The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-06 00:00:00

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN OTTO KOOPS.

This individual was heard in September, 1834, and was
opposed on the ground of a concealment of property, and
the Court intimated that he would receive a serious judg-
ment. He had remained in prison ever since without
again coming up. Since then he had been indicted for
perjury, alleged to have been committed in the proceedings
in this Court, and was found guilty, the Court of King's
Bench reserving certain points to be argued during the pre-
sent Term. The insolvent was entitled to considerable
copyhold property at Poplar, which he alleged he had as-
signed over. An action had been brought by Mr. Brenan,
the assignee appointed at the hearing, as executor of a Mr.
Murphy, who had been in partnership with the insolvent as
pawnbrokers. The property had been recovered by the
assignee in an action of ejectment, and the insolvent applied
to this Court to restrain the assignee from selling it. The
application was refused, and Mr. Machin, of the firm of
Machin, Debenham, and Storr, auctioneers, applied on affi-
davits, stating that the present was not a fit time for the
sale, and that it would not realise its value by a considerable
sum.

The COURT granted a Rule Nisi, which came on for
argument to-day.
Mr. CHADWICKS JONES moved to make the Rule abso-
lute ; and

Mr. Nicuou.s showed cause on the part of the assignee.
Mr. JONES, in support of the Rule, urged the belief of
the insolvent that Mr. Brenan was no creditor. The
Learned Counsel said Mr. Brenan had described himself in
his affidavit as being a gentleman, living in Gibraltar-row,
Bethnal-green, whic was the neighbourhood where Bishop
and Williams carried on their prosperous business of
Burking.—(A. laugh.)
Mr. Brenan, who was present, denied what the Learned
Gentleman had stated.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS—What does it matter ? I
may live next door to a felon ; and, sitting here, we are
very near, no doubt, to felons in Surgeons' Hall.—(Loud
laughter.)
The COURT, at the conclusion of the argument, said
there was not the slightest grounds for the motion. The
assignee had a right to sell the property, and the Rule was
dismissed with costs.

POLICE IN TELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.

Yesterday a great degree of curiosity was excited by the
examination on a charge made by one party of Wesleyan
Methodists against another ; the new light, we believe,
against the old. The Justice-room and hall were crowded.
with Methodists, many of whom manifested feelings of exul-
tation very unlike the meek and benignant spirit of Chri4
tianity which is often so beautifully preached by their Mi-
nisters.

Mr. John Farrar, a young gentleman of very respectable
connections, was charged by Mr. George Booth King, under
the following circumstances :

A constable, named Edwards, stated that a meeting took
place on Wednesday evening in Mr. Alexander Fletcher's
chapel, Moorfields. About 2,000 persons were present,
and a great noise and confusion took place, and the Chair-
man orered witness to take the defendant into custody, as
one of the promoters who had encouraged persons around
to make confusion. Witness saw the dfendant using such
gesticulations as left no doubt that he was opposing the pro-
ceedings.
A placard, calling the meeting, was handed in. It was
headed " London Wesleyan Association," and stated that
the meeting was called for the purpose of stating the
circumstances which led to the formation of the Asso-
ciation, and the objects which it was intended to accom-
plish, and that it was founded upon a recognition of the
following propositions :—" That as the Holy Scriptures
contain a sufficient rule of faith and practice, the Church
of Christ ought not to be required to submit to any
ecclesiastical human authority or rule, except as required
in the Word of God. That no one class of officers
in the Church has authority from the Bible to exer-
cise exclusive power in the government of the Church.

That ecclesiastical history proves that all the corruption of
Christianity originated in the depravation of the character
of its Ministers, and that such depravation was consequent
upon their advancement in wordly rank, and upon their
having been allowed by degrees to assume to themselves
the entire government of the Church. That the Wesleyan
Itinerant Preachers have of late assumed to possess higher
Ministerial prerogatives than are claimed by any other body
of Protestant Christian Ministers ; asserting that they have
Divine authority to make laws and enforce them by expel-
ling from church-fellowship whomsoever they may deter-
mine ought for refusing to obey them to be expelled, and
now have publicly declared in the minutes of this year,
1835, their determination to maintain those assumed pre-
rogatives. That, therefore, it is requisite that all lawful
and proper means be employed to obtain for the Wesleyan
societies their just and Scriptural rights as to their go-
vernment and exemption from the unscriptural ministerial
domination-now claimed over them. If this be not done,
the character of the Wesleyan Preachers will ultimately
beeome depraved ; Methodism be corrupted, enslaved, and
debased ; and so become a curse to the world, instead of a
blessing."
Mr. H. B. King was a tailor—He attended the meeting,
and observed, while a gentleman named Heckett was ad-
dressing the assembly from the platform, that the defendant
and several other persons gave frequent interruptions to the
speaker. The Chairman invited the defendant to go upon
the platform to discuss the matter, but the invitation was
refused. The hissing and confusion were so great that the
speaker was obliged to desist.
The LORD MAYOR—You evidently called the whole
body, and invited a discussion ? Witness—The proposi-
tions were not to be discussed.
The LORD MAYOR—How many were engaged in the
opposition ? Witness—Fifty, or perhaps 100, and there
appeared to be about 2,000 present.
Mr. Berford, of Cottage-place, City-road, timber-mer-
chant, was Chairman of the meeting. The meeting took
place not for discussion, but for stating the circumstances
which led to the establishment of the association, and the
objects it was intended to accomplish. After be opened the
business, Mr. Robert Heckett rose to address the congre-
gation, and was repeatedly interrupted, particularly by two
persons, one of whom was the defendant. Defendant and
his friends expressed their diapprobation by hissing and
hooting, which was met by such loud applause from the
members to whom they were opposed, that the greatest in-
terruption arose from the noise made by the latter.
The LORD MAYOR—But do you not allow any members
of your body to express their disapprobation ? Witness—
Certainly, we have no objection. We, on .the contrary, de-
sire it, for we get more information from our opponents.
The LORD MAYOR—If, then, you are enlightened by
the conduct of your opponents, why did you interfere with
them upon this occasion ? Witness—They might have
expressed their disapprobation as strongly as they pleased
if they had only heard us out. The acclamations, in reply
to the hissing, were the principal cause of the interruption.
The LORD MAYOR—Applause is never considered as
lan interruption, as far as I have been able to observe. I
never yet saw a speaker who considered it with anger.

The defendant denied that he had heard the Chairman
call him to order. He disclaimed all idea of riotous inter-
ruption, but expressed, as he was justified in doing, his
disapprobation of the propositions of which notice had been
given in the placard. In those expressions he was joined
by a great many others.
Mr. Luke Farrar, uncle to the defendant, a surgeon in
the Commercial-road, described the scene. The name of
Farrar was called out several times, and Mr. Heckett asked
the following question, " Whether any Pope of Rome, or
Bishop of the Established Church, or Presbyter, or Mini-
ster of any other Church, had shown a snore domineering
spirit, or more absolute power, than the Wesleyan Minis-
ters ?" The answer was expected by the majority of the
meeting, and witness was ready to answer it, but could not
obtain a hearing, and went away. It was half .an hour
afterwards that the defendant was taken into custody.
'lle LORD MAYOR regretted to see such a division
amongst the members of so respectable and influential a
sect, and that an intolerant spirit was manifesting itself'.
Although lie did not embrace the opinions of the Wesleyan
Methodists, he 'was sorry indeed to see amongst them the
seeds of a very prejudicial discussion ; and he the morn la-
mented that circumstance, in consequence of the well-regu-
lated nature of the institution. The meeting was a public
one. He (the Lord Mayor) knew the way in which people
expressed their disapprobation as well as their applause—
(A laugh)—and it struck him as a monstrous thing that a
Chairman should think of regulating the feeling of an as-
sembly by the aid of the police. He trusted that they
would come to an agreement, but he altogether deprecated
the authority exercised upon the present occasion, as in di-
rect violation of the liberty of the subject.
Loud applause and clapping of bands from the one party
followed this judgment, while the other party gave evident
symptoms cf disappointment and chagrin.