The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-31 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY -(THIS DAY.

His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England heard unop-
posed petitions, short causes, and cause petitions to-day,
This was the last day of his Honour sitting.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Win n.8:11.)
ATTORNEY GENERAL V. ➢IURDOCII.

His HoNoun gave judgment this morning in one of those
many cases arising out of the late secession from the Kirk
of Scotland, which has left a large number of the chapels in
dispute as to which party they shall belong to. The Vice-
Chancellor said the question in this case was, what were the
ti usts under which the meeting-house had been left, called
the Low Meeting-house, in the town of Berwick-upon-
Tweed. The plantiffs said that it ought to be used as a place
of worship only, according to the rules, practice, and dis-
cipline of the Kirk of Scotland, and asked the Court to do
that which would have the effect of providing that no one
should teach and preach in that meeting-house, except a
licentiate of the Kirk of Scotland. He said, supposing that
made out, the case would resemble one which had already
been before the court, the Attorney-General v. Welsh. He
had no special affection for that case, but till he heard the
principles applied in that case invalidated, or some-
thing to make him change his opinion, the Court
must continue to be guided by the same principles.
Supposing a person, a Presbyterian, in connexion with
the Kirk of Scotland, should build and endow a place of wor-
ship, to be used according to the rules and discipline of that
Kirk, and having determined that the same should be per-
petuated for all time coming, should take the means most
proper for the purpose, should direct trustees to hold the
meeting-house as a place of worship, according to the rules
of the Kirk of Scotland ; what the Court in that case would
do would be to make the Kirk of Scotland the model, as
was done in the case of the Attorney-General v. W elsb, and
also to provide that the minister should be one who would
uphold the rules, the discipline, and doc trines of the Kirk of
Scotland. Whether the minister should be a licentiate of
that Kirk was not the question here ; but it, was clear that
he could not be a man who avowedly dissented from her
rules, her discipline, and her doctrines. A stricter question,
however, might be considered here, namely—whether a man
could be a minister in such a meeting-house who openly
avowed opinions contrary to the Kirk. In the case of the
Attorney- General r. Welsh, he had, with a view to that
question, endeavoured to find out what difference of doctrine
or discipline existed between the Kirk of Scotland and the
non-intrusionists. He confessed lie had no difficulty in

seeing how those who held the belief of apostolical succession
might be consistently opposed to any interference from the
civil power, but he could not understand the consistency of
any such opposition from those who recognised a local
church government in spiritual matters. From all the
documents which he had been able to consult, and which
could throw any light on the subject, he was of opinion that
the Kirk of Scotland and the Free Church differed, and that
no trustee of a chapel established according to the rules 01
the Kirk, having seceded, could fill the pulpit and order
the worship in accordance with the Free Church. But
another argument was urged in defence, namely, that the
Church of Scotland, as it existed in 1835, prior to the dis-
ruption, and the Free Church subsequent to it, were identical
in opinion—an argument which his Honour could not re-
concile with the decisions of Chief Justice Tindal and
other eminent judges. The Auchterarder case showed
that the rules and doctrines of the Church of
Scotland were; that case introduced 1, othieg new, the deci-
sion upon it was merely declaratory. The Vice-Chancellor
said he made this remark in case the present litigation
should unhappily be continued, in order that parties might
bring their case forward in such a shape as would lead hint
to review the principles laid down in the case of the Attor-
ney-General v. Welsh. Having assumed up to this point
that the trust was that the meeting -house should be used
according to the rules of the Kick of Scotland, he came now
to Inquire how this stood. There was a deed of 1766, but
the established custom seemed to prove that the trust was
such as the infOrmation alleged: The first minister, John
Turtles', was a licentiate of the Church of Scotland; there
existed some doubt as to one of his successors on this head,
but from 1719 onwards all appeared to have been ministers
in connexion with the Church of Scotland. The deed of
1766 had been raised in argument in the defence.
Now, if the trust was a trust for any Protestant
Dissenters, the effect of that would be, that a licen•
tiate of the Church of Scotland might have been
consistently a minister of the Low Meeting-botise.
But the deed of 1766 was not the foundation of the trust,
and custom was opposed to it. Here;n this case differed front
that one to which he had alluded, that the original deed of
trust had not been proved. His Honour said, in cases like
the present, coming before Lord Eldon upon interlocutary '
applications, that Judge frequently put them in a train of
adjudication which enabled him to express his opinion at an
earlier stage. But Lord Cottenham strongly disapproved of
this mode, as giving a priority to cases of a certain kind
over others ; and in this case the Vice-Chancellor thought
an injunction would have been the source of great incon-
venience, in fact, shutting up the place of worship until the
case had been heard. He was not prepared to say that the
trust on which the meeting-house was held had been com-
pletely proved, but, looking to what had been done in the
case of the Attorney-General v. Welsh, and to the fact that
Mr. Murdoch held the opinions of the non-intrusion party,
he ordered that Mr. Murdoch should be restrained from
teaching or preaching in the Low Meeting-house, in Ber-
wick-on-Tweed, otherwise than in conformity to the doc-
trines, discipline, and practice of the Church of Scotland,
and that the plaintiff.; should be at liberty to apply to the
Court in case Mr. Murdoch should in any manner depart
from the doctrines, discipline, and practice of that church.

RAILWAY COMM'TEES.

(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE 017 LORDS.

Boom A.
SOUTH DEVON (ATATEILATXON AND

zoN).
Ex:rENs re-assembled to-day at eleven
the Blfi. He said that experience
opened the case or
nt in certain points of the
Mr. TALBOT
0_
..ptoveme
shown the necessity r i
o ' The
ocl t ;Lord members'
had
I 11
inB
am, Kingswear, and other places. The
to make branches to
.nce at a point of the South Devon Railway
tho chair.fCommittee
branches were to co
South Devon line, and
ji3t was therefore proposed by the present Bill
called Alter, and terminatem at or near the turnpike leading from
Cud-
hill. In consequence Churston Ferrers to Bori.xlf
slot% Quay,allega titiotisorwniteharresappelcatcetocatilheedleCvuelds:
;as agreed to employ an independent engineer to test the accuracy
it ii-i- sections.e lle would now proceed to call evidence.
engineer, was examined, and stated that he had ex-
oarm3tinre'djethrmisYlnin'e at the points complained of, namely, the 10th mile
3d furlong, 10111 mile 6th furlong and 6th chain, and 12th mile
2d furlong and 6th chain. With respect to the first point the depo-
sited level was 181 feet and a decimal, and the actual 186 feet de-
cimal, and the difference between the real and the stated height was
5 feet 8i,,,, inches. On the second section in question the given height
j was 133 sect decimal, and the actual height 140 decimal, 41 feet,
i making a difference of 7 feet 5 inches. 011 the third section the de-
posited height was 357 feet, the actual height 363 feet 5 inches
milking a difference of 6 feet 5 inclieF. ,
Mr. ROWE, who appeared on the part of the petitioners, the Earl
of Morley and other Owners on the line, contended that the errors
shown by the engineer were sufficient to prove the general inaccu-
racy of the line, they being selected at points suited for the purpose.
Mr. Ararts said it was proposed by his clients not to ask for that
portion of the line below Torquay, where only the property of the
petitioners was affected, and that therefore they had no right to per-
severe in their opposition to the Bill.
The room was cleared, and, on our re-admission,
The CHAIRMAN said, that in consequence of the inaccuracy of the
survey between Torquay arid Dartmouth, that that portion of the
line must be struck out of the Bill.
Mr. Brunel, engineer to the line, was then examined as to the
en-
gineering points, estimate, &c. &c. There being no opposition t
the remaining branches, the preamble of the Bill was
e proved. Committee
The clauses of the Bill were then gone through, and the
separated. .......

THEATRE FRANCAIS, KING-STREET, ST. JANES'S.—
Mr. Mitchell regrets to state, that Bladcmoiselle Rachel not
having sufficiently recovered from her indisposition, the per-
formance announced for this evening is Gf necessity postponed
till Monday evening nest.—Friday, July 31, 1846, 33, Old
Bond-street.
Robert Scott, Esq., 31-P• for Walsall, has announced
•
his determination not to -offer hirasoll again for the
,repre-
-1
tieutatiou of that .borough. • • •