The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-21 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, DEC. 20.
IN RE THE CORPORATION' OF WARWICK.

The argument in this case being concluded, the
LORD CHANCELLOR said he would consider the
matter, and determine before to-morrow whether he
could give judgment on the evidence at present
before the Court, or whether he should direct some
further course of inquiry.

IN THE MATTER OF AN INFANT.

Mr. JONES applied, in support of the petition of
the mother of a young man whose name was not
mentioned, that he might be permitted to sell out a
commission purchased for him, with the sanction of
the Court, in the 12th Lancers. The urgent nature
of the circumstances induced him to hope that the
Lord Chancellor would permit the matter to be
mentioned out of its course. The infant, now only 17
years of age, would, on his coming to years of
maturity, be entitled to a property of 30,000/.,
subject only to his mother's jointure of 600/.
per aunum. The infant having expressed a
strong predilection for the military profession, a re-
ference was made to the Master, who approved
of the proposal, and -a commission in the 12th
Lancers was accordingly purchased, for which 1,3001.
was paid. The young person soon afterwards got
deeply into debt, and now owed upwards of 1,0001.
Other circumstances had taken place, in consequence
of which the commanding officer would be compelled
to take such notice of the lad's conduct as would
lead to a very disagreeable result. The petition
therefore was, that his Lordship would permit the
while there was an opportu-
nity of doing so. --- -
The LORD CHANCELLOR asked if the petition was
opposed, and finding it was not, he granted the prayer.
At half-past three o'clock his Lordship rose to
attend the meeting and prorogation of Parliament,
which took place to-day.

ROLLS' COURT, DECEMBER 20.
The MASTER of the ROLLS was occupied all the
evening on petitions and consent causes.

FISHER V. POLLOCK.

This was a petition praying a reference to the
Master, to approve of a proper person to carry on
the business of the late Mr. Mawman, the bookseller,
of Ludgate-street.—Order made.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEc. 20.
CORBETT V. GERMAYNF.
This was an action for assault and battery. The
defendant pleaded not guilty, but the Jury returned
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 201.

SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE.

MEETING AT STOCKWELL.

CONTEMPLATED MEASURE FOR ENCLOSING BATTERSEA,

WANDSWORTH, AND CLAPHAM COMMONS, AND OTHER

OPEN LANDS.

Yesterday a very numerous Meeting of the most
respectable resident Gentry of Battersea, Wands-
worth, and Clapham Commons, assembled at the
Swan Tavern, Stockwell, for the purpose of adopt-
ing measures to counteract a Bill about to be intro-
duced into Parliament, for dividing, allotting, and
enclosing all the commons, open and common fields,
meadow, pasture, and commonable lands, and waste
grotmds, within the manor and parishes aforesaid.
Several gentlemen, whose property was not at all
likely to be affected by a measure of the kind, at-
tended from public feeling, which is now in very
active operation against the tremendous system of
which the projected Bill is considered a part.

DEACON, Esq. in the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN briefly stated, that the object o:
the meeting was to oppose a Bill about to be brought
into Parliament by Lord Spencer—a Bill calculated
to do very extensive mischief.
Mr. BARCIIARD rose to state the circumstances
under which they were called together. A rumour
had been afloat, that it was the intention of his
Lordship and other persons who had an interest as
copyholders, to bring in a bill for the above-men-
tioned purpose. The rumour increased, and he and
about a dozen other gentlemen met at his house to
consider a subject of such importance to their inte-
rests. They determined to write a strong but re-
spectful letter, urging their objections to the propo-
sition, and requesting a conference. His Lordship
granted a conference to a deputation of the joint
parishes, on the 26th of November, and upon that
occasion admitted the strength of some of the objec-
tions, if such objections had any foundation at all;
but thought that they could be easily removed if
they really did exist. His Lordship added, that if
his project could be proved to deteriorate property
to any extent, he would cease to proceed (hear,
hear), and he directed his steward to give a sketch
of the bill, which, he thought, would effectually re-
move all possible objections. In a correspondence
between the deputation and Mr. Lefevre, upon the
part of his Lordship, that gentleman submitted the
following propositions by way of modifications :
" That that part of Clapham Common which was
within the manor of Battersea, should remain in
its present state; that the avenue on the east side of
Wandsworth or Battersea Common should remain in
its present state; that the remainder of the com-
mons and wastes of Battersea and Wandsworth be
enclosed ; but that no buildings be erected thereupon
except dwelling-houses, of the value of 1,0001. each
at least, buildings (not dwelling-houses) requisite
for the cultivation of land, and buildings for parochial
and charitable purposes ; that the open fields be en-
closed, but no dwelling-houses of less value than
2001. be erected thereupon ; that Lachneere-common
(about 18 acres) be appropriated to the benefit of
the Battersea poor, in such a manner as shall appear
most beneficial : and that an appropriation of a si-
milar extent be made for the Wandsworth poor.—
The deputation replied to this communication, that
the propositions did not appear to them calculated
to obviate the objections, and a public meeting of
the inhabitants was called. Now, with respect to
the alledged modifications, the offer of his Lordship
not to enclose a certain part of the common was
certainly no great favour, for it happened not to be
possible to do so, as a writ had been on a former
without
y'Lordship
eoffcceacsti.on sesxute,d
ittowadsetbetrimt
prudent
dthenetboi
in
dhai
sr
to leave the avenue in the same state, as any alte-
ration there would certainly prejudice his Lordship's
property. With respect to the proposal that no
building of less value than 1,0001. should be erected
on the common, it was well known that if the
common was enclosed, it would be soon cut into
small slices ; and what was to prevent a proprietor
from building whatever sort of house he pleased
upon his portion ? As for buildings requisite for the
cultivation of land, a pigstye, or any sort of wretched
cabin, was included under that head. He called
upon the meeting to reflect upon the consequence
of the erection of small houses. All small portions
a them.
of land were devoted to buil
profit-
able mode of disposing An immense po-
pulation of poor would become ding--the most
me parishioners, and the
parish-rates would necessarily sustain an alarming
increase.—(Hear, hear.)--In Bromley an enclosure
of common was some time ago carried into effect,
and the consequence was, that many of those who
were induced to vote for it had so much reason to
regret the redundancy of a poor population, which
the measure drew together, as to declare that they
would give 1,0001. each for a repeal of it. There
was a similar case at Bexley ; and in Chelsea, where
but a very small portion of land was enclosed, the
rates at once rose from 9d. to 14d. At Hornsey
and Norwood the annoyance andinconveniences were
likewise intolerable, from the same cause. Mr. Bar-
chard then spoke of the great advantages of the
situation and extent of Clapham-common and its
vicinity to the metropolis, and argued with consider-
able force against any intention to destroy those public
and private advantages. The poor inhabitants would
sustain great injury if the measure were carried into
effect. They laid claim for their cattle to the pas-
turage of the common, which they had enjoyed so
long, that it was, if not an actual right, something
very like a right; and their means in that respect
would not only be quite destroyed, but they would
be driven into public-houses, mere roads not being
the most agreeable of walks. Mr. Barchard then
called upon thelleeting, with every respect for the
character and conduct of Lord Spencer, to adopt
such resolutions as would show the determination of
the inhabitants to resist the bill, and concluded by
stating that his Lordship had expressed that he was
ashamed to see the Common in such a state as it

was in, and yet had refused either to improve its ;on•
dition himself, or allow others to do so.

Resolutions, which were the echo of the speech
were then proposed.
tdhehbeen waited upon,
he would have agreed to such modifications as would
set the matter at rest. rn
Alderman SCHOLEY seconded the resolutions.
Mr. GUDE (of the Crown Office, we understood)
asked whether Lord Spencer was apprised of this
meeting ?
Alderman SCHOLEse en said, that
pat Mr. Lcipe
of the meeting, but declined attending from a point
of delicacy.
A PARISHIONER understood Lord Spencer was
most willing to hear from them on the subject of fur-
ther modifications.
wasenxe-
aware
ex-
tremely
modifying.e
ee Mr. yoG feux this
eEi ps
ni oa
ens
eatbi
nl
satisfied b but
and something
if
Lord Spencer was
principle
eitvre
be knew
done

A PARISHIONER was of the same opinion.
Mr. KEYE said, that if the measure proved suc-
cessful, the whole of the waste grounds would be
filled in such a manner as to cause the expulsion of
every respectable man. He had given a high price
for his house under the impression that the enclo-
sures now meditated would not tare place. Some
years ago, when the common vas in a very bad
state, he asked Lord Spencer vihether he would
allow him to drain it, and told bin he would plant
trees in it also at his own expenc!. His Lordship
referred him to Mr. Harrison, win approved highly
of the suggestion, and in the course of conversation
said that Lord Spencer would mt attempt to ob-
tain an Enclosure Bill, as hi had failed in
that object while First Lord of the Admi-
ralty. But although no objec.ion was made,
no answer was ever returned to the application.
At Enfield Chase, when it was theintention of the
Commissioners of Woods and Fcrests to enclose
some lands, the inhabitants opposid the measure,
principally on the ground of the liar of rendering
it,
the place unhealthy by confininglnd the measure
was withdrawn. Here the principlewas of stronger
operation, for the Common was in the immediate
vicinity of the town. What was tle fact'? They
were driving thieves and vagabonds out of Field-
lane, and other places of the kind, and was it not
likely that Clapham, if converted into inclosed land,