The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-05 00:00:00

ARUNDEL V. ARVNDKL.

In this case, the Dowager Lady Arundel was entitled,
under a settlement made in 1818, to a jointure of 8001.
a year, out of certain estates of the late Lord Arundel.
The next heir, feeling it necessary to dispose of these
estates, obtained Lady Arundel's reluctant consent to ex-
change the security she held on them for such is sum of
money to be placed in the funds as would bring an
annuity of the same amount. This money was invested
in the Five per Cents : but in consequence of the opera-
tions of Government on these securities, the interest, which
at one time brought 8001., was reduced to 588/. On the
matter being brought before the Vice-Chancellor, his
Honour decided that Lady Arundel was entitled to receive
the full amouut of her jointure. His Lordship fully agreed
with his Honour ; and observed that, if her Ladyship had
been bound by the mere language of certain portions of
the deed, there was no doubt she must ba confined to
the interest of the money, whatever it might prove to
be. It appeared, however, both from passages of that
deed, and from all the circumstances attending the
transaction, that her Ladyship reluctantly assented to
the change for the benefit of her family, that ahe derived
no advantage from the change, and that it was manifestly
tne intention of the parties contracting with her that she
should not sustain any loss. He was of opinion, there-
fore, that the arrears, whatever they were, must be paid
out of the corpus of the fund, and that the annuity must
also be made good, from time to time, out of the prin-
cipal. Tne appeal was therefore dismissed; and consi-
dering who Lady Arundel was, and her situation with re-
spect to the family, his Lordship dismissed it with costs.
In the case of " Phelps and Sproule," his Loansiarr
reversed the decision of the Court below.

In "Lucas v. Lucas," his LORDSHIP also differed from
the Court below, and ordered the property to be dimtri-
tinted according to the scheme he suggested at the hearing.

BLANCHARD V. CAWTIIORNE.
This was an appeal from an order of the Vice-Chancellor,
refusing to dissolve an injunction granted to protect the
receiver appointed by the Court to menace the rights and
royalties of the Court of Wyersdale, in Lancashire, pend-
ing the trial of an issue in a Court of law.
His Lordship agreed with his Honour Or it the injunc-
tion should be continued for the protection of the receiver,
who was an officer of the Court; but as he felt some
difficulty respecting the preservation of the game, he
wished it to be known that the receiver must not allow
any person to sport over the forest who had not purchased
the right, and that he was at his peril to abstain from
permitting any of his own friends to enjoy the same pri-
vilege.

ST. GEORGE V. WAKE.
This was a bill filed by an Irish Gergyma.n (the Rev.
Mr. St. George), to set aside a conveyance of one thousand
pounds and of twelve hundred pounds, in Liverpool Stock
Bonds, made by a Miss Noble to her sister, ➢lrs. Wake, on
the eve of the marriage of the latter with Mr. St. George.
The grounds stated in support of the petition were, that
the conveyance had been obtained by fraud and deceit, and
that, supposing there had been nu fraud, still that the
conveyance, being made in contemplation of marriage, was
a breach of the marital rights. His Lordship was clearly
of opinion that the charges of fraud and surprize were not
made out. The derision of the Master of the Rolls must,
therefore, be affirmed, and the bill dismissed with costs.
His Loansmr, at the rising of the Court, intimated his
intention to sit until Friday next ; but, after that, he was
determined to devote his time to the House of Lords, where
many pressing appeals required his attention.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE

HOME ClRCUlT.—Ciiorpos, Aug. 3.

The Assizes for the county of Surrey comiaenced here
yesterday : ➢lr. Baron BAYLEY preside.l at Nisi Prius
and Mr. Justice PARKE in the Crown Court.
The ❑ames of 44 prisoners are entered in the calendar,
and sotne of the offences arc of an aggravated character.

Eighty. four causes are down for trial, two of which are
for special juries.
Nothing of the slightest interest occurred in either
Court yesterday ; but Captain Henry Nicol, aged 50,
who was connected with the gang to which Captain Beau-
clerk, who destroyed himself in Horsemonger-laue Gaol
some time ago, belonged, was convicted upon the clearest
evidence of committing a felonious assault, and sentenced
to be hanged.

The following cases occurred to-day in the Crown
Court :

Joseph Knight, draper, aged 27, was indicted for
feloniously forging and uttering a false cheek for 35/., with
intent to defraud Thomas Mellersh and William Keen.
The prisoner said nothing in his defence ; and
The Jury returned a verdict of—Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE sentence dhim to transportation for
life; and intimated that he should recommend his belong-
ing to the second class of convicts, viz., those who worked
on the roads in chained gangs. His Lordship also observed
that it was absolutely necessary, in order to stop the coin-
mission of the crime of forgery, which had greatly increased
since the capital punishment bad been removed, to visit it
with a very heavy sentence. If, however, that severe se-
condary punishment should not produce the desired effect,
the Government would be obliged to return to capital
punithments—a necessity which every well-wisher to so-
ciety would wish to see avoided.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.-BURY Sr, E
Aug. 2. lIMuNDs.

TRIAL OF TWO CLERGYMEN FOR A CAPITAL
FELONY.
THE PING V. HOLDEN AND ANOTHER.

This was an indictment for a capital offonce against the
Rev. Charles Edward Holden and the Rev. Robert Fisk,
the former the Vicar of the parish of Great Cornard, in
Sala, 'he latter his curate—the former being about 70
years of age, and a feeble looking old man, apparently as
to both body and mind ; the latter a young man of a very
respectable and rather manly appearance. The case had
been removed last assizes by certiorari into the Court of
King's Bench, which was the reason of its being tried by
the civil Judge in the Nisi Prins Court. The Court
was crowded to suffocation, so that it was with great dif-
ficulty the members of the bar could get to their places.
The defendants, who were out on bail, surrendered just
before the trial. The father of the younger defendant
stood by him in Court, and by his age and stiiicted ap-
pearance excited great sympstby,

Sir JAMES SCARLETT came specially to defend.
Thomas Prigg was parish clerk in Great Cornard, in
the county of Suffolk, and was in the service of the Rev.
Mr. Holden, as a gardener and out-door servant, but al.
w ys sleeping in the house for nearly twenty-eight years ;
his master was about seventy years of ape, and a widower,
his wife having died about three years ago; the other
defendant (Mr. Fisk) was unmarried, and did duty for
Mr. Holden, as his curate—not living in the house,
but having lodgings in the parish, and coming to the vi•
eange occasionally. The witness then proceeded to state
what constituted the offence charged in the indictment.
Of the particulars of the alleged transaction a great deal
was, of course, unfit to meet the public eye, which we
shall therefore omit. He said that on the Sunday even-
ing of the 29th of July, be was coming to the parso-
nage, to sleep there, about ten at night, and as he en-
tered the garden gate, in front of the house, he saw a light
in the front window of the parlour on the ground filor.
He could see very plainly that there were two candles o❑
a table in the middle of the room, and a large old-
fashioned easy chair at the end of another table, which
stood under the window at the end next the tire-place,
its back being towards the wall of the room next
the garden in front of the house. The arms of
the chair he could plainly see, but not its back. Mr.
Holden and Mr. Fisk were in the room ; the latter was
sitting on a smaller chair near the great one, and the
former was standing in a leaning position. (Witness,
here related some particulars not fit to be detailed.) He
then saw Mr. Holden leave the place where he was, and
fasten the front door of the room next the garden. Wit-
ness on seeing him come towards the door retreated from
the window, because he thought he was coming out at the
door, and would discover him there. He returned after a
few minutes to the spot which lie had left. On looking
agai❑ through the window he saw both the defendants in
the room in a different position. (The witness here de-
posed to circumstances, from which be meant the Jury to
infer that a capital offence had been committed.) Witness
then went into the house through the back door, and
after a little time had elapsed went into the parlour,

where he found Mr.-- Holden alone, whom he ad-
dressed in the following words ;—" I have seen
your contemptible conduct—you ought to be nailed
to the floor by the ears." His answer was,
" Hush, hush, Tom, shut the door—it's a lie." Witness
did not mention any thing of this matter to Mr. Fisk
until the 12th day of August, and endeavoured to account
for it by saying that he had no opportunity, never having
seen hint from the 29th of July until that day, except at
church, and once, when standing at the door of his lodg-
ings, as witness drove by. On the 12th of August he
saw both defendan•s together in the parsonage, and told
them he had seen what be described, and would not sit
under them any more. They made no answer. On the
14th of August he saw Mr. Dimes, the attorney for the
defendants. Oil the same day, but earlier in the after-
noon, Mr. Holden called wi:ness into the room, told him
he wanted to send him ou some business to Sudbury, and
then asked him to take a glass of wine. After that a
second one; then inquired if lie wanted any money, adding
that he " might have five or ten sovereigns, or any money
he liked," but witness told him he " did not want any
money." After that conversation, and on the same even-
ing, as late as ten o'clock, Mr. Dimes discharged him, and
he and the defendant Mr. Fisk forcibly turned him out of
doors. On the 10th of September he went before the
magistrates, and made the charge of felony against both
detendants.

On the cross-examination of the prosecutor, by Sir
JAMES ScArturrr, it was elicited that Mr. Holden had
referred—t ma ni d-t
hs eeri vr a n. tasm
east the
we timere.
,‘i n
nt oe %NC, hhi ch
ap
li hne cant!: c
st indictment
Yorke. The latter had a child some time ago, for which
he pays, and which he admitted to be his. He denied
that he ever applied to her to swear the child to his own
son, but on being pressed on this point, he reluctantly
admitted that he had asked her to lay it to his son. (This
excited a murmur of indignation in Court.) The reason
be gave for this subornation of perjury was, that " it was
laid to his son in every body's mouth, and it might as
well remain so." He called on her on two occa-
sions, and told her to lay it to his son. The other maid-
servant (Chaplin) was dismissed the day after himselt,
and went to live at his house. He positively swore that
he was not improperly intimate with her. He admitted
that his master had been very kind to him, and so bad
Mrs. Holden, who was between 60 and 70 years of age
when she died. He admitted that Mr. Holden's mind is
not as strong as that of some men—that he is rather ner-
vous, but denied that he could he easily imposed upon.
He was then questioned to show he bad a motive for
fabricating this charge, from a desire to get rid of
Mr. Fi-k, who, it was supposed, had, by his inter-
ference, broken down the ascendancy which he had
obtained over the weak and timid mind of his master.
He endeavoured to account for not leaving the service
of Mr. Holden after what he had seen, because be had
a large family to support. (A circumstance connected
with the charge, which witness stated in his examination
in-chief, was called to his mind by the Learned Counsel,
who asked if he list! ever stated it previously to a
magistrate or in a court of justice. The witness fenced
with the questions and sbuffi-d, nor would he make any
distinct acknowledgment or denial.)
Sarah Yorke examined_Remembers Sunday, the 29th
of July. Was in the service of Mr. Holden. The wit-
ness Prigg was in his service. Remembers him coming
into the house about ten o'clock that evening. He ap-
peared much agitated. Heard the voices of her master
and Prigg, speaking together in the parlour. Heard Prigg
make use of a certain word. Was not near enough to
heir in what tone the conversation was. They were
talking in high words.
tedCisass-pexriaglgn,is Cross-examined by Sir JAMES SCARLETT—She is about
19 years of age. Was housemaid to Mr. Holden.
Often heard her master and Prigg talk loud before the
night in question. The Learned Counsel then proceeded
to question the witness as to her child, which she admit-
and her further evidence went to show
that while Ann Chaplin and she slept in the same bed,
scenes of depravity took place which will not bear dis-
closure. Her master knew nothing of those doings then.
She added, " I have had bad advice both from Prigg and
Chaplin, and followed too much of it." She was then
asked as to what passed concerning the child between her-
self and Prigg. He asked her to lay it to his son. He
gave no reason except that as his son was young it
would lie overlooke I. She refused to swear it to
the sun. The witness was afterwards asked as
to the conduct of her master and Mr. Fisk, and
said her toaster was very kind to her and every body, and
she clever observed anything improper in the conduct of
either of the defendants. On the evening of the 29th
of July her master and Mr. Fisk dined together in the
room of which Prigg spoke ; she had been in and
out of the room several times during that evening, and
there was no fastening on the door.
On her re-examination she stated that the muslin
curtain, which she used to draw over the window in the
hook room, covered the whole window. Did not believe
there was any vacancy a person could see through.
A vast body of most satisfactory and indeed conclusive
evidence was adduced in support of the defendants, after
which,

Several clergymen, and a great number of other respect-
able witnesses, spoke to the character which Mr. Fisk had
always su.tained for moral .A. 4 relsgi..s ocladuat, aria de-
cency and propriety of demeanour. Some of them bad been
his schoolfellows and fellow students at college, who de-
posed to the correctness as well as manliness of his habits
and conversation. But the most extraordinary as well as
interesting part of the trial was the voluntary appearance
of the male inhabitants of a whole parish, who presented
themselves en masse to bear testimony to the good charac-
ter and unexceptionable manners and conduct of this
young clergyman, who bad performed the duties of a
curate among them previously to his going to Great Cor-
nard. There were so many of those parishioners came
forward that it would have consumed a great portion of
time to hive gone through their evidence separately; so
Sir James Scarlet: had them sworn together, to the num-
ber of half a dozen at a time, and they were di awn up in
succession before the Jury, and give their evidence, as it
were, in platoons. One of those witnesses, a farmer, who
had all the appearance of a genuine John Bull, added, em-
my, Lord, if a hundred
1 spuhcaht ica
menlly,a
st ophriisgeev iwdeenrec e, " I
to
swearsay to this charge, not one
of us in the parish would believe a word of it."
On the part of the prosecution it was proposed to call'
witnesses to contradict the imputations thrown on the
character and credibility of Prigg ; but two of those wit-
wt
hbeeynhtal:
made
erned JUDGE .
hwisheLnoardbsohuitptotratnhuepnetehde evi-
dence, wit-
nesses, one of whom was churchwarden of Great Cornard,
preli
stated that they would hesitate to believe him on his oath.
The prosecutor, after this, did not venture upon calling
of Not Guilty, '
any more.
be-
gan his charge to the Jury ; but alter making some 'eh:h.:verdict
It was near nine o
up their minds
of authatritoyf
agd° i
3e:
vindnecaehri,Yni
him
its htsaeeftJl observations,at
hr ye
returned
nurforo trouble,
bemadl
eel :dda a
both defendants, which was followed by such a huratis to
acclamation in Court that the admonition
could not repress it.

Mr. Fisk, overcome by his emotions, fainted, and was
carried out of Court.

Sir Tooth Gooch, the High Sheriff, sent an invitation
to Mr, Flak to dinner, as n proof that he considered he

had passed through this dreadful ordeal without a stai n o
his reputation.
The fee of Sir James Searlett was said to be six hun
Bred guineas.
___

OXFORDCIRCUIT.--.SHREIVSBURY, Au°. 2.
George Hayward, a mild, simple-looking lad, aged 20,
was charged with the wilful murder of John Causer, by
stabbing him with a knife.
Mary Causersaid, I live at Beckbury. I knew the pri-
soner. He had been paying his addresses to one of my
slaughters, which I objected to. He came to my house at
about eight o'clock on the evening of the 18th of July.
He remained a short time. My son was not then at home,
but I sent for him to put the prisoner out of the house.
My son's name was John Causer. It was nine o'clock
before he came. I had told the prisoner to go, but he did
not. When my son came he took the prisoner by the
shoulders and turned him out, and gave him a kick behind
as he put him out. I heard no words, and they both left
the house. In ten minutes after my son returned, and said
his life was gone. He was wounded in the right side,
and seemed very ill indeed. I examined the wound, which
was a very severe one; and Mr. Fletcher, the surgeon,
was sent for. My son lived for two days after.

WlWarn Sutton said—l am a schoolmaster at Beck-
bury. I was walking in the village on the 18th of July,
in the evening. I saw the prisoner and the deceased.
The latter was saying that the prisoner should not go
down the village, and the former asserted that he would.
I had got about 15 yards, when I heard an oath, and a
blow immediately followed it. This was the voice of the
prisoner. I walked on, and in a minute or two I heard
a cry of 44 Murder;" it was the voice of the deceased. In
a few seconds I heard another cry of " Murder." I
thought it was nothing of any consequence, and, know-
ing the parties, I thought it was all a frolic. In a few
minutes an alarm was given, and I went to the house of
Mrs. Causer, where I saw the deceased, who was bleed-
ing. I could not bear the sight of it, as it made me feel
very ill, and I was obliged to go out.
The prisoner, when called on for his defence, declined
saying anything.
The Jury, after a very short consultation, found the
prisoner Guilty.
Lord Chief Justice TINDAL passed sentence of death on
the prisoner, and ordered that he should be executed on
Monday next, and his body buried in the pri•on.
The prisoner did not manifest the slightest emotion,
either during the trial or at the passing of the fatal sen-
tence.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—WARwrcr., .Aoo. 3.
The business of the Assizes commenced here yesterday
before Mr. Justice PARK in the .Nisi Prius Court, and
Mr. Justice TAUNTON in the Crown Court. The cause
list contains 28 causes, of %Mai three are for special
Juries; one is an indictment. The calendar contains the
names of 51 prisoners, but the offences with which they
stand charged are of a very mild character compared with
former Assizes. The most aggravated, according to re-
port, is a case of burglary committed in Kenelworth.
Two young men, named Badcock and Bancut, be-
tween 20 and 30 years of age, were found guilty of pass-
ing, at a draper's shop at Leamington, a forged Bank of
England note for 101. _ _

Both were sentenced to be transported for life.
The like seuteuce was passed upon Henry Coop, aged
20, convicted this day of sheepstealing.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—NEwcas.ur-uro,v-
TYNE, AUG. 1.

The Assizes commenced here to-day. Mr. Biron Bot-
LAND presided in the Crown Court. There are but 22
prisoners for trial, and but two cases of a serious character,
namely, one of arson and one of highway robbery, accom-
panied with much personal violence. Of four cases of
horse-stealing the bill was not found in one, and in two
others the prisoners pleaded guilty, and were severally
sentenced to transportation for life. One of these cases
afforded another striking illustration of the injustice and
itepolicy of awarding the like punishment for such offences,
without regard to any mitigating citcuinstances. The
prisoner was a lad of 15 years of age, and his Lordship
seemed to feel so strongly the hardship of the case, that he
told the boy if he would lay before him any statement that
might be in his favour, either during the assizes or after-
wards, he would pay every attention to it, and would pre-
sent it in the proper quarter.
John Jobling was indicted for stealing a mare, on the
25th of May last, the property of Edward Greener, of
Brownhilfs.

The prisoner made no defence.
Verdict—Guilty. To be transported for life.
The witnesses to character not having answered when
they were edited, his Lordship told the prisoner he would,
notwithstanding, make a representation of any mitigating
circumstances which the prisoner might be able to lay
before him.