The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-01 00:00:00

MORNING SUN

V ICTUALLERS.

LORD ASHBURTON.
. (FRom A CORRESPONDENT.)

:

1:
.v,
.... ---......A.0nTrE
ili!l4ll4°
-:'._
Zaer:A9:.
1,- • ,:,
~,,,
•A: ' I sr

'

TELE NEW UNLICENSED

The fate of, this country has been to be ruled by a
confederacy of monopolists, equally opposed to the Sove-
reign, the people, the Constitution, and the religion of
the country. Of what have they been the monopolists ?
Of every thing.—(Cheers.) They have been monopolists
of religious liberty.—(Cheers.) They have been mono-
polists of personal freedom. They have trafficked in
slaves and the souls of men. They have been monopo-
lists of political power, to the disfranchisement of thou-
sands in every part of the country. What have been their
party conflicts but struggles for the monopoly of place,
and pensions, and- patronage, and pelf, and pay?--(Great
cheering.) In what light are we called to regard them
this day ? As monopolists of the people's bread ; as a
tricked combination of victuallers—( Laughter)—conspir-
ing to raise the-price of bread, a class of offenders which
till lately was held by the common law of England to be
criminals punishable with fine and imprisonment.—
(near, and cheers.) Were they punished according to
their deserts they would now take their place along with
the inmates of the dungeon, and those who were at the
treadmill.—(Great laughter.) What was our present
Parliament ? A Parliament of provision merchants.—
(Hear, hear.) Let them be honest and put up ,
their appropriate sign. Let them announce over their j
shop doors, " Messrs. Buckingham, Graham, Richmond,
Peel, and Co., sole provision- merchants to the people of
Great Britain and Ireland.—(Loud laughter.) -For
bread, beef, pork, mutton, butter, and beans, inquire
within.—(ll,airs of laughter.) N.B. No competition
allowed. No connection with the shop over the water."
_(Continned laughter.) The Corn-law was designed to
make food scarce, in order that it may be made dear.
Nothinc else. And why dear ? That landlords may
pocket the price. Who gave the landowners the power
to do so ? They took the power themselves.—(Hear.)
By what means did they persuade the people to accept
it at their hands ? By presenting it at the point of the
bayonet.—(Hear.) How have they perpetuated it ? By
the same means.—(Hear, hear.) It is a law to put a
whole people on short allowance. A whole people tijik
I say ? No ; those who make the famine spare the
selves.— (Hear.) Were it a heaven-sent famine, all
iandd be afflicted. When God punished the Egyptians
with sore plagues, they entered the palace of Pharaoh
awl his magicians ; but our modern Pharaohs and their
sliding-scale enchanters torment not themselves ; they
torment the people.—(Cheers.) Can any act be con- ,
eeived more wicked than the curtailment of the supply
of bread to an industrious people ? Can there be a more
frightful despotism ? On board a man-of-war, when
provisions are scarce, the man who is the despot of the
ship, and might shoot a refractory sailor dead at his feet,
dare not take a crumb of biscuit, or a drop of water, more
than the cabin-boy. He dare not help himself.--(Hear.)
How is it with us ? Do the gentry ashore share and
share alike with those who work the ship, and go aloft,
and reef, and steer ? lie wished they did.—(Hear.)
Parliament would soon be summoned, in good earnest,
for the despatch of sundry divers and important busi-
ness"—(Laughter)-4nd the Corn-laws would be totally
repealed in both Houses of the Legislature.—Mr. Thomp-
son's Speech at Edinburgh.

The appointment of Lord Ashburton, and the con-
stant reference made to it in the daily papers, would
twetn to indicate a great reliance on the success of the
mission, and most certainly betokens a wish to magnify
its importance. How far the ends attainable by a
tah;nted man may be accomplished by Lord Ashburton,
is, :of- course, in the future, and it is difficult to calculate
upon the probable result ; but there is one question
which, in the mouths of many, has not yet had the . ad-
vantage of publication, and is far from easy of solution.
Has Lord Ashburfon received his appointment for pri-
vate interest, or those of his country ? Does his connec •
iion 'with the house of Baring and Co. not render
it more than possible that he will not neglect to super-
intend the trading affairs of that house ? And do not the
immense cotton dealings of the Barings almost exclude
the hope that any time can be found by the Noble Lord
to transact public business in America? Assuredly in this
easeyersonal is the most profitable to attend to. Let the
pubbe, then, know why we have determined hastily on
sending a Special Minister to America ; and although,
from the vast American speculations in cotton, &c., of
the house of Baring and Co., it is almost a delusion to
imagine any event of public benefit can occur, yet there
is consolation in the consequent paucity of blunders that
may be anticipated from the Plenipotentiary.

EAST INDIA SHIPPING.
Arrivals—Simarang, Robertson, from Madras, in the
Downs, 'ailed Oct. 6, Cape Dec. 9 ; Hindostan, Red-
man, from Ma4ras, in the Downs, sailed Oct. 6, Cape
Dec. 2, St. Helend j?ec. 17 ; Tapley, Oct. from
Bengal, off Torbay, sii9ed July. 3, Cape, Nov. 24 ;'
Hotspur, Wilson, from Benga!, 111 the Downs, sailed'
Sep*, 1, St. Helena, Dec. 10.
Arrivals in Table Bay, Cape of Good Hope—The So
vereign, Archer, Dec. 3, from Mossell Bay ; • Margaret;
Canney, from Calcutta ; L Aleide, 4th, from Bourbon ,
Harlequin, Harrison, from Singapore ; Bordeaux
Mutes* 7th, from Bordeaux.
Arrivals in Simon's Bay—Her Majesty's ship Lilly,
Allen, N0v.30, from Mauritius.
Departures from Table Bay—Levant, llolmes, Nov.
30, to Pernambuco and Boston ; Royal Albert, Tessier,
3d; To' London ;Mary_ Heartly, Webb, 4th, to Demerara;
Sovereign, 7th, to li..l)isna.
Departure from Simons Bay—Her Majesty's ship
Fantoine, Butterfield, Dec. 1, to West Coast of Africa.
Arrivals at St. Helena—Nanine, Tartone, Dee. 14,
from Java to Havre • Beulah, James, from China to
Londim ; Ceres, Pecker, 15, from Bourbon, and sailed to
Nantes, since totally ,a reeked (24th Jan.), at the entrance
-on the Loire ; one man lost.
l)cparture from Mauritius—Mermaid, Sedgwick, Nov.
2, to London.
Arrivals in Table Bay—Lloyds and James, Dee. 7,
from London ; Cambridge, tith, from Liverpool. De-
partures—Maid of Mona, 7th, tC, Algoa Bay ; Reflectoi•
and Harlequin, 9th, to London.

The General Steam Navigation Co.npany's ves-
sel the Ocean, J. Fife, from Rotterdam, arrived St the
Custom-house on Sunday, with the Dutch mail.
The following were the persons invited by Sir
Robert Peel, to meet the King of Prussia, at his
residence in Whitehall : Henry Hallam,. Esq.,
. Samuel Rogers, Esq., Professor Airey, the Astronomer
Royal, Rev. Dr. Buckland, Sir John Herschel, E. Land
seer, Esq., Sir Martin Shee, Sir Richard Westmacett,
Sir Robert Smirke, Charles Barry, Esq., (Architect of
the Houses of Parliament), Right Hen. J. W. Croker,
Win. H. Hamilton, Esq., Sir Robert Inglis, Bart., Sir
Robert Wilson, Sir Howard Douglas, Sir George Cock-
burn, Right lion. W. E. Gladstone, Lord Stanley, "Sit
James Graham, Right lion. H. Goulburn, Sir Edward
Xnatehbull, Sir henry Ilardinge: It is understood that
the King expressed a wish to meet some of the most dis-
tinguished men in the several departments of art and
science. Mr. Colnaghi, of Pall-mall East, was in attend-
ance at Sir Robert Peel's house, with several of the best
examples of the art of engraving of the English school,
which were inspected by the King of Prussia with the
greatest interest.
OttTON.—ln the parish of Orton there lived
two tradesmen, who were brothers—each happened to
be born in the same month of the year—to die at the
:same age, each having attained his 81st year—the one_
was married. seven years before the other, and died
seven years before the other. Not less remarkable is
the coincidence in their respective families—to each was
born six children—three sons and t'iree daughters—who
were all living after the death of their fathers—Kendal
Mercury.
The laws of England have been the subject of
eulogy to many sagacious and learned men. I Lind them
often dilatory, often uncertain, often contradictory, often
cruel, often ruinous.: Whenever they find a man down
they keep him so, and the. more pertinaciously, the more
earnestly he appeals tOithem. Like tilers, in mending
one' hole they always snake another. There is no
country in which they move with such volocity where
life- is at stake, or where property is 'to be defended so
slowly. Can it be wondered that, upon a bench under
so rotten an effigy of justice, sat a Saggs, a .;efferies, a
Finch, and a Page !—Law has become in England not
only the most expensive, but the most rapacious and
dishonest of trades.—Lander.
s PIRACY IN THE CIIAI;NEL.—The following
strange story is copied from the Morniny Ilerettl:—" A
most daring and unaccountable act of piracy was com-
mitted during Tuesday evening in Falmouth harbour.
by the crew of the brigantine Brisk, of Bristol, having got
the vessel under weigh and sailed (luring the absence of
the master, Capt: John Sims, who went on shore in the af-
ternoon in a boat belonging to another ship lying close by,
With two or three other captains ; and on going off, about
ten o'clock with the same party, found his vessel was seen
to have gone out of the harbour by the mate of the adjacent
vessel one hour before. Captain Sims proceeded imme-
diately to every part of the harbour to leeward, and onl;
gave up the search on the following night ; but no fur-
ther intelligence or clue could be obtained to throw light
on the mysterious proceedings of his people. The
Brisk is laden with a most valuable cargo, which is.
insured to nearly 20,0001. The ship's papers and the
Captain's clothes and money, are all exposed to the
crew's grasp ; but their, object cannot be divined. They
Were engaged merely for the run to Bristol, which
at times induces the 'Captain to conceive that they got
the vessel under sail, and started to accomplish tht
voyage` with or (rather) without him ; but he is in
such a state of mind that he is not able to remember any
thing from their conduct to deduce one single idea as to
the course they will pursue. The wind, subsequent to
"ilint, and all the fol!owing (lay was most violent at
they cannot, therefore, have got out of tle
Channel ; but either have put into a French port, or
have been driven up Cbannel, probably keeping her ot.
the English toast. Captain Sims expresses his deter
mination to prosecute them for piracy whenever ant.
wheresoever they may he feund. The crew consisted 0
/he mate, three men, and two boys, which is light for a
vessel pf 190 tons.
, WHo WOUND UP THE CLOCK?—On Tuestia%
morning St. Peter's clock was sot going. Why it may
he reasonably asked. If the Churchwardens were right
why not have the courage
stopped,
the proper time,
It
I ordering it to be s.tilq;
to persist in the act t
a,t have been
give an explanation of am defend their conduct
they were not right—if the Rate-payers
the three
. months
seriously inconvenienced during th©
by a contemptible desire on part of some individuals
to show their spleen and spite, do the parish officers who
gave in to a paltry feeling think they are. now:, to esk.ap,
s and make it up, because,
4.* unwhipped—" shake hat i
`forsooth, when the town has been disturbed and the
w Pure h scandalised by their sillyflconduct, they choose to
44tiDunlop, Esq., who had been Sheriff of
"lifirti°6l` going ?—Brighton
",;•et for 25 years, died at his house in Edits-
-I.N last, after an illness of about ten

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, Jan. 31.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE EARL OF STANFORD.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, gave judgment this morning
in this case, which was argued a short tune since upon
motion to take a petition of re-hearing, which had been
presented off the files of the Court. His Lordship, after
shortly adverting to the circumstances of the case, which
we have already. given, stated his opinion to be that the
parties were entitled to present a petition of re-hearing,
and dismissed the motion.

WOODCOCK V. RENNECK.
The LORD CHANCELLOR also gave judgment in this
case, which was an appeal for the judgment of the pre-
sent Master of the Rolls. The question in the case arose
under the will of a person named Linton. His Lordship
ordered the judgment of the C-ottrt below to be affirmed.

BLUNDELL V. GLADSTONE.
Our readers will recollect that a short time since this
case was argued before his Lordship, with reference to
the will of a gentleman named Blundell, who had
amassed a large fortune, and resided in the neigh-
bourhood of Liverpool. His Lordship intimated
on Saturday that he should this day state the course he
intended to pursue with respect to it, and accordingly
this morning, on taking his seat, his Lordship stated that
he considere the matter of such importance as, to render
it necessary to have the subject argued again by one
counsel on each side before two of the Common Law
Judges and himself upon the point that was raised at
the bar as to the admissibility of certain parole evidence.
Mr. Justice Matteson and Mr. Justice Me.ule had kindly
consented to attend the Court on 'any day that might
be convenient.

Thus the matter refits at present, as no day is fixtt
for the hearing.
This being the last day of ililary Term, the Court
proceeded with appeal motions, but no case of interest
came before his Lordship in the course of the morning.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT, Jan. 31.
(Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRA M. )

THE EAST INDIA COMPANY V. THE COOPERS' COMPANY

His HONOUR pronounced judgment in this case. He had
already expressed his opinion that the provision by the
plaintiffs of the ground in question, explained as it was
by the lease, and the expenditure of money 25 years af-
ter its commencement, could not, on this record, be
deemed acts of part performance sufficient to take the
case out of the operation of the Statute of Frauds ; and
that if the plaintiffs could not sustain their case upon
one or other of those grounds, he was prohibited by set-
tled rules of law from enforcing the agreement alleged in
the bill. That opinion disposed of the whole case, so far
as it depended upon any supposed original contract en-
titling the plaintiffs to a license to alien. But if the
Coopers' Company, with notice of the lease to Trinder, had
stood by and allowed the plaintiffs to expend their money
in building upon the premises, that might give the plaintiffs
an equity to an injunction preventing the Coopers' Com-
pany from availing themselves of the forfeiture ; but
further than that he could not go, unless the expendi-
ture could be considered as an act of part performance.
An injunction for such a purpose, however, was not the
object of the bill. The bill sought in effect to have it
declared that the plaintiffs ought now to be in the same
position as they would have been in if the Coopers' Com-
pany, after the execution of the case of the 30th of Oc-
tober, 1770, had granted a license to alien to Mr. Trin-
der, which, according to the decision in Dumper's case,
would have for ever discharged the proviso in the lease
against alienation. Being of opinion, therefore, that he
could not, in that suit, make any such decree, he ab-
stained from expressing any opinion whether the alleged
agreement, as set out in the bill, admitted of that con-
struction or not. The only question which he had then
to consider was, whether, when the bill was framed for
the specific purposes he had mentioned, he ought
to give relief founded upon an equity, which was not
set up in the bill. That the Counsel for the Coopers'
Company bad insisted he ought not to do, and, in
strictness he thought he ought not to do it in the parti-
cular case before him ; for, independent of the frame
and scope of the bill to which his attention had been
directed during the arguments for the Coopers' Com-
pany, the expenditure by the plaintiffs was immaterial,
so far as the equity of the plaintiffs' case depended upon
their right to the specific performance of an agreement;
whereas, upon the equity to which he thought they
might be entitled, that expenditure as a matter of fact,
and under the circumstances in which it took place, was
of the very essence of the case, and a decree founded
upon it might be a surprise upon the defendants, and
work injustice. He thought, therefore, that justice
would be best consulted by his dismissing the bill ; but,
being of opinion that the plaintiffs might have an equity
not set up by the bill, he thought the order of dismissal
should be accompanied by a declaration that it should
be without prejudice to any other bill which the plain-
tiffs might be advised to file.

DUKE V. APPLEBY.

His Magogß gave judgment in this case. It was a bill
filed by a mortgagee to foreclose a mortgage, the mort
gager having become insolvent, and his interest in the
equity of redemption being vested in the provisional as-
signee. It was admitted that a decree of foreclosure
must be made, and the only question was, whether the
provisional assignee was to have his costs paid by the
mortgagee, and the mortgagee was to be allowed to add
them to his debt. His Honour refused to allow the costs.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Jan. 31.
EX PARTE THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
Mr. TALBOT applied for a writ of certiorari to bring
up into this Court the inquisition taken by the Mayor
of Reading, at Reading, on the body of Richard Woolley,
who hail died at Reading orate inJuries he had received
inconsequence of the dreadful accident which occurred
at the Sonning Cutting on 25th December last. The
Coroner had levied a deodand on the carriage and en-
gines, which the Learned Counsel contended he had no
right to do, inasmuch as the accident had not occurred
within the boundary of his jurisdiction. •He might have
a right to hold the inquisition, but he had exceeded his
jurisdiction in levying a deodand. Application had been
made to Mr. Justice Williams on the subject on Satur-
day, and the Learned-Judge had directed the application
to be made to the full Court.
The COURT at first granted a rule nisi, but after some
time, the Judges having consulted together,
Lord DENmAN said the Court is of opinion that the
writ bad better go at once to bring up the inquisition.
The LEARNED COUNSEL then said he had made an
apOcation, in a case of a similar nature, to Mr. Justice
Williams, on Saturday, who had granted a rule nisi.
Perhaps, in that case, the Court would order the writ
to go at once also.
Lord DENMAN—You had better apply to Mr. Justice
Williams on the subject.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION AGAINST THE SUNDAY TIMES
THE QUEEN V. CHAPMAN AND OTHERS.

On the first day of this term, the Attorney-General
had obtained a rule calling upon the defendants, the
printers and proprietors of tho Sunday Times newspaper,
to show cause why a criminal information should not to
filed against them for the publication of a libel reflecting
on the character of Mr. Grove, one of the magistrates 01
the Greenwich Police Court. .

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL this' morning showed cause
against the rule, and said that the proceeding arose
out of certain proceedings which had been taken before
Mr. Grove, in his magisterial capacity, who had, in the
mouth of October, issued a warrant for ejecting Mrs.
Grahain from certain premises occupied by her, for
Which, however, no arrears of rent were due. On the
3d November, the Police-officer applied to Mr. Grove on
the subject of the execution of the warrant, and
stating that Mrs. Graham was near her confinement,
and requesting to know whether under those circum-
stance the warrant was to be executed. Mr. Grove
having had medical evidence tendered as to the dange-
rous state of Mrs. Graham, directed the warrant to be
xecnted. Mr. and Mrs. Graham were removed, and
week after Mrs. Graham was confined of a
dead child. It was in relation to these circum-
stances that the article in question, which imputed
to Mr. Grove, that he had acted with haste, and
inhumanity, that the article in question had been writ-
ten. Now, in showing cause against the rule, he would
first of all call the attention of the Court to the Act of
Parliament under which Mr. Grove had taken upon
himself to act. He contended he had no authority
whatever to act. The tenantry ought to have been
determined, and the warrant ought to have been
issued by the Justices in Petty Sessions assembled.
Now Mr. Grove was sitting alone, and although, under
the Police Act, one magistrate was enabled to do any
acts previously requiring the presence of two, yet it was
expressly provided that no magistrate should, under that
Act, be competent to do acts 'required to be done at Petty
or Special Sessions. He therefore conceived it, at all
events, extremely doubtful whether Mr. Grove had
any authority to act at all under that statute.
Ile, however, had thcught proper to do so, and had
issued his warrant on the 6th October, which warrant
he had not set out in his affidavit, and therefore it was
impossible to know whether it was in accordance with
the statute or not. Application had been made to Mr.
Grove in behalf of Mr. Graham, and the state of Mrs.
Graham was represented to Mr. Grove by a medical
man. Mr. Grove had ordered his warrant to be executed
nevertheless, and it would be for the Court to say, under
the circumstances, whether Mr. Grove was in a posi-
tion to apply to the Court for a criminal information ?
The article was a comment upon a report which had
appeared in one of the daily journals, of what had passed
before Mr. Grove on . the occasion in question, and
the truth of which report was verified by af-
fidavit. Mr. Macdonald, the surgeon, had ra-
prsented to Mr. Grove that the consequences
if the removal of Mrs. Graham would be the death of
!ither herself or her child. She was confined a week
After, and the child died. A letter from her husband
stating this fact had appeared in the Morning Advertiser,
not in the Sunday Tunes, and it was the comment on
that; account of which Mr. Grove complained. That
irticle had accused Mr. Grove first of having offered an
mwarrantable insult to the people of Ireland, which Mr.
,;rove had not attempted to deny; in fact, he admitted
.hat he had made use of unwarrantable language, and
herefore the only portion of the article which lie was
!ailed upon to defend was that which accused Mr. Grove
inhumanity, in regard to directing the removal of Mrs.
;raham. The truth of the report which had appeared
n the papers of what had , passed before Mr. Grove,
when Mr. Macdonald, the surgeon, had distinctly stated to
Mr. Grove that he should not consider it safe to remove
Mrs. Graham in her then state, and when Mr. Grove
had denominated such an opinion a trumpery excuse,
and had directed the order to be executed, was not at-
tempted to be denied. That statement had appeared in
the Morning Advertiser, and what the Sunday Times had
charged him with was with inhumanity to Mrs. Graham,
And with insulting conduct to Mr. Macdonald, and
Mr. Macdonald had pledged himself to the accuracy of
that report, and Mr. Graham had in the Morning Advertiser
of the lath of November inserted a letter, stating that
Mr. Slacdonald's predictions as to the consequences of
Mrs. Graham's removal had been fatally realised in the
death of her child; that letter had been ctu_oted in the
Sunday Times as having apper-ed in the Morning Ad•
cellist'', and yet Mr. Grove bad chosen to proceed