels there was no foundation. The Lord Chancellor,
after going at considerable length into the facts and argu-
ments that had been adduced bet ore him, stated his opinion
filf.arly to be that the construction put by the master and
o
WS en the statutes, namely, that two out of the six
"De's must be in priest's orders, and one in deacon's
orders ,
aim whenever a vacancy occurs, tee senior
'Low who is not in such orders must teke them in the
course of a twelvemonth, or vacate his fellowship, unless
junior fellow takes orders of his own accord, was the
right construction, and the petition therefore must be
dismissed.—Petition dismissed.
Loneisnte, after disposing of the unopposed
"4ie petitioes on his raper, none of which pos.
sassed any points of interest, proceeded to hear the
t_Ltre er arguments in the part-heard appeal of "
_
co v. Tierney," which occupied the whole morning.
VICE-CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
IT (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
nopposed cause petitions, short causes, and cause
Petitions, occupied his Honour the whole morning.
(13e1 ore the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
Petitions and causes, possessing no interest, occupied
the Court the whole day.
(Before the ViCe•ChitECIAIOr EPIGRAM.)
The further arguments in the part-heard case of
4 Griffith v. Luanell" occupied the whole morning.

EXCHEQUER.—(THis DAY.)
(Sitting at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, before the LORD
CHIEF BARON and a Special Jury.)
WOOD v. LITJTTON AND ANOTHER.
, The trial of this case, which was commenced on Tues.
u„,9Y last, and occupied the whole of Wednesday and
-Thursday, was resumed again this morning, when the
examination of the defendants' witnesses was pro
eeeded with.
It will be recollected that this is an issue, directed by
the Vice-Cliancelior, to try whether Captain Newman,
ddeceased husband of the plaintiff, was of sound and
8 e Pesable mind at tho time when a settlement of ac-
Zunis was made between him and the defendants, in
wrse employ he had been as captain of vessels trading
th the West Coast of Africa, for gold dust, elephants'
let th, and
palm oil.
1,411 objection which was taken by Sir Frederick
ger, on the part of the plaintiff, to the reception of
'asas to the state of accounts between the parties,
1i,"3 overruled by his Lordship, and the consequence
das that a lung and tedious examination of the defen-
Zilte accountant occupied the Court the whole morning.
bar evidence was to the effect that, after striking a
t:tuee, Newman owed to the defendants 1,6601., but that
ell Consented to take 1,2501. and relinquish all further
Nallas upon him, and this sum was ultimately paid by
evrizan.
eviTlhe CHIEF BARON observed, in the course of the
par °nee, that he was entirely unable to see how either
endtY eetlid be benefited by engaging in such a suit,
pi that the expenses would probably absorb all the
°43 which had been made in the different voyages of
Newman.
Th
Foreman also exclaimed, when his brother jury-
beVere attempting to understand the entries in the
(1%,-'B, that, having been kept in the box already four
he should quite forget everything he knew about
;Les if he remained there any longer..
The re
st of the jury appeared to coincide in this re-
do.", Wbich was received with loud laughter, and the
nlttetell,dants' Counsel seemed to take the hint, for be inti-
ta,. that he would call no more witnesses, and the
for the defence therefore at once closed.
baser TLIESIGER then addressed the jury in reply,
"ad not concluded when our report left.

COMMONI, PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
prle‘ Court sat in Banco this morning, but did not
41uonnce judgment, as was expected, in any one of the
intanY cases standing over fur judgment, and the parties
Tie were subjected to a fresh disappointment.
tor," Court then heard motions for new trials, but
itf;:e Of them involved any materials of public interest to
`4fY a detailed report.

KECONDARIES.—(TIIIS DAY.)
/ (B ,'Ore Mr. Secondary POTTER.)
10, ,CIATANT QUESTION ON GUARANTEES AND PR,‘MIS-

SORY NOTES.--DAVIs V. PcCOCIi.
of I was au action on a guarantee, to recover the sum
tt, 1501, and interest thereon. Defendant suffered judg-
ent to go ly defeAt.
The plaintiff's attorney ststoi the case, from which it
„ :pared that a pet si.n ramed Carter Lad made a pro-
.'4Bctry note for 1601, which plaintiff had discouutt,d,
:41 the undertaking of the defendant to-pay in the event
~,,"
Carter not doing so. Plaintiff admitted the payment
of 101, on account, and claimed 5/. 4s. 9d. as interest.
the
Lzarned —SECONDARY held that the production of
6 guarantee was sufficient evidence, but he did not
consider it carried interest.
b,,The plaintiff's attorney quoted a case in which it bad
TI held that au action to recover any debt or sums,
pb3.able on a day c,_.rtain, the jury might, if they they
i:teught fit, on ,the trial of any issue or inquiry, give
rkeBt, not exceeding the usual rate.
Learned SECONDARY said interest would un ues-
,tl°Tabl be • q
recovered on the note from the maker, but he
"s very
the n strongly of opinion that a guAratitue to pay
doubt°t" did not embrace any liabilities on it. He had
be that if the jury gave interest the verdict would
otaturbi,d.
verdict was then taken for the 150/.
The
oEcosnany said another action might be brought
~l.nst Cartyr for the amount of the interest.
Leirhere were two other cases, but the solicitors not
bont an attendance, the jury were, after being detained
7hour, discharged

ryasDAY.
as )
r IxEN. Emma Williams, a woman of the town,
brought before Mr. Hardwick°, chat gad with creating
(I isurbance, and breaking a square of plate glass,
value 2, at Mr. Taylor's, Plough Tavern, No. 305,
• 1T,41-strcet.
14-ha complainant stated, that about half:pest four this
tiirning there‘ was a disturbance in his house between
I;ldefendant and a cabman, and on his (witness) re-
testio' her to be less noisy, she took up a drinking
:2•4 an% threw it at him. lie then put her ont of the
and about five minutes afterwards she came back
lagr4lo, and on his refusing to admit her, she broke a
large pane of glass with a stone which she had picked
h? in the street. lie then called a constable, and gave
le r,
oharg?.. Complainant stated that it would cost at
t 2/. to have the glass replaced.
4_ The
0• prisoner, who did not deny the charge, was fined
and in default committed to the House of Correc-
oh for one month.
Would Tho prisoner, on leaY:ng the dock, called out that she
~, smash every b-- window in the house when she
-le out "
Collins,With a servant out of place, was charged
yland 107 C,
being
kl drunk and assaulting the police.
sail he was on duty in Oxford •street,
at three o'clock this mo when he saw the prisoner,
who was
,„
,ve. much intoxicated, with his coat off, challtnging
we 'Y one to tight him. Witn,s3 and another consuat,l-
rerut up and persuaded him to go home quietly. He
__'.l.lB2tl to di so, and swor,,. with an oath that he wcu'd
t°t go till ho had smashed every Peeler." He fo--
owed up th:s, threat by knocking the other constable