The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-06 00:00:00

street, Glasgow, in favour of trustees in behalf of his
children, William, Robert, James, and John, in life-
rent, and to their children in fee and property, equally
among them. The sons Robert and James died without
leaving any issue. William, the eldest son, settled in
Montreal, where he married and died, leaving two
children, William and Sarah Agden Lapsley. In
February, 1819, these two parties were served
and returned nearest and lawful heirs of provi-
sion to their grandfather under the trust disposi-
tion. William and Sarah, therefore, their uncle,
John Lapaley, not having left any lawful issue, were in-
feft in the heritable subjects in Virginia-street. In the
course of time, the property was purchased of their
guardian, with their consent, by the father of the
respondent, for 1,4001., and until 1834, the respondent
remained in quiet possession, at which period the ap-
pellants, as the children of John Lapaley, who had died
in 1810, claimed an interest in it, and contended that
William and Sarah had no title beyond one half.
The appellants raised an action of declarator of legiti-
macy and putting to silence. The respondent, on the
other hand, had brought a reduction of the service
of the appellants, and in these conjoined pro-
cesses the judgment appealed from was pronounced.
The mother of the appellants, and who was
alleged by theni to have been " the lawful wife
of John Lapsley, their father, was a woman of the name
of Janet M-Kinlay. This female originally married
a baker of the name of Kidd, and upon his death she
afterwards united herself to one William Paul, who
subsequently went nut to the United States, in conse-
quence, as it was imputed, of the intemperate habits of
his wife. Paul went away in 1801, and settled at New
York, leaving his wife Janet in Glasgow. This last
letter that had been received from Paul was to his
brother Thomas, and bore the date of 21st of May,
1804. From this period it would seem there had been
no tidings of him. After Paul had been gone some
time, his wife contracted an intimacy with John Laps-
ley, and of this connexiO4 appOlant Robert, and
the mother of the two .other appellants, were, the
alleged offspring, their statement being that, from
the year 1807, those parties had cohabited as
man and wife, and were . babito and repute married
persons. When the matter had come before the magis-
trates of Glasgow in the 'month of April, 1810, three
months after the death of John Lapaley upon a memo-
rial from Janet 11•Kinlay, praying. for aliment for the
children as the lawful issue, of the deceased by
herself, the respondents .hasl••opposed the applica-•
tion on she ground mainly that there was no
evidence of- the death of -.Paul, her former hus-
band. The magistrates direLlid aliment, and gave
a commission to America to take proof of the death of
Paul, of which fact at that moment, they said they had
no satisfactory evident.:. The aliment, therefore, was
awarded to her children. as the illegitimate issue of John
Lapsley. The matter was subsequently carried before
the Court of Court of Session when the Court pro-
nuanced an interlocutory judgment to the effect that
the appellants were not proved to have been the legiti-
mate issue of a legitimate marriage, and therefore, that
the two children of the eldest sou, William, were the
sole parties entitled to an interest in the property in
question. The present appeal was, therefore, against
that interlocutor. _

Mr. Stuart Wortley and Mr. Anderson were counsel
for the appellants; and Mr. G. Turner and Mr. Bolt
supported the decision of the Court below.
Mr. S. WORTLEY concluded his reply to-day, and
Their LoaDstries postponed giving judgment till
Thursday next.
COMMITTEE FOR PRIVILEGES AND ELECTION FOR RE-
PRESENTATIVE PEERS FOR SCOTLAND.
The House will sit in a Committee for Privileges on
Tuesday next, April 11, for the purpose of taking into
consideration the resolution of the House of March 21,
with respect to the election of Representative Peers for
Scotland; also to consider the cases. of
The Saye and Sele Barony;
The Crawfurd and Lindsay Peerage;
The Marquis of Drogheda's claim to vote for Repre-
sentative Peers for Ireland;

The Earl of Lanesborough's claim to vote for Repre•
sentative Peers for Ireland; and

Lord • Dufferin and Claneboy's claim to vote for Re,
presentative Peers for Ireland tor Ireland.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY

OLD COURP.

STABBING .- Yenry Parker a tailor, aged 26, was
found guilty of dangerously wounding Mary Ritchie, a
young woman with whom he had cohabited for some
time, and by whom she was in the family way at the
time. The case must be fresh in the recollection of our
readers. The woman had left him, and gone to her
mother, and because she would not come to him when
he came for her to her mother's house, although he
had previously told her he would see her no more, he
rushed into the room, where she stabbed her several
times, and then similarly assaulted her mother.

The prisoner was found Guilty.—Sentence was de
(erred.

THE CHARGE AGAINST LORD KINGSTON.—At five
o'clock this evening the grand jury at the Central Cri-
minal Court ignored the bill charging him with inde-
cently assaulting George Call, on Friday last.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY.)
I3ODMIN.
The rest . of the day was taken up with Mr. Sergelw).
Wringhani%Tsaimmiug lity ow behalf of Mr. Lac y,14
Mr. Wordsworth's reply to the case of the".petitionin
on behalf of Mr. Wyld.
The Committee adjourned at four, till eleven o'clock
to-morrow morning.

GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ELECTIONS.
The General Coinmittee of Elections re-assembled
this afternoon at:two o'clock; Mr. Tux Maule in the
chair.
The parties engai'ad in the prosecution of the Chel-
tenham, Walsall, and Leicester petitions (being the three
cases which stood for nomination- to-day) having been
called in,

The CHAIRMAN announced that in consequence of the
Election Recognizances Bill not having yet passed
through the Lords, they were not.in a position to justify
their striking any
,petitions to-day, and as there would
be a further delay before the Bill could pass into a law,
the Committee had determined' to adjourn the appoint•
ment of the Cheltenham and Leicester Committees till the
4th of May, and the Walsall, Dublin, and Longford Com-
mittees till the Bth of May.
The Committee then adjourned.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENIN G.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool.
sack at Five o'clock.

ODD FELLOWS.
The Duke of WELLINGTON presented several
petitions .from the societies of Odd Fellows, praying to
Le put on the same footing as Friendly Societies.
. ANSWER To THE ADDRESS.
Eatl FORTESCUE, the Lord Steward of the Royal
Household, brought .tin her Majesty's answer to the
address of their Lordships, congratulating her Majesty
on the birth .of a Princess. The following is the
answer :
" Lords,—l have received your affectionate and
loyal address with the • truest satisfaction. I sincerely
thank you for your congratulations on the birth of a
Princess, and .the regard which you express on this
occasion for my person and family."
. . • NAVIGATION-LAWS.
The Earl of EGLINTON presented a petition from
Gla>gow against any alteration in the navigation-laws.
DENUNCIATIONS FROM THE ALTAR.
The. Earl .of MOUNTCASIIEL presented petitions
from different parts ut Ireland against denunciations at
the altar.
Earl FORTESCUE presented petitions from several
societies of Odd Fellows praying to be put on the same
footing as friendly societies.
Lord.BEAUMONT presented similar petitions,
The. Bishop of WINCHESTER presented petitions
from Winchester .and Salisbury against the duty on
charitable bequests.
RASTER RECESS.
Lord. STANLEY wished to know from her Majesty's
Government at what period they intended to propose the
adjournment. of the house for the Easter recess, and for
what duration,; he, also wished to know whether, sup-
posing .the Jewish .Disabilities Bill came up from the
House of Commons. before Easter, it was their intention
to proceed with that measure before the Easter recess?
The. Marquis of .LA.NSDOWNE did not see any
reason, at present, why the usual coarse should not be
adopted, of reoving..the adjournment of the House on
Tuesday in Passion Week, till the Tuesday week
following, nor did .be see any reason why the measures
alluded to by the Noble Lord should interfere with the
adoption of the usual course.
..PROPERTY TAX BILL.
Thelfarquis of LANSDOWNE then rose to move the
second. reading of the Property-tax Bill. The Noble
Marquis went at some length into the provisions of the
Bill and the.. exigencies of the State that required the
re-enactment of the property-tax for three years,
and was . .