The Sun.
London, England, 1826-11-13 00:00:00

EEis LOANS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.SlR—Seeing my ,
inamost . name published• ttis m
justifiable and shameful manner by Mr. Lurio
x.
the Ttmes Newspaper of this day, with a view to
public
un-
ciilpate himself, I think right to acquaint the punilt
your Journal; that I have instructed my So-
licitor
proceed immediately
through
to
J
against him (and also
the Editor of the Times if so legally advised) for the
libel and defamation of my character. By the pro-
ceedings in Court the public will i i
JuGge the true merits
of the case, which r wish fully exposed, satisfied of
what will be the result.
I am, Sir, your most obedient Servant,
Olil Brood-street, Nov. IS, liQa. WI% BURTQN.

• ;
LAW INTELLIGENCE.
.61; e ;; :,;,vs tad
coußtr..OF:-CHANCERY.—(TritinDiarr
arrciwrigarinatelitats. 174.1VOILIV3LAWSPITLD41CD::11THritS.
TheiLokrillifitwona-Aiavgav'atjadvaipit in this!intportant case
to-tlay The matter carne-befoneAheiCourt upon -an inforniation
ant petition- in canatquente,of difficulties, arising out of the admi-
nistration of property I by: Sir Roger Choiroondeley for the
foundation and'perpetuity of a free. Grarrtmar School at High-
gate, commmily called--the -Highgate Charity, together with a
chapel for .the use of the school. There had been an application
made to Parliament, for an authority to alter the nature of the
original foundation, which failed, and the present petition
prayed the costs of that application, which the Court on
no account. could grant. ; The application to Parliament, in a
great,tiegree related to.what_a long series of years bad sanctioned
in alterations of the foundation, and whether Parliament would or
would.not, upon another application to
that quarter, take into
consideration the costs that had been incurred on the former ap-
plication, would be for the wisdom of ,the legislature to say, and
not the C9ort of Chancery.Chancery.The grant was made in or about
the, year-1565, and it was well known that at or about that period,
Free Grammar Schools were scattered all over the kingdom, with an
intention to promote the Reformation ; and the chapel was a
place that had been inhabited by hermits, The gravamen of corn-
plaintin this case was, that for a long time past the object of the
Chrity had been.almost entirely neglected. The Master ap-
pointed was a clerical gentleman of the highest respectability, who
taught the boys by au usher; the chapel had been enlarged from
time to time for the accommodation of the inhabitants of High-
gate as they had increased, and the mode of instruction had de-
viated from the intention of the founder. In the enact-
ments regulating this Charity, there were the most ex-
press • words, that the property given should be for the
,nse, intent, and purposes of a Free Grammar school
fori ever, and for no other use, intent, or purpose what-
ever; and that the master should be a graduate, a sober, and
learned man, • who should teach the boys their A. B. C. and other
English books, as well as writing, arithmetic, • &c. His Lord-
•ship had taken infinite pains in reading over and over again the
-immense mass of evidence that had been laid before him, and
all the Statutes, &c. relating to the case, that he might enable him-
self to come to a proper decision; and the opinion he
had now formed was clear and decisive. His judgment was,
that the meaning of teaching boys their A. B. C. 'to. meant that
which had for a considerable time been practiced throughout most
of the free grammar schools in the kingdom, namely, that the A,
B, C,. were to be considered the first step in the ladder of edu-
cation that boys were to climb, and that they were to mount up-
wards through English books, Latin, &c. ; that the master
Was himself bound to teach the boys; that the Chapel was
for the use of the school (not, however, excluding any inhabit-
ant who might choose to go iu), and that the trustees were
not compellable to enlarge it as the inhabitants increased ; the
Chapel in no respect could be considered as a Chapel of Ease.
As to its being said that boys might go to the school, merely with an
intention to learn the elementary part of their education, and then
'to retire from it, leaving therefore, the master without his 40, or
without any part of that number of boys, to be taught grammar,
(the number by the grant allowed), .the Court would prevent it by
taking care that those who did 'commence their education there,
should proceed with it. The Couit therefore felt bound to adhere,
In all respects, to the intention of the founder. If, after this state-
ment on the part of the Court, a decree was called for,
that decree would have to be, referring it to the Mas-
ter to :settle a plan for carrying: on the charity according to
the purposes so declared ; but his. Lordship wished, after having
heard the law, that both sides would take a week to consider what
they would do, and whether they could decide upon any thing
among themselves, particularly with regard to the past, as well
as with respect to the future management of the charity, that
might be considered beet for it. What he had said 'he had said as
Judge, his private feelings might be, that it would be wise and
proper for all parties to come to an arrangement, 'which they
might take a week to consider of.

WIELLYCSLIY v. %Alla or urAirrolvr.

, • PERSONAL APPLICATION.
Wer,ratst.ty atepped in between the Bar awl his Lordship
innuediately .on the above .case being disposed of, and thus ad-
dressed himself:—My Lord, will your Lordship allow me to say
one word? I come before your Lordship to request that you will
be sy good as to fix a day on which to give your judgmeut in a
cue which you must be aware is so particularly Qonnected with
mie honour.
His LORDSHir—Take Saturday.
Mr. WILLEsIA:v.--I thank your j.ordship. Your Lordship
is aware--

Ilis
LoILDSHIP.--.1 have said S:tturdiw Sir. 1 had already
stated, that before the latter end of this week I should give imy
Wria.ustatsr-1 ionlaf obliged to our Lordship. %Ir.
W. then bowed and retired.

\'ICE-CIIA CELLOR'S COURT—(Tuss DAY.)
auyti,otass V. kiLsoN.
This was aipetition on the part of a Solicitor of the Court, who
wished to,ezatpt to Oze,,Mitater's report. :The 'petitioner, Mr.
Reynolds, having in 1818, gone to Ireland, neglected to take Out
his certificate,.-.he, however,: took it out regularly every lobar-
spthni year, and having in his capacity of Solicitor, conducted a
cause, war obliged to bring au action for his costs,—he was then
met with an objection, that inasmuch is he had not taken out'
certificate in 1818, his pWer to act as Solicitor Was 'annulled.
Mr. Wants's/an now contended that the neglect of the peti-
tioner had been cured on his re-admission to the late Mister of the
Rolls, (Lord Gifford) who had replaced the petitioner on the roll,
he having made the usual affidavit, that during the veer in ques-
tion, he had not practised as a *Wicket. The Leirnid CientleinAn
also argued, that even if the petitioner had not been readmitted,
he was empowered' to sue for his costs, under the 6th Geo. IV.,
which enabled solicitors after losing their places on the Rolla, to
maintain actions for costs.

Mr. KNtorrr opposed the petition, observing that the petitioner
could not claim the interference of the Court, he having corn.
witted a fraud to the amount of IV: (the stamp duty of his'eerti..
ficate) on the revenue. It was further urged that the Act of Par.
liament•could not apply to the petitioner's case, as it was passed'
subsequently, and was meant to have, only a prospective effect.
llis Honoun concurred in this latter view, and it was finally
Agreed, that, on the petitioner's paying the costs of this application,
and also of the former taxation of costs, he might he at liberty to
tile a petition,•praying that. the Master be allowed to review his
report. •

COURT OF KING'S BENCIL—(Tnts DAY.)

TAM XING IN ILIA%

The defendant in this case was convicted of felony woe time
theloteper,Quarter,Sessionsi and application having been
rnSdeftnthe c.,eurknf King's:Bench, in arrest of judgment, the,
se°olcti°9 3vllf flo!o4ls on the ground that the.guarter eitalotatt
had no,iuriediction. The defendant was tried a second thne, at
NisiPritts,,before 311.. Justice Littiedale, and convicted.
Mr. Iteto moved this day for a rule to show case why the ver-
diet should not be set aside and a new trial had. There were four
Separate indictments (he observed) against the defendant, and the
Counsel for the prosecution not being permitted to proceed on
them altogether, made au election, and put the defendant on his
trial for one indictment, which Was for stealing tiix shillings,,
the property, of Susannah' New Man, in his capacity: of servant.
Counsel fur the defendant, objected to the adinitision of more evi-
er(T than was. necessary to prove this single felony, yet he ",
nver--ruled by the Judge, and general evidence of all the counts
was admitted; the Learned Counsel submitted that this was irre-
gular, anel therefore a sufficient ground for a new trial. '
Chive JUSTICE °bums], that it was perfectly competent
for the Judge.to admit the evidence objected to; the rule ftir com-
pelling the prosecutor to Ina the defendant on his trial on One in
diettio.nt alone at 3 time, was made for the aceortimodation of the
person on trial, and lesthe should be entangled be multifarious
:prOceedings ; but the 'Judge should take care that that rule did
4114 operate to the injustice, while it was observed for the benefit
I
•
rit4 prisoner. If it should appear, au reading' the report, that
An tattier bid been done to the defendant in. this ea*, the Court
wettld give it due consideration, when he' would be brought
np
,1;4 judgment, at present there were not sufficient grounds for
granting the application:—Rnle refused. - „i
THE KING V. CALI.AOIIAIf. .
iThe defendant in this case has been at large on bail, on a charge
fl !rje made

application -having been made to day to exempt the
4ilors 'from responsibility tdon rendering him up, he addressed the
Curt, requesting that he be allowed to remain at large for a few
days longer as he was unwell, and had not at present means of pro-
curing a bed or other things necessary for his comforts.
The Crarr Jqwricx said that it was not in the power of the
Court tri accede tri his request, howeYer much they way feel ilis-
pieed ',to do it.--Thp'tlefendant was accordingly,corarnitted.

cOunT op colkfmoN pLEAS.---(THis DAY.)
RIMONDS V. Slant.
1114 waS an action of assumpsit, at the plaintiff's instance, for
lye payment of the price of cattle sold by him to manoeid,
agent for the defendant. The verdict was found for the de-
fendant.
Mr. Sergeant Wu.n now moved for a rule to show ramp why
tke verdict should not be wet aside and a new trial granted. lie
Appithoded the Vettioll wee) whether thq cattle were sold on

the credit of Mansfield himself, or on that of his muter; thrre
was no evidence that the plaintiff knew at the time that Manstiad
was acting for the siefe44o4l.imt it turned out Afterwards that
some of the cattle,44lmptilpt3o bis hands. He (Mr. S. Wild)
therefore contetided,A4tAig must, be held liable for their price.
The Loan CHIEF ,Itiffict, upon turning; to his notes, 'found
that the defendant hid -never authorivd lilunstield to purchase
goods for him on credit, having always supplied him with cash
to pay ready money. It further appeared from Mansfield's evi-
dence, that he had purchased some of the cattle for himself and
some of them for his master. His Lordship therefore refused the
rule.