The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-17 00:00:00

CLAYTON V, OREOSON

Mr. POLLOCK said this was an Action to recover
22,000/. for breach of covenant: It was tried lidoste Mr.
Justice ittnEnsos, at the last Lancaster assizes, and a
verdict was found for the plaintiff: He now moved
for a rule Nisi to reduce the amotint to 5,0001., which
was admitted by the defendant, or to have a new
trial. The plaintiff granted a lease to the defendalt
of certain coal mines, dated January I, 1807, which was a
continuation of a previous agreement for 32 years, so that
the lease would expire in December, 1833. It was con-
tended that the defendant had broken all the covenants of
the lease ; but upon all but one a verdict of Is. each was
taken ; that one, however, was the material one, and
upon the construction of its provisions the ques-
tion depended. The Learned Counsel went into
long details of the state of the mines in reference
to the plans, and then contended that the material covenant
of the lease had been complied with. One important point
was the meaning in which the word " level" in the lease
was to be taken. His lordship took it in its ordinary sense,
but it could have been proved by a number of witnesses
that that word, among miners, meant below the point of
drainage. That evidence was rejected.
The Court granted a rule why the sum should not be re-
duced to 5,0001., or why they should not grant a new trial.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT hoped that the rule would be
subject to the payment of the 5,0001. admitted to be due.
The Court thought that a reasonable thing.
Mr. PoLLocx had no objection to the proposition, and
said the money would be paid in a fortnight.

CORDING V. BALLANTINE.
This was an action for false imprisonment by Mr.
Cording, a pawnbroker, against the defendant, a magistrate
of the Thames Police, and a verdict was returned for the
plaintiff, damages 1301. It will be recollected that
the plaintiff's house was burnt down, and the property of
the depositors, among whom was a person who had pawned
a gun for 31.95., destroyed. On application to the plaintiff he
was informed of the loss, and declined to make it good. An
information was then issued br the defendant at the suit of
the party, under the 39th and 40th George 111., and after-
wards a warrant was issued, under which the defendant
committed the plaintiff, in default of making restitution.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL this morning moved for a
new trial on several grounds ; he contended that the pro-
perty should be proved to be negligently, wilfully, and
maliciously destroyed. The plaintiff was discharged by
habeas, and then he brought his action for the 40/. costs,
besides the value of the gun, and also damages for false
imprisonment, and the jury gave 1301., which the learned
counsel contended was excessive. He also contended
that the magistrate, in construing the act as he had done,
had exceeded his duty.

The CouRT were of opinion that the damages were ex-
cessive, and on that ground alone granted a rule nisi.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

RUSSELL V. COWLEY

This was an action for the infringement of a patent,
which was tried before Lord Lyndhurst at the sittings after
last term,. when the case occupied nearly two days.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL this morning moved for
leave to set aside the verdict, which was for the plaintiff,
and have a nonsuit entered. The plaintiff was a manufac-
turer of gas pipes at Wednesbury, under a patent taken out
by a person named Whitehouse, in 1826 • in the specifica-
tion, he said the principle upon which he claimed the pa-
tent was that he heated the iron, passed it through a grove
which turned up its edges, and then it was passed
over a die, being then at a welding heat, which, by the
compression, welded the pipes much better than by the
old way.

The' defendants were also gas-pipe manufacturers at
Walsal, and they also welded them by compression, but by
means of rollers ; however, on the trial, Mr. Brunell and
another very eminent engineer, gave it as their opinion
that the principle upon which both worked was essentially
the same. The Learned Gentleman having failed on that
ground, now moved for a nonsuit, on the ground that White-
house's patent was void, as the very same principle had been
-known, and. had been the subject of a patent many years
before, two persons named James and Jones having taken
out a patent for the making of gun barrels, by the very
same process, in the year 1811. He then read a passage
from Mr. Babbage's book, in which he stated, that in con-
sequence of the combinations, or unions, of the workmen,
men's minds were turned to the means of finding out some
way of encreasing the power of machinery, when these
gentlemen made the discovery of making gun barrels with-
out the hand or hammer welding, thereby making the
masters, in a great measure, independent of the men.
Lord LYNDHURST enquired the date of the book, oral
what time these Unions had first sprung up ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said itwas publishedinlB32.
Lord LYNDHURST (laughing)—Since you became a law
officer of the Crown.
The ATTORNEY- GENERAL said he believed there was
nothing in the Book that called for his official interference.
Lord LYNDHURST did not at all mean to draw any such
inference. Laughter. )
' '

The ArrosRNEV"-GE;IERAI. then went on to shew that
Mr. Babbage, no mean authority on such a matter, treated
the manner of making the gun barrels and the gas pipes as
merely an extension of the same principle.
The COURT granted a rule nisi.
COLBURN V. PATMORE.

This case was also tried before the Lord Chief Baron at
the last sittings, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff,
with 1931. damages.
The plaintiff is the celebrated publisher and proprietor
of the Court Journal ; the defendant was the editor of
that paper. The action was brought to recover damages
for the negligence of the defendant in allowing a libel to
appear in the paper upon the Duchess of Richmond, for
which the plaintiff was convicted upon a criminal informa-
tion, and fined 100/.

MAULE now moved for a rule to show cause why
the judgment should not be arrested, and a new trial had,
on the ground, first, that there was nothing disclosed in the
declaration to warrant or support the action ; and secondly,
that the plaintiff had pleaded guilty to the criminal infor-
mation, which charged him with publishing a false and ma-
licious libel. That, being his own admission, would stand
against him at all times and in all places ; and it was a
plain and well-defined maxim of law, that, in a civil
proceeding, the fait feason could not proceed for
contribution. Now the plaintiff had pleaded guilty
of the libel, and now he charged it upon the de-
fendant. Surely the same principle would step in and
prevent him. He granted that it might have made a dif-
ferente had the plaintiff defended the case and been found
guilty by the jury, but he trusted he would be considered
entitled to his rule.

Lord LYNDHURST said the case appeared a very hard
one, if persons in the situation of the plaintiff were not to
be allowed to recover from their servants for negligence of
that sort. The court would grant the rule in order to have
the case argued and decided whether it was not better for
the plaintiff to save the expense of the defence.
Rule Nisi granted on both grounds.
LEE V. LEFAN.

This was an action for false imprisonment, tried at the
late Leicestershire Assizes, before Mr. Justice LITTLE-
DALE, when a verdict was found for the defendant.

Mr. HILL now moved for a rule to show cause why that
verdict should not be set aside, and a new trial had, on the
grounds of the improper rejection of evidence, and misdi-
rection. He stated that the plaintiff was a horse-dealer ill
Leicestershire, and the defendant a magistrate of that
county. The plaintiff was taken before the defendant on a
charge of receiving a horse that he knew to have been sto-
len from a person named Robinson. He was attended there
by his solicitor and witnesses. The solicitor was allowed
to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution, and the
prosecutor, after hearing the plaintiff's witnesses, on his
oath stated that he abandoned the charge, and did not be-
lieve that he knew of its being stolen. Lee was then dis-
charged, but the magistrate said he had information from
his solicitor that there was a man in Northampton gaol
who said he was a regular buyer of stolen horses, and made
out another warrant, which he gave to a con-
stable. The solicitor called upon him to execute the
warrant, and have the charge inquired into at once, but
that he refused to do, and Lee went home. Lefan in four
days after went to a person named Gocock with a bunch
of warrants, one directed to the constable of Leicester,
one to Northampton, and several other places, but
some little time passed over, and nothing was done.
Lefan again went to Gocock, and ordered the war-
rants to be sent to the respective constables, which
was done, but still Lee was not taken. In the
course of a few weeks he had occasion to go to Liecester
fair, and while there, the constable of that town executed •
the warrant in the market-place, and by order of the
defendant, put handcuffs upon him. He was taken before
a bench of magistrates in the town, but as the warrant was
specially endorsed, that the prisoner was to be taken before the
defendant who lived at a distance of 16 miles, a cart was pro-
cured, and away he was taken with the handcuffs on. He
got leave to send to his solicitor and witnesses, all Whom
be met at Lefan's door ; but on that occasion he got into a
i olent rage, and refused to hear either the solicitor, the
witnesses, or the prisoner, saying to the solicitor—
•• I shall send him to Leicester in spite of the

•
201•Pertc,.nt
•
\=•-
• •: .1 • r
•
15 or yottr leeth ;" and ewe enough tie •
i the committal all ready cut and tirV, and away 4,
•
. ' 1
-1'
• he plaintiff the whole sixteen miles. Ina ctav —7:
committal for trial was ltalged by the same defendan .
the silicitor acted for the prosecution, but the grand juil1111103:qa
at owe ignored the bills. One would most reasonably
have nought that here the matter might have been
allowed to rest—but no. He in a few weeks after
had occrsion to go to Northampton fair, and there
again he was taken into custody upon a warrant, directed
to the constable there ; and as it was also specially in-
dorsed, he was again carted off twenty miles to the defend-
ant's house, but this time he was morereasonable, and would
not meddle in the matter. All these facts were proved on
the trial, and he (Mr. H. )called a witness to show the spirit
in which defendant had acted. He intendedto have shown
that in the previous October he was charged before him
with horse stealing, which fell to the ground, but the de-
fendant used certain expressions of malice and revenge,
which he after put ittto execution. The learned judge,
however, ruled that no malice except it bore di-
rectly on the case could be allowed in evidence—though
he allowed the witness to be cross-examined to the fact
Of the plaintiff being in prison for horse-stealing. That
he complained of. Then as to the misdirection. He
seems to have quite changed his mind when he summed
tip, for he told the jury that if they found that the defen-
dant had acted in a bonu fide manner, and had reasonable
cause for suspicion, no action wouldlie. Upon thesegrounds
he craved the interference of the Court.
Lord LYNDHURST said the proceedings were altogether
very singsllar, and granted the rule upon both points.

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE-THIS DAY

(f7tOI%I_I,LOYJYS.)

DEAL, APRIL, le--411 E. N. E. —No arrivals.
from Cadiz.
15.—Arrived tit:,
PORTSMOUTH, APRIL 16. —7,Yind S. S. E•
ShPugl;,l4 Falmouth packet,
FALMOUTH, APRIL 15.—Wind S.E., stro.7lg breezes
and sqttally.—Arrived his Majesty's ship Pike, fru'm Lis-
bon•—sailed the 6th instant, and Oporto the Bth; Com-
merce, Cowper, from Bahia; and Sprightly, Liujngstoo,
from Charente.

LIVERPOOL, APRIL lb.—Arrived the Louisa, Wood,
from Savannah ; Catherine, from Trieste ; and Chal-
lenger, Newman, from Lisbon. Off port the Mauney,
Jones, from the Mediterranean.
DUBLIN, APRIL M.-Arrived the Swift, Way, and
Two Sisters, Baker, from London.
WATERFORD, APRIL 14.—Arrived the Sion Hill,
Richards, from Trinidad.
Coati, APRIL 14.—Arrived the Ursula, Jobling, and
T. S. Reeves, Bailey, from London.
YARMOUTH, APRIL 16.—Arrived the Juno, Pietch,
from Memel ; and Fortuna, Wilder, from Kiel.

The Echo, Coaker, and the Mary Elizabeth, Fusser,
from Viana, and the Sultan, from off Figneira, were sent
into Lisbon the 3d instant as prizes.
The Wilberforce, Harrison, from Demerara, is supposed
to have arrived in the Channel.

The Reindeer packet sailed from Rio Janeiro the 14th
February for Falmouth.

THE LONDON UNIVERSITY.

Yesterday the Lord Mayor, accompanied by Mr. Alder-
man Wood, Sir C. Marshall, the Sheriffs, Recorder, City
officers, and about 100 members of the ourt of Common
Council, proceeded from Guildhall to St. James's Palace,
where they were introduced to his Majesty, and presented
the address agreed to at the last Court.
To which his Majesty was pleased to make the following
answer :

" I thank you for your expression of loyalty and attach-
ment to my person and Government.
" I am anxious to promote the extension of the benefits
of education throughout my dominions, being convinced
that sound learning and science are the best foundation
both of respect for the law and of reverence for religion.
" I shall direct your petition to be referred to a Com-
mittee of my Privy Council, as I have already directed
other petitions which have been presented to me, in order
that I may receive their advice after that full inquiry and
consideration of the subject which its great importance de-
mands."

SPIRIT OF Tin PfIBLIC JOURNALS.

The debate on Tuesday in the House of Com-
mons upon Mr. Roebuck's motion, with regard to
the mighty grievances of a certain party in the
lower province of the Cana:slas., oftist hot only have
been highly interesting ft% t'al connected with these
tine offsets of the titt}ent empire, but also to all who
have anv respect for the British Constitution. We
Ere the lad who would tolerate public abuses, and,
therefere, we are gratified that Mr. Stanley's amend-
ment, "to inquire how far the grievances corn.
Pla;:aea of by the inhabitants of Lower Canada in
1828 were founded in justice ; and how far the re-
commendations of the committee then appointed
were attended to," was fink tlx adopted by the
House. It will show to the restless and "
the-manger" part of this noble population (we in-
clude under the noble many of the descendants of
the French Canadians)--it will show them that the
British government and parliament can discriminate
between factious outcry and political abuses. We
would ask if the tide of voluntary emigration and
the influx of British capital is to be checked by the
democratical reasoning of the hon. mover In his cut-
and-dried speech :'iiiVe trust not, and from eur
knowledge of public opinion in the Canada*, We will
venture to say that the major part of the population
dread nothing so much as the spread of demo-
cratical doctrines ; they 'know too well the value
or the protection and the mild sway of the Bri-
tish empire to foster such notions as Mr. Roe-
buck and bis tutor, Mr. Viger, would have a
British parliament believe. The Yankee family have
for some time been very lax in their praises of a
Nave
form of government, and late events
slave not increased their partiality for it. There-
fore Mr. Roebuck's argument was founded in error.
Let us ask Mr. Viger, whose supporters can afford
to allow him 1,7001. per annum as grievance am-
bassador, why they are so inconsistent as not to
pay the salaries of their judges and public officers ;
and whether this line of policy is likely to give
their own party security ? The sense of this grow-
!ns colony will soon demonstrate to the contrary.
The amazingi-improvements which, by magic, as it
tvere, 110:.,e started into life, have been fostered by
,
isrit.s.o energies and British capital; under the as-
`..urance of protection from British laws and institu-
tions. Let "les enfans du sal" enjoy their ancient
privileges ; but let them not forget that they share
the protection of the British government equally
with every emigrant who breaks the soil of the
Canadas, to the .silent but sure aggrandisement of
those hitherto almost useless tracks of Atlantic
wastes. We wish that every colony of the British
empire should participate with those institutions of
the parent state which tend to the security of real
freedom and an impartial administration of the
law ; but we must set our face against faction ; yet
we repeat that we are pleased that Mr. Stanley's
motion was adopted, because we hate abuses when
they exist, and because we respect our colonies as
integral parts of the British empire.—Morning
Herald.

Any measure for the substantial and safe com-
mutation of tithe must, from the peculiar nature of
that property, and from the condition of the public
feelings with regard to it, be attended with extreme
difficulty when brought to the test of practice. We
fear that there has been a good deal of self-decep-
tion indulged by two classes of people on this sub-
Jtet, and that the outcry against the tithe system,
an irksome and tormenting system, and for that
reason, if for no other, grossly impolitic in an age
like this, has derived much of its foi cc, both among
landlords and farmers, from the notion that a com-
mutation of tithe would amount to nothing less than
a transfer of it to their own pockets, albeit the
latter would even in that case, we suspect,
Dave been disappointed, as to their proportion
of the spoil. Lord Althorp, therefore, took
a manly part in stating two distinct propo-
sitions, very near the commencement of his
speech on Tuesday. Ist. That tithe was at
all events not the property of the English land-
lords, and on being taken away from the church
could not be claimed by them. 2d. That the total
amount of tithe received by the clergy would not
be, if ditly"distributed, more than an adequate re-
muneration for ,the fulfilment of their religious
duties. In his explanations of the measure by
which Lord Althorp announced that it was his de-
sign to follow up the resolutions which lie proposed,
and afterwards amended, we cannot state that his
Lordship was altogether so successful or satisfac-
tory as might be wished. We have, however,
obtained from a well-informed correspondent such a
summary of the projected Commutation Bill as
may at least render its provisions intelligible, whether
it vindicates them from all objection, or leaves
them still sub lite. In reading Lord Althorp's
speech we had been perplexed by the manner in
which the valuation, first, of land, and second, of
tithe, was recommended. It appeared to us that
two standards, somewhat irreconcileable, had been
resorted to,—one of fact, as to the amount
of tithe which had been received during those
years when the average was to be collected, and the
other touching rent, which was to be determined by
mere esti»late of the value of such land as should
he submitted to survey. It now appears, however,
that the actual rent is to be taken as the measure
of value for land, save only in disputed cases, or
where a manifest disproportion exists between the
rent reserved and the real value per acre, or where
fraud or collusion is presumable. There are three
provisions of the measure on which some diversity
of opinion may be expected,—namely, that which
draws a distinction between the tithes of arable and
pasture lands ; that which determines the future
payment of the commuted tithe in each parish by an
average drawn from the whole of the parishes in a
given county or extensive•district ; and lastly, that
which fixes the price of redemption or release from
all future payments at twenty-five years' purchase
of the new tithe-rate. The partisans of the more
stiff-necked among the clergy will say, perhaps,
that it is. hard upon the church to fix the
amount of tithe for pasture lands at a lower rate
than for land under tillage, inasmuch ass-. the land-
owner nilay instantly afterwards find his account

in converting the favoured soil from pasture to the

plough, and thus the incumbent be, as it 'were, de-
frauded : but, first, if the security against a future
increase of tithe-rate proportioned to the agricultu-
ral produce should operate as an encouragement to
the outlay of capital required by the change in ques-
tion from grass to corn, it may prove a great public
benefit ; and next, it cannot be of lasting detriment
to the clergy, because the bill proposes a revision of
the land after the expiration of every seven years,
and a corresponding adjustment of the tithe-rate to
any inc rease of agriculturalproduction. On the other
hand, there are those who take a directly opposite
view of this clause, and reproach the Government
with gross partiality to the church, for not consti-
tution. the low tithe of pasture land as the basis
on which to ground every estimate of future pay-
ments to the clergy. To us it appears that the
distinction is a fair one, as suggested by the bill,
and that while it simplifies the business of the
valuers, it is indispensable towards any. Just ap-
portionment of the ecclesiastical claims. With
regard to the future assessment of tithe-rate upon
each parish being governed by an average of all
the parochial scales throughout an entire county, it
is not without its liabilities to injustice either against
the parishioners or against the church. Like the
bed of Procrustes, it stretches 'the short payments,
and curtails the full ones, to meet a central standard
of supposed perfection, by which means—whatever
good it may otherwise effect—it undoubtedly alters
the relations of almost all parishes with almost all
incumbents, and produces, possibly, a change de-
trimental to poor parishes, where a relaxation of the
parson's demand may have been found necessary,
but favourable to more affluent communities which
could well afford the complete liquidation of their
tithes. It is true, of course, that a rigid adherence
to the rate of tithe levied in each' particular parish
might, in some instances, work harshly against the
tithe-payers ; and in others, where the incumbent
was improvidently liberal, might hurt the permanent
interests of the church ; but surely, if lands too low

rented can be valued with a view to ascertain what
rents they might pay, so might they be valued
to obtain a precise estimate of what tithes they
egh." i -to pay, without resorting to the clumsy
expedient of legislating for one parish from ma-
terials supplied by others differently circum-
stanced. We imagine that this plan of county
estimates for parochial payments stands some
chance of being eventually given up. Lastly, with
respect to the terms of redemption, and the number
of years' purchase taken at 25: It would seem a
more reasonable proposition to inquire what have
been the usual number of years' purchase hitherto
paid for tithes on the transfer of lay impropriations,
and to decide by them: But there is another dif-
ficulty. The market for the sale of other estates
fluctuates with the value of money. Why, then,
lay down one inexorable law whereby the purchaser
of tithe property must in all cases be restricted ?
Nothing is more probable than that in the vicissi-
tudes of affairs other rent-charges may fall four or
five years below their present price. Ought, then,
the party subject to one species of rent-charges to
be excluded by the law from all advantage deri-
vable from the charges of the money-market.
At least, if the rate of purchase be a fixed one, let it
be a moderate one, that men who are compelled to
deal with a vast corporation may not be subjected
to needless hardship in the laudable effort to
clear their properties from debt. Nor do we
see any valid reason why the lands to be bought for
the clergy should be exempt from those parochial
rates and charges to which the lands of all other
Englishmen are subject. Sir Robert Peel's objec-
tion deserves consideration, that in such case it
would be the interest and aim of the church to buy
up the land most heavily burdened with poor rates,
thus throwing an increased proportion of them on
their neighbours. While we are on this tithe sub-
ject, it may be as well to add that the lay proprie-
tors of rectorial tithe ought to be compelled in some
way or other to provide more adequately for the
wants of the clergy who perform the vicarial duties
of their respective parishes. In no bad temper to-
wards the Tithe Commutation Bill or its authors,
we have hastily thrown together the few foregoing
remarks. Notwithstanding the doubts which strike
us as to certain clauses of the proposed measure,
we can state a conscientious and cordial hope that
it will be so amended where faulty, as to secure a
speedy and triumphant passage through both Houses
of Parliament. All men of all parties express the
most anxious desire to see the tithe question set at
rest, and whatever may hap ,en with regard to Ire-
land, here we do think that all obstacles to that
happy issue may be successfully encountered.

ANALYSIS OF THE TITHE COMMUTA-
TION 13 ILL.

PILINCIPLES OF THE BILL FO:. THE COMMUTATION AND

REDEMPTION OF TITHES.

Valuers are to be appointed in the different counties,
whose duty it will be to ascertain the actual annual value
of the lands in each parish now subject to tithes, distin-
guishing the land into two classes—arable and not. arable.
The rent paid, it is presumed, will in general be taken
to be the annual value ; so that actual valuation will not
be necessary, except where the land is manifestly let above
or below its real value, and where the parties interested
cannot agree, or where fraud or collusion is suspected.
The valuers will in like manner ascertain the amount of
tithes paid by the same lands in each parish on the average
of the last five years, distinguishing the amount paid by
arable, and the amount paid by not arable.
This having been done for each parish of a county or
district, the proportion between the total tithe paid for all
the parishes in that district and the rent of the land which
pays it is determined, and this proportion becomes the
tithe rate of the county or district, and continues invari-
able. In ascertaining this tithe rate, the distinction be-
tween arable and not arable is preserved. For example—
suppose the annual value of the arable land is 100,0001.,
and the value of the tithe 20,000/. ; the arable tithe rate
will be in that district 4s. per pound on the annual value or
rent. Suppose the rent of the pasture land in the same
district to be 80,000/.' the tithe 10,000/„• the non-arable
tithe-rate will be 2s. 6d. per pound on the rent of land
not arable. These respective rates, viz., 4s. per pound
and 2s. 6d. per pound, being thus determitril for the dis-
trict, are to remain fixed and unalterable ; but the annual
value of the land is subject to revision every seven years ;
so that the amount paid in lieu of tithe may riw or fall at
these intervals with the rent of the land which pays it. The
payment of this sum is cast upon the landlord instead of
the tenant, a provision which at once removes the cause of
those frequent disputes between the clergyman and his pa-
rishioners, not less destructive of the moral influence of the
one than injurious to the real interests of both.
So far the measure is imperative. If the landowner is
of opinion that the value of land is falling, he may not be
disposed to proceed further; if, on the contrary, he ex- I
pects that it will rise, or if he means to lay out capital on
his land, he may convert (if unwilling or unable to redeem
in the manner to be explained presently) the annual tithe
charge above.rnentioned, and subject to certain variations
depending on the value of the land, into a fixed and per-
manent rent charge, estimated in bushels of wheat, in the
manner usually adopted in regulating corn rents.
By adopting for the value of tithes the average payment
of the last five years, an actual valuation is avoided, which
it is well known would raise very materially the total
amount of tithe paid throughout England. By determin-
ing the tithe-rate for a distract or county, the injustice so
loudly and fairly complained of in the bill of last year,' of
fixing a heavy permanent charge on a parish where tithes
had been severely exacted, and a light charge where they
had been moderately taken, is avoided. By the present
plan, where the demand has been severe, it will be re-
duced, where it has been unusually small, it will be in-
creased, where it has been moderate, it will continue nearly
the same. The amount, therefore, to be paid to the tithe
owners in lieu of tithes in any county or district, will re-
main unchanged, though its -'distribution may be thus par-
tially altered. _ _

But while the consequence of determining the tithe rate
for each individual parish would have been the objection-
able result which we have explained, on the other hand too
large a district is to be avoided. There are local cus-
toms observed in valuing and paying tithe peculiar to
different counties, and so generally observed as essentially
to affect the value of the land. In Northumberland and
other northern counties, for example, it is the practice to
value the crops annually ; in Devonshire to take a portion
of the rent ; in Kent to collect in kind, or to enter into
composition for a certain number of years. In the latter
county, where the collecting in kind is not unusual, the
value of tithe is much nearer its true value than in those
counties where the practice is rare. These differences,
however, are so marked, and the value of land is so much
affected by them, that it becomes desirable to limit and de-
fine the districts, according to the prevalence of particular
customs, as well as the nature of the cultivation, and the
general fertility and character of the soil.
As the tithe of poor land bears a larger proportion to
rent than the tithe of rich land, and a rate bearing the same
proportion to the rent is to be imposed on both, the poor
land will be somewhat benefitted at the expense of the rich;
but there can be no great objection, we conceive, to an ar-
rangement which does nothing more than equalize the bur-
dens of the poor land and the rich.
In the case of hop land, a fixed sum of shillings
per acre will be charged in addition to that which it would
have paid if only subject to the arable tithe rate of the
county ; and any land on which the tithe rate may have
been redeemed shall nevertheless become subject to this
fixed annual charge if hops be grown thereon.
With respect to the redemption, it is provided that any
owner of land may, by a payment equal to twenty-five
years' purchase of the annual charge, determined in the
manner above-mentioned, free his land from such charge
for all time to come. The fixed rent charge, the nature
of which we have already explained, may also be redeemed
at the same rate. At the present rate of interest this will
not yield to the clergyman so much as he receives from the
tithe ; but this small pecuniary sacrifice will probably be
snore than compensated by, the certainty and facility of pay-
ment., and the removal of those many annoyances to which
he is now subject.
The purchase-money of all clerical tithes :to be paid to
commissioners appointed by the bishop of the diocese, and
to be invested in the public securities or inland, or on
mortgage, as may seem to them most expedient. When
the whole or any portion of the purchase-money for any
parish is invested in land, such land must be situated either
in the parish itself or in an adjoining parish, and is to be
considered as glebe land, under the control and manage-
ment of the incumbent, who is empowered to grant a
lease for 21 years; but restrained from receiving any fine or
premium for its renewal.
Such we believe to be the outline of the proposed mea-
sure ; we have endeavoured to explain its principles,'avoid-
ing all technicality and as much detail as possible. When
the bill is before the house we shall again return to the
subject, and point out the provisions for adjusting the pro-
portion between great and small tithes--for regulating the
mode of proceeding in those cases where the produce of
the land is wholly or in part protected by a modus, and
where tithes are let on lease for a term of years or for lives.
The tithes or the lay impropriator are, we perceive, to
be dealt with in the same manner as those of the church.
Times.

We refer our readers to a very interesting dis-
cussion, on the subject of education, in the House
of Lords last night. The country will be delighted
to learn from the Lord Chancellor the amount of
the income of the foundations for charitable pur-
poses. The amount at present is 800,0001. per

annum, but with proper management, the amount
would be 1,200,0001. His Lordship touched on
a nice question—that of the extent to which effect
ought to be given to the intentions of founders. In
all times the legislature of this country has inter-
fered with foundations. The statute of Mortmain
is and early and suitable example. The transfer-
ence of property bequeathed to the church to pri-
vate individuals and colleges, at the reformation, is
another instance: It is not long since the Univer-
sity of 'Oxford, under a foundation, paid a yearly
sum to a clergyman for preaching a sermon to prove
the evils of witchcraft ; and we believe the cler-
rgyman is now alive, whose printed sermons we pos-
sess. This has been done away with. Lord Brougham
alluded to the noxious establishments of the Small
Pox Hospital 'and Foundling Hospital. There is
a difference between wanton interference with
foundations, and the rendering them useful
instead of being noxious. It may be questioned
whether any foundation can exist for a long space
without requiring correction. What would have
been at this day a ftiundation made in the time of
William the Conqueror ? Lord Wynford, by claim-
ing for the Church of England the merit of the va-
rious foundations for education, led Lord Brougham
to settle the respective claims of the Dissenters and
Churchmen in a very edifying way. He did the
Churchmen the justice to say, that though they
never originated any liberal or benevolent measures
for the public good, they always followed the ex-
ample set by the Dissenters ; which humility on
their part was, he thought, very creditable to them.
We should have had no attempts at diffuse infor-
mation among the people, but for the Dissenters.
His Lordship, however, did not state, that when
Sunday schools were first established by Mr. Raikes
and a number of liberal Dissenters, the Churchmen
opposed themselves strenuously to the attempt. In
those clays it was enough to be connected with
establishing a Sunday school to be persecuted by
the Church. • We believe that Barrington, Bishop
of Durham, was one of the first of the clergy of the
establishment, who, so far from opposing, encouraged
Sunday schools.—Morning Chronicle.