The Sun.
London, England, 1823-04-21 00:00:00

[BRITISH PRESS.]

Sir F. Burdetr's.motion for an inquiry into the
conduct of the Sheriff of Dublin stands for to-morrow evening.
As the facts which give occasion to this motion are of a nature
fully to elucidate the system of legal justice, as administered by
the official members of the Orange faction, we trust it will not
be got rid of' by any compromise which shall shut out their
disclosure. 'Mr. Ellis, we remember, stated that the Sherif
of Dublin was anxious to have his conduct fully inquired into.
We hope this laudable anxiety will be gratified. If it should
note--and we have some misgiving that it will not..-we shall
suspect this.affected relish for Inquiry to be caused by the con-
sciousness, beforehand, that the motion will be defeated. This
would be a pity, on more accounts than one. It is so very rare
that persons in office discover a true taste for this sort of
research, and they owe so little to the bodnty of Ministers,
in the way of concession on such occasions, that any dim)).
pointment in the present instance would be matter of public
regret. We shall be Satisfied, though Mr. Peel, casting a shade
over his accustomed magnanimity, should yield only his reluc-
tant consent ; we will not ask him to put his shoulder lustily to
the wheel, in order to accelerate the motion, but will be content
with his non-resistance. It will enable us at least to quote
one exception to his general rule, of opposing eve!), enlight-
ened and liberal course of policy which the essential interests
of the sister kingdom either recommend or require. Not that
we consider Mr. Peel as of any great weight in the political at-
mosphere. Were, we to take .Mr. Canning, for instance, as
a standard by which to ascertain his specific gravity, we could
find no co-efficient expressive of the difference. The Foreign
Secretay is willing to promote the peace and foster the pro-
sperity of Ireland ; and in these views, in whatever else they
may differ, the great majority of the British nation is with him.
But the ome Secretary has no redeeming qualities to set him
right with;the public; lie excites in all minds an unmingled
feeling of regret that the administration of' the public
affairs should, in any department of them, be entrusted to such
hands. Ireland has arrived at a fearful crisis. The stateman
than look upon it without alarm is not to be applauded for
his firmness, but condemned for his apathy. If lie can Ipok
upon it without compassion, and without'an earnest desire to
arrest the progress of a revolution,—for to that it is fast hasten-
ing, and to that it must come at last,--which will finally over-
whelm both Protestant and Catholic, the oppressors and the
oppressed, in one common ruin—if he can look at this ap.
preaching crisis of horror, without using every effort which a
sense of justice and, sound policy dictate, to avert it, he must
have divested himself of every feeling but bigotry, and, of every
attachment but to place.

LAM INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Amu, 19.
THE KIND V. LORD YARBOROUGH.

This was the first of several cases tried at the last assizes for
Lincolnshire, in which the question was, whether the Crown
or the owners of adjacent lands were entitled to the accessions
of soil along the coast which have gradually been formed by
the alluvia of the sea. In all these cases, except one (the
King v. Scrope), verdicts were found for the defendants ; and
in the excepted case the Crown succeeded, not on the merits,
but on the point of form.
Mr. SOLICITOR-GENERAL now moved on behalf of the
Crown for a rule to show cause why the verdict should not be
set aside, and a new trial granted. He contended that the in.
crease on the coasts of Lincoln was much too great to come
within the principle de minirnis non enrol lex, on which only
lands acquired from the sea could belong to a subject. The
shore had been extended for a considerable space in the me-
mory of living witnesses ; 'the accession was clearly definable
by metes and bounds.; and if this were held to belong to the
subject, then in no case of alluvia could the rights of the Crown
attach, but they would be confined to cases where the lands
were derelict of the ocean. The case was one of high import-
ance, and therefOre lie trusted the Court would suffer it to be
subinitte,d to a further inquiry.
The CounT seethed tuincline in opinion to sustain the ver-
dicta, but they granted. the rules, and allowed the facts to be
turned into a special case. It was agreed that the King v.
Scrope.shoUld be placed on the same footing with those in which
the defendants succeeded at the trial.

TIARUIET WILSON V. Silt 11. W. WILSON.
This was nn action brought by Miss Wilson against Sir
H. W. Wilson, to recover the arrears of an annuity of 2001.,
which be had engaged to pay her by quarterly sums of ,901. The declaration stated as the consideration of the promise, that
the plaintiff was, governess in the family of Lord sandwich,
and that the defendant engaged to make this provision'for her
in case she should leave it. It appeared that Sir Henry Wilson
had discovered that the Lady was his sister, and thinking it
improper that she should continue a governess, prevailed on
her to leave a situation in which she was the' object of much
affectionate solicitude and esteem. The case 'rested on his
letters ; and on these the Lord Chief .Justice thought no legal
annuity was 'made out, and nonsuited the plaintiff; giving' Mr.
Gurney leave to move to enter a verdict for the amount of the
arrears.

Mr. (Ity:TEY now moved to set aside the nonsuit, and to
enter such verdict.

The Co HT expressed no opinion on the painti but granted
a rule to shew cause.

HEALY V. WATERHOUSE.

This was an action against the proprietor of the Balloon
coach, running from Birmingham to Warwick, to recover
damages for the negligent driving of the coachman, by which
the coach was overturned, and the plaintiff's leg broken in two
places. At the trial, which took place at the last Assizes for the
county of Warwick, the Jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff,
damages 100/.
Mr. Serjcant VAUGHAN moved fora new trial, on the ground

that the verdict was against the evidence, as no negligence
could be fairly imputed to the coachman.
The COURT saw no reason for impugning the decision of the
Jury, and refused the rule.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, APRIL 19.

LEGALITY OF TIME BARGAIN IN FOREIGN STOCK..

VAN ROSSUM V. TAYLOR.

Mr. Serjeant PELL moved for a rule to spew cause why a
new trial should not be granted in this case. This was an action
to recover the loss occasioned by the difference in what is called
" time bargains" on the purchase of Colombian Bonds. There
were several objections, the first and second of which were, that
the contract of " bought notes" of the stock required a stamp,
as being agreements for the purchase of certain stock, such
stock not being " wares, merchandise," &c. within the mean-
ing of the Stamp Act. The third objection was, that if
these contract notes could not be received as evidence of the
purchase unstamped, then the contract was void, there being
no memorandum such as was required by the statute of
frauds. The fourth .objection arose from the want of au-
thority under which the plaintiff had made good the loss.
If he had paid the money he had paid it in his own wrong,
and could not now recover it. The plaintiff had represent-
ed himself; in the first instance, as the broker, and after-
wards demanded the loss as the principal; and on this fact
the fifth objection was founded, no person being by law (as the
Learned Serjeant contended) allowed to act as principal and
agent in the same transaction in the sale or purchase of stock.
The last objection was one of the greatest public importance.
The bargain was clearly and indisputably a time bargain, and
the question was, whether such bargains in foreign stock were
not illegal, as coming within the provisions of Sir J. Barnard's
Stock Jobbing Act, which it was contended on the other side
applied to British funds only, as foreign stock was not alluded
to in the Act.

Chief Justice DALLAS.--.This is clearly a stock jobbing trans-
action, and Sir John Barnard's Act, which was made to pre-
vent that " infamous practice" of stock-jobbing, seems equally
to apply to jobbing in British and Foreign secutities. Take
your rule as it is prayed for.—Rule ganted.

CONSISTORY' COURT, APRIL 19.

ALLEGED CLERICAL IRREGULARITIES.

THE PARISH OF GREAT WALTHAU v. REV. DR. CLARKE.
Dr. SWABY addreised the Court in support of articles
promoted by the Churchwardens of the parish of Great Wal-
tham, Essex, on behalf of themselves and fellow parishioners,
against the Rev. Dr. George Somers Clarke, Vicar of said
parish, for divers neglects and irregularities in the discharge of
his clerical functions, for refusal and neglect to perform the
office of burial ; for refusal and neglect to perform the office
of baptism; for refusal and neglect to perform the ceremony
of marriage; for refusal and neglect to perform public wor-
ship; and for divers other neglects and irregularities. The
charges were exhibited in 20 articles ; ar.d depositions were
made in their support by 21 witnesses. The depositions, which
were very long, were read by Dr. Lushington and Dr. Dodson.
It was stated that on occasion of one of the deponents hav-
ing applied to him to know when he could conveniently per-
form the burial service at the funeral of the deponent's son,
who was then dead, Doctor Clarke inquired of him whether he
had not been at the Six Bells public-house; and the deponent
having answered that he had been there to order some beer to
be given to the bearers of his son's body when they should
bring it for interment, Dr. Clarke told him, that " as he (the
deponent) chose to deal with people that had insulted him (Dr.
Clarke), he would not bury his _child at all." And the de-
ponent was, in consequence of Dr. Clarke's refusal, obliged
to haie his child buried in another parish. In another case, it
was deposed, that Dr. Clarke refused 'to bury a corpse in
the part of the church-yard where the family of the de.
ceased were buried, saying; that as his parishioners had in-
dicted the pathway he had made through the church-yard,
he would bury it in no other part of the church-yard than
that path-way. The depositions stated two instances of Dr.
Clarke having refused to baptise children, because their pa-
rents, when they brought them- to church for the purpose,
had gone into the Six Bells public-house before they went to
the church : the parents anti several witnesses deposed, that
they had not drank any thing at the public-house, but merely
went in to rest after a long walk. Several witnesses deposed to
the Rev. Dr. Clarke having kept the church locked on Sundays,
and refused to perform divine service, though not prevented by
sickness, nor any other justifiable cause; and also, that he re.
fused to allow vestries to be held in the vestry of the church,
saying, they might be held in the Six Bells ; anclf on one occa-
sion, when the churchwarden gave notice in the church, imme-
diately after divine service, that a vestry would be held on a
day he named in the next week, the Rev. Dr. Clarke said, in
a loud voice, " and I give notice that I will not do duty in this
church again until the windows are mended." And on another
occasion, two persons having come into the church while Dr.
Clarke was preaching, he broke off his sermon, and said, " You
that are come in to make observations, may count the broken
panes in the windows."
The Judge (Sir C. Rontstsox)) adclressed Dr. Clarke, who
was in Court during the whole of the proceedings, and said, that
as he defended himself, the Court was desirous of giving him
every possible indulgence; and he might either enter on his de-
fence then, or on the next Court day, as he thought fit.
Dr. Clarke said, he would take till the next Court day.
Sir C. ROBINSON directed the officer of the Court to admo-
nish Dr. Clarke to attend on the next Court day ; after which
the Court adjourned. ;"

BOXING.

THE SUFFOLK CHAMPI9N..,
_AND PRICE THE

NAVIGATOR.

Saturday was a busy day in the Attic line. The first match
we have to record, was fought in Essex, between the men above
named.. Giblett—a man who will fight any body of his weight
for a hundred (12 stone), seconded Sufiblk. Jack Forde, a man
well known in the ring, seconded Price.
1. In the first round, Suflblk missed his hits, and proved
himself very awkward; Price had the best of him, and grassed
him.
2. Suffolk made all play.; but Price had decidedly the best
of it, and grassed him against his will.
3. Suffolk went in with the courage that belongs to him, and
seemingly doing nothing, but• he floored his man in talent's
style.
4, Li and 6. Suffolk had worked himself up, and the piper
beat him. He had the worst of the round, and was grassed.—
The first round was a sinillie to the last.
In the seventh round, Sufiblk having recovered second wind,
won the fight offhand.
He fought with the left hand a la Randal, at the body, and
so completely knocked the wind out of his adversary, that there
was no come again.

CHARLES MATtrEws, after enriching himself by
the exercise of his powerful talents at the expence of the Yankier,
is now on thp seas on his return to England. Alay the " gales
be propitious," and waft `him to his native land in safety and
in health.