The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-07 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 7, 1834.

CONSISTORY COURT, JUNE 6.

(Before Dr. LUSHINGTON.)
JUDGMENT—TANN AND CLITHEROE V. OWEN.
Dr. LUSIIINGTON gave judgnent in this case, the ar-
guments on which were fully heard last court-day. The
learned Judge stated that the cause was one for the sub-
traction of church-rates, promoted by the churchwardens
of the parish of St. Matthew,, Bethnal-green, against Mr.
Owen, a parishioner. The rate was opposed on three
grounds—first, that the vestrymen had no power to im-
pose a church-rate; secondly, that i f they had, they had unduly
exercised the right; and thirdly, that the rate had been
made for an illegal purpose—for paying the rector's salary.
He now had to consider if the objects for which the church-
rate were levied had not vitiated it. If he should declare
it illegal, he was aware great difficulties would be occa-
sioned in the parish. He should take the law as he found
it—no judge ought to strain or deviate from the established
law or usage—such a course produced uncertainty for cer-
tainty. The law gave the vestry no power to apply a
church-rate for the purposes intended ;it was his duty to
protect the inhabitants in a case like this, and he was
bound to declare the rate illegal. Considering the parish
had gone on in this way since 1797, he should give no
costs. The parish would have to go to Parliament, and
his present decision would ultimately be advantao-eow.
The RECIsTEAE—Does the
,Court pronounce the rate
null and void ?
The KING'S ADVOCATE said the Court pronounced
that-the churchwardens had failed in their proof to establish
the rate.
Dr. LosnixoToN said, that was the formal mode, he
gave his judgment.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 6.

The SPEAKER resumed the Chair at twenty-five
minutes past five.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

A message from the Lords announced that their
lordships had agreed to the Navy Pay Bill, the
Bill relative to Friendly Societies, and several
other hills. Their lordships also
,requested that that
house would be pleased to allow William Tooke, Esq.,
to attend a select committee of their lordships, ap-
pointed to inquire into and regulate the practice of
sweeping chimneys.
On the motion of Mr. BYNG, the Staines' Bridge
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. EW ART presented a petition from the mer-
chants of Liverpool against the Court of Passage Bill.
Petitions against the Poor Laws' Amendment Bill
were presented by Mr. William Brougham from St.
George's, Southwark ; by Mr. Shaw Lefevre, from
Basingstoke ; by Mr. Strutt, from Derby; by Mr.
Hawkins, from Newport, Isle of \\Tight ; by Mr.
. Charles Tyrrell, from Hackney ; by Lord Ebrington,
from Withering-ton ; and by Mr. Gisboine, from the
neighbourhood of Dprby.
On the motion of Mr. HEATHCOTE, returns
were ordered of the amount of exports and imports of
flour, meal, &c., in the islands of Guernsey, Jersey,
and Man.

Mr. P. THOMSON, in answer to a question
from Mr. A. BARING, said, that cases of imputed fraud
respecting the importation of corn from the islands
of Guernsey and Jersey had been inquired into,
and he had received from the custom-house
officers of those islands their opinions stating that
they had no grounds for supposing that
frauds of that description had been committed. He
would further inquire into the subject.
Mr. FINCH gave notice that he would move an
amendment to the motion of the hon. and learned
member for Tipperary on Tuesday next, respecting the
Irish church.

Lord ALT H ORP, in answer to a question from
Mr. GOULBURN, said, that if the house had no
objection, he would propose that the house should
sit on committee on the poor laws at the morning
sittings on Monday and Friday next week.