The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-12 00:00:00

originally imposed ; and that, if continued beyond
that time, in any form, it be confined to tangible,
ascertained property. Secondly—a total abolition, or
material reduction, of duties.which press most severely
on the trade and industry of the country. Of such
duties, there is one which is peculiarly impolitic and
oppressive. Perhaps there is no tax a reduction or re-
moval of which would be more advantageous to the
community than the duty upon Policies of Insurance.
At the same time it might be effected without ulti-
mately occasioning any material loss of revenue.
The great comparative extent to which the business
of insurance is carried in Great Britain affords one of
the least equivocal tests of our superior progress in
civilization, and of the greatest diffusion amongst us
of habits of providence and foresight. It appears,
from the official returns, that the gross duty received
on policies of insurance against fire in the United
Kingdom, in 1843, amounted, in round numbers,
to one million sterling, independent of farming-
stock, which is exempt from duty. As the duty
is three shillings per cent., the property insured,
subject to duty, was valued at the immense sum of
nearly 667,000,000/. But, vast as this sum cer-
tainly is, it is still true that most buildings, with
their contents, are not insured at near their full
value. Even in towns, many are not insured at all ;
and in the country the insurance of farm-buildings is
comparatively rare. It is difficult to imagine that
this disinclination to insure can be owing to any cause
other than the exorbitance of the tax. It is especially
the duty of governments to encourage habits of
forethought, and to contribute, by every means in
their power to the protection of property, and to
the mitigation of the disastrous effects of those
casualties to which it is exposed. But it
would appear as if Parliament, when it imposed
this tax, had thought that the less security there
was for property and the more disastrous fires,
and other calamitous visitations upon it, were ren-
dered, the better! The practice of insurance has
grown up amongst us, not in consequence of encour-
agements by the Government, but in the teeth of
the most formidable obstructions. The duties im -
posed on it do not really seem to have been imposed
for the sake of revenue, but that the business might
be suppressed. The premium charged by the dif-
ferent offices on risks of ordinary hazard is, at
this moment, Is. 6d per cent.; while the duty is no
less than 35., or 200 per cent. on the premium ; so
that an individual insuring 1,000/. upon a house, a
shop, &c., pays the insurer 15s. to indemnify him
against his risk; and 30s. of duty to Government,with
Is. on each policy, whatever may be the amount in-
sured, for liberty to enter into such a transaction !
We hesitate not to say, that the existence of such a
duty is disgraceful to the country. To enlarge.
on its mischievoas influence is utterly unnecessary
Its operation in lessening and preventing insur-
ances is universally felt and acknowledged. We
are supported by the authority of every one best able
to form a sound conclusion on such a point, when we
express our conviction that the reduction of the duty
from 3s. to Is. per cent. would occasion such an
extension of the business, that the loss of revenue that
would take place in the first instance would, in a
very short time, cease to be considerable, or be alto-
gether replaced. But though this anticipation
\yore not fully realised, would not the sacrifice of
100,000/. of annual revenue be compensated a hundred-
fold by the security afforded to two hundred
millions of capital? We incline to think that Mr.
Goulburn himself would pause before he determined
to resist a proposition for the reduction of this im-
politic duty. The extreme hazard to which property
at sea is exposed, rendersits insurance of peculiar
consequence to individuals and to the public. Yet
the insurers of ships and cargoes, as well as of
houses and the property they contain; are subjected
to very oppressive duties. All policies of marine in-
surance must be on stamped paper. Policies
on vessels engaged in the foreign or colonial
trade, iz.aay be as conveniently effected in Hamburgh,
Amsterdam, or New York, as in London; and as
policies executes in these cities are either wholly
or are subject to such
exempted from du-.`_egy
as are nominal only, the ~,duty imposed on them
in this country causes a larg.,' portion of that in-
surance business to be transal"ted on the Con-
tinent, and in the United States. That such is
the case is known to every merchant. ~ite ins uranca
of vessels in the colonial and foreign tra..4e is gra-
dually, but certainly, leaving this country. The
duty is, in fact, driving a valuable branch of indus,'"V
from amongst us. Even though it had no such effect,
it is clear that a tax on the security of property at sea
is nut one that ought to exist in ans- country, and,
least of all, in a commercial country like England.
We do, Therefore, hope that Sir R. Peel will avail
himself of the favourable condition of the public
finances to repeal these duties. The country, so deeply
interested in their removal, should, by deputations
from the various ports of the kingdom, press the sub
ject on his consideration. The Right Ilon. Baronet
will thus be prepared for having the subject brought
before Parliament early in the approaching session ;
when we hope the removal of the tax on policies of
fire and marine insurance will form one of the items
of the new budget.

STANDAIitt.—A case of' some importance was
argued in the Irish Rolls Court on Thursday last,
which involved the question of whether or not a be-
quest in Ireland of money directed to be expended
"in masses for the soul's sake " be valid. The Bill
alleges that such a bequest is for " superstitious pur-
poses, and therefore against the policy of the law."
The facts of the case are these :—ln 1837 the Rev.
Mr. Kearns, a Roman Catholic priest, of Rath-
farnham, madeC a will, granting certain legacies ; di-
recting a life annuity to be paid to his sister out of
his property ; and further devising that any residue
accruing after the death of the annuitant should be
" expended for masses for his soul's sake." The
will named two executors, the Rev. Mr. Dugienan
and Mr. Hodgens. NVithin five years of its date
Mr. Kearns died without having revoked his
will, and the surviving executor (Mr. Hodgens)
having taken out letters of administration, paid
the several legacies, and continued to pay
the annuity up to 1840, when the annuitant
died, and he proceeded to dispose of the " remaining
residue of the property" in accordance with the desire
of the testator. Two parties, alleging to be next of
kin, have since disputed, not the general validity of
the instrument, the insufficiency of administration, or
the manner in which the effects of the deceased were
administered up to the period of the demise of the
annuitant; but the validity of that portion ‘‘f the
will which directs the " residue to be expended
in masses " for the soul of the deceased ; alleging by
their bill that the " bequest of the said residue
for masses for the sake of the soul of the said
testator, was void and of no effect, as being a gift
for superstitious purposes, and, therefore, contrary
to the policy of the law." Accordingly they seek to
recover the amount of this residue from the executor.
The arguments of counsel on both sides have been
heard, but the case still stands over for judgment.
The Freeman's Journal contends that, to refuse
to permit a Roman Catholic priest to practice the doc-
trine of his Church—the doctrine that it is " a holy
and wholesome thought to pray for the dead," when
preparing for death himself, would be a virtual
repeal of the Emancipation Act, which invested per-
sons of that persuasion with the right of being as
superstitious as they pleased ; and that the recog-
nition of such an obstacle would be to prohibit di-
rectly the free exercise of the Roman Catholic reli-
gion in Ireland, and render a new agitation for
emancipation indispensable. The case was ably
argued in both sides, and the question appeared
to be whether the law which has existed in
England since Ist of Edward IV., and which
was intended to restrain such bequests can be
considered as applying with equal force to
a country in which so large a majority of
its people are Roman Catholics. The question is
certainly a delicate one, but precedents for disre-
garding such bequests in this country are numerous
and unequivocal;_ and if the law of the land be ap-
pealed to to establish the validity. of Mr. Kearn's
will, why should not the supremacy of the Pope (a
formal doctrine of the Roman Catholic religion)
and the injunctions of Dr. Dens, be similarly vin-
dicated ?

THE NEW VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURTS.—A meet-
ing of the Queen's counsel and Chancery barristers took
place on Saturday, at Westminster, for the purpose of
taking into consideration the great inconvenience which
all th members of the Chancery bar are now suffering
from, by reason of no efficient courts having been pro-
vided for the two Vice .Chancellors, Sir J. K. Bruce and
Sir J. Wigram ; the former of whom has been sitting in
the sessions court, Westminster, whenever that court
was vacant ; and the latter has been occupying the
large dining-room appropriated to the use of the county
magistrates. The distance of these courts from those in
Westminster-hall his been felt most severely during the
late inclement weather. A deputation of three Queen's
eounsel has been appointed to wait upon the Lord Chan-
cellor to request that, since the Government have
thought proper to appoint two new equity judges, they
will also provide proper courts for them within the pre-
cincts of Westminster-hall.

FORGED NOTES AND BASE COlN.—Within the last
few days, the tradesmen of Stockton, and others more or
less interested in the monetary world in that town, having
been informed that a considerable number of base 51. notes,
sovereigns, half-sovereigns, half- crowns, shillings, and six -
pences, were in circulation, a kind of a panic took place,
which ended in the capture of several suspicious cha-
racters. Some respectable persons are implicated, and
several have been already apprehended, while the police
are on the alert for others, who are supposed to be the
principals in this nefarious transaction. Many of the
notes, as well as the counterfeits in gold and silver, have,
it is generally supposed, found their way into circulation
at the late fairs in the north of England. Plates of
copper, steel, &c., with moulds of various kinds being
every day brought to light, it would be premature to say
any more on the subject at present, as from this simple
notice the public will be on their guard. In addition to
the above, minor robberies and depredations of almost
every kind are daily taking place, and are evidently most
alarmingly on the increase.-IVcvcasele Advertiser.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY.—Nov. 11.

The Lord Chancellor took his seat in his Court to-
day, at a quarter before eleven o'clock, for the pur-
pose of hearing appeals.

MATTHEWS V. BRISE.

The further arguments in this case, which were
partly heard on Friday and Saturday, were resumed
and concluded to-day. The case came before the
court upon appeal from the court below, which had
ordered the defendant to make good the value of a
number of Exchequer-bills, which he had, as a trustee,
left in the hands of bankers, who converted them to
their own use, and afterwards became bankrupts. The
defendant was also ordered to pay the costs. The
facts of the case may be thus shortly stated :—A tes-
tator, of the name of Matthews, by his will appointed
the defendant a trustee of considerable estates in Suf.
folk, with directions to dispose of them in a reasonable
time, and, at the termination of a beneficial interest in
the fund, which was to be enjoyed by his widow, to
divide it among his younger children, of whom the
plaintiff was one. The testator died in 1834, and the
defendant sold a portion of the estates, and placed the
purchase-money, for a time, in the hands of
Messrs. Oakes, as his bankers ; he, however, shortly
afterwards, for greater security, placed the money,
which amounted to 7,5001., in the hands of the Messrs.
Wakefield, the bill-brokers and bankers, in Broad•
street, London. Negotiations were going on, with the
concurrence of the widow of the testator, for paying
the money out on mortgage, and in the meantime he
gave Messrs. Wakefield instructions to invest it in
the purchase of Exchequer-bills. The bills were pur-
chased, but the Messrs. Wakefield became bankrupts
in April, 1841, and it turned out that they had felo-
niously sold the hills afterwards, and converted the
produce to their own use, subjecting themselves to
the provisions of the 7th and Bth Geo. IV., chap. 59,
for the fraud. The money being therefore lost, the
Master of the Rolls held the defendant to be re-
sponsible, on the ground that he had transferred to
other persons the confidence reposed in him, and that
having parted with the custody of the money, he must
replace it, and pay all the costs.
Mr. Bethell and a gentleman behind the bar ap-
peared for the appellant, and Mr. J. Russell and Mr.
Chandless supported the judgment of the Court below.
The arguments having concluded to-day,
The LORD CHANCELLOR postponed giving judg-
ment till he had had an opportunity of looking into
the papers and the authorities that had been cited.
The Court did not rise till nearly four o'clock.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 11.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
lIUXTABLE V. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.

The arguments in this part-heard case were re-
sumed and concluded to-day. The case came before
the Court upon demurrers put in to the bill by the
defendants, Messrs. Magniac and Co., and Messrs.
Baring, Brothers, for want of equity as against them,
they having been made, by the plaintiff, defendants to
the suit, upon allegations that they were the autho-
rised agents of the State of Illinois in this country.
The plaintiff, who is a married woman, by the pre-
sent bill sought payment through the defendants, as
such agents, of a debt which she alleged to be due
to her for principal and interest, accruing in
respect to certain bonds of the State of
Illinois, which she had been induced, before she
married, by John Wright, of the late banking firm of
Messrs. Wright and Co., with whom she kept a bank-
ing account, and before the bankruptcy of that firm,
to purchase, and that at a time when Messrs. Wright
and Co. were the accredited agents of the State of
Illinois in this country, for the sale of the bonds
of that State. The plaintiff by her bill further al-
leged that the State of Illinois, through its agents,
Messrs. Magniac and Co., proved a large debt against
the estate of Wright and Co. in rasped of the bonds
of the State entrusted to them for sale in this country,
and that a sum of 15,0001. was then standing to the
credit of the State of Illinois in the Court of Bank-
ruptcy, the amount of dividend already declared upon
the debt due to the State of Illinois. To obtain pay-
ment of her debt out of that fund, the plaintiff filed
this bill against the State of Illinois, making the
defendants, Messrs. Magniac and Co., and Messrs.
Baring, Brothers, as the alleged agents of the State on
this country, defendants to the suit, for that purpose,
and praying by the bill that the State of Illinois and
the defendants, as its agents, should be restrained
from receiving the fund from the Court of Bank-
ruptcy without first satisfying thereout her demand.
Epon the conclusion of the arguments,

.
The VIDE-CHANCELLOR gave judgment, allowing
all the u"-nwirrers, with costs, but giving the plaintiff
,ucl her bill.
liberty to m '
v. COULSTRING.
00ULb the Court uprpela husbandion a plea put
This case came be.
in by the defendant to t,:s 'bi the
The plaintiff and the det* -_,ant
eantiff and
• some years and had
wife ; they had lived together fog
four children. They quarrelled a. 4 separated and
n
upon that occasion the defendant, husband
the
executed a deed, by which he alloN:r44
plaintiff, his wire, twenty-eight shillings a ..."ell
to keep herself and her four children. In that deed w2..`
a proviso, that if they should live together again, and
thereby invalidate the deed, that upon any future
separation another deed to the same effect should be
executed. It appeared from the statements la the
bill that the parties lived together again for about six
weeks, and then separated, and the defendant refused
to execrate another deed. Upon this event taking
place the plaintiff filed her bill to compel him to do
so, to which the defendant put in his plea.
Mr. JAMES, who appeared in support of the plea,
was proceeding to open his case, when
The VICE-CHANCELLOR inquired who appeared in
support of the bill?
A little dapper female here stepped forward, and
said she was the plaintiff, that she had very little to
say, and she therefore thought that she could do it as
well as employing counsel.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR (smilingly) said he was
always happy to see the ladies, but he thought it
would have been much better for her if she had
entrusted her case to counsel.

The lady, notwithstanding the good advice, pro-
ceeded in a rambling strain to argue her case, and
the result was as might have been expected.
His Hosouu ordered the plea to be allowed.
(Before Sir J. WIGRAX.)
3UDOXENT-31`GREGOR v. TOPHAM.

This case was argued at considerable length in the
months of June and July last, and his Honour gave
judgment in it this day. Mrs. Topham, one of the
parties, was the widow, and claimed to be the universal
devisee under the will of the late Richard Wrightson. of
Kockerton, in the county of Durham, and Mrs. M•Gregor
was the sister and heir-at-law of the testator. By order
of the Court an issue devisavit vel non had been directed
to be tried, relative to the alleged will under which Mrs.
Topham claimed. Under this order a trial took place at
the last spring assizes at Durham, the hearing of this
case lasting three days. The jury found their verdict
for the allegeddevisee. In June last a motion was made
for a new trial, and an application was also made to have
the venue of such trial changed. It was on the motion
so made that the lengthened argument above mentioned
took place, and on it judgment was now given.
His Ilosiona was of opinion, that with respect to the
change of the venue there was no ground to establish iM
necessity or expediency. He could not attach any
weight to the allegation by which this part of the mo-
tion was supported, viz., that an important witness in
the case (Mr. Newburn) had, from his character and
position, a great local influence in the vicinity of which
the trial was to take place. As to the other point, the
motion for a new trial, the point in dispute was this,
whether the docummt purporting to be the will of
Richard Wrightson was really his will or not. As to this
fact, the evidence of Mr. Newburn, the solicitor who drew
up the will, was positive, that it was the testament of Mr.
Wrightson, under which Mrs. Topham claimed. The
evidence of the two servants, George and Jane Hind,
and of the other witnesses on the trial, was not of such
a nature as to outweigh that of Mr. Newborn; and he
could not think, therefore, the investigation of truth, or
the ends of justice, would be promoted by granting the
application for a new trial. His Honour went through
the evidence at great length, commenting upon it as he
proceeded, and said that, finding Mr. Newburn's evi-
dence confirmed in every material particular, he must
refuse the motion. He would make no order with respect
to costs.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 11.
(Sittings in Banco.)
The Court heard motions in the early part of the
morning. These motions were mere motions of course,
and did not occupy the Court half an hour.
The Court afterwards proceeded to take the cases in
the new trial paper.

BAIL COURT, Nov. 11.
Nothing of the least public interest came before the
Court this day. The Court rose at an early hour.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 11.

FISHMONGERS COMPANY V. ROBERTSON AND OTHERS.
This was an action upon an argument brought by the
Fishmongers Company of London v. the seven defendants,
for breach of contract, in respect to the draining of cer-
tain lands belonging to the Company, and adjoining
Lough Foyle, in the North of Ireland. The damages
were laid at 1,0001, but the jury found for the de-
fendants.

-
Last term a conditional rule for a new trial, and to
enter the verdict fur the; plaintiffs, was obtained upon
points reserved.
On Saturday the Court was occupied the greater part
of the day in hearing Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, Mr. Ser-
geant Byles, and Mr. Hindmarsh, who showed cause
against the rule.
This day Mr. Sergeant MURPHY followed on the same
aide, and Mr. Charnock replied at great length in sup •
port of the rule.
Their Lordships took time to consider judgment.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nov. 11.
(Before Mr. Commissioner GotTLEITRN.)
IN RE WILLIAM ORIYNEY.
The insolvent, who is so well known to the sporting
world as a successful jockey, this day came up for his
interim order, but was opposed by an attorney's clerk,
on behalf of the detaining creditor, a Mr. Bradshaw.
His HONOUR objected that Ive could not hear any per-
son saving only counsel, the solicitor in person, or the