The Sun.
London, England, 1827-02-01 00:00:00

PIGEON SHOOTING.

On Thursday lost, amatch took pkace near Newport, Isle of
Wight, between Mr. 11. Toorner and Mr. E. Way, at 21 birds
etch, 21 yards from the trap, each pulling his own string, which
vam Woo by Mr. Towner. Mr. Way shot well, but most of his
birds fell oat of hounds. After this match Mr. T. killed 20
°Parrown out of 21 shots, let off at 18 yards.
On Thursday last there was a grand match of pigeon shooting
st lichen Ferry, near Southampton, which was attended by all the
crack shots, and the excellence of the shooting at which made it
ident to all, that, in this department of sporting at least,
``There's no place like Southampton.

LAW IStELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY).

COURT OF CHANCERY.

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.

WELLESLEY V. DUKE OF BEAUFORT.

Before the doors were opened to-day, the crowd in front of
them was immense, both of persons interested in the resuleof this
important case, and of persons prompted hither from motives of
mere curiosity. When they were opened, the rush into Court was
so great, that every corner of it was almost instantaneously
blocked up. There were a great number of Common Law Counsel
likewise present, and, indeed, half the Learned Gentlemen in at-
tendance could not find accommodation with seats.

The LORD CIL% NCELLOR entered the Court at a quarter before
eleven o'clock, and immediately proceeded to apply himself to the
case.

His Loonanie commenced his judgment with saying, that the
case came before him, upon two bills that were filed with respect
to the fortunes of the children, by Mr. and Mrs. Wellesley, and
upon a petition subsequently presented by Mr. Wellesley.
It appeared, to his Lordship's mind, at least, quite clear, that
about the 20th of May, 1825, Mrs. Wellesley had determined to
seek a separation from her husband, by a sentence of the Eccle-
siastical Court; whether that determination had been abso-
lutely made before that time or not, did not appear. Con-
sidering the nature of the evidence that had been given
in this case by %fr. Wellesley, the letters written by Mrs.
Wellesley herself, were clearly to be considered testimony ou the
part of the Misses Longs, to which the Court was bound to give
attention ; and it appeared by one of them, dated on the 28th of
August, 1825, that she had learned from Lord Maryborongh,
that Colonel Shaw had informed him that Mr. Wellesley
had declared, " if he did not obtain the possession of
his children by law, he would have it by stratagem."
This declaration very soon followed, which Mr. Wellesley had
stated in a letter to Mr. Pittman, of whose character and honour
the highest testimony had been given, and which statement ex-
pressed Mr. W.'s notion of the law—" that a man and his children
ought to go to the devil in his own way, if he pleases :" in a poste
script in the same letter, he added, " that neither God nor
Devil should interpose between him and his children. lie then
gave his love to Mr. Pittman, but told bins, that he was not the
person to whom he offered love of an ordinary nature.—Mrs. Wel-
lesley, it was clear, gave instructions for the application to be
made to the Court to take the possession and care of the children.
Mr. W. being abroad, at that time, according to what had long been
settled as the law, notwithstanding the common law right of a
parent to the care and custody of his children, when the pro-
perty of the children was put under the eare of this Court, it
could not suffer him to interfere in any manner whatever. It
could not make a person responsible who resided abroad, and it
had been the habit of the Court not to risk damage to children,but to
prevent it if it could. Upon the application being made to the
Court, the children were put into the possession of the Misses
Long, with an order that they should not be removed without the
leave of the Court. Mr. Wellesley came over to England upon
the 14th of December, 1825, and represented by his peti-
tion his arrival ; he stated also, that he meant to make
this country his residence, and prayed that the children might
be delivered over to him. It appeared, however, that the inten-
tion of Mr. W. was to reside in France, and also to have his
children there. This petition naturally brought on the most dis-
tressing discussion, which had of late occupied the Court for seve-
ral days. The Court would give no opinion upon whether
the discretion of the gentlemen concerned in the case, had been
properly exercised or not, in hearing the discussion in public; it
was not the duty of the Court to pronounce any opinion upon this,
still his Lordship had alway considered that cases of this sort,of such
vital importance to those interested, were better discussed in private,
but he could cot deny the right of the parties to have the discussion
in public if they pleased, nor forget that the best security the
judge had for the due discharge of his duty, was the presence of the
public; and he should now discharge publicly the duty that devolved
upon him, in the best possible way he could, recollecting
that what he was called upon to do was a very strong act, that it
stood upon principles which ought not to be adopted without the
Judge's considering all the feelings of a parent's heart, and all the
common law rights in a parent to his own children ; and his Lord-
ship earnestly and humbly ahanked God, that there was
an appeal from his judgment in this case, if the parties chose to
make the appeal. It had not been doubted at the Bar, that the
Court had jurisdiction to interfere, and the Bar had acted
well in considering the question not arguable. It might be expe-
dient to say a worzi or two on the nature of the law between parent
and child as administered in that Court; and notwithstanding
all the doubts respecting the jurisdiction that might exist, or ra-
ther that might have existed, hie Lordship believed that: it
would he found to be absolutely necessary that such a jurisdiction
should exist, suliject to correction by appeal, and subject to the most
anxious rare on the part of the individual exercising it not to exer-
cise it erroneously, if possible. There were many learned treatises on
the subjeet, and probably the result would be found to be, that
the jurisdiction belonged to the King as pater patrim, having
the care of those, unable to protect themselves, and founded in
the obvious necessity that the law should place in some
one the power of throwing that care around those in-
dividuals who were unable to protect themselves. It had
been stated, that the Court could not exercise the jurisdic-
tion, unless there was property belonging to the child in
Court. Whether this doctrine was tenable or not, probably
founded on what Lord Hardwicke had said in a case in Ambler,
namely, that there must be a suit in Court, perhaps required more
attention than had yet been given to it ; but it followed of course
that the Court would not act, unless it had property to act upon,
because it could not take upon itself the Sustenance of all the
children in the world ; and therefore in this sense only, whether
the jurisdiction belonged to it or not in cases where there was no
property, it could exercise it, for then it bad the means of exer-
cising it usefully. That this jurisdiction had long been exercised
no one could deny : by law a child was considered to have a fa-
ther and mother ; an Act of Parliament gave a father the power of
appointing a guardian, and when that guardian was appointed, he
had as strong a power as the law could enable any one to possess.
But, above a century ago, when the case of Lord Beaufort
was before the then Chancellor, his Lordship determined that the
statute-guardian was subject to all the controul, and the same
jurisdiction of this Court that a father was subject to. The then
Chancellor added, that the Court was nut to proceed on doubt-
' ful grounds; but that, if it had a reasonable ground for sup-
posing that children would not be properly treated, and as it
would rather prevent injustice than punish injustice, on that
ground would it interpose. In the case of Powell v. Clever,
halilsowprtekseenctueLotrodebe argued,
hipwasa Counsel ; Lord Thurlow would not
(and it might be properly so) for he
thatth e
Heater'stphrae childnetas ebnhtwa
Chancellor;
enc
er proirrno;cpi eprl
ale
syn
de datedriueLcrLore
said, that the Court had a right, and it would take care to see
fullykut laidhad down
wbe(
them, in not allowing a child to have by
"been sent to a
rdveaiiadt brought up. In A.
Popish School. If this Court had not the power to
interfere, what might be the consequence ? Individuals might go
to the Court of King's Bench to compel the restoration of a child
to its father; but when that restoration was compelled, could that
Court go on to compel the father to subscribe 55. for the mainte-
nance of that child ? A Magistrate might make an order, but
there never had been a Mandamus in the Court of King's
I3ench upon the subject ; so that unless this Court inter-
fered, and looking at the common law power, what-
ever might be the rank and expectations of a child, a father
might keep it in a state of starvation.—With these observations,
hie Lordship found himself in this situation, humbly repro-
tenting his Majesty, bound by the settled law of the Court,
and unable to retire from the discharge of his duty, in
acting upon that law. He durst
of the Court; Lis du
notvielatethei prin-
ciplest that sprung out of the practice
nl eogkri ing
yt y
Navt alltoasth
appcircumstanceslytboseprinciopflesth honestly,eease,w
aind t
judicial
diligently
i
which ought always to be of the purest nature, to determine
manfully, and manfully to declare what his individual opinion
was; if he should be in error he could not help it, but had great
consolation, from the reflection, that his judgment was subject
to a review. In most of the eases of this sort, this
Court had been enlightened by the evidence of near relations,
which, it had cot in the present instance ; such evidence
was generally drawn from the evidence most reluctantly, and
most painfully, and was consequently to be most relied open ;
still, so far as evidence had been given by the Duke
of Wellington, Lord Maryborough, and the Marquis of Wellesley,
it could only amount to this, in the most forbearing way of look-
ing at it, that they did not consider it right to suggest to the
Court, that in their opinion Mr. Wellesley ought to be entrusted
with the care of his children. As to Mr. Wellesley's pecuniary
circumstances, as far as the affidavit of that gentleman was to be
satisfactory, that had been made since the ease closed at the bar;
the objection to his haring his children on that ground was put
to flight; but though his embarrassments in this respet might have
been an insuperable objection ; yet, notwithstanding his Lordship
was neither a friend to methodism or sectarian principles, (that
had been imputed to the Misses Long), looking at religion
as the foundation of all moral good here and,hereafter, he could
not put pecuniary considerations in the balance, when called
upon to discharge his duty, in seeing that these children had a mo-
ral education given to them.
His LORDSHIP now entered into the nature of this particular

case, and Went at great )ength thtot►gh the mass olpapers he Lad
before him. He observed, that lie was not called upon to say,
what was the mere consequence of an act of adultery on
thelpart of a father, and he should not give an opinion upon it.—
In the present case, it seemed to have received the condolence of
Mrs. W., and his Lordship abstained from going at length into
it; at the same time, he had no hesitation in declaring, that
if a father was living in a state of adultery, ineapable of taking
proper care of his children, that he was not a man of that reason
and understanding, who ought to have the custody of his children ;
therefore if a ease of that kind should occur again, the Court
would take care that children should not be under the controul of
a person so debasing himself, and so likely to injure them. There
could not be the slightest doubt that the adultery between Mr.
W. and Mrs. 13. had been continued and, kept up at any rate from
Mr. W.'s coining to this country in Dec. 1625, to the present time,
for it was absurd to say, that there had not been a continuation
of it, because the parties had happened to have been at a distance
from each other for the course of a fortnight ;:it had been continued
till this moment, in the most shameful manner, and in a manner
so disgraceful to Mrs. Bligh that his Lordship thought she ought
to be hunted out of all society, and he would sooner forfeit his
very life, than permit Victoria (the girl) to go into the care of
Mrs. Bligh ! !
(The greatest sense of universal satisfaction throughout the
Court, was loudly manifested upon his Lordship's thus express-
ing himself.)
HALF-PAST TWO O'CLOCK.

His LORDSHIP has just concluded.—Arrived as I am, said his
Lordship, at such an advanced age, I cannot l.ut feel that I am
soon to appear myself before another tribunal, there to render an
account of my conduct in this life, and most conscien-
tiously do I feel that I could not face that solemn tribunal,
with the conviction of having honestly discharged my duty,
were I to suffer this girl to remain with a father who has dis-
graced himself as Mr. Wellesley has done, by his profligate
and adulterous intercourse with such a woman as Mrs. Bligh,
and if I cannot allow the girl to remain with him, upon what
principle of justice, I ask, can I separate the boys from their sister,
and upon thispoint I have the coneurrenceof Mr. W. himself. There
remains, however, one circumstance which I own has given me
many a sleeplesehour, and that is, thatsi do not know who, under
Heaven, can be found to undertake the guardianship of these
infants, in ease my decision shall he confirmed by the House of
Lords : but, if it should be confirmed, I earnestly hope some
person may be found qualified for such an awfully important trust,
and who will inculcate filial affection towards their father, as well
as every other moral and religious duty. For myself, I can only say,
that I have done my duty industriously ; I have done it pain-
fully ; and, if I am now wrong, I thank my God that there is an-
other tribunal to correct me.

[When hie Lordship concluded, there was an expression of ge-
neral approbation throughout the Court, which had been all day
thronged to excess.]

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.

The Court was occupied the whole of the morning in hearing
arguments in a case involving the accuracy of certain partnership
accounts.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH,
CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

Mr. CAMPBELL moved for a rule, calling on Herbert Phillips
Rowel, an attorney of this Court, t. show cause why a criminal
information should not be filed against him, for attempting to
provoke Robert Water, Esq., a magistrate of the county of Car-
marthen, to fight a duel.—Rule granted.

PREROGATIVE COURT.
IN THE GOOD; OF THOMAS WALKER.

Da. Lnontwurox said, that in this case be was counsel for the
Executors named in a will executed by Lieut. Walker, of the 9th
Regiment of Native Infantry, who died some years since in India.
The deceased left a will which was now propounded, but which
the testator's father called upon the executors to prove. Mr.
Walker (the father) resided at present, and had done so for seve-
ral years at Naples, and the atilAeot of his motion now was to pray
the Court to order that Mr. Walker should enter into security for
the costs, should the Court think proper to condemn him in them.
Dr. PMILLIIKORIK appeared to oppose the motion, which be
insisted was altogether unprecedented. He also argued that the
application was absolutely necessary, as the father of the testator
had a right to call upon his executor, to prove his will without
the possibility of the Court condemning rim in costs.
The Colfax could see no injustice in granting the application,
the only effect of which would be to protect the executors against
vexatious proceedings on the part of Mr. Walker. As to a pre-
cedent, it might be found in a practice which was of every day oc-
currence, in which a wife sued, her husband not being in the
and was ordered to give security- for costa, because
otherwise she might evade the payment. This was the practice
in the Courts of Common Law, as well as in Chancery. In the
present instance it appeared that the party opposing bad been ab-
sent from the kingdom for nearly twenty years, and, under such
circumstances, there could be no doubt that the executors were en-
titled to security for the costs.—Motion granted.