The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-29 00:00:00

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM TIIE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—The following resolution, amongst others,
was adopted at the important meeting, which we re-
port, at Birmingham :—" That this m eting rejoices
that the National Anti-Corn-law League have convened
a meeting of deputies to assemble in London on the
Bth of February ; and this meeting earnestly recom-
mends to the deputies, when assembled, to take prompt
and efficient measures, irrespective of the course which may
be pursued by the Government, for testing the opinions of
the Members of the House of Commons on the total
and immediate abolition of the Corn and Provision-
laws." It was also suggested that Deputies from the dif-
ferent associations throughout the country should attend
the great general meeting on the Bth of next month.
Aide toi, le . Ciel t'aidera. This is the tone forced on
the Industrial Interest by the -Make-believe Ministry.
Their measures are nOt patiently waited for by those
whom monopoly pinches. Their intentions inspire no
confidence in manufacturing towns—and they ought to
inspire none. This is the tone which rejection of mo-
derate offers has drawn after it. We pray attention to
the fact, and it is a-very remarkable one—that while
this is the tone held in the great seats of our
staple manufactures--the very partisans of the pre-
sent Government, one after the other, are making the
amende honorable to the lite Ministerial plan of a fixed
duty ! Yes—now that patience is exhausted in the
suffering interests—nosy that concession will have lost
its grace, moderation its efficacy—the very lackeys
and lickspittles of the party ascendant are beginning to
find out the policy of the plans of the party displaced !
This is curiously evident in the successive insertions
of the Times in sfavour of a fixed duty. Whatever
under-current of opinion is systematically admitted by
that journal, it may always safely be supposed to be-
lieve likely, in the end, to carry the public with it. For
some time back, the correspondence columns of the
Times have furnished ample vindications of that Liberal
commercial policy which the leading articles of the Times
have vilified. No farther back than yesterday a Times
Correspondent called attention to what is really the
crowning absurdity of the sliding scale—namely, that
its practical operation, on foreign markets, plac3s Great
Britain in the absurd position of a bidder at an auction
who, having outbid all his competitors, should continue to
bid against himself.
STANDARD.—None can be more sensible than our-
selves of the unfitness of a newspaper as a vehicle for
theological discussion, or even for the investigation of
questions bordering upon theological; but what can we
do? Is error to be freely and even profusely disseminated
through newspapers, and disseminated without contra-
diction or criticism, because it has adopted a channel
hitherto considered, and properly considered, an
unbecoming one for the matter in which -the error lies?
Nobody will answer the question in the affirmative ;
but if our Contemporaries will abstain from sacre„;
subjects, we promise that we shall abstain and
great will ,be our gratification at being a: jje to fulfil
the promise to forbear. With this, -we hope, suffi-
cient apology, we return to t
,t,e consideration Of
the words Catholic and Prote,::ant, words just now on
every lip, and in almost ',very newspaper. .‘ IYords are
things," said a "is(' Stan, and very important things they
are, too, wher, as at present, they are made the founda-
tion of a.:guments upon the most serious subjects. A
very intelligent, and, notwithstanding all its bitter-
ness towards ourselves, a much respected Contemporary,
gravely stated in a late number that the Catholic church,
in which we profess our belief when we recite the creed
called the Apostles', is the Church of England ! a tulle
meat which would make all the Protestant Churches of the
world; for they all use the Apostles' Creed, to acknowledge
the Church of England as the one true Church,
while. •we, as English Churchmen, by such an under-
standing, exclude from the pale of Christianity all
the Protestants in the world, including our fellow-
subjects of North Britain. This almost incrt.dible
inconsistency shows to what an extent error prevails,
and to what injurious contradictions it leads even in-
telligent minds. As we explained, however, yesterday,
Catholic means universal, and it is a plain ogical sole•
cism to limit the term to the Church of any ps.rticular
country, or to the Church of any particular organisation.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
ROLLS' COURT, Jan. 28.
CIVIL V. ABIIAIIAMS.

In this case an injunction ex parte had been obtained
to restrain the defendant from appropriating or distri-
buting the purchase money of a certain estate which had
been conveyed by the defendant to the plaintiff, on the
ground that the conveyance was incomplete, as there
were certain parties necessary to the deed of conveyance
who refused to execute.

Mr. PE3IBERTON applied to his Lordship to have
the injunction dissolied, as the plaintiff had in his pos-
session the title:deeds to the estate, and acknowledged
that the deed of conveyance gaVe him a good title thereto.
Mr. liINDEnsLEy appeared for the plaintiff, and re-
plied that it was necessary the injunction should con-
tinue, as the plaintiff, in the present state of his title, could
not possibly make use of it; and, further, that the defendant
had given an undertaking, at the time of the conveyance,
not to distribute the purchase-money, which was held in
the Funds till the purchase was completed. The defend-
ant was executor to a certain party, and it was in the
execution of this trust that he sold the proPerty; AS di-
rected by the will of the testator, to whom he was ap-
pointed as executor, and the party refusing to execute
was the heir-at -law to the testator.

Mr. PEMI3ERTON said the plaintiff had in his posses-
sion the whole of the title-deeds, and he had it in his
power to compel the heir-at-law to execute the convey-
ance. Ile took all control over the estate from the de-
fendant, and also, by this injunction; he deprived him
of all benefit in tho purchase-money.
His LORDSHIP said he did not think, under the pre-
sent circumstances, the defendant ought to be allowed to
part with the stock which comprised the purchase-
money, and therefore the injunction must be contilam. .

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT,
Jan. 28.
(Befire Vice-Chancellor W-LGRAm.)
THE FAST INDIA CIIMPANY V. T} COOPERS' COMPANY.
The arguments in this cau`...e were resumed.
..
His Hoeroun, after ex- 'c his opinion on some of
the points raised in "drgument, requested the Counsel for
the defence to a'4l- ress themselves to the fact of notice
in'connectit
'"..i with, and as affected by, the question of
expendtdre by the East India Company, that being the
POir upon which his ultimate decision would probably
:Am.

Dir. COOPER addressed the Court for /the defendants.
The Learned Counsel repudiated the imputation of the
plaintiff's Counsel that the Coopers' Company wished,
by availing themselves of a strict rule of law, to acquire
possession of a site of ground upon which the East
India Company had expended a large sum of
money. It appeared from one of the letters
put in on the other side that the defendants
were acting as trustees for Lal„),, Gibson's charity,
and claimed nothing in eliek own right. The
Learned Counsel, after goiii'fratv-XL4ith into all the facts
of the case, .subinitted time iheiVtOai not the slightest
pretence for any of tI4 chid kcsYset up by the bill, and,
that it must therefore'

Mr. Sutton Shaipe, Mr.4Mtintagne, and. Mr. Willock
followed on the same side.

Mr. SURGE replied for the plaintiffs, contending that
there had been a clear agreement to grant an under lease
to Trinder ; that the defer_da,nts had notice :of what took
place. and suffered the plaintiffs to expend large sums
on the property, and that there had been, no interposi-
tion whatever on the part of the Coopers' Company for
the purpose of insisting that the East India Company had
forfeited lheir lease. The expenditure took place under
the eye' of the Coopers' Company, and with a knowledge
on their part; according to tlreir own proposition; that
the lease had been forfeited. On these grounds, there-
fore, he claimed relief at the hands of the Court.
His HONOUR ordered the cause to stand in the paper.
for judgment on Monday next.

' COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Jan. 26.
TILE QUEEN v. THE SUEnIFF of HERTFORD.
This was a motion to dis!:;narge a rule obtained for
the purpose of setting aside an order of the Court on
payment of costs. The order was an attachment against
the Sheriff of Hertford for not having returned a writ of
fiere facias, in pursuance of an order of the Court.
The question was, whether the reasons alleged in the
affidavit upon which the rule was obtained were sufficient
to entitle the Sheriff to the relief sought for? The affi-
davit was made by the Sheriff's officer, who stated that
the fiere facias was delivered on the 27th of November,
and the warrant was given to him on the day after.
Upon the Ist of December he entered the plautiff's pre-
mises, and on the next day he sold part of his goods.
He then stated that he also seized s quantity of bricks
belonging to the pl'aintiff, upon which a claim of wharfage
had been made, f,nd that he found a purchaser fur these,but
that they
eora...d not be removed immediately in conse-
quence of %:tte state of tke weather. On the 30th of Dec.
the 611',riff was ruled peremptorily to return the writ on
7th dr January. But upon that day, and with the consent
(I.r the plaintiff's attorney, an order was made for further
time, for the space of a week. The Sheriff's officer pro-
ceeded to state that on the Bth of January, the day after
the original writ expired, he received from London a let-
ter stating that a week's delay had been obtained; and then
he went on to say that he believed the time of that
delay expired on the 15th of January; upon which day
the return was made by the Sheriff. The time, how-
ever had, in reality, expired on the 14th, or the day be-
fore. Another reason assigned by the officer for the de-
lay was that he had not been able before the 15th to give
to the plaintiff or his Solicitor any proper or satisfx-
tory. account of the proceeds of the said levy, he having
received the money for the bricks only upon that slay.
There was an affidavit on the
,part of the plaintiff which
Stated that on the 9th of December an application
was made to the Sheriff's officer, upon which
he cal.ed _on the plaintiff's attorney, stating that he had
seized and sold certain goods of the plaintiff to the
amount of 201., but that he had not received cash for the
same, but that he expected it in a day or two ; and he
promised to remit it to deponent within a week.
These circumstances having been stated to the Court,
The COURT observed that if the Sheriff had done any-
thing wrong the plaintiff's remedy was to proceed by
action; and the late rule of the Court would not prevent
him from pursuing such a course. The rule was there-
fore made absolute.