The Sun.
London, England, 1834-04-01 00:00:00

GRAND FEAT OF PEDESTRIANISM.

A numerous assemblage of persons collected at an
early hour on Monday morning on the Mallow and
Fermoy road, to witnesLthis performance, DarnelY, g
march of ten miles in TA minutes, by Captain John:
F. G. Campbell, of the 91st (Argyllshire) Regiment,
accoutred in heavy marching order of a private
soldier, viz.,—

Knapsack and kit, complete; greatcoat and mess lin, musket,
bayonet, and sixty rounds of ball cartridge; total, 501bs. weight.
Heavy bets were pending on the issue. The gallant
Captain started at eight o'clock, A. M., and performed
this arduous undertaking in the unparalleled short
space of time of 107/ minutes, thus winning the
match with the greatest ease, having 12i minutes to
spare. We understand large sums have changed
hands on the occasion. So great d favourite is this
officer with the men of his corps that the Pipe-major
and chief part of the garrison met him wifliiri a mile
of the goal, and cheered him in with the exhilatating
sound of the Campbells are coming. On arrialig at
the goal, amidst overpowering acclamations, the men
of his company instantly rushed to divest him of his
cumbrous trappings, and then conducted him in tri-
umph to the barracks. Captain Campbell, after par-
taking of a sumptuous breakfast, was seen playing at
a match of rackets an hour afterwards, which, not-
withstanding his previous exertions, he won !—Cork
Constitution.

We are happy to be able to state that Earl
Fitzwilliam is not, as we had inferred from a letter of
his Lordship, which we have seen, unfavourable to the
admission of Dissenters to the Universities, but, on
the contrary, decidedly favourable to that measure,
though he doubts whether Parliament would be justi-
fied in compelling those learned corporations to admit
Dissenters to their privileges and honours.—Leeds
Mercury.

The General Steam Navigation Company's mail
packet, the Ramona, from Hamburg, arrived off the
Custom-house, at nine o'clock, A. M., this day

The Methodists in Leeds, and in many other
places, will not move as congregations to obtain the
redress of Dissenters' grievances ; this is never done
among their body, except on receiving a recommenda-
tion from the Conference ; but here, as elsewhere,
they are almost unanimously of opinion that all reli-
gious sects should be placed on the same level in re-
gard to civil rights and privileges, and that each
sect should support its own worship, and not that of
another also. If, therefore, a town's meeting should
be held, and a general petition prepared, thousands of
Methodists would gladly attend the meeting and sign
the petition.---Leeds Mercury.

HUNTINGDO N.—A human skeleton was
discovered, a day or two ago, by some labourers who
were digging gravel on the common near the mills.
The bones were about 18 inches from the surface, and
appeared to have been buried many years. Conjecture
is busy as to how they came there ; but whether the
spot formed part of one of the churchyards in days
long passed, or whether he to whom they once be-
longed was laid there with—

" no requiem read o'er him,
No mother to weep, and no friend to deplore him,"
must now, most likely, for ever remain a mystery.
Cambridge Chronicle.

S TEA M-CA RRIA GE S.—On Saturday we took
a trip on the Harrow-road in Colonel Macerone's
steam-carriage. It left Paddington Wharf at 25
minutes past three, and completed a distance of five
miles in 18 minutes and a half. Within the five miles
were several considerable acclivities, which the car-
riage surmounted in gallant style ; gigs, carriages, and
four-horse-stages at full gallop, were left in the ob-
scurity of distance. The carriage was cheered as it
proceeded by the passengers and drivers of coaches,
and horses and dogs manifested their astonishment at
the speed of the vehicle. Colonel Macerone was ac-
companied by several foreign gentlemen, who ex-
pressed great admiration at the perfection to which the
Gallant Colonel had brought this beautiful piece of
machinery. The manner in which it overcame every
obstacle, and the facility with which it was stopped and
turned to a hair's breadth, called forth much commen-
dation. Having expended a few minutes in taking a
fresh supply of water, it returned to Paddington, and
performed the same distance in 18 minutes, being half
a minute less than the first stage was performed in. A
notion of the powers of the machinery of this carriage,
different in principle from all before built, can scarcely
be entertained without having witnessed its feats.
Morning Advertiser.

COOPER'S " BRA vo."—This striking Vene-
tian Romance will be presented to the public in a few
days, as the next volume of " The Standard Novels,"
in regular course of monthly publication. The author
of the " Spy" has here ventured on new ground—but
he enters into the spirit of Venetian manners and
society with all the zest of one born beneath the sunny
sky of Italy. No recent novelist has become more
popular than Cooper. His tales of the sea, indepen7
dently of the interest that attaches to the stories them-
selves, are unrivalled, as faithful pictures of life on the
ocean. Nor is he less successful when the land and
its inhabitants form the subjects of his pen. No
traveller has delineated the manners, customs, and
scenery of the new world with half the truth or the
power of Cooper. The new and cheap edition of his
works in " The Standard Novels" will, by the addi-
tion of the Bravo, include nine of his most popular pro-
ductions, each of which, distinct and complete in
itself, now costs no more than six shillings, neatly
bound and illustrated, revised by the author, and
the
ga new introduction and notes illustrative of
story.

FORTUNATE RECOVERY OF A LARGE
AMOUNT OF SOVEREIGNS.—On Saturday morning
last, Mr. Laxton, an extensive ale brewer (and one of
the Overseers of St. Marylebone parish), had occasion
to take a hackney coach, for the purpose of conveying
a very considerable amount of specie, in two bags, one
containing silver, and the other sovereigns (we be-
lieve 700/. ), moneys belonging to the parish, to his
bankers for security. In the hurry of business Mr. L.,
after getting out of the coach, took only one of the
bags, containing fifty pounds worth of silver. Imme-
diately on Mr. L. paying the coachman he drove off.
On entering the banking-house Mr. L., to his great
consternation, discovered his serious loss. Immediate
pursuit was commenced, and information given of the
circumstance at Marylebone Police-office. No tidings
were heard of the money until Sunday, when the
coachman (no doubt from pure honesty) took_ the
_bag,
containing the money, to Somerset-house, but there
was no one to receive it at the Office, it being Sunday.
theY wholesterday,amtootuhnet
was
great joy
to and satisfaction
sfaction of Mr. L..

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

In our first notice of the trial at Dorchester,
and of the sentence passed on the six delinquent
labourers, we intimated an opinion that the pu-
nishment to which those poor men were destined
might be considered too severe. This feeling,
appears to have gained much strength through-
out the country, and to have produced represen-
tations from more than one quarter to his Ma-
jesty's Government in favour of a mitigation of
the sentence. It is always essential, in the ad-
ministration of justice, to make manifest the pre-
vise nature of the crime for which a penalty is
to be inflicted ; and thus to clear away all sha-
dow of suspicion from the public mind, that ad-
vantage has been taken of the letter of the law,
by prosecuting a man for one offence, ih itself
a matter of little real moment) as the only
means of insuring his chastisement for another
offence, morally and 111bstantially of a graver
character, which may be thought desirable
to punish. In the case of the Dorset-
shire labovirers, the formal charge against them
was that of administering arid being bound by
secret, and therefore unlawful oaths ; whereas
the real gravamen of their guilt was their form-
ing a dangerous union, to force up, by various
modes of intimidation and restraint, the rate of
labourers' wages. The nominal offence, how-
ever, was that of which they were found guilty,
and for which they were sentenced to seven
years' transportation ; while the proceedings—
to wit, acts of coercion, violence, &c., for
which they would be justly thought deserving
of serious punishment—.were kept in the back
ground, or at least were not brought so forward
as to satisfy men's minds that an offence suffi-
ciently malignant and dangerous in itself,
was legally proved against the prisoners; in
short, that they were sentenced according to
law for the only crime which was of any politi-
cal importance. All freemasons and all orange-
nur-n, as is rightly stalkki by an evening contem-
porary, might with equal justice be sentenced to
transportation for the fact of having taken secret
and unlawful oaths as these poor ignorant fel-
lows.- The dilemma in which the prosecution
tands, then, is this—the crime which called
for punishment was not proved—the crime
brought home to the prisoners did not justify
the sentence. There is yet another considera-
tion which might, we think, induce Ministers
to deal mercifully with these delinquents. The
conabinati(ms of country labourers never can be
one-te.lith as pernicious to society as those by
wliich the manufacturing towns are tormented.
`The leaders and instigators of these latter
unions are, for the most part, selfish, worthless,
and designing men--desperate in circumstances
and in temper--who never fail to impress the
vicious features of their own minds upon the mea
sures and characters of the collective bodies whit

confide in their skill, and blindly submit to their
man affement. These men care not a single straw for
the welfare of the working classes, or the rate of
wages. On the contrary, they regard the at-
tainment of their ostensible objects as a certain
death-blow to their own power, which agitation
prolongs, while victory would subvert it. Such
are the criminals whom it would be justice to
attack, and a public benefit to punish. In-
stead of receiving deputations such as have
had the boldness to besiege the Home Secretary
as dictators, in the guise of supplicants, to
command the pardon of the six agricultural
convicts, it would have been a more gratifying
spectacle to the public to see some of, these pa-
trons of turbulence and mischief change places
with their clients, and the real stimulators to
outrage against the law become the exclusive
victims of their own machinations. However,
we do hope that mercy may yet be shown. The
state of the law must now be a matter of uni-
versal notoriety, and the same practices, we ven-
ture to anticipate, will not be repeated.— Times.
The Marylebone vestry meeting, of which we
gave a brief sketch in our paper of yesterday,
shows that the proposed alteration of the poor
laws is not likely to be carried without some re-
sistance. We do not regret this, because from
the collision of opinions we expect a more equi-
table and beneficial settlement of the question
than if the public had been driven by their fears
or their aversions into a slavish adoption of the

government measure, without any exercise of
their own judgment upon its provisions. It is
now generally understood that the report of the
poor law commissioners will form the ground-
work of the government plan. That report has
been for some time in circulation, and the multi-
tude of pamphlets, and letters, and commentaries
in all shapes, which have since issued from the
press, are so many proofs of the anxiety with
which the public mind has been directed to the

subject. Happily, however, the alarm—for it is

not too strong a Phrase to designate the sort of
emotion with which the evils of the present poor
laws are contemplated—happily, the alarm
is not likely to produce a blind and headlong
rush into the first project that offers without a
clue investigation of the pretensions which are
put forth in its behalf. At the vestry meeting
of Saturday last, the one to which our observa-
tions refer, some indication was given of the ob-
jections most likely to be urged against the ex-
pected measure. We shall take them as they

appear to us in the order of their relative hn-
portance. The first to which we would direct
attention, because of its importance, is the ob-

jection made by Lord Kenyon to the principle of
entrusting the Government with the manage-
ment of parochial affairs. Our readers may re-
collect that on the first publication of the com-
missioners' report we objected to this very part
of the plan. It is not an unreasoning jealousy
which dictates caution and doubt as to the pro-

priety of any change that includes an increase of
the power of Government. We are aware that
it is usual to answer such objections with a

flourish upon the nature of responsibility and
the security it affords against abuse. Such was
the defence set up for that most unconsti-
tutional measure, the New Police Act. But

it should never be forgotten that every ad-
dition to the power of Government is an ab-
straction from its responsibility, so that the ar-
gument may be said to shrink, and its virtue
to diminish at each successive application. But,'
in -Addition to the constitutional difficulties

which we feel upon this subject, there are local
advantages attending the administration of poor
laws by the parishes themselves, not easy to be
realised in any other regulation. Those who

pay the rates have so great an interest in keep-
ing them down, and such obvious facilities in

ascertaining the wants and detecting the impo-
sitions -of applicants, that we confess we should

feel more
.confidence in any modification of the
system which retained that part of the present
machinery than in a total change, in which a
new machinery is to be adopted, liable to all the
casualties and disadvantages of an untried expe-
riment. It is true that great abuses have arisen
under the self-management of the
_parishes.
But those abuses are now known. The mere

animal docility of the species would warrant us
in relying upon their cordial co-operation with
the government in any attempt to correct such
abuses, rather than have recourse to the strong,
we had Alniost said the desperate, alternative of
trusting every thing to the government itself.
The next objection we would notice is that
suggested by Mr. Wilson to the plan for
the abolition of out-door relief. We confess
that we were inclined to think favourably of
such an arrangement, in the first instance,
as a check to imposture, and an impediment
to the advance of pauperism and demoralisa-
tion. But we hesitate as to its practicability.
Its effect must be, unless we calculate on the
great majority of those who receive out-door-
relief being imposters, to fill the workhouses to
overflowing, besides producing a mass of misery
which it is frightful to contemplate, even in
imagination. The great danger is lest, in our
anxiety to amend the law, we should overlook
the obligations of humanity. It is natural for
the inhabitants of Marylebone to object, as Sir
Samuel Whalley did, on their behalf, to the
union of their parish, where the poor rates
amount only to is. 10d. in the pound, with
parishes that pay as much as 14s. or 15s. in
the pound. But it is natural at the same time
for those who pay the heavier rate to wish for
the partnership, and to wish for it on the very
ground that makes the other party object to it
—the ground of their own interest. But the
question is not how either of the two parishes
may feel inclined to the union, but whether
justice and policy do or do not require that the
pressure of the poor rates should be equalised
as far as possible throughout the kingdom, and
whether the union of parishes be not an im-
portant and necessary step towards the accom-
plishment of that object. This last-mentioned
objection appears to. us to be weaker than either
of the preceding. But we shall keep our
minds free from all improper bias, and will give
due consideration to the reasoning of Sir Sa-
.muel Whalley when he comes to support his
opinion by the considerations which have in-
duced him to adopt it. As we propose return-
ing to the subject soon again, we shall break
off here for the present, recommending a carefu-
consideration of it to every class• of the emu
munity, who are equally interested in the resu
—Morning Herald.

We collect from the expressions which Lord
Melbourne is reported to have used to the de-
putation of the Trades' Unions on Saturday
last, as well as from the altered language of the
Ministerial press, that Government, as we anti-
cipated, are about to succumb to those dange-
rous and powerful confederacies in the matter of
the Dorsetshire convicts. Feeling that the duty

of urging the necessity of a severe administra•

tion of the law in the case of individual offenders
is a most painful one, we should willingly have
abstained from any further allusion to this sub-
ject ; but upon a question which appears to us
to touch the vital interests of society, we think
ourselves bound to say that, notwithstanding the
sudden and entire change which the policy of
Government appears to have undergone, we ad-
here to the opinions we have already expressed.
The Globe prepares the public for the submission
of the King's Government to the dictate of the
Trades' Unions after the following fashion :
" The strongest ground on which the remission of

the sentence passed on the Dorsetshire labourers can
be sought for is this--that the circumstance of the

members being bound by oaths can affect in a very
trivial degree, for good or for evil, the character of
combinations. The experience of combinations shows
that the sanction of an oath is not necessary to bind
the members together; the fear of the resentment of
great numbers of their equals and associates is security
enough that the engagements entered into by the mem-
bers will not be lightly disregarded. The real mis-
chief of such a combination as tEat in Dorsetshire—

the evil which should be prosecuted, if at all—is the
act of combination under such rules as the Labourers'

Union submitted to. If, as the legislature seems to
have said, such a combination, cemented by mutual
promises and mutual fears, be perfectly innocent, the
punishwent which has been awarded for the merea ci-

dent—which, if the conspirators had been crafty, t ey
might have avoided—of an oath seems certainly to be
severe."

Whatever truth there is in this is certainly
not very recondite truth, and must already, we
should imagine, have been fully considered by
ministers before Sir James Graham expressed,
in the House of Commons, their opinion that
the case did not call for the intervention of the
Royal prerogative of mercy. But upon exami-
.

nation it will not, we think, appear to contain
much of what is true. The administration of
the oath taken by the Dorsetshire labourers is
not a mere accident. It is in morals and in
law a substantive offence. If the Legislature
seems to have said that such a combination as

theirs, cemented by mutual promises and mu-
tual fears, is perfectly innocent, it has distinctly
said that an oath binding men to secrecy, to obey
committees, &c., when introduced into such a

combination, is highly criminal. Neither does
it appear to us to be true that the circum-
stance of the members being bound by oaths
can only affect in a very trivial degree, for
good or for evil, the character of combinations.

this circumstance separates more completely
han is otherwise possible such combinations

from the general body of society ; it renders
their proceedings more unapproachable, mys-
terious, and alarming ; it strengthens the con-
fidence of the members in the fidelity of each
other to the purposes of the confederacy, be
they good or evil ; it facilitates the process by
which such confederacies naturally swerve into
crimes not in their original contemplation ; and
it pollutes and discredits the only evidence by
means of which they can eventually be made
amenable to the laws of their country. With
greater wisdom than that which the Legislature
has displayed in tolerating combinations, it has
pronounced that the distinctive circumstance of
oath or no oath is any thing rather than trivial.
—Morning Post.

A WARNING WELL TAKEN.—When I
began business I was a great politician. My master's
shop had been a chosen place for political discussion ;
and there, I suppose, I acquired my fondness for such
debates. For the first year, I had too much to do and
to think about, to indulge my propensity for politics ;
but, after getting a little a-head in the world, I began
to dip into these matters again. Very soon I entered
as deeply into newspaper argument as if my livelihood
depended on it ; my shop was often filled with loungers,
who came to canvass public measures ; and now and
then I went into my neighbours' houses on a similar
errand. This encroached on my time, and I found it
necessary sometimes to work till midnight, to make up
for the hours I lost. One night, after my shutters
were closed, and I was busily employed, some little
urchin who was passing the street put his mouth to the
key-hole of the door, and, with a shrill pipe, called
out, " Shoemaker, shoemaker ! work by night and
run about by day !" " And did you, inquired the
friend, " pursue the boy with your stirrup, to chastise
him for his insolence ?" " No, no," replied Mr. Drew;
" had a pistol been fired off at my ear, I could not
have been more dismayed or confounded. I dropped
my work, sayidg to myself, True, true ; but you
shall never have that to say of me again.' " I have
not yet forgotten it, and while I recollect anything I
never shall.—Autobiography of Samuel Drew.

APPEALS.

HOUSE OF LORDS, 111.1r.cii 31.
(Before the LORD CHANCELLOR, &C.)
SCOT V. STEWART.
This was an appeal from a decision of the Court
of Session in Scotland, and involved a question as to
the liability of a surety. The facts appeared as fol-
lows :—The late James Stewart, Esq., of Burgh,
died intestate in March, 1811, leaving the respondent,
an only child and infant, without guardians, on
which the Court appointed a Mr. Allcock to manage
the property as factor in loco tzdoris, but whose
factory was recalled in 1814, with the intention of
applying to the Barons of Exchequer for a gift of
tutory, which was obtained hi favour of Mrs. Maria
Stewart, the mother of the respondent, the late Mr.
Thomas Strong, his uncle, and Mr. Alexander Ste-
venson, and bore date the 2d of June, 1814. These
parties being required to give a security for the due
performace of their duties, granted, along with James
Baikie, Esq., of Tanlzerness, as their cautioner and
co-obligant, a bond, obliging themselves jointly and
severally, and their heirs, executors, &c., " to make
just compt, reckoning, and payment to the said pupil
of all intromissions, omissions, commissions, and acts
of management had by them by virtue of the said
gift." The parties entered upon their duties, Mr.
Alexander Stevenson taking the active management
of the property, who was afterwards, in April, 1819,
appointed their factor, by a deed of commis-
sion and factory, when he granted a bond in
conjunction with Mr. Scot (the appellant) eas
cautioner, and co-obligant to account for his
intromissions. Under this commission he imme-
diately acted. In August, 1820, Mr. Strong
died, when it was contended on the part of the ap-
pellant that a considerable balance was due from
the estate of Mr. Stevenson. This, however, was
in some measure denied by the respondent. Mr.
Stevenson, however, continued to act till February,
1825, when the respondent became of age, when it
was contended a debt of about 2,0001. was due
from Mr. Stevenson, who soon after becoming em-
barrassed, his estate was sequestrated, when an
action was brought against the principals and the
securities to recover the amount, and obtain an
account. Mr. Baikie, the cautioner under the
original bond, having carried on proceedings in the
Court of Session for the purpose of having it
established that the tutory, as being a joint nomina-
tion, without power to a quorum or survivor, fell by
the death of any of the nominees, and had therefore
terminated by the death of Mr. Strong in August,
1820, in which opinion he was supported by the
decision of Lord Cringletie, in June, 1822, who
ordered the surviving tutors to lodge a full account
of their intromissions, which was done accordingly.
Other proceedings, however, afterwards took place
upon this point, and the decision of Lord Cringletie
was overruled by the Court. An action was also
brought against Mr. Stevenson and the trustee on
his sequestrated estate, and against the appellant as
his cautioner, in which they concluded for compt
and reckoning- of Mr. Stevenson's intromissions till
the 23d of February, 1825 ; which was met by the
appellant denying his liability after the death of Mr.
Strong, in August, 1820, contending that not the
factory only, but the tutory itself, expired at that
date, and that Mr. Stevenson being one of the
tutors, as well as factor, it could not be held to be so
tutorial an act that it could have subsisted as long as
the tutory ; for if Mrs. Stewart had died it could
not have stood, the factor himself being sole tutor,
which could not be, and the factory therefore must
necessarily fall ; that if the factory fell, Mr. Scot
could not be liable to the intromissions of Mr.
Stevenson as tutor ; and if the factory did not fall,
Mr. Scot's obligation as cautioner fell by Mr.
Strong's death.
The Lord Advocate and Mr. Knight appeared
for the appellant, and Dr. Lushington for the re-
spondent.
After the conclusion of the argument,
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was a case of
very great importance with respect to the law and
practice of tutory, and after going minutely through
the arguments of counsel, and the cases cited, said,
as at present advised he was disposed to recommend
their Lordships to reverse the judgment of the
Court below, but in order that a more satisfactory
answer than had been given might be made with
respect to the returns from the Court of Exchequer
in Scotland, he would advise that judgment should
at present be postponed.—Judgment postponed.
WEIR V. GLENNY AND OTHERS.
On this case being called,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he appeared for
the appellant, in conjunction with the Lord Advo-
cate, and most earnestly solicited their Lordships to
decide the question mooted on Saturday last—
namely, whether the Lord Advocate of Scotland or
the Attorney-General of England had priority at
their Lordships' bar. He did not mean to urge his
claim to lead as a personal matter, but solely on
account of supporting the dignity of the office which
he had the honour to hold. There was one con-
sideration of great importance which he felt himself
bound to state to their Lordships, which he thought
very material to support his view,—that the Attor-
ney-General had precedence at their bar—namely,
that by the ancient law of Parliament there was a
writ from the King directed to the King's Attorney-
General, by virtue of which he was entitled to a
seat on the woolsack. He thought this very mate-
rial, as it was a privilege which he believed the
Lord Advocate would not deny did not belong even
to the Scotch or Irish judges, who, if they appear
in that house, must appear at their Lordships' bar.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—What you say is very
correct, that there was a writ from the King giving
such privilege, but it went also to the King's Ser-
geant. Therefore it is not decisive.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—It may not be de-
cisive, but I believe the King's Advocate never en-
joyed any such privilege.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—And the King's At-
torney-General did, in the trial which was alluded
to the other day, lead the King's Advocate. In
ancient times the Attorney-General was in that
house, as had been stated ; and the connexion was
such that Sir F. Bacon was the first Attorney-Ge-
neral who was allowed a seat in the House of Com-
mons. • It was supposed his duties in the House of
Lords were, incompatible with those in the House of
Commons ; but now he is allowed a seat in that
house.—(A laugh.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—It will be for your
lordships to determine which office of the two has
priority, or, if the offices be equal, whether it will
depend on priority of appointment ; but it is my
duty to see that the office which I have the honour
of holding loses none of its dignity or privileges
whilst in my possession.
The LORD CHANCELLOR---Will you allow me to
mention, that I find by an order of the house, of
the date of the 13th of June, 1685, " neither an
Attorney-General nor any other person, after taking
his seat on the woolsack, shall be allowed to appear
as counsel at the bar of this house for any private per-
son whose case may be brought before the house ?"
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—My Lords, I am
fully aware of such order, because Mr. Sergeant
Lens did appear at the bar of the house after
having taken his seat on the woolsack, when Lord
Eldon intimated to him that, having taken his seat
on the woolsack, he could no longer appear at your
lordships' bar ; but this is an ingredient worth con-
sideration when your lordships decide this very im-
portant question.
The LORD ADVOCATE—I hope your Lordships
will give me a little further time for consideration
before I am called upon to argue the question, for I
have only recently heard that the rank and dignity
of the Lord Advocate of Scotland was once made
the subject of a solemn argument, not before your
Lordships, but before that eminent man Lord
Mansfield. Before, therefore, deciding this ques-
tion, I should like to have time to prepare myself.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—It iS quite impossible
now that this question can be decided.
The LORD ADVOCATE—Perhaps I may be al-
lowed to mention a parallel case to that referred to
by my learned friend in connexion with the former
right to a seat on the woolsack. The Lord Advo-

cate had by ancient right a seat in the Scotch parlia-
ment with the Peers and Commons.
ri„,
n LORD CHANCELLOR—Why that would not
do much for you, because that was a right which
might have been claimed by a burger of Dunferm-
line.—(A laugh.) Your claim, my Lord Advocate,
is of this nature,—it is not confined to Scotch cases.
There is no distinction at this bar between English,
Irish, and Scotch cases,—it is an imperial court. You
might argue at the present moment on a writ of error
brought to this bar from one of the law courts. Sir
J. Dalrymple, a Scotch barrister, whose historical
knowledge was highly appreciated, argued a case at
this bar with respect to literary property,—a ques-
tion of considerable importance. Your proposition,
if admitted, would go to this—that you have a right
to lead the Attorney-General in an ex officio or other
information filed by himself in the Court of Exche-
quer. You must go en under prOtest.
The Loan ADVOCATE, by arrangement, then
opened the case, which was in part heard, and fur-
ther consideration adjourned.