The Sun.
London, England, 1827-01-22 00:00:00

ammmmw.-;

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

with the offices they hold,the commands of superiors. The
official situations of these gentlemen were not of a political
We insert another letter on Mr. Trotter's late marl character; two of them, at least, were purely literary;!
riage; and. this, with a few observations upon it, must they were the rewards of superior literary merit, displayed
suffice on the topic. The writer of the letter replies butt ;it works to which the country was indebted, both for in-i
to few of out:preceding remarks. Persons of all the re-?, structien and amusement; literary excellence was the
formed Churches are frequently married by the rites of consideration for which, it was said, and believed, that I
the Church of Rome, without either protesting against k ,they were conferred. The world had never been apprized
the ceremony to which they submit, or being suspected !hat abject political obedience to the Minister of the day,~
'having changed their faith. Our paper of yesterday every particular measure which he might bring for:
-morning contained an instance of such a marriage. The ward, was an indispensable requisite to the contintae
mere civil stature of the ceremony of marriage neither isr• ance of the enjoyment of Royal patronage, by literary,
nor can be acknowledged by any one who believes his men. There was nothing to apprise Lacretelle,
Ville-
Bible.in any way, or according to any interpretation. Let 4.s main, and Michaud, of the servitude by which they
the writer of the letter peruse the passages in which ouri were bound, or of the true nature of the tenure by which!
Saviour' has spoken of marriage—in how especial a man- they held their offices. Had these gentlemen engaged
ner he mingles up the Creator with it; and though it may wantonly in political warfare with the Ministers, and cares
be asserted that Christ was human only, yet surely his into that warfare an indecent bitterness, the Crown
assurance may and must be taken, as to the high religious might have been justified in withdrawing all marks of,
nature of a
_rite through which God is said to make of 1.; Royal favour from them. Their offence, however, is not,
two, one ;fah. While the Dissenter sttstggles for the -t that they have plunged into the extravagancies of political'
rights of conscience for himself, he cares nothing for the con- faction, but that they have dared to express their opinions
science ;of the officiating clergyman. Why is this- latter eon one specific legislative measure. That measure, too, is
to accept of a protest against a ceremony which he re-"t= one in which they have a deep individual interest, and in
-veres, in. the very Temple of the Gad whom he serves ?`..5* which the public would-expect them to declare a plain
Does even the civil Judge ever accept in his Court of .: Opinion, either the one way or the other. The law of the
a protest against the law which he is administering press would operate most especially on men devoted to
and which he is sworn to adMinister as it etands ? If the • literature, and on the classes of the people connected with,
Dissenter must make his objection, to the matrimonial ce- or employed by them. The French Academy, in expres-
remony known, he may make them known in a thousand sse sing their sentiments on such a subject, did not inter•
ways, without insulting the Minister whom he calls upon sry fore unnecessarily in politics. They merely took into
to eiciate, and profaning the Church dedicated by conse- their consideration a particular measure, likely to exercise.
cration to the established religion. We believe that the es, an important influence on those literary interests which it'
only persons interested in ene subject are the flock and' was their especial duty to protect. Is it just or generous
shepherd.of the himself. - Let him, as we said 1 to deprive literary men of the marks of Royal favour which
before, make kw:en to them by protest, that his going to ; the Crown has conferred on them for literary merit, simply
Churckfor ceremony,ree
is no proof of his general con-, because, on such an occasion, they state their opinions,
version another faith, and he will have done all that the and vote as members of a literary body, according to those
case 6enafide requires;-or if this :sill not suffice, if greater 4, opinions ? M. de
.Peyronnet may imagine that the re-,
'eublicity, for pretty obvious reasons, beysought, he might moval of these gentlemen from office is a vigorous proceed-'
paste his'in,ofest up against _the -walls, of the church-yard; : ing. It shows, certainly, that he is not afraid to injure
or, at tt ietsry'trioderate expence, send the bellman about to rthose who have no means of preventing the injury, and
cry ite However, we
_dp not. pretend to prescribe one that he hss courage enough to brave public opinion.—
amours' thi*Otrei fiyvaish the protest might, if necessary, Such, however, is not the energy which it becomes a
be malephbriCeesthey..are.fruiumerable—we only contend Statesman to manifest; and, for sake of the future tran-
that it. is a jpgat oppressive and unjust proceeding to make :e quillity of Fiance, we wish sincerely that its rulers-may act
the Cl4le-yosart, who reveres.the service which he-is called upon more liberal principles.—New Times.
on to perform; the instrument of publishing in his own ;e.
consecrated • Church the objections which others start h.:
against its forms. Where is it laid down as a part of a 1:
Clergyman's ditty fo receive protests ? What is he to do "I's
with them when he has got them ? We are for liberty of
conscience to all a to the Clergyman of the Church of Eng-
land (to Which we belong) to perform his duty without ob-
struction or impediment; and to the various Dissenters tc
pursue their dissent as c.Teely, till it pleases God to eie
lighten their mint's,__ 'Muses.

COURT OF SESSION-SECOND DIVISION,
EDINBURGH, DEC. 5, 1826.

TROTTER V. TROTTER, &C.

EFFECT OF A TESTAMENT MADE IN INDIA.—Thc de-
cision in this case very deeply interests a great many of out
countrymen, who, after having made fortunes abroad, have,
in expectation of coming home, from time to time, re-
mitted money to Scotland, to be invested heritably, or de-
posited in banks. Most of the individuals situated, in
India for example, make their wills before sailing home-
ward, in order to prevent any disappointments arising to
their relatives if they die on the voyage, or meet with any
fatal accident. Now, in a majority of cases where there is
heritage in Scotland, the proper solemn words are omitted,
and the intention of the testator to a certain extent de-
' feated, We would, therefore, strongly recc.mmend that in-
dividuals abroad, who have any heritable property in Scot-
land to leave, would consult some man versed in Scots la*
previous to making their wilts. - But, as we are-aware this is
'a privilege seldom to be attained abroad, we would seriously
inculcate upon all our - countrymen, who leave this tc
reside in a foreign country, with the prospect of realizing
'a fortune, and which they may happen to have heritably
vested in Scotland, to be exceeding careful in noting down,
in their memorandum book, the following words, which
may save to their dearest relatives, whom they mean to
favour, a great deal of vexation, viz.—" I hereby give
grant, and dispone, &c." whatever the property may be,
which of course they will describe.
These technical words of de preesenli, conveyance, are ab-
solutely necessary to transfer property, i. c. land or rights
connected with land. The word dispone, is indispensable.l
If a man makes his settlement, in the form of a will of
testament, without these words, though expressly desiring,
in the most explicit terms, his executors to convert all his
property into money, and then divide it in a particular way,
which he shall point out, still it will be insufficient; and
,if there be any heritage in Scotland, the heir-at-law will
take it up first, and then perhaps come in as a legatee foi
a share of the moveables under the will, though the com-
mon sense interpretation of the will would lead to a different
conclusion. We shall illustrate what we have stated by a
case which was decided the other day in this Court.
Colonel Charles Trotter left Scotland, and went to In-
dia on the Company's service, where he continued about
thirty years. During this period he realized a considerable
fortune. Intending to come home, he, from time to time,.
remitted money to Scotland to his youngest brother Wil-
liam,who acted as his attorney and factor. This money
was to have been deposited in banks. But it was heritably
secured by bonds to the extent of about 3,0001. The Colonel
was apprised of this, He approved of the inN estment of
of hie money over land. In 1819 he,.died in India, leaving
a will apparently executed in the English style, and just such
a one as a soldier, unpractised in legaltechnicalities,would be
expected to make. The words of conveyance were, " all
my estate and effects, which may belong to me at my
death." After stating certain provisions which were to
be paid, he hares the residue of " his whole property in
Europe" to residuary legatees, share and share alike, who.
are specially named—of whom young Trotter, the pursuer,
is one. Colonel Trotter had, for above ten years previous
to his death, signified his intention, by nutnerotts letters ex-
tant, of leaving all his property among his brothers and
sisters and their children equally, in the same way as their
own father had divided his fortune among his children,viz.
the Colonel's brothers and sisters and himself. Upon this
settlement a dispute arose relative to the intention and in-
terpretation, and effect -of the will of the deceased. The
pursuer, the immediate younger brother of the Colonel,
claimed the three heritable bonds, as heir-at-law of his
brother, and also a share of the moveables as a residuary
legatee under the will, without collating or communicating
heritage ; that is, throwing it and the moveables into one
mass and taking his share from the aggregate fund.

The MiaW'seex Justices, it FeCTIIS, have, by a majority
of 28 to ;:I, Otermined that the public business of the
Cour.:ty 'shall continue to be transacted with closed doors :
P..nd their reaeees.Tor this determination, as far as we can
' gather tire kern the
,account furnished, apparently by
olie of tt.e4r.,own body, to some of the public papers, are,
that tAeLpraqice in other counties is the same, and that
to admit thepublic to their deliberations, and with theM :.
persons. on the part of the Press, would tend to encourage
!the relit)* •of -persons who' possess the knack of publie •
speakingeeend;•deter'those whci hare not the same talent
from giving = 'their:- opinion's ttpon subjects whiCh come
before thew:" 'Certainly,' if wse may judge from the only
'specimen which is given of the organ of the 28, we
must allow that they have very 'substantial grounds for the
decision they have come to; for if the person in question ,
furnishes, as he may be supposed to do, a fair specimen
of the oratorical and reasoning powers of the Middlesex'
Justices, they do very right, as far at least as themselves
are concerned, to shut their doors ; and were they to
shut their ears too, no great loss would be sustained. The
Press, it cannot be denied, has its evils, as well as its;
advantages ; and among the former, that of administering
to the overweening vanity of weak minds ought not to be,:
overlooked. But the
.true reasoning on this occasion, as:.
far, at least, as we are made acquainted with it, seems to i.-
be all on one side, and that, in the teeth of the decision, ss
this Worshipful Body have come to. The question is not
whether stupid people would be ashamed that their stu-
pidity (should- become known—for, generally speaking,
stupidity possesses no sense of shame—but whether an it-;`
responsible body shall be allowed to deal with, and to raise
large revenues upon, their fellow subjects, without the:
persons-whose funds they then possess themselves of being':
-permitted to know how or why they are so disposed of.—
We
-
We readily admit that persons appointed to the Magistracy'
ought to be such as an implicit confidence can he placed
in ; and if they were such, little anxiety need be felt about
the result of their deliberations ; but when the public know,
as they have too much reason to do, that Justices, more •
especially Middlesex Justices, have been, in past times, corn- ..
pesed ofpersons with whom the term jobbing has been almost
synonimous,we cannot wonder that they should wish to know
ss little about the proceedings even of the immaculate and
irreproachable race upon whom the mantle of past jobbers
has devolved. The worthy cheesemonger, who was the
principal and apparently sole opponent of publicity, who
had the hardihood to avow himself upon this occasion, al—
luded, it would appear, in reity, but somewhat coarse terms
to this paper ; expressing his evident, and no doubt serious -
alarm, lest his sapient harangues should be handed up to
to the pnblie in our columns. It is the painful duty of:
' public journalists, certainly, to be obliged to record a great :
deal of very worthless trash. If the result of education
is to bring incompetent people into public situations, and
if, in such situations, they utter a great deal of nonsense,'
the fact itself is very much to be deplored. But one re-
sult -.
of publicity is, that it, sooner or later, puts such ~
people to silence; and- their alarm soon subsides in the in-
significance to which the- Press reduces them. And the
very reason which this sapient orator gives for opposing
the publicity which the measure in question would have
given to the proceedings of the Middlesex Justices, will
,
form, withessany persons, a convincing reason in favour of
it—viz. that ignorance and vanity would find their level,
and be no longer-permitted to intrude themselves where
l the public interest requires the exercise of very different
qualities. This qtiestiOn, however; lies in a nut-shell. A
public Court is a public place, from which the public can
not legally be excluded; and we trust that some person .
will be found with public spirit enough to try that question
with the Worshipful Advocates of closed doors and secret
proceedings. Let some rate-payer demand admission to'`
this secret. conclave ; let him be pushed aside, obstructed,
or turned out by some of the Justices or their officers; and
let him bringhis action against the person so assaulting
him; and jel'6.ll,then be seen what a Judge and Jury will
say to persona anting in an open Court, under the King's.
Commission, who
dare to oppose the entrance of any of
the King's sulieete to
evilness those proceedings and deli-
berations from which the
inclination nor the pewern to
King himself has neither the
Herald. . - , . exclude them.—Morning
~, _ • ,„
MM. de Lacretalle, Y Manikin, and Michaud, have suf-
fered for the ,part they took in supporting the Address of
the French Academyagainst the Law of the Press, which
is now in progrsss. Lacretelle has been deprived of his
post of Dramatic Censor; Villemain, of that of Maitre de
Requetes to the Council of State ; and Michaud has ceased •
to be one-of the King's Readers. It is natural that the
Ministers should have been provoked at the step which the
Academy has taken; and it is natural, too, that they should
feel pique and resentment towards those literary men,
whose influence in that Body might have enabled them to
keep it quiescent. But it is silly to act according to
the suggestions of that pique and resentment, and
to allow such motives to • hurry them into a course,l
in which there is neither justice, nor generosity, nor;
policy. Such men as Lacretelle, Villemain, and
Michaud, cannot be regarded as mere official de-'
pendents of the Ministry, filling places for which
strict political obedience is the known arid indis-1
pensably requisite. They are not subordinate functionaries,'
, whose duty it is to follow, even in matters unconnected

It was objected by William Trotter, and the other resi-
' ciliary legatees, unless you collate, you are only entitled tol
the heritable bonds, and have no right to any of the move-
ables. You cannot, at one and the same time, approbate
and reprobate the will; which you would effectually do,l
if you took the moveables in terms of the testament, and
'also the heritage in direct opposition to its intention.
It was answered by the pursuer, my claim is well found-
ed, and 1 do not approbate and reprobate the will, which
can only convey moveables; and there is no provision for
the conveyance of the heritage at all; therefore, as it were
ab intestato, I take up the bonds, and also a share of the
• money under the settlement, without collation. This is
manifestly the law of Scotland, which is strict in the ex-
pressions necessary to convey heritage.