The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-26 00:00:00

WAR.

The following sarcastic recommendations are given
1,- Dr. Benjamin Rush, an,eminent American physician
and philanthropist who died about thirty years ago :--
" In order to impress more deeply the minds of the
citizens of the United States with the blessings of
peace, by contrasting them with the evils of war, let the
following inscription be painted on the sign which is
placed over the door of the war-office at Washington,
namely :
An office for butchering the human species.
A widow-and-orphan-making office.
A broken-bone-making office.
A wooden-leg-making office.
An office for creating public and private vices.
An office for creating public debt.
An office for creating famine.
An office for creating pestilential diseases.
An office for creating poverty, and for the destruction
nthe wounded
soldiers, u o
ocean,nded
of liberty and national happiness.
fire, ships
withsink
sick
g in and In the lobby, let there be painted representations of
the common instruments of death ; also, human skulls,
broken
bones, hospitals
rivers
(i villages on oyed with blood, and extensive plains without a
tree or fence, or any other object but the ruins of de-
serted farm-houses.
Above this group of woful figures, let the following
words be inserted in red characters, to represent human
blood :
NATIONAL GLORY !"

Monday,willhave an-
other the oOth
of July.
onottilektilngh
iat
almterpalkliacaej, onnesoty
It
SistattleilßaaellrSatt
An admirable family hotel has recently been
erected, and opened, opposite to the terminus of the Great
Western Railway at Vauxhall, which will be found to possess
great advantages to persons travelling by this line. A pier,
from which steam-boats are constantly plying to all parts of
the river, is immediately in the rear of tile premises, and
coaches and omnibuses are constantly running from opposite the
establishment. Its immediate contiguity to the Railway must
prove of great comfort to the weary traveller ; and the excel
lent arrangement of its cuiBin6 departtnent i 3 a stroll addi•
timid recoraniendation.
.. .. ,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Juxi 24.
(Sittings in Banco.)
~......

THE QUEEN V. THE PRESIDENT AND CHAPTER CF TILE C 11...
THEDRAL CHURCH OF EXETER.
Lord DENMAN delivered judgment. In this case a rule
had been applied for that a mandamus might be issued to
to the dcfcndar.ti, commanding them to proceed to the
election of the Rev. Mr. Grylls, as canon of the said cathe-
dral church, in order to:qualify him for the appointment of
Dean of the said church, and then to proceed to elect him
to that office. The situation of Dean appeared to have
been created, and the office endowed by the Bishop, in
the reign of Henry 111. That was subsequent to a charter
of King John, by which the Chapter was authorised to-
elect the greater and the lesser canons of the cathedral.
This deanery itaelf appeared to be the last which had been
founded before the dissolution of the monasteries. By the
terms of the charter of foundation he was to be elected by
the chapter, subject to the confirmation of the Bishop.
Subsequently it was proviled that he was to be one of
the Canons and a Prebendary of the Cathedral, and the
practice had prevailed that he should be one of the Canons
Residentiary. In this manner he was in form elected by
the Chapter, subject to the confirmation of the Bishop,
who confirmed him if all that had been dove was done re-
gularly. The Dear, thus elected, then took the oath of
the Canons to obey the orders of the Bishop, who then
took him to his stall, and he was inducted into and con-
firmed in his office. In the fourteenth and fifteenth cen-
turies the Bishops regularly collated the Deans into office.
In 1550 the Crown, fur the first time, interposed its autho-
rity, and claimed to appoint the Dean ; but Edward VI.
died before the appointment thus attempted to be made
was completed, and the accession of Mary changed the
course of proceeding in these matters. In 1559 Eliza-
beth sent her mandate to elect a Dean. The answer of
the Chapter was, that the members thereof could not, by
the Statutes, elect a Dean who was not a Canon Residen-
tiary, and they therefore prayed either that her Majesty
would direct the election of a different person, or would
grant a dispensation of the statutes. There were three
other cases of which no exact accounts had been preserved,
and then they came to the year 1629, when Charles I. re-
commended for Dean a Prebendary, who was also resident.
The person thus recommended was elected. in 1661, the
office being vacant, Charles 11. scat a letter recommen-
datory of another person. The particulars of what then
occurred were not before the Court. In 1761 Charles 11.
cave the appointment to Anstey, who was not a Prebend.
The letter recommendatory sent in that instance stated
that the deanery belonged to the Crown. The Bishop
g,;ar,ted the letters appointing the person thus nomi-
nated by the Crown to the office of Prebend, and Mr.
Anstey was elected and instituted to the deanery. Four.
teen elections had taken place since that time, and of
these it appeared that nine were strangers to the Chapter,
but on the nomination of the Crown the Bishop made
'them Prebendaries. Such being the ancient and modern
practice with regard to election into the office, the deanery
occame vacant in 1838, and the Crown made a presenta-
tion to the Chapter, the members of which returned that
they could not, by law, elect the person so presented to
them, for that he was not a Prebendary nor a Canoe
Residentiary of the cathedral. The Crown then nomi-
nated Mr. Grylls, and suspended by statute the rule as to
the Prebendary, declaring that every spiritual person upon
collation should be a Prebendary or Canon Residentiary
of such church to all intents and purposes, and so qualified
to be elected of such church. Immediately after the passing
of the Act, namely, on the 12th of June, Mr. Grylls was
again appointed, and was by such appointment qualified to
be elected as if he had been, in fact, a Canon Residentiary.
No step was taken on this intimation of her Majesty's plea-
sure, but on the 27th of June the Chapter elected the
Rev. Mr. Lowe, who was Canon Residentiary, to fill the
office of Dean, following the practice of ancient and mo-
dern times in the election of Deans in all respects, ex-
cept that of adopting the recommendation of the Crown.
In this state of things the present rule bad been applied
for, and the Court had been desired to treat Mr. Lowe's
appointment as null and void, and to command the Chap-
ter to proceed to a new election, by first qualifying Mr.
Gr)lls to take the office, and then by electing him into- it.
The appointment by the Crown in virtue of the statute of
last year carried his qualification with it, and the Chapter
could not prevent his election to the office of Dean on the
ground that not being a Prebendary, or a Canon Residen-
tiary, he was not by the statutes of the Chapter qualified
to fill the office. This first step, therefore, having
been taken, the question was—whether it would now be
followed up by the order of the Court, compelliug the
election of Mr. Grylls into the office of Dean. The Act
of last year restored the law in this respect to what it had
been before the sth and 6th of Wm. IV. What, then,
were the rights on which the election of Mr. Grylls was
disputed? They were the rights of the Chapter. The.
members of the Chapter asserted the right of Choosing
their own president. In making that choice they had
followed the practice of ancient times ; but the Court was
no:; asked to say that all that had thus been done had been
badly done, for want of the lettere recommendatory of the
Crown. It was asserted, in fact, that the right, which
in the most ancient times of the deanery had
been exercised by the Bishop, was now trans-
ferred to the Crown. Such a transfer ought to
be supported by clear proof, and in this in-
stance it was said to be borne out by the opinion
of Mr. Hargrave, in his notes to Coke upon Littleton.
His Lordship here read Mr. Hargrave's observations, and
the authorities on the subject, and expressed the opinion
of the Court that that learned writer had been mistaken
on this subject. Tho statute of Henry VIII., which gave
the appointment of Bishops to the Crown, did not Men-
tion Deans, and the right to appoint the one by no
means conveyed the right to nominate and appoint the
other. No one could say that a Judge could, in. such a
case as the present, direct a jury to presume an Act of
Parliament on a matter which must have been the subject
of legislative interference within two hundred and fifty
years, there being no trace of such legislative proceed-
ing, in the journals of Parliament, in the proceedings of
the courts of law, or in the works of text writers.
This, then, put an end to the assumed right of the
Crown in consequence of an Act of Parliament. Nor
did the Court see that that right was better established .by
the existence of any ancient composition, or of a practice
consequent upon such composition. If the Deanery had
been a donation of the Crown, the letter recommendatory
would have conferred at once the right to the office, with-
out any intervening election. Yet the right to elect and
the form of election were not denied to exist. Under these
circumstances the Court did not see that the right of the
Crown was made out. But if it was still believed that
that right existed, then it was clear that the Crown had
other and better means of trying the right than by this
writ of mandamus. The Court was, therefore, of opinion
that the rule for the mandaMus must be discharged.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER. JUNE 25.
NEGELEN V. MITCHELL,.
This was an action brought by a foreign artist residing
in this country against Mr. Mitchell, the printseller, of
Bond street, to recover a sum of money for the copyright
of a portrait of Madame Grisi, and the value of fifty prints
that the plaintiff contended Mr. Mitchell had contracted
to deliver to him.

The jury found their verdict for the defendant.
(RIM. CON.-DANIEL V. FAWKES.

This was an action for criminal conversation.

Mr. KELLY st,tad the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff, Mr.
Daniel, was a lieutenant in the 7th Dragoon Guards.
fhe defendant was a lieutenant in the 88th Regiment of
Foot. The unfortunate subject of this inquiry, Mrs. Da-
niol, was the daughter of a Mr. Gossett, a gentleman pos-
sessed of considerable property in the island of Jersey, but
who resided chiefly in London. The parties were mar-
ried in September, 1830, at the church of St. Clement
Danes ; but the marriage was not with the consent of Miss
Gossett's parents, who were not present at it. After the
marriage they became reconciled, received plaintiff as a son-
in. law, and everthing proceeded happily, and with the best
prospects of a continuance of that happiness. Mr. and
Mrs. Daniel resided at different places after their marriage,
chir fly at Cheltenham, and had two children, the eldest a
girl, now nearly nine years of age; the second a boy,
about four years old. About the conclusion cf the year 1838
Mr. and Mrs. Daniel went to reside in France, and be-
came acquainted with the defendant, who was received by
the plaintiff and visited his house upon terms of confidence
and friendship. The plaintiff and his wife removed from
Paris to Versailles, and afterwards to Dieppe and Boulogne,
and at all those places they met the defendant ; but this
circumstance excited no suspicion. In the month of Oc-
tober Mr. Daniel, having business in England, proceeded
-to Dover, leaving his wife for a few days after him in Bolus
logne, whilst he was making arrangements for her recep-
tion at Dover. He accordingly took a house for his family
at Dover, where Mrs. Daniel joined him. After staying
there for a short time Mr. Daniel was called away' to town
upon business, and left his wife at Dever, and during his
absence Mrs. Daniel, forgetting her duty to her husband
and children, eloped with the defendant. The first inti-
mation which the plaintiff had of his wife's departure was
through a letter from Mrs. Daniel's sister, informing him
that Mrs. Daniel had left Dover, and gone to Boulogne,
in consequence of the illness of her daughter, who had
been left at a boarding-school at Boulogne. This letter
occasioned Mr. Daniel much anxiety, but it excited no
suspicion. He was satisfied that Mrs. Daniel had gone
across the Channel for the purpose of attending to their
child. A few days, however, brought another letter, which
was unfortunately but too explicit, and reduced the unsus-
pecting husband to misery and despair. The letter was
addressed by the defendant to the plaintiff, and was as
follows

" October 2 4, 1839
" You will no doubt be extremely surprised on reading
this, but I feel it better that you should know all, even
from me, as soon as possible, than be left in suspense about
the fate of Mrs. Daniel, who is now under my protection.
Of course I can have no objection to give you any satis-
faction you may require, and should you wish it, a letter,
addressed to Mons. Dalton, No. 7, Rue de Clichy, will
be forwarded to me, and answered by the earliest oppor-
tunity. Should you prefer proceeding in another Hay, I
suppose this letter will be sufficient evidence against me,
though I shall of course ernoravour to excuse, as far as
possible, the injury I cannot deny having done you.
1 have the honour to be, &c
•

" E. FAWKES."
After the receipt of this letter it was but too plain that
Mrs. Daniel had for ever abandoned her husband and chil-
dren, and, at the same time, her station in society. Under
these circumstances it was only for the Jury to consider to
what damages the plaintiff was entitled. Having married
Hiss Gossett without the consent of her parents, the
rfter his marriage, made a settlement, under
which Mrs. Daniel, if she survived him, would have the
power of leaving a considerable fortune, to which she was
entitled, to any of her children she thought fit, and, as it
was understood she was now pregnant, this tortune might
be left to a child, the legitimacy of v hich was unfortunately
not doubtful.
Mr. TIIESIGER, for the def:ndant, was instructed to deny
the fact last stated.
Mr. KELLY did not well know how to understand his
Learned Friend's denial. At all events, under the settle-
ment generously made by Mr. Daniel, after his marriage,
his pecuniary interests.rnight be seriously affected, A re.
laden of Mrs. Daniel had: 4180 generously allowed her

200/. a year, and her parents 50/. a year, snaking together
2501, which bad ceased since the elopement. The injury
which Mr. Daniel sustained could not be compensated, but
yet the Jury could only award pecuniary compensation;
and, in estimating the damages, they should take into ac-
count that Mr. Daniel was deprived of the pecuniary ad.
vantages he enjoyed, and was left viith two young children
to support and educate.

Witnesses were then called to prove the marriage, and
that the plaintiff and his wife had lived happily up to the
elopement.
The probate of the will of the defendant's father aas
put in, from which it appeared that the defendant to a
sum of about 13,0001. under his father's will.

Mr. Daniel, a barrister, the plaintiff's brother, also
proved that he was in the habit of passing a part of every
year with the plaintiff and his wife since their marriage,
' and that they lived on terms of great affection and cor-
diality. He admitted, ea cross-examination, that be dis-
approved of his brother asking a person known as " Hand-
some Jack " to his table at Cheltenham ; and also re-
monstrated wiih his brother upon leaving his wife, who
was remarkably handsome and attractive, at Boulogne; and
that his brother in consequence immediately after sent
for his wife.
Mr. MESMER addressed the Jury for the defendant,
contending there was too much reason to suppose that the
plaintiff had stolen away from her home and her family a
young lady not more than seventeen, for sordid purposes,
and not from affection. It was easy for persons who met
the plaintiff and his wife in public to talk of the happy
terms on which they lived, but it was quite clear enough
that Lieut. Daniel treated his wife with coldness and in-
diffarcnce. Mr. Fawkes had committed a crime ; but there
was no evidence that the defendant had ever been under
the plaintiff's roof, that he bad abused any confidence or
hospitality, and under these circumstances small damages
would satisfy the justice of the case.
Lord ABINGER left the question of damages to the Jury,
observing that a man who took a young girl away from her
parents' roof and her mother's care, though for the pur-
pose of marrying her, was afterwards bound to be moro
than ordinarily cautious in guarding her from temptation.
It was for the Jury to say, under all the circumstances, if
they considered the plaintiff had conducted himself in all
respects as a careful and affectionate husband should have
done, and to estimate their damages accordingly.
The Jury, after a short consultation, found a verdict for
the plaintiff—Damages 5001.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.

Yesterday Mr. Kirby, Relieving-officer of the Strand
n, waited on Mr. Twyford to request his assistance in
releasing a child from confinement, which he had reason to
suppose had been reduced to a state of idiotcy in conse-
quence of the ill-treatment she had received from her pa-
rents. He stated that having received information from
several persons of the circumstance, he went to 27, Ship-
yard, Temple-bar, and finding the door fastened, be looked
through a window and saw a grown girl tied with ropes to
the bed-post, with a vessel of water beside her. On ques-
tioning the lodgers in t'..e house, he was told that the girl's
name was Elizabeth Bates, and that her father, who was a
porter in Hungerford-market, and her step-mother, were
constantly beating her, and not content with denying her
the common necessaries of life, they prevented her ever
going outside the house. He hoped there would be no ob-
jection to force open the door, and bring the poor creature
out for the purpose of hearing her own account of the
treatment she bad received, and to afford her protection.
Mr. TWYFORD instantly directed an officer to accompany
him, and, if the parents were not in the way, or refused to
place her under his protection, to break open the door and
bring her to the Court.

Mr. Kirby thanked his Worship, and in a short time en-
tered with the girl, carrying in his hand the rope with
which she had been tied, together with a cat-o'-nine-tails,
which she pointed out to him in the room, and with which
she was in the habit of being severely chastised. There
were also several people in attendance, who seemed anxious
to confirm the account by what they had repeatedly seen
and heard.

Mr. TWYFORD said that he would not pre-judge the case,
and would grannt every redress to the poor girl, as she was
then under the protection of the parish authorities.
The girl said that she was about sixteen years of age,
and from the frequent complaints that had been made to her
father by her step-mother, he treated her in the most barba-
row: manner, by kicking her and flogging her with the cat-

Mr. TWYFORD observed that the poor creature was evi-
dently in fear of the consequences of the complaint about
to be made against her unnatural parents, and the most
prudent course to adopt would be to place her under the
care of the medical person belonging to the workhouse,
until the parties would be present to answer the charge,
but, in the mean time, the door of the room should bo
fastened.

Mr. Kirby said that he had shut the door, but finding
that the girl's body was bruised all over, be was anxious
to take proceedings against them as soon as possible.
The girl said, that the last ',eating sbe had got was 'or
untying the rope, which her father had found on returning
home.

Mr. TWYFORD asked why he had beat n and ill-treated
her at different times ?—The girl said that she had pro.
miscd to clean out a room fJr a woman lodging near to
her, and her step-mother having told her father of it, he
flogged her.
Mr. Kirby said that the parents seemed to him very
comfortable, for they had a good: feather-bed, although
they obliged the girl to lin on a straw mat.
In answer to other questions, the girl said that she had
never baen to school, nor was she ever taught to say her
prayers, and she had eaten nothing during the entire day.
She had been in Barthlomew's Hr.spital, end. her father
beat her lately because her step-mother told him that she
wanted to go there again.
Mr. TWYFORD having ordered her to be sworn, she said
that the whole of the Recount was true.

Mr. Kirby said there were severe bruises on her back
from the kicks she had received from her father, and it
was in consequence, of his repeated ill-treatment, that she
had to be sent to the hospital.
Mr. TWYFORD considering the case worthy the attention
of the parish authorities, directed that a warrant should be
issued, and that the father should be brought up to-morrow
(this day) to answer the charge.