The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-26 00:00:00

FATHER MATH

SIR ROB:

The following has been sent to us by Dr. Sheil, of Bally-
shannon, in the county of Donegal :
" Dear Dr. Sheil,—ltly almost continued absence from Cork
during the last and present month has prevented me from
acknowledging the receipt of your interesting letter. lam
now about to enter the coach for Lough Brickland, where I
am to administer the pledge on next Sunday.
" With respect to the speeches at repeal dinners, and the
performance of temperance bands at such parties and at poli-
tical processions, you must be aware that I cannot prevent
what is complained of. These are faithful teetotallers, dear
friend, and were amongst the most ardent Orangemen of
Ulster, attending Orange processions, and playing the 'Boyne
Water;' and I have never complained, much less attempted
to prevent, the one or the other.

All I require is total abstinence from all intoxicating
drinks, and from all religions or political subjects in their
temperance rooms or their public meetings.
" I am proud to be able to assert that there is scarcely an
instance of the violation of this rule.

"That truly great and good man, Sir Robert Peel, is Jul.
filling all the anticipations I formed of his administration.
" He will soon pacify and calm Ireland, and make our un-
happy country prosperous. lam much limited as to tune
now, but I shall write to you, God permitting, on my return
from the county Down.
" Believe me, dear Dr. Sheil, yours affectionately,
"THEOBALD MATHEW.
" Cork, April 17, 1845."

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
ROLLS' COURT, April 25.
HARRIS V. CALLAGHAN.
Mr. Kindersley, with Mr. Bird, appeared for the plaintill ;
Mr. Tinney, with Mr. Rolt, for the defendant.
This was an application for an injunction to restrain the
defendant from using the name of the plaintiff on the front
of his shop, so as to mislead persons by making it appear
if ho were in partnership with the plaintiff.
The facts of the case, as appeared from the affidavits en-
tered upon one side and admitted on the other, seemed to be,
that the defendant, who had been taken from St. Giles's
workhouse by the plaintiff; the well-known optician of Great
Russell-street, Bloomsbury, had learned the trade, and after
fifteen years' servitude, started in opposition to his em-
ployer, his shop being only seven doors removed from
Mr. Harris's. He also used the name of plaintiff above his
doors, and on the window-sill, in such a manner that the cus-
tomers of the plaintiff were misled, and entered the de-
fendant's shop:when they meant to go to the plaintiff's. To
restrain him from the use of Mr. Harris's name the action
was brought.
After the arguments on either side,
Lord LANGDALE suggested that to prevent further litiga-
tion the matter should be arranged, and thedefendant having
promised to cancel Mr. Harris's name on the window, and to
paint the word "from" Mr. Harris's above his door in letters
of three inches in length, the cause was dismissed, each party
paying their own costs.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Ap►il 25.
TRIAL AT BAR.—THE GREAT DISTILLERY CASE.
THR ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GEORGE SMITH.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
The cross-examination of Joseph Drinkwater having con-
cluded, Sir Thomas Wilde rose to re-examine him.
The CHIEF BARON said that, as it was now approaching
five o'clock, he saw no object in proceeding further that day.
He also intimated that the other public engagements of the
judges made it inconvenient to continue the trial to-morrow
for more than two or three hours. As this was the ease, it
would be more convenient to adjourn the trial to Monday.
The counsel on both sides, as will as the jurors, having ex.
pressed their satisfaction at this arrangement, the trial at
bar was further adjourned until Monday next.

MA.RYLEBONE.-(YESTERDAY.)

THE HAMPSTEAD MURDER.

Allan Kaillmack (not lielmnr), was placed before Mr. Long .st
two o'clock, and Mr. Sargent, the landlord of the Kings and Keys,
and City police-constable Groves, 360, having certified to
the writing of the letters by the prisoner, and some et
his family having deposed to the diseased state of his
mind, Mr. Loaa said he did not think, after what had trans-
pired, that he should be Justified in detaining the prisoner; but as
he was at a loss how to act, he left the Court to consult S r J.
Graham. On his return, he said he could not detain the prisoner.
He had no doubt deluded himself into the belief, whilst in a state
of melancholy, that he was implicated in the murder. He should
therefore discharge him. .
The prisoner then left the Court with his solicitor and friends.

- -
SALE Or THE HANOVER-SQUARE ROOMS.---ThRTSe•
day a sale took place at the Auction Mart, of the Queen's Concert.
rooms, celebrated as the:Hanover-square Rooms, on which occasion
many of the elite of the musical and theatrical world were present.
These premises were built about sixty years ago, by Sir T. Ga
who bequeathed theta to his daughter, the late Miss (laMot, by
re At of whose devisees in trust they were disposed of Tire
first offer for the property was 6,0601:, the
seFend 8,0001, and It
the dicti
was knocked down, after great competition, for 12,250 t, to &festal&
B. Cocks and Co., of Few Burlington-erect M
, utnc-
rdleta it
Queen.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, April 25.
The Lonn CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at
Five o'clock.

MA YNOOTH.
Tie Earl of CLANCARI Y 'presented a number of peti-
tions from Athlone, Nilmore, and several other places in Ire-
land, against the grant to Maynooth.
Lord DACRE presented several petitions from Birmingham,
Handsworth, and other places in the neighbourhood, to the
same effect.
Lord CAMPBELL said that, in the fulfilment of his public
duty, he had felt obliged to present several petitions against the
grant to Maynooth ; but he had now the plea=ure of presenting
one from Porto Bello and the neighbourood, in favour of that
grant.
Petitions were presented against the grant, also, by Lord
Monteagle, the Duke of Richmond, and by the Marquis of
Breadalbane, from a great number of the congregations of the
Free Church in Scotland to the same effect.
The Bishop of DURHAM presented various petitions from
the Archdeacon and clergymen in the different parishes in his
diocese against the grant to Maynooth.
Lord KENYON presented petitions against the union of
the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor, and praying for returns of
what the clergy received in those dioceses from 1'433 to 1545.
Lord NORMAN BY presented a petition from a parish in
Wilts a4ainst the grant to Maynooth, and also a petition from
Droitwich, in favour of the establishment of local courts for
the arrangement of small debts.
ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Lord COTTENHAM presented a Bill for the consolidation
of the Juri diction of the Ecclesiastical Courts in England and
Wales, in conformity with the reports of the Commissioners in
16-36.
Tne Bill was read a first time.
INSOLVENCY ACT.

Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition in favour
of the revision of the Insolvency Act from the
traders and merchants in London. At all events,
there ought to be something done in the present sess-
ion of Parliament to relieve these tradesmen, and unless
somebody else came forward to no it he should feel it to be his
duty to apply the remedy. He would much rather, however,
that the remedy should come from a recommendation of their
Lordships' House.
Lord COTTENHAM did not think there was any necessity
to make any inquiry into the subject, because it was suffi-
ciently plain that the operation of the 201. clause--
Lord CAMPBELL had received numerous applications to
bring the subject before their Lordships, and he was glad at
what had fallen from his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord
Brougham). Still it would be much more satisfactory to him,
and, he thought, to the country, if the Government were to try
to propose a remedy.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said his N,b'e and Learned
Friend's Bill was sanctioned by a Committee of their Lordships'
House, and he would suggest that the Bill itself should be re-
ferred back to that Committee for reconsideration.

Lord ASHBURTON said, that in legislating upon this
subject, the House had displayed a reckless want of considera-
tion for the chief sufferers ut.der the law, viz., the unfortu-
nate creditors. He concurred that some remedy ought to he
introduced, but %vas not desirous of returning to the old system
of imprisonmt nt for debt.
Lord BROUGHAM was understood to give notice that on
a future day he would move for a Committee to inquire into the
operation of the law passed last session.
The LORD CHANCELLOR had no objection to the ap-
pointment of a Committee, and remarked that if it turned out
that they had gone too far, it would be necessary for them to
retrace their steps.—The subject then
-dropped.