The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-25 00:00:00

THE FUNDS.

It is now stated that the cause of our Funds having materially
improved in the latter part of yesterday afternoon, was owing to
a general belief that both parties on the Reform Bill have come
to a favourable understanding, and that it will pass the second
reading in the House of Lords and go into Committee. It is also
stated that very few I'eers will require to be made.
This day is a close holiday at the Bank, Stock Exchange, and
Foreign Market. The brokers have assembled on 'Change and
in the court of the Stock Exchange, but scarce a bargain has
as yet, been done.
Consols may be nominally quoted at 524, the same price they
left off at yesterday.

TWO O'CLOCK.
The contents of the express from Paris have not to this hour
transpired.
Consols are done on 'Change at 82 % for the account. The
speculators are afraid to operate until they know the French
prices.
We hear that an express arrived yesterday evening to Govern-
from Holland and Berlin.

Consols, 82i

THREE O'CLOCK

NEW STRAND THEATRE.—Here we have
a new candidate for the Olympic prizes. The more the
better. Many competitors increase the rivalry of the
course, and afford to the spectator a higher excitement and
gratification. There is a certain improvement in the
style of theatric decoration in latter years, which may be
particularly remarked in all the alterations and renova-
tions of this nature which have recently taken place. It
is so far conspicuous in the new house that the eye is
unoffended therein by any of that gingerbread gaudi-
ness which formerly wooed the admiring gape of
plebeian cognoscenti. The interior shape of this dimi-
nutive edifice, as far as it is determined by the line
of panelling, is almost circular. It contains a pit and
two rows of boxes, more conveniently arranged than
could be anti, ipated in-a place where room is so precious.
The colouring throughout is light and chaste, with
gilt °roam, nts, producing a lively general effect. The
only error in the arrangements of the whole to which we
shall allude consists in the too great number of gas foot-
lights (and this, it must be allowed, is a glaring one),
which are inconvenient to the eyes of the audience, and
must be to the properties of a small minor. Perhaps we
should arid, as a hint to the proprietors, that there was
not sufficient ventilation to counteract the heat generated
by the lamps, as well as the other usual causes. Mr.
BLAND, and one or two young ladies of the nascent com-
pany, sung a few airs, with the accompaniment of a band
quite sufficient for the purposes of noise, but which, for
the sake of harmony, we should rather see brought more
together, after the manner of Drury-lane, than stretched
along in single file. To-morrow night will reveal to us
more of the important point of the corps dramatique, its
purposes, and powers. It is reported, we know not with
what truth, that efforts are being made to induce a certain
high personage to enforce the strict letter of the law, with
a view of suppressing such places of entertainment as are
not honoured with " patent right." But we feel, in com-
mon with the public, that it is high time that the
age of monopoly is past, or nearly so, and we are.
confident that the high character of the Duke of
DEVONSHIRE, and the liberal encouragement that he
is known to have always given to the fine arts,
and to artists (particularly his patronage of the com-
pany of French performers), are sufficient guarantees that
he will not so far exercise the " right" which is unques-
tionably vested in him by law, as to deprive the public of
any part of their amusements.

The Duke of 'WELLINGTON was led clown
to Parliament on Tuesday, and on Thursday a dinner party
was got up at Apsley-house, consisting, according to the
ostentatious announcement in the Papers, "of his Grace's
late colleagues in office, with their ladies." This species
of exhibition may be overdone, and defeat its purpose.--
It is very well known that the Duke is unfit for the
fatigue either of the Senate or of society. The " trea-
cherous bulletin" makers, and the small faction of in-
triguing politicians, would best evince attachment to the
decayed Chief by leaving him to privacy and repose. The
more immediate illness, from which the Duke is pretty
well recovered, was a violent inflammation of the mucus
membrane of the lungs. But his digestive apparatus has
long been in a disordered state, and he has been obliged to
pay particular attention to his food. When in office, the
frivolous details of Downing-street occupied too much of
his care, and left him too little time for regular healthy
exercise; then, his numerous journeys during the night—
his evening parties—and "shooting excursions," as they
were called—all these, added to the natural wear of a long
and arduous military life, have gradually undermined his
constitutioa, and put it, wefear,beyond reform.— Spectator.

ROLLS' COURT.-(TNIS DAY.)

At the time of our reporter leaving, nothing worth reporting
had occurred in this Court.

VICE-CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY,

Causes of no public importance occupied his Honour the
Vice-Chancellor the whole morning.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY,

THE KING v. CHARLES MOORE.

The defendant, who had been convicted of a nuisance, ap-
peared in Court to receive judgment.
Lord TENTERDEN read his notes of the evidence given on
the trial, from which it appeared that the defendant, who was
a gun maker, occupied some premises at Notting Hill, and that
he enclosed one field, which he appropriated for the use of gen-
tlemen who met there to shoot with rifles at a target, and to
shoot at pigeons. It was proved that the lives of the persons
in the neighbourhood were endangered, as well as those passing
along the high road,the field being close to the road ; that the fence
of the adjoining fields were much injured by persons who were
attracted thither to shoot the birds that escaped the shots of the
gentlemen within the enclosures, that horses in the road had
received stray shot; that the windows of neighbouring houses
had been broken by shot, and also that several persons had re-
ceived wounds in the face, &c. The defendant was found
guilty upon some counts of the indictment and acquitted upon
others.

Mr. JAY appeared for the defendant, and Sir JAMES
SCARLETT and Mr. GURNEY for the prosecution.
Mr. JAY said that having obtained permission of the Lord
Chief Justice to move to enter a verdict for the defendant he now
rose to do so. The nuisance as laid in the indictment was threefold,
but one charge, viz., that of erecting a forge for making gun-
barrels, was abandoned by the prosecutor ; with regard to the
rifle shooting, certainly there was some evidence that it •was
dangerous, and the defendant was willing to suppress that
practice ; the only important question was, whether the de-
fendant was not allowed to continue the pigeon shooting on his
own grounds, he having erected a sufficient fence to secure the
neighbourhood against danger, or whether he was to be held
responsible for the nuisance committed by the " scouts," who
were outside of his ground ready to shoot the stray birds, and
over whom he had no controul ; indeed, the defendant had em-
ployed a man to drive those scouts away. The defendant had
a clear right to allow shooting on his own ground, which was
secured by a fence that protected the public against danger.
Whatever nuisance was committed, was committed by those
scouts who ought to have been punished ; they were the imme-
diate cause of the nuisance, and it was contrary to the principle
of law to seek to punish the remote cause of it ;—the defendant
could not hove any object in creating a nuisance, and conse-
quently he ought not to be held criminally responsible for acts
committed by others. The defendant was a gun-maker of emi_
. nence, having been brought to London by the late Mr. Huskis.
son, from Chichester, and having amassed some prpperty,
he purchased the villa at Notting Hill; and in enclosing a field
to try his rifles, and allow his friends and customers to enjoy
the sport of pigeon shooting, he was only doing what
many other gun-makers kJ. He had consequently gone to a
very great expellee, and if he were not allowed to continue it,
and the law should be laid down that he was criminally respon-
sible for the acts of persons over whom he had no controul, the
consequences to him in his business would be very serious.
Their LORDSHIPS were unanimously of opinion that the'
verdict was good in law; the defendant could not be allowed to
make a profit of his own ground to the annoyance of the public.
If a person attracted a crowd to the annoyance of the public, he
was guilty of committing a nuisance. This gentleman invited
people to shoot in his inclosure, and the necessary effect
is, that idle persons were attracted to trample on the neigh_
bouring lands and fences to shoot the escaped pigeons.
The defendant, no doubt, had no object to create a
nuisance, but it was the effect of his allowing shooting
on his own premises. The law was clear, that any
thing that had a necessary tendency to draw numbers of people
together was a nuisance. Their Lordships therefore refused
the application.

Mr. JOY then handed in several affidavits made by persons
in the neighbourhood, stating that since the indictment had
been found the nuisance had been abated.

Mr. GURNEY, for the prosecution, handed in several affida-
vits from which it appeared that the shooting was carried on as
usual, and that the defendants' son and foreman directed it.
Mr. JOY said the only shooting carried on since the indict-
ment was found, was the trying of rifles, which was a necessary
branch of the defendant's trade.

Sir JAMES SCARLETT said, it was not the object of
the prosecutors to punish the gentleman, but they wished to be
secured from all danger to themselves and the public, and
would be content if the defendant were ordered to find suffi-
cient sureties to prevent a repetition of such occurrences by
himself, and to prevent his letting the premises to others for a
similar purpose, as It was proved in evidence he intended to do.
Lord TENTERDEN, in consenting to that suggestion, said
it should be a condition in the recognizance that the defendant
should not let the premises for any such object ; and ordered
him to enter into recognizances biniself in 1,0004 and two sure-
ties in 500/. each.

The defendant said he had no one in Court to become surety
for him.

Mr. JAY suggested that the defendant should be allowed to
depart, and appear to.morrow with his sureties.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT said he understood it was the de.
fendant's intention to go immediately to France.

The COURT then ordered the defendant to remain in Court,
and send for his sureties in the course of the day ; otherwise he
must be committed to the King's Bench.

Lord TENTERDEN thought it right to state that the de-
fendant had been treated very leniently by the prosecutor, for
it was a most savage amusement.

COURI OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

JUDGMENT.-DOE ON THE DEMISE OF MERRICK

v. 111 ERRICK.

This case was argued last term. The judgment of the Court
was delivered this morning by Lord LYNDHURST.—He said
this case came before the Court on a deed made by Thomas
Merrick, in 1809, by which he conveyed certain property to his
daughter, with remainder to his heirs male. The property was
described as one messuage, thirteen closes, one grist mill, &c.
with other closes thereunto belonging. Wm. Merrick took pos-
session of the property under the deed of 1809, and in 1816 he suf-
fered a recovery, but in that deed the mills were not mentioned ;
that deed set out by stating that it conveyed property therein
after mentioned. The property is afterwards mentioned, and
it consists of eight closes. From these words, it is impossible
to suppose that he intended to convey the five closes, the sub-
ject of the present suit. The eight closes mentioned, par-
ticularly agreed with the eight in question, that deed could
not, therefore, pass the other five; besides in the deed, the
words " part and parcel" are used, which clearly
spewed that there was no intention to pass the whole.
The Court, therefore, were of opinion that he only intended
to pass what was particularly mentioned in the deed. At
hearing of the cause great reliance had been placed on the ge-
neral words, and that under them he intended to convey the
whole of the closes. In the case of " Lord North v. the
Bishop of Ely," Ist Bulstrode, a similar description followed
the words which particularly described the property, and it
was then held by the Court, that the general words were not
sufficient to convey other property than was particularly
mentioned In the deed. The Court never put a violent
construction on words, but always looked at the inten-
tion of the parties. The judgment of the Court was,
that the deed of 1816 did not pass the five closes in question,
There was another question, whether the five fields
passed by another deed of 18:24. In the recital of that deed, it
is shown that the five fields were never intended to be passed by
the deed of 1810. In that of 1824 the five fields were pro-
perly described, but they were described as part of the
demesne lands, whereas that was impossible unless he
had purchased more land, he having previously disposed of
the eight closes. The Court were of opinion that these
five closes did pass by the deed of 18:24, notwithstanding
these words—" part of the demesne lands." The widow (the
plaintiff) was entitled to that property. In consequence of a
proposition which was made at the bar, the Court would with-
hold its opinion, as to the disclaimer, till they were made ac-
quainted with the decision at to that proposition.