The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-07 00:00:00

THIS DA Y'S NEWS.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.)
The House sat to-day for the first time to hear appeals
since the termination of the Easter recess. The Peers pre-
sent were the Lord Chancellor, Lord 13rougham, Lord Cot-
tenham, Lord Langdale, and Lord Campbell.
ROBERT ALLEN (A PAUPER) v. M`PHERSON, TWIRL% afili
THOMAS ALLEN.
The arguments of this appeal from the decision of the Lord
Chancellor, reversing a judgment of the Master of the Rolls,
which were only partly heard before the Easter recess, were
resumed this morning at eleven o'clock. The case is one
of a rather singular nature, and the facts may be thus
stated :—John Allen, of Highbury-place, Islington, by his
will, dated 11th December, 1834, gave and bequeathed differ-
ent sums of money to various relatives, of whom the plaintiff
was one. By the will he appointed M'Pherson and Tomkins
his executors. He afterwards made nine codicils to his will.
The fourth codicil was in the following words :—" Whereas I
am desirous in the „event of my daughter Susannah Evans
dying in the lifetime of her husband, George Evans, to in-
crease the provisions hereinafter made for the undermentioned
persons : I hereby give and bequeath to Susannah Allen,
daughter of my late nephew, Thomas Allen, 3,0001 ; Thomas
Allen and Robert (the plaintiff), sons of the said Thomas
Allen, 2,0001. each ; and to John Allen, son of my nephew,
Charles Allen, the sum of 2,000/. ; the same moneys to
be paid as soon as conveniently after my decease, in ad-
dition to the legacies hereinbefure mentioned." The
testator, by his sixth codicil, dated the 22d of
March, 1837, gave and bequeathed to the plaintiff
one-fourth of the clear residue of his estate and effects, to and
for his own use and benefit. By his seventh codicil tie tes-
tator appointed William Allen (one of the defendants) to be
a trustee and executor with his former trustees and execu-
tors. The testator, by his ninth and last codicil, dated the
3d of October, 1837, after revoking the legacies given by his
will and codicils to and in trust for his nephew, Charles Allen,
and his children, and the child or children of his deceased
nephew, Thomas Allen, declared that they should take no
further or other benefit under his will, or any codicil or
codicils thereto, save and except as therein mentioned;
and he thereby gave unto trustees, therein named, the
sum of 1,000/. sterling, upon trust to invest the same,
and to receive the dividends, and pay the same unto
his nephew, Charles Allen, and his wife, during their
lives, and the life of the survivor of them, and after-
wards to fall into and form part of his residue. And the
testator thereby gave and bequeathed unto Nathaniel Bart-
lett, Susannah Evans, and William Allen (one of the de-
fendants), the sum of 4001. sterling, upon trust, to invest the
same in their names, or in the name of the survivor of them,
and to pay the same unto Susannah Allen, at such time as
she might marry with consent of the said trustees, or the sur-
vivor of them, or at such time as the said trustees might think
proper. And after bequeathing the sum of 300/. to Thomas
Allen for his own use and benefit, he thereby directed his ex-
ecutors, as soon as convenient after his decease, to purchase and
invest in the names of Nathaniel Bartlett, Susannah Evans, and
the defendant, William Allen, the sum of 8001. Three per Cent.
Consolidated Annuities, for them to receive the dividends there-
of, and to pay the same by equal weekly instalments unto the
plaintiff. during his life, or until he should attempt to sell, or
otherwise dispose of the same, and in such case, he declared
that the same should fall into the residue of his personal
estate. The testator died on the 28th of November, 1837,
leaving his nephew, Charles Allen, and his children, and the
plaintiff, and Susannah Allen, and Thomas Allen, the chil-
dren of Thomas Allen deceased, another nephew of the testa
tor, him surviving The will and nine codicils were proved
by the defendrnts, Richard M‘Pherson, Samuel Tomkins, and
William Allen, in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury.
The bill stated that the testator was born in 1760, at
East Chinnock, Sornersetshire, and that at the date
of his will he had acquired a fortune of almost
80,0001. as a wholesale provision merchant at Queenhithe.
The bill then stated that the testator had cohabited for many
years with one Mary Butler, and that during such cohabi-
tation he had one son by her, the defendant William Allen;
that he afterwards intermarried with her, and that Susannah
Allen, afterwatds Susannah Evans, the wife of George Evans,
two of the defendants, was the only child of the marriage.
The bill further stated that about the year 1824 a separation
took place between the defendants Susannah Evans and
George Evans, and that Susannah Evans lived with the tes-
tator thenceforth up to the time of his death. The bill then
alleged, that the mind and intellects of the testator, during
the latter months of his life, became generally weak,
and that he was incapable of managing his own
affairs • that during this time his daughter,
Susannah Evans, obtained an absolute power and control
over him ; and that in this state of things, having been in-
formed of the contents of the sixth codicil, she formed a
scheme to avail herself of her influence, and in execution of
that scheme, she caused a written report of several matters
prejudicial to the plaintiff and the rest of his family to be
presented to the testator ; that the report was read to the
testator; and that the defendant, William Allen, afterwards
took it to the solicitor of the testator, who immediately pre •
pared the ninth codicil, which was executed the same even-
ing. The bill then proceeded to state transactions with
various circumstances, tending to show that the testator had
always manifested a great interest in his native place, East
Chinnock, and in the welfare of the plaintiff, and the other
members of bis family who lived there ; that he had fre-
quently expressed himself favourably inclined towards the
plaintiff personally and by letter; and that in March, 1837,
shortly before the execution of the sixth codicil, the testator
assured the plaintiff, and his brother, Thomas Allen, that he
had handsomely provided for them. The bill then charged,
that the affection of the testator was unabated towards the
plaintiff until the defendants, Susannah Evans and William
Allen, caused the fraudulent and untrue report to be made to
the testator; and that, by such fraudulent and untrue report
only, the testator was prevailed upon to execute his ninth
codicil, and that he signed it without the contents
having been read over to him. The bill then stated that
the plaintiff had ineffectually attempted to prevent probate
of the ninth codicil in the Ecclesiastical Court, but that he was
confined to the objection which affected the said will and
codicils, as an entire testamentary instrument; and it prayed
a declaration that the plaintiff was entitled to the several
bequests and legacies given to or intended for him by the
testator, in and by his will and other codicils, or any or either
of them, without revocation thereof by the ninth codicil;
and that the defendants, Richard M‘Pherson, Samuel Tom-
kins, and William Allen, or Susannah Evans, are or is trus-
tees or trustee of or to the extent of such bequests and lega-
cies for the plaintiff ; that an account might be taken of all
the personal estate and effects of the testator, possessed by
the defendants, or any or either of them, or any or either of
their application thereof; and that the proportion to which
the plaintiff might be declared entitled in the legacy
of 4,0001. bequeathed by the testator in his will to
the plaintiff, and Susannah Allen and Thomas Allen,
might be paid the plaintiff out of such estate ; and
that the legacy of 2,000/. in the fourth codicil, in case the
defendant Susannah Evans should die in the lifetime of her
husband, might be invested in the names of trustees for his
benefit, and that the clear residue might be ascertained, and
one-third paid and transferred to the plaintiff for his use and
benefit. The defendants, Richard M'Pherson, Samuel Tom-
kins, and William Allen, put in a general demurrer to the
bill and the whole of the discovery—first, for want of equity ;
and, secondly, for want of parties, because the plaintiff had
not' made Nathaniel Bartlett a party to the bill, or prayed
process against him The Master of the Rolls overruled the
demurrer, and the respondents appealed against his decision
to the Lord Chancellor, who reversed it en the 11th of Nov.,
1842. The present was an appeal against that reversal.
Mr. KINDERSLEY, before the recess, was heard on the part
of the appellant ; and to-day
Mr. J. RUSSELL and Mr. J. TURNER were heard for the re-
spondents.
(The arguments were not concluded when our Evening
Edition went to press.)

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.) ,
The Lord Chancellor did not sit to-day, in consequence of
having to attend the House of Lords.

ROLLS COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
The Master of the Rolls having been requested by the
Lord Chancellor to attend the House of Lords, did not sit in
his Court to-day.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND.)
His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England, this being
the first seal, sat in his Court in Lincoln's Inn, and took mo-
tions to-day, none of which were of interest to the public.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE. )
ELLIS V. GOODSON.
His HoNouß having disposed of this lengthy case, which
related to West India property, proceeded to hear motions,
and having nothing further to proceed with, rose shortly
after twelve o'clock.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor WionAm.)
His HONOUR gave judgment in Mayhew v. Edwards, and
afterwards heard motions, it being the first seal.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner SHEPHERD.)
IN RE WILLIAM BAKER.
Mr. William Baker, merchant and general dealer, residing
at Oundle, in the county of Northampton, appeared on the
summons of Mr. Thomas Thorpton, in the same county
Mr. Nyas, who appeared for Mr Baker, took an objection to
the terms of the summons served on the defendant, inasmuch
as it did not contain a proper description of his business and
residence. After a short argument, the Learned Commissioner
decided the objection to be good, and ordered the defendant
to be discharged, the Court allowing him costs.
IN RE HENRY STIMSON.
This bankrupt, Mr. Henry Stimson, late farmer and
publican, at Hockham, in the county of Rutland, came
up for his final order. The granting of the order was op-
posed by Mr. Boydell, who appeared for Mr. Blackburn, wine
merchant, one of the creditors. The defendant was sub-
jected to a long examination, gone into with the object of
showing that the bankrupt had contracted this debt without
any reasonable prospect of paying it, and after he had made
an assignment of his property to another party ; also that he
vexatiously defended an action for the recovery of the same,
thus adding a considerable amount of costs to the original
debt.

His HONOUR decided that there were not sufficient grounds
for the objection, and granted the defendant his final order.
IN RE THOMAS FRENCH.
The party in this case, an insolvent, and described in his
schedule as a straw-plat dealer, appeared on his petition for
the protection of the Court. This was his final examination,
and he was opposed by Mr. Sturgeon, on behalf of the prin-
cipal creditors. The insolvent resides at Redburn, near St.
Albans, in the county of Herttord, where the debts were
contracted. The insolvent had but recently gone to live
there, and gave himself out in the neighbourhood as a man
of substance, and kept several dogs, with which he was in
the regular habit of sporting. These appearances induced
the tradesmen of Redburn to give him credit, the defendant
having repeatedly represented himself as possessed of consi-
derable money in the funds, which was not the fact.
At the very time that he had applied for the
protection of that Court he was going about the town
flourishing a 1,000/. note, which turned out to be a flash one,
and offering to lend money, the object being to obtain goods
by these fraudulent representations. The opposition was
made on the ground that the petitioning creditors had been
induced to supply goods by these means, the impression being
that he was a gentleman.
Evidence was tendered in support of theseallegations, when
His HONOUR stated that sufficient had been advanced to
induce him to refuse the final order.—The case was then ad-
journed sine die.

- - _
INJURIES BY A Cow.—Mr. and Mrs. Hoyte, the
large cowkeepers of Pentonville, who were so dreadfully in-
jured by a cow on Monday last, are fast recovering. It is
untrue that they were both tossed in the air, and that a
labourer in their employ stuck the prongs of a pitchfork in
its eyes and ears. Air. Hoyte only was tossed, but both were
trampled and gored by the infuriated beast. Mrs. Hoyte
had three of her ribs broken, and her left arm dislocated,
while Mr. Hoyte received some severe injuries on his back
and neck, but not of so serious a character as was ..;Lated. If
the cow had not had crooked horns there is no doubt but
both would have been killed on the spot, and their bodies
dreadAdly mangled.

ONEY and CO N/IVIERLIAL NEWS.
C/ TY, Q UAR TER TO THREE.
The sales of Cotton at Liverpool on Saturday were 6,000
bales, 1,000 of which were on speculation. Prices since
Thursday had been slightly in favour of buyers.—Shares
were animated and prices generally were well supported.
Aberdeen, 5% 4; Barnsley Junction, 10% 9% ; Ditto,
New Shares, 4%; Belfast and Ballymena, 53/4 ; Black-
burn, Burnley, and Accrington, 8% 3% ; Blackburn,
Darwen, and Bolton, 51/ % ; Birkenhead, Manchester,
and Cheshire Junction, 12 4 11% ; Birmingham and Glou-
cester, New Shares, 51,(s ; Bolton,lN'igan, and Liverpool, 14 % ;
Caledonian, 1314 13; Cambridge and Lincoln, 9%; Chester
and Birkenhead, ex div., 483/4 4 ; Ditto, Half Shares, at 5
dis., ditto, 244 ; Chester and Holyhead, 9% 10%; Churnet
Valley, 8% '5/.4; Direct Northern, 5% :A; Dublin and
Belfast, 104 ' • Dublin and Cashel, ex new, 163/4 ; Ditto,
Extension, 11% ; Dublin and Galway, 43/4 5; Dundalk
and Enniskillen, 44 ; Dundee and Perth, 3% ;
Eastern Counties, 21 ; Edinburgh and Glasgow, 63 ;
Edinburgh and Northern, 1% ; Ely and Bedford, 2% 4 ;
Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 21s. ; Glasgow and Greenock,
ex div., 18% ; Grand Junction, ex div., 226 ; Ditto,
Half Shares, 112 ; Ditto, Quarter Shares, 45 ; Great North' of :England, ex div., 61/8 ; Goole and Doncaster, 2'/ ;
Huddersfield and Sheffield, 81/s ; Leeds and Thirsk,
5% ; Leeds and 'West Riding, 8% ; Limerick
and Waterford, 7 634 ; Liverpool, Ormskirk, and
Preston, 545. 565. 3d. ; London andßirmingham, ex div.,
236; Ditto, Half Shares, 45; London and South-Western,
ex div., 81 ; London and York, 31% 3/. Is. ; Londonderry
and Enniskillen, 3%; Lynn and Dereham, It. Bs. 6d. 1%;
Lynn and Ely, 74 ; Manchester and Birmingham, ex new, 61;
Ditto, New Quarter Shares, 7% ; Manchester and Buxton,
9%
4% 4%; Manchester,Sheffield, and Midland Junction, 10%
; Manchester and Leeds, ex div., 149 ; Ditto, Half hares,
ditto, 66 ; Ditto Sixteenth Shares, 71/ ; Midland Stock, ex
div., 153; Ditto, 40/. Shares, ditto, 191/2 % ; Ditto, Fifth
Shares, 4 ; Mullingar and Athlone, 214 3% • Newark and
Sheffield, 73/4 %; Newcastle and Carlisle, Quarter Shares,
new, 31 ; Newry and Enniskillen, 31/2 4 ; North Bri-
tish, Half Shares, 51/2 4 ; North Wales Mineral, ex
new, 16%Shares,
; Ditto, New 6% ; North Wales,
34 % ; North-Western, 51% 34 premium ; Oxford,
orcester and Rugby, 414 ; Oxford, Worcester
and Wolverhampton' I/. 18s. ; Preston and Wyre, 36 1/4
Scottish Central, 6% ."3/1 ; St. Helens and Runcorn Gap, 24%;
Ditto, Half Shares, 12 121 ; Ditto, Preference Shares, 36;
Sheffield and Lincoln, 245. ; Sheffield and Manchester, ex
interest, 1301 ; Ditto, Quarter Shares, ditto, 16 15% ;
Shrewsbury and Grand Junction, 614 ; Shrewsbury,Oswestry,
and Chester, 41/ %; Shrewsbury, Wolverhampton, and
Birmingham, 43/4 41. 165. 3d. ; South-Eastern ex dividend,
4314 ; Ditto, New Shares, at 16i discount, 12s ;
Ditto, New Shares, No.. 3, 91% 9 ; Trent Valley, ex
new, 18% ; Ulster, ex div., 453/4 ; West Yorkshire,
4 ; Wexford and Carlow, 3% ; IVaterford and Ril-
keney, 4; Whitehaven and Furness Junction, 1% %; York
and North Midland, New Half Shares, 19 18%; Lyons and
Avignon, (English), 31. 6s. 6d. ; Northern of France
(English), 6% ; Paris and Lyons, Lafitte's, ex new, 31/s .
Paris and Lyons (Ganneron's), 2/. 12s. ; Great Paris and
Lyons, 1,4 prem. ' • Paris and Strasburgh, 2/. 165.2% ; Paris
and St. Quentin, 21. 2s. ; Sambre and Meuse, 63/4 ; Toureand
Nantes ( English), 3% ; Toulose, Bourdeaux, and Cette
% ; Verona and Ancona, 21. ls. 6d. 2/. ,
The returns of the Quarter's Revenue as published, in
general terms are considered as most satisfactory, especially
as respects the Customs and Excise; but as to the aug-
mentation of the Post-office revenues we do not think that the
increas... so tar as it goes, is worth that high degree ofcommenda-
tion paid to this branch of the revenue by some ofour Contempo-
raries. It is the farthest from our intention to say a word against
the new system of postage as brought forward, and so suc-
cessfully carried out under the auspices of Mr. Rowland Hill.
But there have been accessions to the Post office revenue
which cannot be expected to continue. We allude to the
immense mass of letters sent for applications for
shares in the new railway and other companies
which have been started in the last quarter. We have it
on undoubted authority that there were 36,000 letters sent
through the Post-office, all being applications for shares in a
recently formed railway concern.
We have accounts to-day from Buenos Ayres to the 25th
of January. The Legislature had beon opened, and Rosas
in his address enters most fully into the affairs of the Re-
public ; and a pretty fair picture is drawn of the state of
its condition. A political feeling against America appears to
be in the ascendant.

There has been an increase of :business in the Money
Market to-day. There have been private transfers made in
all these stocks, which have been for some weeks closed, pre-
paratory to the payment of the quarterly dividend. Without
the interest now due, Bank Stock has been sold at 212 and at
211 ; the Three per Cents. Reduced at 98%, and at 98%;
the New Three-al,l a-Quarcer per Cent:. at 101//i aIAU
102. Consols for the Account at 991/2 %. The premium
upon Exchequer-bills has advanced slightly.
very few bargains hays been made in tns Foreign Funds,