The Sun.
London, England, 1834-11-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1834.

is he a gainer when there is abundance. He cannot
relieve himself by sending his corn abroad ; for though
abundance under the operation of a restraining law
makes it ruinously low to him, it is still much higher
than the price abroad, h the absence of thc.great de-
mand of this country for corn, by which the price is
regulated in foreign countries capable of yielding a
foreign supply. The fact that British farmers have
lost their capital admits of no dispute, and the cause
and the manner of their losing it is thus explained.
Prior t 6 1815 there were no such monthly fluctua-

tions as have since occurred, particularly after the pre-
sent law came into operation. In 1828 the average
price of the year was 60s. 5d., but the monthly prices
varied from Ms. 3d. to 765. 7d. So in 1829, the

monthly prices varied from 535. 7d. to '72s. 10d.,
while the average of the year was 665. 3d. ; and, in
1830, the average price of the year was 645. 3d.,
while the monthly prices varied from 545. 4d. to
725. 11d. Unobservant and unreflecting persons,

looking only to the yearly averages, which approach
each other, have praised the present corn law for its
preserving steady. prices, when the fluctuations in the
monthly prices are destroying the British farmer. We
have the authority of the Agricultural Committee of
1821 for the fact, appearing from accounts which form
part of the appendix to its Report, that before 1815,
when the trade in corn was free, the price, in a
course of years, at the shipping ports on the Con-
tinent "was the same with the price here, with the
difference only of the expense of transport ; but since
1815, it appears from the reports made by our Consuls
abroad that the difference of such price there and here
Thus in the five years ending in 1825,

s excessive.

when the highest average price-of wheat in England
was 70s. 7d., the highest price at Dantsic was 365.,.
and when the lowest average price in England was
395. 11d. the lowest price in Dantsic was 18s. Bd. ;
and in the five years ending in 1830, when the highest
average price in Englaid. was 765. 7d. the highest
price in Dantsic was 725. 11d., and when the lowest
average price in England was 50s. 9d. the lowest at
Dantsic was 18s. 10d. The explanation is that when
our great demand is allowed to operate at all times, as
it (lid freely at Dantsic before 1815, the price there is
always the same with the price here, with the dif-
ference only of the expense of carriage ; but when
our great demand is prevented from operating at
Dantsic at all, the price there falls so much lower
in proportion to the rise produced when it did
operate, and when our great demand after some
cessation comes to operate suddenly at Dantzic,
as, it has done since 1815, having a small field to

operate upon, it raises the price in a greater pro-
portion than it does here. And so here before the
importation of foreign grain can take place, the price
is raised in a greater proportion than it otherwise
would be ; and when an abundant harvest (as at pre.,
sent) renders the importation of foreign grain 'unne-
cessary, the price is lowered in a grest;f,r proportion
than it otherwise would be. Tl'..e home grower thus
suffered doubly. He does •:iot obtain the higher pro-
portional price, which goes to the foreign dealer, and
he receives th lower proportional price when the
foreign dealer does not, or cannot, furnish a supply.
Under a free system the home grower prospers, and
did prosper previous to 1815. Und..r a restrained
system he languishes, and 1-as languished since 1815.

COURT OF CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

INJUNCTION-RIDGWAY V. HENDERSON'.

Mr. KINDERSLEY applied this morning in this case,
ex parte, for a Special Injunction to restrain the defendant,
who is a printer and publisher, from publishing a piratical
copy of a work called Edward's Botanical Register.
The application was made on behalf of Messrs. Ridgway,
the eminent booksellers and publishers, who had purchased
the copy-right of the work in question, and had published
it in a monthly number, ever since 1815. Each of the
numbers contained eight plates of various plants, and also
a description of them. The pirated number, in some in-
stances, gave only the plates of the plants, and in others,
only a description of them.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, after having the original and
spurious work handed up to him, felt convinced that there
was a piracy of the other, and granted the injunction as to
all the numbers except the 18th, giving leave to apply for
an injunction as to that upon notice.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

SKRINA V. POWELL.

His HONOUR gave judgment this morning in this case,
which came before him upon demurrer, directing the de-
murrer to be allowed, and refusing the plaintiff leave to
amend.

MESSEY V. PARKER.
The COURT also gave judgment in this case, the facts o
whicl, have already been before the public, overruling de.
murrer.

MARTYN V. HOBBS.
This was the petition of Francis Mountjoy Mar-
tyn, praying for the payment to him of one-third
of 150,000/. The father of the petitioner had two
sons, to each of whom he left the sum of 150,0001., to
be paid in the following manner :—One-third upon each of
his sons attaining the age of 21 ; another third upon their
attaining 25, and the remaining third upon their attaining the
age of 30. The present petitioner upon attaining the age
of twenty-one had received one-third of the property left
to him. He had now attained the age of 25, and therefore
applied for the second third.
The MASTER, of the RoLLs made the order according to
the prayer of the petition.

tion on the part of the Learned Judgc, atid was not the
verdict of the Jttry 1-le was therefore entitled to move
for leave to enter a verdict for the plaintiff, or if he was not
entitled to that, he was at least entitled to move that the
verdict be entered as it was found by the Jury, in order
that the plaintiff might take advantage of it in any subse-
quent proceedings he might think proper to institute.
Tl:e COURT granted a rule on the last point, with leave
to move for a new trial, or to enter a verdict for the plaintiff.

THE GREAT LANCASTER WILL CAUSE.

TATHAM V. WRIGHT.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT said that he could assure their
Loreships that, although the title of his present
motion was rather formidable, there was nothing in it
which would require him to trespass at any great length
upon the time of the Court. The case had been originally
tried at York, and came on again for trial at the last As-
sizes for Lancaster ; and it was perhaps in the recollection
of the Court, that various applications had been made to it
for the purpose of insuring an impartial jury. It was al-
leged, on the part of his Learned Friend on the other side
(Mr. Pollock), that a prejudice existed among all the re-
spectable persons in the neighbourhood against the sanity of
the testator, and he had been allowed to choose his special
jury from the hundred of Salford, the most remote place
in the county from that where Mr. Marsden had lived, and
which embraced the populous town of Manchester. Other
precautions had also been used so that they should not be
summoned on any other panel, nor until the precise day
previous to that fixed by the Learned Judge for the time, in
order that they might not be exposed in any way to the
influence of interested persons on either side. Concurring
fully in these precautions he (Sir J. Scarlett) thought that
they were equally entitled to the same impartiality, and
that they should have a jury unknown to the litigant
parties, their attornies, or witnesses. The motion which
he was about to make was for a rule to shew
cause why a new trial should not be had ; and it
was grounded upon five affidavits, one made by a gentleman
not resident in Lancaster, the other by different persons,
who attested to the same fact. He did not intend to name
any individual juryman, but he would state the fact, that
on the day previous to the trial one juryman was seen to
enter the house of Mr. Sharpe, an attorney, and the prin-
cipal witness in support of the will, and remain there a consi-
derable time. That man was the following day sworn upon

the jury. On the evening of that day, after the Court had
adjourned, he was again seen to enter Mr. Sharpe's house,
and remain there for a considerable period. There were
two other affidavits corroborating this fact, and stating that
the same 'juryman, and another who had been also sworn
on the jury, had been seen either twice or three times to
enter Mr. Sharpe's house. The parties supporting the
will were Mr. Wright and Mr. Lister, who had taken the
name of Marsden, and the son of the latter, a young gen-
tleman, who had the remainder in tail, sat behina his learned
friend Mr. Pollock during the trial, who occasionally re-
ferred to him for the purpose of exciting the sympathies of
the jury in his behalf. It was sworn that one of the special
jurymen went in a post-chaise on the Monday that inter-
vened during the trial with this young Mr. Lister, to the
sea-side, and dined and spent the day with a person who
was a material witness in support of the will. Two of the
jury were excused during the trial, and the verdict was given
by ten ; three of whom were thus manifestly biassed, and
diminishing the chances in favour of the plaintiff. The
second ground on which' his motion rested was, that on
the first trial, letters found among Mr. Marsden's
papers were attempted to be given in evidence be-
fore the learned Judge (Baron Gurney), but they had
been objected to by him (Sir J. Scarlett), on the ground
that before a tribunal for determining facts evidence of
that sort might receive undue weight. The letters
were rejected on that occasion, but were received at
the late trial ; to this he (Sir J. Scarlett) objected. The
third ground was, that the verdict on the former trial was
given in evidence, although the judgment had been pre-
viously_ set aside on h!s (Sir J. Scarlett's) application. The
Learned Counsel proceeded to state the other grounds
upon which his application was founded, and which had re-
ference to the proceedings before the Judges of the Exche-
quer Chamber, when a bill of exceptions had been tendered,
and concluded by moving for bis rule.
The Court, after deliberating for a short time, gave it
as their opinion that the rule should be granted on all the
grounds stated by the Learned Counsel except the last.—
Rule granted.