The Sun.
London, England, 1818-11-21 00:00:00

CORDIAL BA.NI OF GILEAD.

11
_AMES of a cold, acrid, or billions habit of
body, affected with anzuor, head-ache,—or hysterical
affections, cannot hare recurse to a more salutary remedy
than the Cordial Balm of iilead. To Gentlemen from the
East or West Indies, the tudeut from public seminaries, or
those whose occupations tquire a sedentary life, this medi-
cine has effected wonderfi cures in cases of debility, origi-
nating from heat of clinive. or relaxations from juvenile in-
discretions, and the eficis of intense application to study or
business.

Sold by Bacon and Co. 50, Oxford-street ; Way d, 324, Hol-
born; Leigh, 18, Strati ; and Mr. Gostley, 133. Minories.
Sold also by every reptable Vender in all Market Towns
throughout the King•ddi,, and all other Medicine Venders,
price 1 Is. each, or fount one Family Bottle for :335. by which
one Its. bottle is save, with the words " Samuel Solomon,
Liverpool," engraved n the Stamp.
4344 Dr. Solomon .:pects, when consulted by letter, the
usnakompliment of one-pound note to be inclosed, -ad-
dressed " Money Let r. Dr: Solomon, Gilead House, near
erpool. Paid -dittle postage."

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 20.

DUKE OF NEWCASTLE AND OTHERS V. CLARKE AND

OTHERS.

The plaintiffs are the Commissioners of Sewers
in Sussex; the defendants are the Commissioners
of Rye Harbour. The plantiffs built a wall, for the
purpose of draining and shutting out the tide
from covering and rendering useless many adjoin-
ing acres of land. This wall the defendants de-
stroyed as obstructing the navigAtion of the
harbour. The plaintiffs brought their action of
trespass in 1817, at Lewes, before the present
Chief-Justice, and a Special Jury. A prelin►ii,ary
objection was then stated, 'that the plaintiffs,
having no property in the ,wall, could not main-
tali) an action t trespass. This point was saved,
and the case went to. the Jury, on the evidence
of tihc facts. The Jury found a verdict, and con-
siderable damages for the plaintiffs. A rule had
been long since obtained to show cause why the
verdict should not be set wide, but the cause was
not heard till now. It was agreed that the points
to be argued were, first, that the plaintiffs had
no power to maintain the action of trespass ; se-
cond, that the wall was an obstruction of a navi-
gable river, or highway; and, thirdly, that non
obstante veredicio, judgment should he followed
up for the defendants. The plaintiffs offered to
agree to a new trial, provided the first objections
were waived. The defendants required that the
trial-should be in a different county. This was
refused, and cause was therefore shown.
Messrs. Sergeants BEST, VAUGHAN, and COP-
LEY were ranged for the plaintiffs ; Messrs. Ser.
geants LENS, BLOSSET, and TADDY for the de-
fendants.

Mrssrs. Sergeants BEST and VAUGHAN only
were. heard to-day. They argued, that the plait.
tiffs had a right of action, as having built the wall
in question, and having authotity trout an Act of
Parliament to keep it in repair. There was no
other remedy; an indictment would only punish
the offender, but would not compensate the loss.
It was not necessary in an action of trespass, as
in trover, to prove the right of property ; it was
may necessary in trespass that there should be
possession. In a case in the King's Bench, the
Commissioners of Enclosure sustained an action.
of trespass for a stake planted by their surveyor,
and carried away. That they could not maintain
the action, as to land, was irrelevant to the pre-
ent question, as They had not such rights and
powers as the Commissioners of Sewers. If the
plaintiffs had not a right of action, none had.—

The property was unprotected, and this could
not he said of any property in this country. But
the 37th of the King, chap. 130, section 18, en-
titled them '' to cut new Sluices or dams nearer
the sea, if they thought it necessary for sewing
out their waters." They had then at least as
much. Tight of action as the master of. a ship,
whose right could not be questioned. They had
exclusive possession, so far as that none had a
right to go upon their works. But it was not
necessary that it should be exclusive ; each of
two tenants in common could bring an action ; a
tenant by sufferance, or his landlord, might bring
an action. As to the second point, if it was a
navigable river, they had a right by the Act to
stop it. Besides, they were here contending with
wrong-doers, not with owners of soil. I.loey
were, 'therefore, clearly entitled to maintain their
action, otherwise the stake case in the King's
Bench was wrong.

CHIF.F JUSTICE.—Without giving any opinion.
I put one question to my brother Copley, which
he will come prepared to answer when he is heard
on the subject. " Is there any instance of com-
missioners carrying on a public work who
tained an action of trespass in case of injury, and
proved their possession as the foundation of their
action ?"

The further hearing Was put off till Monday.

THE ACT (IF iNSdIXENCV AND AGENTS

Fcift THE sUN.
Ebyrdti,—Eve}' ready tti acknowledge the
correspOndenee of any person designated my
friend, I embrace the earliest opportunity of an-
swering the Letter in your Papei of the 18th inst.
signed Ar 4 AGENT.
The observations tibia I* have occasionally
submitted to the Public; in reference to Agency;
were the result of experienCe and conviction ;'and
as they were applied with reference to facts com--
municated, I have no apologk to offer for what
has appeared under my signature. It is due, hoti—
ever, to your Correspondent, who signs for SELF
AND CO. to say, that the removal or censure of
individuals, to whorn the statement applied, has
resulted troth such Communications, and I have
no evidence at present applicable to such as are
now employed in the capacity of Agents, although
1 cannot help repeating that due discrimination
• should be: exercised in the future admission of
Agents. If abuses are still practised, those' who-
have kndwledge of them should complain where
complai:it may be made with effect.
In my address to the Public on the subject of
indiscriminate Agency lay principal ai:n was to
protect the legitimate rights oN4:ractitioners itt
the Law against infringements oti their practice;
having been well assured that under the denomi-
nation -of Agents of the Insolvent Court, indivi-
duals have trespassed on those rights, by inter-
meddling with the practice of other Courts : and
if my animadversions-have tended to correct or di-
minish those innovations, the public will derive
benefit superior to that which is sought for the ;
profession.

Certainly the reprehension of other Writers in
your Paper has been great, and the complaints
have been scattered promiscuously ; and although
in such cases, aliquod haret, I am not prepared to
specify express • charges against those with whose
actions 1 ato unacquainted. 1 have heretofore dis-
closed instances of abuse which had come to my
knowledge, and I am not aware that those parti-
cular instances have been repeated. It your Co:-
respondent, who signs for Self and Co., will leave
his name and address at your Office, together
with the description of the Agents under whose
sanction- he wrote, you are at liberty to disclose
mine to bin! ; and it he deigns to visit me on behalf
of himself, or any of those whom he represents, I
shall have no difficulty in avowing personally whe-
ther they, or any of them, were the individual ob-
jects of my reprehension.
I admit with your Correspondent that there
are unworthy characters in every profession and
calling, altho►igh their conduct °a tilt not to 1)1.44:
reproach on the general body ; and will also
venture to say,. that he who exposes public
abuses, by holding individual offenders up to
public reps oof, renders a service to the commu-
nity, anti need not fear the retaliation of those
whom be censures.

State super Alas antiquas•
You►'s, W. M
Temple, Nov. 19, 1818,

FOR THE SUN.

MR. EDITOR,--G. M. 'the volunteer advocate,
n your Paper, of Mr. BELLAMY, was very pro-
ierly answered, through the saute channel, by
ANGLICANUS, whose letters appeared about the
middle of last month. But ANGLICANUS was
silent upon some points, which ought not, I think,
to be to passed over. In the first place, he did
not reprehend the ignorance of G.M. in address-
ing Mr. D'OYLEY, -as holding the Office of Chris-
tian 4dcocatc, at Cambridge, which he has not
held for two full years past ; Mr. KENNEL, son
of the Dean of Winchester, having been nominat-
ed to it in the year 1816. The offices, iii fact,
can only be held by the same person for four or
five years ; so that if G. M. should wi•h to at-.
tack Mr. RENNRL iu the same character, he must
do it before the year 1821, or he will tall again.
into die same blunder. But I can guess, though
perhaps ANGLICANUE could not, why that writer
particularly chose to address Mr. D'Ortuy. Bur
no matter, the attack,was as idle as it was pre-
sumptuous in every point of view.
Another part of the subject seems worth men-
cioning. Time daring calumny of Mr. B. repre-
sents the authorized version-of our Church as di,-
figuring and deforming the Scriptures. AVhai
then have the Bible Societies been doing, which,
for 13 or 14 years, have been distributing that
very version without note or comment, by mil-
lions of copies the allegation 'were true,
from which it is as remote as the Thames front
the Ganges, it would be incumbent upon those
Societies at once to suspend their operations, re-
call their corrupt gifts, and wait in patient in-
action, till Mr. B.'s perfect wink should extin-
;Nish all other translations. They might wait,
I fancy, long enough in that case, for after the

just exposures which have been made, not only
by the QUARTERLY, hut by several other lie
views, it will be the strangest of all events if Mr.
BELLAMY'S should ever be completed. But at
all events, Mr. BELLAMY has aimed, though it i,
likely to miss, the heaviest blow against those
popular Societies that ever was attempted or
meditated, lie has undertaken to spew that tliev
have been doing mischietinstead of vod, anti in-
definitely extending the circulation of that, which
ought, in his opinion, to he suppressed. In the'
opinion, few of sound understanding will ev, r
coincide, nor will the consolation of millions
drawn so easily from their hands, by the asser
lions of an interested adventurer, or at least a sell-
deluded pretender.

POST.
*,* We can assure our Readers PAULO
that Mr.
BELLAMY is wholly unconnected with the authoi
of the letter signed G. M.