The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-11 00:00:00

MASONS' STRIKE.

An Adjourned Delegate Meeting was held last
evening at the Craven Head, Drury-lane, for the pur-
pose of receiving from the Secretary the statement of
the accounts since the commencement of the strike, to
receive the Reports from Trades' Unions, to adopt re-
solutions relative to the proceedinga of the masons, and
to answer the replies of Allen, lately put, forth in
The Sun.

Mr. Butler, a carpenter, took the chair at half-past
eight o clock.
Soon after the Chairman had take❑ his seat, Mr.
Wakley, M.P., entered the room, and was received
with cheers.

The CHAIRMAN then called on the Secretary to read
the minutes of the last meeting, which were confirmed.
The Sect'Mary then read the balance-sheet of the
Society of Masons, which was preceded by a short
account of the proceedings since the commencement of
the masons' strike a: the New Houses of Parliament.
The account 3 were—Receipts 1,147/. 32. id. ; and the
expenditure I ,098/., leaving a balance in the hands of
the Treasurer of 491. Amongst the contributors were
the names of Mr. Wakley, 10/., and Captain Ackerley,
101., the announcement of which was received with
loud cheers.

The adoption of the Report was then moved and
carried.

The CHAIR3IAN then called on the several delegates
to make their reports.
Mr. BAKER, frocn a society of plasterers in Port-
land-street, said hit society had voted the sum of 20/.
for the use of the masons.—(Cheers.)
Mr. Cox, from a society of carpenters, in Druz-3-
lane, said they had voted the masons 201., with a de-
termination to assist them to the last.

Mr. WILSON, from another society of carpenters in
New-street-square. They bad bad a meeting oa
Monday evening, and had voted the society of masons
the sum of 50/.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. BLAND, fro.n a society in Somers' Town, ten-
dered 5/.

Mr. GODDARD, from a society of stone sawyers,
who had held a meeting on Tuesday evening, and had
come to a resolution to support the masons with a
weekly subscription. As be saw his friend Wakley in
the corner, be would, as he (Mr. Goddard) was a pump
man, just allude to his (Mr. Wakley's) speech at the
last meeting at the Crown and Anchor. Mr. Wakley
then said he hoped that the teetotallers would rise in
rebellion against such tyrants as that of Allen, in lock-
ing up the pump. He begged to say that that rebel-
lion had commenced.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Mr. TURNER, from a tailor's society, said they had
come to a determination of entering into a subscription,
each man, of a shilling a week for the masons.

Mr. BANG, from a-society of bricklayers, held at the
King's Arms, Holborn, tendered 1001.—(Great cheer-
ing for some minutes.)
Mr. JENKINS, from a society of carpenters, in Ox-
ford-street, delis ered in 151.
A JOURNEYMAN TAILOR said he had 2/. 10s. from
a small society of tailors, but he could neither give his
name, nor the name of the society to which he be-
ns, if he did so, their masters would discharge
them. He hoped to bring them another 2/. lOs. next
week.—(Cheers.)
Mr. KNACK, from the Pimlico carpenters, 30/.
Mr. CROKER, painter, said they had called a meeting
for next week, to enter into a subscription.
Mr. COCHRANt, from the painters of St. James's,
bad come to the determination of subscribing 3d. a week,
each man, as long as the strike lasted.
A WORKING MAN asked how much the masons
were paid per week ?
The CHAIRMAN said he would answer that question
at the conclusion of the receipts from the various dele-
gate bodies of London.
Mr. Taßanur said he came from a society of car-
penters wbo bad lately lost much in tools. &c., in con-
seqeence of fire, and they had also taken fifty shares in
a Trades' Hall.—(Cheers.) He therefore could not on
the part of the society tender them any assistance, but
they would try to do individually what they were pre-
vented accomplishing as a society.,
Mr. VINEn, delegate from a tailor's society, ten-
dered Si.

The CHiIRXAN then read a letter from a society of
tobacco pipe makers, stating that they would have
assisted the masons in their present strike but that un-
fortunately they were out on strike themselves. The
writer called on the meeting to withhold their support
to those that used Mr. Smith's pipes, he being the
maker: against whom the workmen had the greatest
complaint.—(Laughter.) If the meeting did this it
would enable the society to assist the masons.—(Hear.)
Mr. VINING said that the pipe-makers lately em-
ployed by Mr. Smith had determined to establish
a pipe-manufactory, and thus revenge themselves.
The CHAIRMAN then read the following circular :-
8, Brighton-street, Cromer-street, Nov. 1841.
SIR—In soliciting your support and custom, I beg to
lay before you the reasons why I am forced into the
competitive market.
Through acts of oppression and tyranny I have been
compelled to leave my late employer, Mr. Smith, of
Little Clarendon-street, Somers" Town. These acts of
tyranny and oppression have caused me (with the um-
nimous wish of my fellow-workmen) to seek the support
of yourself and the public.
For a length of time my late employer had three ap-
prentices in his -shop ; he has now taken another boy,
and is about engaging with another, so that the men are
thrown out of employ ; the work being made up by
boys, and the men who have served seven years to their
trade, thrown upon the wide world.
With confidence I lay my case before you, feeling
that every well-wisilir to the mechanic will prevent an '
injury of this vast extent being quietly allowed, and
tamely submitted to.—l have the honour to be, Sir, your
obedient servant, CHARLES LONGWORTII,
Tobacco-pipe-maker.
N.B. Allnrders punctually attended to.'
In answer,to the question previously put,
The CHAIRMAN said that the masons received 12s.
a week each, and that if funds came in they should
raise it to 1.5 a. per week.

Mr. ARMSTRONG WALTON then rose to answer the
statement put forth by Mr. Allen, in The Sun, on
Monday. Most of them were aware that since the
meetieg held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, the
charges made against Allen had been denied by him.
Finding this the Committee immediately wrote a chal-
lenge to the Foreman, calling on him to come forward
and submit the case to arbitration, and that challenge
bad been mi:t by an answer from Messrs. Grissell
ar.d Pato, together with Allen, denying the charges.
—(Hear.) He then read the two letters, that from
Messrs. Grissell and Peto having appeared in the
Morning Advertiser. Both letters denied the charges.
This was the way they met the charges, by merely
giving them a Oil ►t denial, although they (the masons)
had given publicity to those charges at public meetings,
and throigh the medium of a portion of the public
press. They invarialily denied them, and shrank from
any attempt to prove titeir denial. They were aware
that the challenge had been pat in The Sun, calling on
Allen to come forward and prove that the charges
were false. They called on Messrs. Grissell and Peto
to come forward, or any one on their behalf, but this
also was declined. The only fair and honourable 'way
for both parties was to submit the question to arb"tra-
tion befo►e the public.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WAKLEY—When did you first ask for arbitra-
tion

Mr. WALTON—Before the masons struck at Wool-
wich and Nelson's Monument. He would then read
them Messrs. Grissell and Peto's answer to the chal-
lenge. They stated that if the charges had been made
pre% ious to the strike, they would have had no hesita-
tion in going into the matter. They (Messrs. Grimell
and Peto) wished to make them believe thet the masons
did not make those statements before ; but the Com-
missioners of Woods and Forests knew well that those
complaints were made before the strike took place-
They said that the letter sent by the secretary did not
those facts. The reason the letter al-
contain any of
luded to did not contain any of those facts was, that
they (Messrs. Grissell and Poto) had been made ac-
quainted with them over and over again,H
letter.
and it
would
was not
necessary to detail them in every
leave the meeting to judge as to tvirether,the charges
brought against Allen were just or not. If Allen had
been an honest man he would have met those charges
immediately,—( Hear, hear, and cheers.)
Mr. WOLLTHINGTJN then entered into several de-
tails relative to the alleged acts of oppression
lno
n the
part of Allen ; and concluded by stating, that
depu-
tion had obtained an interview with the Earl of
coin, who told them that he had bad an interview with
Messrs. Grissell and Peto, but that he did not intimd
to take any part with either of the parties. His im-
pression was, that the masons were striking for wages.
Thuy told him it was no such thing. He advised them
to put up with things as they found them.—(Laughter.)
Me did not like unions, nor did he like strikes.—
(Much laughter.) They told him they expected to
hear that from him.—(Cheers and renewed laughter.)
Mr. JOSEPH KAY said he bad worked with Allen
when he was a journeyman at the Fishmongers'-bal!,
and when he was discharged for joining a trades' union.
The whole of the men turned out in conscqu•nce, and
were never taken upon those works again. Allen's con-
duct ea% a pretty return for that kindness.
Mr. Bassi rose to propose a resolution, that, in the
opinion of this meeting, Messrs. Grissell and Pato re-
fusing to submit their tool, Alien, to public arbitration,
proves
that the statements of the masons are true.
CHAIRMAN thought it would be better to erase
the word " tool," and substitute " foreman."
A short conversation then ensued as to the word
which ought to be used ; some were for the word stand-
ing, others proposed " driver," till at length it was sub-
mitted to a show of hands, and decided that " foreman"
should be the word.

Mr. WAKLEY then rose to address the meet-
ing. His speech commenced with a recapitula-
tion of his exertions on behalf of the Dorchester
Labourers ; it then wandered into a disserta-
tion upon Universal Suffrage; and finally came to an
explanation of the Hon. Member's conduct in Parlia-
ment. He declared that the Whip wanted to turn
him out of his seat because he would not join in the Corn-
law cry to get them into office again. We have already

expressed an opinion as to this course of proceeding on
the part of the Hon. Member. He was received with
loud cheers throughout, and he frequently expressed a
wish that some of his constituents might be present
during his speech, and at the conclusion the welcome
intelligence was conveyed to him that several of those
constituents were in the room.
A resolution was then passed that another meeting
should be held at the same place, and at the same
hour, on Wednesday evening next.
Thanks were then voted to the Chairman, and the
meeting adjourned at half-past eleven.

COURT OF ALDERMEN.
THE PRINCE OF WALES.

Yesterday a Special Court was held by summons
issued by the Lord Mayor the moment his Lordship
heard of the birth of the Prince of Wales, for the pur-
pose of voting addresses to her Majesty, Prince Albert,
and the Duchess of Kent, upon the joyful event.
The Court was held at the Mansion-house, and almost
every Alderman was present.
Mr. FIRTH (the chief clerk in the Town-clerk's-
office) having read the minutes of the last Court, and a
vote of thanks having, according to the usual practice
observed at the commencement of a new mayoralty, been
moved and carried to the late Lord Mayor,
The LORD Mayon said—" I feel great pleasure in
calling together this Court, to announce to you, offi-
cially, the event which has already been very heartily
celebrated in the metropolis—the birth of a Prince.—
(Loud cheers.) It is impossible for me not to feel great
pride and gratification under the circumstances in which
I am placed, as Chief Magistrate, and having on the
very day of the birth of the Prince commenced the duties
of the situation of Chief Magistrate of this great city,
and had the honour of entertaining her Majesty's Minis-
ters, and other exalted functionaries.—(Cheers.) I shall
read the communication which I have received on the
subject to this Court, and I leave it to the members to
adopt the course which they may think most advisable.
—(Cheers.) His Lordship then read the following :
" Home-office, November 9, 1841.

"MY LORD—I have the honour to inform your Lord-
ship, that at twelve minutes before eleven o'clock
her Majesty was safely delivered of a Prince, and that
her Majesty and the Royal Infant are both as well as
possible. I have the honour to be, my Lord,
" Your Lordship's obedient Servant.
" J. R. G. GRAHAM.
" To the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor."

" Home-office, Half-past Twelve o'clock,
" November 9, 1841.

"MY LORD-I have the honour to inclose a copy of
the bulletin issued at Buckingham Palace by the me-
dical attendants on her Majesty, and I congratulate your
Lordship on the favourable announcement which it con-
tains. I have the honour to be, my Lord,
" Your Lordship's faithful Servant,
" J. R. G. GRAHAM.
" To the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor."
(This bulletin appeared in The Sun last evening.)
" Home-office, Nov. 10, 1841.

"My Lord,—l have much satisfaction in forwarding
to your Lordship the inclosed copy of the bulletin issued
this morning by the medical attendants on her Maje3ty.
" I beg leave to inform your Lordship that the copy
of the daily bulletin will in future be sent to your Lord-
ship about half-past 12 o'clock. I have the honour to
be, my Lord, your Lordship's obedient servant,
" J. R. G. GRAHAM.

" The Right Hon. the Lord Mayor."
(This bulletin also appeared in The Sun last evening.)
The Court having expressed by acclamation its feeling
upon the official announcement of the intelligence,
Alderman Sir C. S. HUNTER (the father of the Court)
rose to move an address to Her Most Gracious Majesty.
He had, he said, been nearly forty years a member of
that Court, and he never felt in all that time greater
pride or pleasure than he felt at that moment in rising
to move that an humble and dutiful address of congra-
tulation be presented to the Queen upon the joyful
event of the birth of a Prince.—(Loud cheers.) It
was wholly unnecessary for him to delay the Court
on a matter upon which the minds of all had been
for some time dwelling, and on which they were
completely unanimous.—(Cheers.) He would only
say that the event inspired the citizens of London with
the most lively gratitude towards that benignant
Power which had been pleased to grant to the people the
fulfilment of their hopes and wishes in the safe delivery
of her Majesty, and the birth of a Prince.— (Cheers.)
The Hon. Baronet then moved, " That an humble and
dutiful address be presented to her Majesty, congratu-
lating her Majesty upon her safe delivery and on the
birth of a Prince, heir apparent to the throne."—(Cheers.)
Alderman FAREBROTHER seconded the motion, which
was carried by acclamation unanimously.
Resolutions were immediately after agreed to unani-
mously voting addresses to Prince Albert and the
Duchess of Kent, upon the safe delivery of her Majesty
and the birth of a Prince, heir-apparent to the throne.

The Recorder then wrote addresses, which were
agreed to, but which we shall not be at liberty, in conse-
quence of the usages of the Court, to publish until they
shall have been presented.
It was in conclusion resolved, that the addresses
should be presented by the whole Court, immediately
after which the Court adjourned.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.

SECOND EDITION
THE FUNDS-(CLOSING PRICES.)

BRITISH FUNDS.
Bank Stock 165 (India Stock 246
3 per Cent Red BBll Ditto Bonds 1 pr
3 per Cent Cons B9 Ditto Old Annuities ...
3i per Cent Red 9B Ditto New Annuities...
New 3i per Cent 99* Ez. Bills, 1,000/....21d 13 pm
New 5 per Cent Ditto 5001
Long Annuities toexpire Ditto Small. .
Jan 1860 l2 7-16 Bank Stock for Acct...
Oct 1859 lndia Stock for Acct....
Jan. 1860. Consols for Acct B9i
FOREIGN FUNDS.

Austrian, 5 per cent Portuguese, 5 per cent.
Belgian, 5 per cent lOO4 Ditto, New Ditto 294
Brazilian Bonds..
.Prussian, 5 per cent. ...
Buenos Ayres, 6 per cent 19 ;Russian, 5 per cent —
Chilian, 6 per cent...... 76 Ditto, Metallic
Colombian, 6 per cent... Spanish, 5 per cent 2li
Ditto, 1824. 194 ;Ditto, Deferred —
Danish, 3 per cent — French, 5 per cent. —f. —e.
Greek, 1825, 5 per cent — !Exchange
Mexican, 5 per cent...: !French, .3 percent —f. —c
Ditto, 6 per cent, 1625 \ Dutch, 24 per cent. sli
Peruvian, 1825, 6 per ct. , Ditto, 5 per cent.
SHARES
•
Birmingham and Derby Railway (100 pd) 48
Great Western Railway (65 paid) 794
Ditto New Shares (50 paid 574
Ditto Fifth (4 paid)
London and Brighton (50 paid) 37
London and Birmingham (90) ......... ... .. 157 i
Ditto New Shares ( 2 paid) ..
London and Greenwich Railway (20 pd)
Ditto New Shares (20 paid) .........
London and South Western
Ditto Tenths (24 paid) ............
London and Croydon Railway (Trunk) ll4
South Eastern and Dover (43 paid)... 20
York and North Midland Railway (50 paid) 831
HAMBURG BORSENHALLE, Nov. 6
BM. Money
Austrian 5 per Cents.
Bank Shares lf-60 1559
Anglo- Russian Loan lOB% JOB%
Russian 5 per Cent. Ist series, C,.rtificate
Inscription, Ist Sex iRs loa
Rus:ian 5 per Cent. Hope and Co. 3d and 4th
Series 9BM 98
Ditto in Certificates
New 4 per Cent. (1840) B6 85A
Dutch Actual Debt, 2% per Cent .t.o
Ditto 5 per Cent —
Polish Bonds .............. ......... .. .................
New ticket
Anglo-Danish Loan, 3 per Co,. 75Th 75%
Norwegian Loan, 1634, 4 per Celt' , 1.:14 102 k
Spanish, New 5 per Cents. l5) ...

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

BARBER V. SWANN.

Mr. TURNER, with whom was Mr. BIGG, stated that
this case came before the Court upon exceptions to the
Master's report. A gentleman named Barber was seized
in fee of the property in question, and in January, 1832,
agreed to sell a certain portion of it to two gentlemen
named Buddel. On the 9th of February, 1832, Messrs.
Buddel agreed to sell the property to a person named
Wollason, and on the 22d May, in the same year, the
Buddels authorized Mr. Barber to receive the purchase
money that would be due to them from Wollason. On
the Bth February, 1833, Wollason became a bank-
rupt, and the defendants, William Swan and
Samuel Timmings, were appointed his assignees. The
bill was filed by Mr. Barber and Messrs. Buddel
against Messrs. Swan and Timmings as the assignees of
Wollason, and against Samuel William Haynes, the
petitioning creditor and solicitor under the commission,
who claimed a lien on the property, upon an agreement
for a conveyance, by way of mortgage, made to him by
Wollasan on 18th September, 1832. The cause came
on to be heard in July, 1838, and a decree was made
for a specific performance, but the right of con-
veyance of the property being in question between
Haynes and the assignees, it was ordered to be referred
to the Master to inquire to whom the conveyance
ought to be made, and on the 10th of February, 1841,
the Master reported that conveyance of the property
ought to be made to Mr. Haynes. Two exceptions were
taken to this report—first, that the Master ought to have
found that the conveyance ought to be made to the
assignees ; and secondly, that he ought not to have re••
ported that it ought to be made to Mr. Haynes.
The Learned Gentleman said that under the circum-
stances of the case there was strong ground to pre-,
sume that there never was any valid conveyance from Wol-
lason to Haynes ; and, moreover, that if there were Mr.
Haynes had concealed it, notwithstanding many occa-
sions had occurred in which it was his duty to have
brought forward his claim, and had permitted the as-
signees to lay out upwards of 1,0001. on the property in
building without informing them of it, and, therefore, if
the mortgage subsisted, it was not competent for him to
set it up against their title ; and that if Haynes was en-
titled to a conveyance, it was to a conveyance by way of
mortgage only, and that still a conveyance should be
made to the assignees, subject to the mortgage to
Mr. Haynes.
Mr. KINDERSLEY, on behalf of Mr. Haynes, contended
that his client was entitled to a conveyance of the fee
simple and inheritance of the property, by way of mort-
gage, than which neither then, nor at any other time,
had Mr. Haynes made any other claim. The bill al-
leged that Mr. Haynes had no claim at all, and that the
assignees were entitled to the conveyance of the pro-
perty, on the ground of the money they had
laid out upon it ; but, in their own state-
ment of facts, there was no suggestion that
they had expended the money in ignorance that
Mr. Haynes had a lien on the property; they only said
that Mr. Haynes had not communicated it. The equity
they attempted to set up was such as no one would dis-
pute if it existed ; but there was nothing in the affi-
davit to show that they were led into the expense they
had incurred on the estate, without being aware of a
charge upon it. The reason it did not appear
in the balance-sheet of the bankrupt's accounts
was, that it was not thought necessary to in-
clude that or the other liens on the estate.
Up to the moment at which the proceedings commenced
Mr. Haynes had no reason to believe but that the as-
signees were perfectly well acquainted with his claim. It
was stated that on one occasion Mr. Haynes stated it to
Mr. Timmings, who said that it was of no effect, and that
subsequently Mr. Haynes wrote, offering to submit the
validity of his lien to arbitration. The money expended
on the property by the assignee was not laid out until
after they had received full notice of the lien ; and, there-
fore, if they, nevertheless, thought proper to expend
money on the property, Mr. Haynes was entitled to the
benefit of it. He, therefore, asked of his Lordship to
overrule the exceptions, and when the case should come
on for further directions to deal with it as he should
think fit.

bill was filed in November, 1839. It appeared that in
October, 1820, the plaintiffs had arrested Colt the hus-
band for two quarters of the annuity thMn due, obtained
judgment against him, and charged payment in execu-
tion. Searle, in whose favour that annuity was granted,
died in the year 1835, and it does not appear that any
part of the annuity was paid since the year 1820. Searle
died intestate, and the present plaintiff had taken out an
administration to his estate. It was upon that state of
facts, the plaintiff founded his title.
The arguments in the cause had not been terminated
when the Court rose, shortly before four o'clock.

QUEEN'S BENCH-(THIS DAY.)
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
BROOKE V. FENNY AND OTHERS.

Mr. KELLY was heard in support of the rule. It
would certainly Le a matter of much surprise and regret
to him, if their Lordships should be of opinion that a
surveyor proceeding under the Highway Act would be
justified in destroying the property of one of the Queen's
subjects in the manner that had been shown in the pre-
sent case. He would remind the Learned Judge before
whom the case was tried, that a portion of some of the
trees was produced at the trial, and they were of a
height and thickness which, in the eyes of any fair
Jury would have at once put an end to the
case. Their Lordships would be of opinion the
case must go down for a new trial, inasmuch
as the verdict was against the evidence given on both
sides. He was satisfied that when he had called their
attention to the terms of the Act of Parliament, and the
defects in the order of the Justices, they would be of
opinion that these proceedings could not be maintained.
He was surprised at the argument of his Learned Friend,
that because the plaintiff in the first instance sought to
obey the order he acquiesced in what was done after-
wards. That was an argument which would have
very little weight with the Court. He would now
refer to the language of the 65th section, because
upon it the whole question turned. Now the
effect of the section was, that where a manager alleges
before Justices that the owner of certain land or hedges
next adjoining the highway had failed to cut it, and that
the sun and wind were prevented from coming to the
road, whereby it was injured, then the Justices might
determine the question between the parties, and might
make an order upon the owner of the land to cut and top
his hedge in such manner as that the road should not
be prejudiced. Then followed a proviso, that where
the Justices made an order, and the owner of the land
refused to obey it, then the surveyor himself may
proceed to do the act. It was as clear as the lan-
guage of the Legislature could make it, that the power
of the surveyor to cut these trees was conditional, and
dependent upon the Justices having made such an order.
Now, he thought he could show their Lordships very
conclusively, that the parties never made such an order
within the meaning of the Act of Parliament.
Lord PENMAN thought the order was a sufficient pro-
tection to the surveyor. He could not be supposed to
examine with special pleading accuracy that the order
was in the precise terms of the Act of Parliament. It
was only necessary that the thing should be substantially
correct, and then the surveyor was bound under a penalty
to do it.

Mr. KELLY submitted that the real question was,
whether the order was legal or not ?—and to answer
that, they must look to the framing of the Act of Par-
liament. If the defendants in the present case had
not • complied with its provisions, the verdict could
not be supported. Now, the order directed the
surveyor to cut and prune these trees, but it did not
state the object for which that act was to be performed,
and that was an express contravention of the terms of
the statute. The Learned Counsel having referred to the
other points in the case.
The COURT said it was impossible not to lament that
when the wording of the statute was so clear that
it had not been adopted in the order of the Ma-
gistrates, and thereby have saved the very long
argument that had taken place upon the question.
The objection on that point appeared to the Court to
be a good one, because when a party was called upon to
exercise a discretion his attention should be called to the
object for which that was to be done. On these grounds
the Court was of opinion that the rule for a new trial
must be made absolute.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
BRADSHAW V. BRADSHAW.

This was an action brought to recover 551. 19s. Bd., an
excess of composition paid to the defendant. The plain-
tiff was insolvent, being indebted to the defendant. A
compromise for 10s. per pound was entered into with his
other creditors, but the defendant refused to come in.
The father-in-law of the plaintiff thinking it would provee
his son's ruin, gave the defendant 55/. 19s. Bd. to induce
him to sign the deed of composition. This was done
without the LlEnowledge of the plaintiff. As soon as he
became aware of it he brought his action for the recovery
of the excess. It was tried before Lord Abinger, who
nonsuited the plaintiff. .

Mr. ERLE liad obtained a rule nisi to enter a verdict
for the plaintiff, or for a new trial, cause against which
was now shown by
Mr. THESSIGER, who contended that as the father-in-
law had paid the money voluntarily, as there was no
pressure upon him, he could not maintain an action for
its recovery ; and as he could not give the plaintiff a
title which he had not himself, which he had not him-
self, the nonsuit was right. The Learned Gentleman
cited many cases in support of his view of the case, and
also to show that the transaction having been concluded,
no action was maintainable. He admitted that had the
defendant been seen seeking to enforce an agreement
which was clearly in fraud of the other creditors, he
could not have recovered, as its illegality would have
been a good defence.
Mr. ERLE and Mr. BrtAmWELL appeared in support of
the rule, and contended that a fraudulent preference was
in itself illegal, even although the money was not that of
the debtor. As the defendant could not enforce any
such an illegal agreement, could he do so indirectly by
circulating the bills givenhim for such preference ?
The COURT were of opinion that there should be a
further inquiry, because no evidence had been given of
the payment of the bills. Neither did it appear that
they were in the hands of third parties, when they were
paid. They would therefore make the rule for a new
trial absolute, the costs to abide the event.

SPIRIT of the-1-)--ÜBIAC--3—OURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.

GLOBE.—The congratulations addressed by Lord
Lyndhurst to the company at the Lord Mayor's din-
ner, taken with the history of the " legislative pro-
vision" with which his Lordship coonected them, sim-
ply means, that the Tories " struggled" successfully to
prevent the public from deriving from it the advan-
tages it proposed to confer, by facilitating the adminis-
tration of justice in that Court, which had become a
nuisance rather than a benefit, in consequence of the
tardiness of its proceedings—until they should be able
to select the additional Judges from their own party
ranks, and provide for the son of Lord Abinger in the
way we have described, by fastening him—as a recom-
pense for a few months occupancy of an enormously-
paid office about to be abolished—a pensioner upon the
public revenue ! So much for the subject-matter of
Lord Lyndhurst's laudatory oration—the "WE have
at length been able to obtain," to which the citizens
were expected to respond with suitable " cheers."
Lord Lyndhurst is egregiously mistaken if he sup-
poses that the newly•appointed Chancery Judges, or
the newly-issued Chancery Commission, will remove
" the standing roproach on the Court of Chancery."
The evils in which that "standing reproach" originated,
sink deeper into the system than they will wenture to
sound, and rise higher than they will presume to soar,
in search of their origin, or the patronage which pro-
tects and fosters them. The Court of Chancery, to
be worthy of, or worth anything to the country, must
be so constituted as to be placed in a condition to ad-
minister justice at cheap and easy rate to all Isuitors,
be the value of the property in dispute 500,0001.,
or only 501. To palliate the evils which abound
in the constitution of that Court, is rather to retard
the crisis which assuredly awaits it, and which can
be postponed only to the period when the institu-
tions of the country are adapted to the improved spirit
and character of the age. The additional Judges, and
the newly-issued Commission may serve to ward off the
dreaded crtastrophe from those of the present genera-
tion who batten upon the harassing delsys and ruinous
expenses to suitors in that " standing reproach" upon
the public justic of the country.
STANDARD.—The happy birth of the Heir Ap-
parent, and the safety of a beloved Sovereign, are still
the engrossing subjects of interest, and we should feel
shame for the degeneracy of Englishmen if any other
subject rivalled them ; hut there is do cause for appre-
hension of such an occasion to blush. Englishmen
are what they always were. Their public virtue has
its root where only national virtue can ever flourish—
in the reverence for domestic duties and domestic
affections ; they are the best citizens, because they are
first the hest sons, husbands, and fathers ; but aq
their highest domestic affections are now awakened
in sympathy with their Sovereign and her family.
It is almost to desecrate the love of which Queen
Victoria is with so many millions the object, to
mingle with it any consideration of loyalty, still
more to alloy it with a sense of personal interest ; but
were it not indeed an unnecessary task to reinforce the
feeling of personal affection by considerations of loyalty
and of interest, the birth of an heir to the British
Crown and to the House of Hanover suggests such
considerations in ample profusion. The Crown of
E gland is held by older, more numerous, and
in, re sacred titles than any crown in the world.
It, tenure is of the extent of or .e thousand years at
les st ; and though that tenure hat been in early times
broken by interruptions, these interruptions have been
br.ef, and the possession has constantly reverted to
the family of her who now adorns it. This proves no
D.vine right—but it proves the general virtue of the
family to which the glorious inheritance has constantly
been reserved, and the indelible loyalty of the British
nation. The dignity of the Crown of England is in-
deed transcendent, and it has been so guarded by Pro-
vidence to the family holding it for a thousand y ears,
that there is some excuse for the votaries of Divine
right. It is, however, upon the heads of the Hanover
branch of the Illustrious House of England that the
British Crown has beamed with the greatest brilliancy
—a brilliancy not less splendid because mild and
beneficent.

Lord LANGDALE, after hearing Mr. Turner, in reply,
said that it appeared to him that the evidence before the
Master on the part of the exceptants did not establish that
distinct equity, by virtue of which he could establish that
a conveyance such as was sought ought not to be made
to Haynes. He, therefore, thought he must overrule
the objections, and decree that the conveyance must be
made to Haynes, subject to being redeemed by the as-
signees. The only difficulty he might have on fur-
ther directions was one which he owned he
might try to get over. He did not think that
it was as clearly made out as lie could desire, that
the assignees had full and complete knowledge of
this lien, though they had some knowledge, no doubt.
Ile should therefore try and so frame the decree, as to
leavo it open to the assignees to try other means to esta•-
blish their equity, if they should be so advised.

VICE CHANCERY-THIS DAY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
(Before Vice Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
SEARLE V. COLT AND OTHERS.

The parties interested in the cause were the "plaintiff,
Edward Searle, the personal representative of a person
named Andrew Searle, to whom the defendants Mr. and
Mrs. Colt granted an annuity of 122/. per annum,
charged upon certain freehold premises in Bushbury, in
the county of Stafford. Sir John Dutton Colt was the sur-
viving trustee of the marriage settlement of Mr. and Mrs.
Colt ; and in him the legal fee of the premises was
vested, and Robert Abraham, the legal personal repre-
sentative of a subsequent grantee of an annuity which
was charged on the same premises as the original an-
nuity, and also upon certain leasehold 'premises in
the county of Ilerts. Both the plaintiffs Edward
Searle, and the defendant, Robert Abraham, claimed
representatively. Abraham had also vested in trust for
him, as upon legacy, an old mortgage term for 500
years, which affected those freehold premises at Bush-
bury, and which term was created in June, 1749. The
object of the bill filed in the cause was, in sub-
stance, to insist that the annuity granted to the in-
testate of the defendant Abraham was in effect void for
want of proper enrolment, and to obtain for the plaintiff
the benefit of 500 years, which term, either in whole or
part, was vested in a person named Bevon, for
the benefit of Mr. and Mrs. Colt. The plaintiff
claimed the assignment of that term as a fur-
ther security for the payment of his annuity.
The facts of the case were these. On the marriage of
Mr. and Mrs. Colt in March, 1804, a marriage settlement
was executed, by which the freehold premises at Bush-
bury were conveyed to two trustees, the survivor of
whom was the defendant, Sir John Dutton Colt, upon
trust during the life of Mrs. Colt, so as to vest the legal
fee in those trustees to pay the yearly rents, profits, &c.,
of those premises to such person or persons, or tor their
use, as Mrs. Colt should from time to time direct, or for
want of such directions then to pay the rents and profits
to Mrs. Colt during her life to her separate interest.
The legal fee in those premises, therefore, by that set-
tlement became vested in the trustees ; and long
antecedent to the execution of that settlement
the mortgage before-mentioned, for the term of 500
years, was created on those premises, and vested in trust
for Abraham in the following way :—At the time of the
assignment, there was clue upon the mortgage of that
term, a sum of 463/., to a person named Smith, who,
upon the occasion of granting the annuity to the de-
fendant Abrahams, intestate, assigned that term to
fi
Bevon upon trust, for the purpose of securing the annuity
to Abrahams, subject to any trust for Colt and his wife.
Part of Abrahams' consideration money for the purchase
of the annuity
intestate.
tWle2set2na/Tt.t )teoe
'chat
consideration
annumwtal mortgage to Smith.
;rs
anted
an
thele plaintiff's
of
firs. Colt
o
Long antecedent to those transactions Mrs. Colt eTanted
annuity •
nt annuityAndrewmon ey fo r during
itl theySearle,a
7931.; and the date of the deed granting
that
annuity
was April, 1810. It was charged upon those freehold
premises of Bushbury, and by the same deed those pre-
mises were conveyed by Mr, and Mrs. Colt
. to a person
named James Thorpe, for the term of 99 years, if Mrs.
Colt should so long live. For the better securing that
annuity, and by the same • annuity-deed, Colt, the husband,
covenanted with Searle for the due payment to him of it.
• The annuit, was paid from time to time by Colt or his
his wife to Searle. It was paid, according to the plaintiff,
down to some time in the early part of the year 1820.
That point was one of those as to the satisfactory proof
of which a question was raised by the defendants. The

COURIER.—There is net a quaraer of the British
dominions, widely extended as they ;are, in which
the birth of a Prince of Wales will not be hailed

TRE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER li, 1841.

with an equal degree of vivid end joyous enthu-
siNstn, ns that which hailed the auspicious event on
Tues(lay throughout the len;th and breaclili of
this vast metropolis. The birth of the heir appa-
rent to the throne of these realms has been ever
signalized in British history as an occasion for the
outpourings of gratitude and thankfulness to the All-
wise Disposer of all human events as for the manifcs.
tations of that ardent and affectionate loyalty which so
prominently marks the charactea of Englithmen.
With us, thank heaven ! loyalty is not a bare ab-
straction ; it is a vivifying princfple, inspiring senti-
ments of reverence and love for the person of the
Sovereign, of obedience and attachment to sovereignty
itself, and if ever the nation was permitted to gibe way
to its joyous and generous impulses wholly and unre-
servedly—if ever there was an event cmanecred with the
occupants of the British Throne which may be celebrated
by all classes, ranks, and conditions of people, as not
only a present blessing but the promise of innumerable
future ones—it is that which thrilled all loyal and faith-
ful hearts with joy on Tuesday last. The nation re-
joices in it as filling up the measure of her gracious
Majesty's happiness—as gladdening the heart of
her Illustrious Consort—not more illustrious by ex-
alted s'ation, than by the sublimest virtues, and as
realising the fondest hopes of an anxious and grateful
people. Our beloved Queen has endeared herself to the
hearts and affections of every class of her subjects, by a
combination of the rarest moral and intellectual attri-
butes. In every quality that dignifies the woman, and
becomes the Queen of a free people, our present gra-
cious Majesty stands alone and unapproached, the per-
fect model of every womanly and queenly virtue. And
therefore it is, that even on personal grounds she com-
mands the dutiful affections of her people. During her
short reign (may it be long and glorious) she has in
every act of her life shown herself a truly constitutional
monarch--benevolenty anxious to promote the welfare
of her people, to consult their wishes and be guided by
their legitimately and constitutionally expressed advice!

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nov. 10.

SMITH AND MARSHALL'S BANKRUPTCY-THE LATE

TALLOW SPECULATIONS.

In this case the sitting was for the choice of assignees,
and proof of debts against the joint and separate estates
of these bankrupts, described as Russia brokers, of
Austinfriars. There was a large attendance of creditors
present.
Mr. MAYNARD, who appeared for the petitioning cre-
ditor, said there was a number of creditors who sought
to prove upon contracts, the relative position of some of
which materially differed from others. He proposed to
submit them in regular order to the Court for its de-
cision. The first was that of Messrs. Raleigh and Co.,
for 4,3451., which showed a guarantee on the face of it
made by the bankrupts for John Marshall and Sons, in
favour of the claimants, and which was signed in the re-
gular way. The custom of business at the Baltic Coffee-
house was, he was given to understand, to hold the
broker liable for all contracts made, whether a guarantee
was given or not. With respect to that, however, he
thought in all probability the Court would differ, when
the circumstances of these particular cases came before
it. In the case of Messrs. Raleigh the guarantee was fully
stated, with the consideration paid—namely, a sovereign.

Mr. Commissioner FANE said, he could not refuse the
proof if no objection was raised. It appeared to him all
regular enough.
Mr. MAYNARD could see no objection to the proof. He
had mentioned it to bring the proofs in regular order
before the Court.
Mr. H. Thornton, a creditor, wished an examination
of the bankrupts, to prove the actual passing of the con-
sideration stated. In a case some time ago before one
of the Commissioners, and in which he was a heavy suf-
ferer, all proofs of this sort were disallowed if it was not
shown that the consideration had passed.
Mr. Marshall (one of the bankrupts) was examined on
this point. He could not swear that he received the con-
sideration. He usually received it, and made a memo-
randum of it, but for this contract he could find no entry
of the receipt of the sovereign.
Mr. Commissioner FANE was open to argument on the
subject, and would readily hear all that had to be said.
Mr. MAYNARD did not apprehend that the non-pay-
ment of the consideration made a material difference,
for if it had not been paid it was still owing, and was re-
coverable by rate of action. In the case of policies of
insurance it was well known the underwriters made the
premium received, whereas, in fact, they did not receive
it till the arrival of-the vessel.

Mr. HUBBARD (who at this stage of the proceedings
entered the Court) said he at the next meeting should
have a number of heavy proofs to put forward on the
strength of a guarantee without consideration. He
hoped, therefore, in the present discussion his case would
not be prejudged before he had had the opportunity
of supporting it.
Mr. MAYNARD said he had purposely abstained from
involving the cases in one common discussion, with the
view to let each stand upon its respective merits. He
then referred to the 4th section of the Statute of Frauds,
for the principle of guarantees, and for which he con-
tended that as long as the consideration was stated it was
sufficient to bind the parties making the contract.
Mr. Commissioner FANE was understood to say that
that was his present impression. In these cases it seemed
that the guarantee was given on the payment of the no-
minal sum of one sovereign for the increase of business.
The principle that Lord Ellenborongh had laid down for
guarantees they had modified to the shortest, and, what
appeared to him, the best method, for the convenience of
their trade.

After further discussion, in which it appeared that
Mr. Maynard was not quite prepared to go fully into
the whole cf the proofs, the consideration of them was
further adjourned, the Commissioner stating that it
would be useless to go into one or two before him now,
as he should not sit again for some time. The better
plan, he said, would be to take the whole of these proofs
before the Commissioner, who would on the next occa-
sion take the cases, and then argue them seriatim. They
then could all be disposed of at one sitting. Or, if the
creditors throught proper, a day could be set apart for
their consideration.

As the creditors all agreed with the suggestion, a day,
it was understood, will be named for the disposal of these
proofs.
The debts admitted at this sitting amounted to 21,8001.
and the assignees chosen were Mr. Richard Thornton
and Mr. Charles.

INSOLVENT DEBTOR'S COURT, Nov. 10.

TN THE MATTER OF JOHN RANGELEY.

The insolvent in this case applied to be liberated on
bail. Mr. Montague, of Grove-street, Camberwell, and Mr.
Curtis, of Church-street, offered themselves as sureties.

In a rigid cross-examination by the Learned COM-
MISSIONER, previous to entering on the solvency of the
bail, the insolvent stated that in May, 1840, he was
granted a patent for a certain description of wheels to be
used on railways, called safety rotation wheels, by which
danger would be much diminished. A company was
formed under the nam^ of the Safety Rotation Com-
pany, of several influential individuals, for the pur-
purpose of carrying his invention' into practical utility,
amongst whom was the present Lord Mayor, and to
which Mr. Cornwall Barron Wilson was solicitor.
In endeavouring to perfect his invention he had incurred
considerable expense, and was obliged to deal largely in
accommodation bills. His debts were considerable, and
tne only available assets for the creditors was his patent,
the right in which he had sold to the Company for the
sum of 61,500/., which was to be paid as soon as the in-
vention was found to be practicable. To two branches
of the Society, called the Irish and English Companies,
he had also sold a portion of his rights as patentee for
about 3001.
Mr. Commissioner LAW said it was to be regretted
that if there were so many influential persons forming
the Company, they did not step forward to assist him in
perfecting his invention, without obliging him to rob
the public, for by no other name than robbery could he
designate the conduct of persons who recklessly dealt
with accommodation bills. However, as the insolvent
was a very old man, and he (the Learned Commissioner)
was satisfied of the solvency of the gentlemen offering
themselves as bail, he should order his release.
The insolvent was then liberated on bail.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

John Richard Paccard, Joseph Paccard, and John
Kennot, were again placed at the bar, before Mr. Jardine,
yesterday, having been remanded since Saturday,
charged on suspicion with having administered delete-
rious drugs to Michael Aungier, thereby causing his death.
Previous to the entrance of the prisoners into Court
an arrangement had been come to by the solicitors on
both sides, that the prisoners should be remanded until
Friday next, in consequence of the absence of Mr. Hall,
who had heard the evidence already given before the
Court in the case ; and inasmuch as the prosecutors wee
not prepared at the moment to bring forward their wit-
nesses.

Mr. JARDINE, addressing the prisoners, said he was
sorry to find, from the doubtful nature of the Coroner's
verdict, that he could not then dismiss them. He would,
therefore, remand them till Friday next, when Mr. Hall
would give his final decision in the matter.
QUEEN-SQ UARE.
Robert Smith, a man about forty years of age, whose
appearance and manner evinced his having seen better
days, was charged with having attempted to break a
lamp in the street.

A police-constable of the B division proved that he
saw defendant at eleven the previous night throw two
oyster shells at a gas lamp in Sloane-street. He took de-
fendant into custody, when the latter admitted that he
had tried to break the lamp in order to be sent to prison.
Mr. BURRELL asked defendant what he had to say to
the charge ? Defendant—l did endeavour to break the
lamp in order that I might be sent to prison. I have no
roof, no home, no food, no shelter ; nor have I the means
of procuring any.
Mr. BURRELL—Where is your parish ? Defendant
—I came from the neighbourhood of Dorking, Surrey,
but I decline mentioning the name of the parish.
Mr. BURRELL—Where have you been living recently;
you surely must have some relations or friends ? De-
fendant (despondingly)-4 have plenty of relatives, but,
alas ! no friends. I failed as a gardener in Kent, and
came to London, where I felt into deep distress. I can-
not beg, and never yet have stolen.
Mr. BURRELL observed that he could not commit the
defendant to prison, as he had committed no offence.
He was, therefore, discharged.
The defendant declared that he must commit an of-
fence for which he would be sent to prison, as it was the
only refuge left to him.

LAMBETH-STREET.
Yesterday William Virtue, who stood remanded since
Monday last, was placed at the bar for final examination
on a charge of stealing a telescope, of the value of 31.,
from the Ordnance Map-office in the Tower, during the

prevalence of the fire in that fortress on the morning of
Sum] lv week.

It appeared from the evidence adduced that the pri-
soner had been employed during the fire in carrying
maps, &c., from the Ordnance-office. The telescope in
question was identified by its owner, Mr. Baker, an
engraver employed in the Ordnance Department, as his
property, and was left by him safe on leaving the Tower
on the Saturday on which the calamity happened.
A pawnbroker produced the telescope, and proved
that it was pawned by the prisoner.
By other witnesses the prisoner was identified as hav-
ing been active at the fire, and as having partaken of
the refreshments ordered for the men who had been so
employed.
Mr. Gunner, the master of the prisoner, gave him an
excellent character, and said he had been frequently in-
trusted with the most valuable stores belonging to her
Majesty, and other property of a very costly description,
and he had always considered him, for the twelvemonths
he had been in his employment, an excellent servant.
A constable belonging to the Tower, and who had been
on duty at the. Spur-gate on the morning of the fire, to
examine persons going out, said he was confident the
prisoner, who lie knew very well, had not passed through
on the morning in question, but he did not wish to be
sworn to the fact.

A gentleman from the office of the Solicitor to the
Ordnance, who was preseut, said the case had been laid
before the Board of Ordnance, and the Board had deter-
mined on prosecuting the prisoner. He had, therefore,
to request that the prisoner might be committed for
trial on the evidence at present adduced against him.
Mr. HENRY committed him, and the witnesses were
bound over to prosecute.