The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-08 00:00:00

! similar cause; but the anxiety betrays an uneasy eon-
! science. It is said broadly that our piety springs from uo-
easiness. Such conclusions are, we know, forced on fo-
reigners by the over anxiety of our people strictly to
observe the formalities prescribed by the Church, and
to propitiate the priesthood. Neither Louis XIV. nor
Phillip 11. could buy personal peace, or the peace of
society by such methods. They built magnificent
churches, and founded magnificent colleges, without
adding either to their own happiness or promoting the
welfare of their subjects. Are the present race of
Englishmen about to tollow the example of Louis XIV.
and Phillip II.?

CHANCERY COURT-(THIS DAY.)

LOZON V. PRYSE.

The LORD CHANCELLOR was occupied the whole morr-
ing with the further arguments in this part-heard rase, the
question in which related to the tithes of timber, and the
description of wood that came under the denomination of
under wood.

CERY-(THIS DAY.)

His Honour the VICR-CIIANCELLOR took short cases,
and unopposed petitions to day.

DE IS ITT V. DE WITT.
The bill in this case was filed for the purpose of obtaining
the opinion of the Court upon the residuary clause in the will
of a gentleman named D., Witt. The testator, after giving
certain parts of his property to different individuals, gave
the residue in the following words : " And as to the rest,
residue, and remainder of my property not hitherto dis-
posed of, I give it to trustees to sell and dispose thereof
as they may think fit, and to stand possessed of the p:operty
thereof for the sole and exclusive use of m% daughter and
her children, independent of her husband." The ques-
tion in the ease under this clause, was whether Mrs. De
Witt, tho daughter, took an estate for life of the property,
independent of her children, or whether they took jointly.
His HONOUR was clearly of opinion that by the words of
the will, the wife and children took jointly, and decreed
accordingly.

LYNCH V. PHILPOTS.
This case came before the Court for the purpose of
obtaining its opinion as to the proper course to be adopted
for the purpose a securing 4,0001., which the testator in
the canse gave to his daughter upon her attaining twenty-
one, or marriage. The testator, after giving certain lega-
cies, among which was the one to his daughter, gave his
residuary estate to the plaintiff,. who now asked, upon the
authority of the decision of Sir J. Leach, that the whole
residuary property, which the executors admitted amounted
to 10,0001., should be paid te him, ho giving security to be
approved of by the Master, for the payment of legacy to
the daughter, who was now twelve..years of age, upon her
attainingitwenty-one, er marriage.
His HONOUR observed.that the decision of Sir J. Leach
was a most extraordinary one. In his opinimn the contrary
course to that adopted in that case ought to have been
taken, namely, that the whole fund in the hands of the exe-
cutors, which formed the residuary property, should be
brought into Conrt, and there remain until the time of the
young lady's attaining 21, or marriage.
After some discussion it was arranged that the executors
should pay 7,0001. into Court, to meet the legacy when pay-
able, and that the remainder of the fund in the hands of the
executors should be paid, to the residuary legatee.