The Sun.
London, England, 1832-12-06 00:00:00

THE ATTORNEY-GENKRAL V. CAWTHORN.

Mr. GA RRATT stated that this was an application at
he instance of certain persons subscribers to a charitable
society, called " The Laudable Institution." The so-
ciety was established many years since, for the relief of
decayed licensed victuallers and their widows. According
to the rules and regulations of the society, annual sub-
scribers of one guinea or upwards, and persons paying five
guineas at once, were constituted members. Annual sub-
scribers for three years were eligible to become annuitants,
and the election of such annuitants was vested in the sub-
scribers generally. Under those regulations the society
continued to exist for several years, hut had not flow islivd.
There was a sum, however, of 1,9501. Consols, standing
in the names of the trustees of the charity; and, as the
object of the society had totally failed, it was meant to
propose befoze the Master that the hind standing in the
names of the trustees of the Laudahle Institution should be
transferred to the Licensed Victuallers' Society.
The MASTER of the ROLLS could not exercise a power
so extensive without explicit authority, and therefore the
case must stand over to allow Counsel an opportunity of
examining into the cases.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC.

DODD V. CREASE.

This was an action of slander.

Mr. Sergeant BOMPAS stared the case. The plaintiff
had been for some years principal clerk to a Mrs. Brook,
who carried on the coach-m ,king business. In May,
1831, her affairs became embarrassed, when a meeting at
hrr creditors took place, and auditors were appointed to
inspect the accounts. The defendant having been ap
pointed an auditor, took occasion to impeach the honesty
of the plaintiff by saying, in the presence of several per-
sons, on several occasions, that he robbed the concern,
and pocketed the money, to the amount of 1,3001., and
other words to the same effect. In consequence of which
the plaintiff was discharged.

Moses Kipling, an ironmonger in Thames-street, was a
creditor of Mrs. Brook. Attended the meetings of cre-
ditors. Heard the defendant say, in the presence of
several others, that the plaintiff had robbed the concern to
the amount of 1,5001. or 1,600/, The plaintiff was
discharged about a month afterwards. He frequently heard
the defendant say that the plaintiff had robbed the estate.
Cross-examined by Mr. PLATT—The accounts were
kept very irregularly. They were not unravelled up to
this day. Witness was not at all satisfied with them. He
believed that the defendant thought at the time when he
made the charge against the plaintiff that he was stating
the truth.

Mis. Brook gave evidence to the same effect, respecting
the charges made by the defendant against the plaintiff.
In her cross-examination she stated her conviction that
the defendant, in making such charges, believed that they
were well founded, and that he was actuated solely by a
desire to serve her and her children. She dismissed the
plaintiff because he had kept the books badly, and not on
account of what the defendant had said of him.

The Jury, having deliberated for a short time, returned
a verdict for the plaintiff.—Damages, 1501.

ARCHES' COURT, DEC. 5.

WILCOX V. WHITE.

This was an appeal from the decision of the Judge of
the Consistory Court in a cause of office promoted by the
Rev. Samuel White. perpetual Curate of Hampstead pa-
rish, against the Rev. John Wilcox, for performing
Divine Service in St. John's chapel in the same parish,
without license duly obtained. The Judge of the Court
below decided that the Rev. Mr. Wilcox had acted con-
trary to law in performing Divine Service in the chapel
alluded to, admonished him to refrain from such conduct
for the future, and condemned him in costs. From this deci-
‘as promoted to this Court, on the ground
the assignation for the sentence in the
siC)ifoongurraitenvbaaeni:p eoc%evatl havtwas irregular, and was therefore a nullity ;
and that the statement that the Rev. Mr. Wilcox was an
ordained minister of the Church of England was not fully
supported by evidence.
Dr. HAGGARD having been heard at great length in
support of the appeal, and the King's ADVOCATE, in
reply—
Sir JOHN Nicium, gave judgment. The sentence was
a perfectly right one, the defendant having violated the
law. He should, therefore,
. pronounce for the appeal, as
far as respects the grievance, and retain the principal cause,
and should admonish the defendant to refrain from doing
duty in the chapel again without license, and should con •
demo the Rev. Mr. Wilcox in 50/. nonznie expensarum
for the costs in the Court below, but would give no order
respecting the costs on the appeal.