The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-03 00:00:00

ADMIRALTY, JUNE 1.

Her Majesty having been graciously pleased to com-
mand that a medal should be struck to record the ser-
vices of her fl,ets and armies during the wars com-
mencing in 1793 and ending in 1815, and that one
should be conferred on every officer, non-commissioned
officer, petty officer, soldier, and seaman, who was
present in any action, naval or military, to com-
memorate which medals have been struck by command
of her Majesty's royal predecessors, and distributed to
superior officers, according to the rules of the service at
that time in force;

All officer 3, petty offices, and seamen, who consider
that they are entitled to receive this mark of their
Sovereign's gracious recollection of their services, and of
her de,ire to record the same, are to send, in writing,
the statement of their claims, addressed to the Secretary
of the Admiralty, Whitehall, London, specifying fur
what action, and at what period of time, the claim is
preferred, and the names of the persons or the titles of
the documents by which it can be established.
A boar.' of officers will be appointed to take into con-
sideration the facts stated in these apphcations, and to
report upon the same to the Lords Counnisioncrs of the
Adtntratty, for the information of her Majesty, so as to
enable those commanded by her Majesty to deliver to
the clair»4nts the maids accordingly.
The names of all those who may apply for the naval
medal will be classed alphabetically, and to each name
will be appended the actions at which the claimant may
have been present, proof of which must be given to the
entire satisfaction of the board.

The occasions for which medlls have been granted by
the Sovereign are spce.fied below for general information
and guidance.
By command of the Lords Commissioners
of the Admiralty,

11. G. WARD.
GOLD MEDALS (TO FLAG OFFICP:BS AND CAPTAI S)
WERE ISSUED BY THE ADMIRALTY FOR THE ACTIONS
UNDER MENTIONED:-

Ist June, 1794, Lurd Howt's victory over the French
fleet.

14th Febrdary, 1797, Lord St. Vincent over the
Spanish fleet.
11th of October, 1797, Lord Duncan over the Dutch
fleet.

Ist August, 1798, Lord Nelson, battle of the Nile.
15th October, 1;99, Captain Sir Edward flatnilten
Surprise. Heirnione reeaptur,d.

21st October, 1805, Lord Deleon, battle (4 Trafalgar.
4th November, 1805, Sir It. Strachan, French s.qua
drun taken. • "

6th Feburary, 1806, Sir J. Duckworth, action off Si
Domingo.

_
I,t January; 1807, Captain Brisbane, Arethusa arid
three others. Cur: oti taken.
10,h November, 1808, Captain M. Seymour, Amethyst,
Thetis captured.
• 6th July, 180.6, Captain Stewart, Radere Zaffer, Sea-
horse (Turkish frigate) captured.
6th July, 1809, Captain Mounsey, Furieuse, Bonne
Citoyenne captured.
13th March, 1811, Captain W. boste, Amphion and
three others, action off Lisa. _

0:h August, 1810, Captain C. Cole, Bonde Neira, Caro
line taken.

22d February, 1812, Captain Talbot, Rivoli, Victorious
c: pturcd.

lit June, 1813, Capt•.iin Broke, Chesapeake, Shannon
captured.

27th March, 1814, Captain E. Palmer, L'Etoile,Hebrus
captured.

. _
15th JAnhary, 1815, Captain IL Hope, President, En
dymion defeated.

EXTENSIVE ROBBERY OF SIR ALEX. M4KENZIE.—
Monday information was received at all the police stations
of the following extensive robbery, committed on the 28th
tilt., at Christie's Hotel, St. James/s-street, when the follow.
ing property of Sir Alexander M•Kenzie, contained in a
Russia leather travelling portfolio, was abstracted, viz.:-
1551. in Bank of England notes, in three 104, Nos. 17,661,
17,662, and 17,664; tour 10/., numbereA 97.424 to 97,427 in-
clusive; four 5/., numbered 69,983 to 69,986 inclusive five
5/., numbered 27,330 to 27,334 inclusive; the dates of all the ;
above are not at present known. A 10/. and four Si. notes,
and 221. in gold, a small Geneva watch, having a small gchd
brequet chain attached; ten of Messrs. Coutts and Co.'s
circular notes, payable on the Continent, for 25/. each, dated
the 25th of May, 1847, and numbered from 3,401 to 3,416 ,
and Messrs. Coitus and Co.'s letter of credit in favour of Sir'
Alexander 111‘lienzie, addressed to Messrs. les Freres Beth-
men and Co., at Frankfort. fur 3004, bearing date the aBth of
May, 1847, •
bOUTII DEVON RAILWAY.—THE ATMOSPHERIC
PRINCIPLE.—At the special meeting held a few days ago, at
Plymouth, T. Gill. Esq., in the chair, after drafts of two Bills
promoted by the company before Parliament had been ap.
proved, the Chairman entered into explanations with refer-
ence to the working of the atmospheric, and which, owing
to its recent abandonment on the Croydon line, have more
than usual interest. He said, in reply to inquiries, that
their line had bean repeatedly worked from Exeter to Daw-
Hatt in every possible way, both by heavy weights and light
weights; and all the experiments have been emu curly suc-
cessful with respect to both. A speed of seventy miles an
hour had been attained with light weights, and carrying 90 to
100 tons they obtained a ~peed of from thirty to thirty-five
miles an hour; so that they had no doubt of the success of
the atmospheric.—(Hear.) They did not wish to open it for
a less distance than fifteen miles. It could be but a very
short time before they should use the atmospheric, and et e
atmospheric only—as far as Teignmouth.—( Hear, hear.)
They were making the utmost efforts to coreple e the engines
between Teignmcuth and Newton, and in three months they
hope to get those engines ready. General Lewis -aid, after
the sinister reports that have been spread with regard to
the
atmospheric princil le, it must be pleasing to hear these
statements. Tue Chairman—These reports have never
affected us. The rumours have arisen out Of misrepresent&
lion. With reference to the. Croydon, it had been stated by
those who were not in the secret, that the reason why OA
was abandoned was the failure of the system; whereas the
system had nothing to do with it. It was a matter of expe-
diency. It was determined to abandon it because it WAS in-
expedient to have two systems of traction working within so
short a distance of each other, and because one was often an
obstacle to the other.
y
Ascot' Racks.—The female complexion has, per-
haps, no fiercer f.O than the summer, with its cteacomitunti
of heat and dust. On the drive, the ride, the promenade, or
the aquatic excureion, ladies should ever be p
ratefullrovidedrefresh with
"Rowland's Kal dor," which will be found g y
ing to the complexion, dispelling the cloud of langour and
relaxation, allaying all irritability and heat, and immediately
affording thepleasing sensation attendant on restored elas-
ticity and healthful state of the skin. As a protector. and
e preserver of the hair,
g,,wlsnd'sat Macass, Oil will be Mural
oldie efficacious, guarding
it trout the injurious operation (4.1
the sun and dust. It is necessary to see tha' the word
." Rowland's " precedes the name of the article ou the
wrapper of each, as ,spurious imitations of tlio 4194 dole-
tains character arcabroid,
. .

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
• COURT OF CHAACERY, June 2.
The Lord Chancellor sat in his Court at Westminster to-
day.

PIRYIS V. MEDDOW CROFT.

The arguments in this case, which were commenced on
Saturday, were resumed this morning. The case came before
his Lordship upon appeal from the judgment of the Master
of the Rolls, disallowing certain exceptions to the report of
the Master. The cause came before the Master of the Rolls
in November last, upon exceptions to the Master's report,
who, upon a reference directed to him, received in evidence
a decree pronounced in the Ecclesiastical Court on
the 12th of July, 1816, declaring a marriage between
William Mfddowcroft and Mary Gregory null and void on
account of the minority of the former, and because the latter
had caused the banns to be published in the name of
" Widowcroft ;" and upon that the Master bad found that
there was no lineal descendent of William and Edmund

Meddowcroft. This was now objected to; and it was said,
in addition, that he should have found William Aleddowcroft,
the son of Mary Gregory, to be his lineal descendant. James
Meddowcroft, the testator in this cause, was a solicitor car-
t-% ing on business in Gray's Inn ; and by his will he directed
his trustees to invest the income arising from his property in
the purchase of real estates, and accumulate the income for
twenty-one years. He then gave the estates to the male
lineal descendant of William Meddowcrott, the younger,
deceased, and, in case there should be none, then
he gave the estates to the male lineal descendant
of Edmund Meddowcroft, and in case there should

be none, then he directed his estates to be sold.
The testator died on the 7th of• July, 1821, and the period of
accumulation expired on the 7th of July, 1842. On the 30th
of January, 1843, a reference was directed to the Master to
a,certain whether there was any male lineal descendant of
William Meddoweroft and Edmund Bleddowcrof'. Two
states of facts were taken, in the one by William Meddow-
croft, the son of Mary Gregory, and the other by Mrs.
Huguenin, showing the state of the testator's family at the
time of the expiration of the period of accumulation; and
upon this
.inquiry, the Master received the decree of the
Ecclesiastical Court in evidence, and reported against the
claim of William Meddowcroft, the son of Mary Gregory,
and certified that there was no male lineal descendant of
William Meddoweroft, the younger, living at the expira-
tion of the period of accumulation. In 1813, William
Meddoweroft, the younger, came to London as a clerk in
the office of his uncle, James Meddowcroft. He was about
the age of eighteen, and resided in a boarding-house,
kept by Min Lewis, at No. 13, Devonshire-street, Queen-
square. He there became acquainted with Mary Gre-
gory, the widow of a lieutenant in the navy. She was
about the age_ of thirty years, and had an annuity
of 60/. a year from Government. It was said that acquaint-
ance ripened into attachment, and that in 1814, William
Meddowcroft. who represented that he had no father or
mother living, made a proposal of marriage. Mr. James
Nteddowcroft, the uncle, was apprised of this, and he ex-
pressed his determination of breaking it off. He removed
his nephew from the boarding-house. Mrs. Gregory also re-
moved, and went to reside at Craven-street, in the Strand ;
but notwithstanding this separation a correspondence was
kept up between them, and it was alleged that Mrs. Gre-
gory's friends were made acquainted with all that took
place. In 1815 the parties resolved to be married unknown
to the uncle. Mrs. Gregory gave instructions in writing to
Elizabeth Bradley, at whose house she resided, for putting
up the banns. Mrs. Bradley, without reading it, took the
slip of paper to the house of a person named Penry, the
parish clerk of St. James, Clerkenwell, and gave it to his
daughter Elizabeth, who, from this slip of paper, entered the
flames in the clerk's book as William " Widowcroft," bache-

tor, to Mary Gregory, widow. This entry was copied into
the banns-book, and in those names they were published on
the 12th, 19th, and 26th of February, 1815. On the 28th
February, 1815, the parties attended to be married, the banns-
hook was laid upon the table. illiam Meddowcroft looted
at it, and disclaimed the name of " Widowcroft.",
It was alleged that Mrs. ' iregory then refused to proCeed
with the ceremony, but this reluctance was removed upon
the name being altered in the banns .book; and upon the
assurance of both clergyman and clerk that the marriage
would be good, and that there was nr:thirg to fear, the
marriage was then solemnized. It, however, proved un-
happy, and within a year Mrs. Gregory went to reside in
Devomhire; she subsequently returned, but in consequence
of her continued unhappiness, which resulted in a miscar-
riage, she resolved to acquaint James Al eddoweroft, the uncle.
She accoidingly went to him in January, 1816; he at first
treated her with apparent kindness, but upon being
male acquainted with all the facts relating to the marriage
his manner changed, and he declared his resolution to have

it set aside, cost what it would. She was shortly afterwards
served with a citation from the Eulesiastical Court, at
the suit of the father, and then for the first time, as alleged,
she became aware that William Meddowcroft the younger
had a tattier whose name was also I,V illiam. Upon being
served with the citation, Mrs. Gregory went to Messr.
Nicholls and Bishop, the King's proctors, fer advice; but
they, after listening to her statement, required her to write
her further instructions upon paper. She then wrote that
the suit was instituted to
..set aide the marriage between

William Meddowcrott and Mary Gregory, the banns having
been published in the name of Widowcroft, but altered pre-
vious to the marriage. She also is alleged to have expressed
her determination to defend the suit at all events, though
her pension as a naval officer's widow was insufficient. It was
alleged that she told her proceedings to William Meddow-
croft, and that he told them to his uncle. During the
whole of those proceedings William Meddowcroft lived
with Mary Gregory, and on the 6th of June, 1816, she
wrote to Messrs. Nicholls and Bishop, stating that there
was a prospect of her becoming a mother, and that she
trusted a provision would be made for her child.
During the whole of this time William Meddowcroft was in
the office of his uncle, who expressed his resolution to have
the marriage annulled, but his nephew told Mrs. Gregory
that he would marry her again, and under that promise it
was alleged 'that she neglected actively to defend the suit.
It appears, however, that Dr. Jenner and Dr. Dobson ap-
peared on her behalf, but in the result Str William Scott de-
cided that the marriage was fraudulently effected, and for a
fraudulent purpose. It was said that nflections had been
made upon her character, and that she desired to go into
evidence upon that, but none was gone into, and the only
evidence produced was to show that fraud had been com-
mitted. The marriage was accordingly set aside, and
William Meddowcro.t subsequently married Miss Davis,

but died without leaving any issue, and this widow has since
married Mr. Huguenin. Upon the decease of William
lileddowcroft, the present exceptant disputed the right of
his wife to take out letters of administration to her husband.
In this, however, he was &Mated, and again in the Privy
Council. It was insisted, before the Master of the Rolls, on
behalf of William Me idoweroft, the son of Mary Gregory,
that the decree had been obtained by collusion, and it was

said that it was competent
.lor this-Court to entertain the

question; it was also Insisted that the ecclesiastical courts
had no authority to set aside a decree obtained by fraud, and

that the evidence now brought forward gave a new aspect to
the case.

Mr. Bethel!, lir. Walpole, Dr. Phillimore, and Mr. Daniel,
were in support of the appeal, and Mr. Hodgson and Mr.
Cole appealed as counsel to support the decision of the Court
below.
Mr. BETHELL resumed his arguments on behalf of the ap-
pellant this morning, and was proceeding with his address to
the Court, w hen
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated he was clearly of opinion
that IL- could ❑ot decide the case satisfactorily without the
intervention of a jury.
After same short discussion the case was directed to
stand .over for a week, in order to afford the parties an op-
portunity of considering whether, for the purpose of having
the necessary docuMents (all the witnesses being dead) be-
fnre a jury, they should file a bill for discovery only, or a
bdg for discovery and relief.

ROLLS' COOK r, June 2

THE ATTOI{NEY-6KNEItAt.; V. GIBBERT.

The arguments for the clete,:dant. in this cause were con-
cluded to-dav, but the Attorney-General not being able to
attend the further hearing of the cause was postponed tiil
Friday next. •