The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-25 00:00:00

(LEFT SITTING.)

HOUSE OF LORDS._(THIS DAY.)
The House sat to-day to hear appeals and give several
judgments. The Peers present were the Lord Chan-
cellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, the Marquis of
Westminster, and the Bishop of Hereford.

FARMER s. FARMER
Their Lordships gave judgment in this case, affirming
the decision of the Court below with costs.
v.atth`cis important
inmv.
Their Lordships judgmentLaoßrEdAslarripNsuaNlsocAgsaEve—FuLili on
case, which our readers will recollect was argued before
them a short time since upon an appeal
from the decision of th© present Lord Chancellor of
Ireland. The original suit was instituted in the Court
for the purpose of obtaining two
of one of the appellants, Maria
odfisCtrhihauntcievroy is
shlarreelsand ,
M`Carthy, and of a respondent, her sister, Catherine
M`Carthy, in the personal estate of their father, de-
ceased, Alexander M`Carthy, of Cork, merchant. The
appellant, Maria, had, with the approbation of her
father, in 1828, become a nun, and professed of the
order of St. Ursula, at Black Rock, Cork, when
her father paid to that community 1,000/. for her
admission and maintenance for life. Next year her
sister Catherine adopted the same course, and paid a
similar largo sum to the convent. The father's pro-
perty at his death amounted to upwards of 100,0001.
lie had ten children, and it was conceived that
the 1,000/. given on his daughters' admission to the con-
vent was intended to be their portion, having renounced
by their vows the world and all right of succession to
wealth. The Catholic supef iers of the convent, Cecilia
Fulham and Margaret Lynch, advised them to assert
their claim to two entire distributive shares of the
100,000/. in the Ifish Court of Chancery. This the
heir-at-law resisted for the family generally. The two
sisters had executed deeds transferring their shares to
the two superiors of the convent, which there was reason
to believe were not made without the pressure end com-
pulsion of their religious " vow of obedience" upon
taking the veil, and the Lord Chancellor acting on that
impression, decreed " That the Court otlering to direct
an issue at law to try whether the two deeds of
assignment in the proceedings mentioned, bearing
date the 29th day of December, 1843, and the 13th
day of March, 1544, were executed by the plaintiff,
Maria M`Carthy, and the respondent, Catherine
M`Carthy, as free agents ; and the counsel at
the bar for the appellants declining to take
such issue, they having insisted that, without any such

els
being directed,, the appellants were entitled to a decre
and it appearing to the Court that the deeds were not)
nor was either of them, executed by the appellant,
Maria M`Carthy, and the respondent, Catherine M'Cor
thy, as such free agents, but that, on the contrary, the
same were executed by them not of their free will, WO
under the pressure and compulsion of the vow of oho'
thence' taken by them respectively on becoMing pro;
fessed members' of the convent, and wherein they slot
remained as such members, and under the obligation of
the row, the Court declared that no relief ought to be,
given by the Court founded on deeds so obtained, 50'
thereupon his Lordship did dismiss the appellants' bill,
with costs to be paid by the appellants Cecilia Fulbote
and Margaret Lynch, without prejudice to any other
suit which the appellant Maria M'Carthy, or :the respell'
dent Catherine M'Carthy might be advised to institti
as the next of kin of their father, Alexander: M'Carthy,
deceased." From that decree the appellants appealed
and upon that appeal their Lordships now gave judgment,
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after going at some length
into the case, stated his opinion to their Lordships to be'
that the suit in the court below was improperly framed,
inasmuch as two co plaintiffs having inconsistent irate'
rests, could not join in a suit. He therefore re;
commended their Lordships to dismisi the ht"
with costs generally, but without prejudice le
any party filing a new bill ; to revele
the decree of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland so far 0
it offered the direction of an issue, but to retain it so for
as it dismissed the bill of the plaintiff with costs.
Lord BROUGHAM and Lord CAMPBELL concurred
with the Lord Chancellor, and
The HOUSE ordered the decree of the Court below le,
be reversed so far as it related to the issue, but retain&
that part which dismissed the bill. The effect of Oil
discussion is to leave all parties in the position tbd
wero before the bill was filed, but enable them to coto'
mence their proceedings de novo, in an amended for.
THE PRINCIPAL OF GLASGOW COLLEGE W. THE ATIO

NEY-GENERAL.
The further arguments on this part-heard case wlO,
resumed and concluded to-day; and
The LORD CHANCELLOR intimated that their Lord.
ships would give judgment on the case on Thursday.

BANKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONBLANQUE.)
IN RE BRADING. _
This bankrupt was the proprietor of the Stands!.
Tavern and Albert Saloon, Shepherd and Shepherds'
fields, Islington, and to-day came up to pass his last er
emulation, which had been adjourned in consequent*
the accounts not being prepared on the last occasion.
.J
Since the issuing the fiat the business has been earl
on under the management of Mr. Brading fpr the ben,
of creditors, under an order of the Court of Review,
a petition for that purpose by the trade assignee, if
anticipated being able to pay off the mortgages, v
ultimately paying a dividend of 20s. in the pound.
The bankrupt passed without opposition.

- -
MARLBRO'-STREET-(THIS DAY.)
Ann Burns, a woman of the town, was placed at Y.,
bar, before Mr. Bingham, charged with having ,tor
from the person of Mr. Robert Cornvon, a gentlell
residing at Anderton's Hotel, Fleet-street, a gold wit
value 20/.
The prosecutor said he was now staying at Andertslt
Hotel, but his real residence was at Newcastle-ur,`
Tyne. About one o'clock this morning the priso7
accosted him in the Haymarket. After some little 0.4
versation he consented to treat her to some Wir
after drinking which he went with her to a (1
place, where they stood some time. She ~
suddenly called out " Here is somebody
ing" and ran away. Ho then put his b
to his waistcoat pocket and missed his gold was
He pursued her, and accused her of the theft. ?"
said, " Oh, nonsense," and put her hand into his a
coat pocket and said " Here it is." He then foundt
there. At that time a constable came up and ho g'
her in charge.
Wells, C I, said he took the prisoner into cus
about ten minutes after one this morning. He sear
the spot where the prosecutor and the prisoner had
standing, and found the gold ring which had beeDl
from the watch.

The prisoner, in tears, denied the robbery, and
Mr. BZNGRAM remanded her for a week.