The Sun.
London, England, 1829-06-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
(CONCLUDED FROM OUR PAPER OF YESTRADAT.)

LEIGH PEERAGE.

• Sir JAMES SCAELETT now addressed their Lordships o•.
behalf of Mr. Chandos Leigh, who felt little interest in the
title, but considerable interest as respected the estates, of
which he was in possession. The case, he believeci, he
should be able to show, bad its foundation, with respect
to the claimant in delusion. The Learned Gentleman
next proceeded to comment on the evidence which had
been offered in support of the claim, and contended that,
even from that evidence, no pretence had been made out
that the claimant was entitled to the dignity which be
endeavoured to obtain. The case, he said, had been got
up with great ingenuity and care, and the solicitor who
was engaged in it, he understood, was to have a per
centage ou the property, if the claim succeeded, of 300/.
With respect to the monument which was said to have
existed in Stoneleigh Church, and to which many wit-
nesses had spoken, different accounts had been given, not
only as to the inscription, but even as related to colour
and shape. In Dugdale's History of Warwickshire, of
which two editions had been published, the latter having
been published in the year 1730, not one word was said
about the Leigh monument, although the other monuments
in the chancel had been noticed. Webster's monu-
ment was only put up in the year 1768, 83 that
it could not, as a matter of course, he noticed
in the publication. A person might have a faint.
recollection of the shape of a window curtain, or a
monument, after a lapse of 20 years, and yet be able to
give some general description of it, but some of the wit-
nesses spoke of the exact shape of the Leigh monument,
and others said the inscription was partly in Latin and
partly in English. This was not a very common circum-
stance. Some of the witnesses said that it commenced
with the m ords, " To the memory of Sir Christopher
Leigh." Tile witness who was examined that day assured
their Lordships that it began in Latin—Hand peach! oh
hoc loco requiescat in pace. That witness, alter a lung
and painful cross-examination, was discovered to be an
attorney. He did not venture to swear too much. Pro-
bably he had learnt by experience that it was a dangerous
thing to do so. How he came to leave practising., that
profession and keeping a farm, which he said was profit-
able, did not exact!), appear. He would have it believed
that be had been induced to enter business at liirminghan►
by two young men. He could not swear that he bud not
read the Latin inscription in the newspapers. Their
Lordships would recollect that an ingenious clergyman,
named Ward, had written an inscription, supposing that
if a monument had existed such would probably be the
inscription. This had been sworn by a respectable witness.
He (the Learned Counsel) believed that much of what hail
been stated by the witnesses respecting the monument owed
its origin to the idle gossip of the neighbourhood after

the reward had been offered-. It was not uncommon to

hear stories related so often that people really believed in
their truth. One woman had expressed an opinion that
she had always believed the monument related to a Christ-
mas charity of the family. He thought that when the
Church was rebuilt, it was very probable that some tablet
containing an account of donations might be removed front
the south wall. Ile remembered two cases of pedigree
(in the course of his professional avocations) having been
attempted to be made out by monuments, and they both
failed. The last occurred about 23 years ago, when a
man named Angel, endeavoured to make out the claim.
The monument was produced before the Judges of the
Assize at Croydon, with a full inscription upon it. Some
gentleman, whose eye was more curious than others in
these matters, detected, as be thought, something mo-
dern in this monument, which was said to hare
been buried in the earth for ages. Artists were
called, who examined it, and it was satisfaetnrity
proved that the letters cut on the monument were
of very modern date indeed. Mrs. Leigh had been
charged with assisting in the removal of the monument,
by holding a lighted candle to the workmen so engaged.
She was ready to be examined at their Lordships' bar, and
she would prove that she was not even at the Abbey that
spring which the witness had stated. With respect to
the alterations in the cellar, they were done at the sug-
gestion of a gentleman who was then in the house. She
never gave any directions. about them whatever. The
whole story was a perfect fabrication. He had opened the
case generally, and he believed he should be able to show
that there was no pretence whatever for the claim. The
Roger Leigh front whom the claimant derived his claim
must have not only married, according to their accounts
at the age of 12 or 13, but have been at that period toe
father of children. This was not a very likely citentn-
stance. The Learned Gentleman, after adverting to the
nature of the documentary evidence which he should pro..
duce, concluded his address.

Mrs. Leigh, examined by Mr. DE A IV-4 am the
mother of Mr. Chandos Leigh. I visited the Abbey in
the time of Mr. Thomas Leigh. In September, 1806, I
went to the church with him. There was no monument
to the memory of Christopher Leigh. I never was there
in the spring of the year before 1813. Immediately on
his death I went there. There had been no alteration in
the wine-cellar. I was not present at any time when a
stone was carried into the cellar. I never saw a monu-
ment conveyed to the cellar. Upon toy oath I never wit-
nessed such a circumstance. I conversed with Mr. Leiglk
about the Webster family. I was only talieu once to Ow
church. I entered by the old porch. There was a stone
to the memory of a porter. I remember his pointing out
two lines, which I thought improper to be on a monument.
By the SOLICITOR-GENERAL-When I went into the
church I turned to the right, and saw the monument uf
Webster, who was High Sheriff. That was the only mo-
nument that I saw. There were several momments in
the chancel—family monuments.

Cross-examined y by Mr. ADAM—The principal object
that Mr. Thomas Leigh had was to show me tiro church.
I had Dugdale's History of Warwickshire the night before,
which I consulted. Mr. Leigh did not call my attention
to Webster's monument. There were insciiptiona of
charity on the walls. I rememher the bridge being built
there in Mr. Thomas Leigh's time. The foundation store
was laid :on the present Uing's birth-day, and I gave the
workmen five guineas to drink hie health. The inscrip-
tions, I believe, were upon the north wall.

Re-examined—Although I went to see the D.:,„hess
of
pecting Web-
wh eacsonnovte
ars:7r rp-s
Ous to make myself
tot
neighbourhood.
Mr. Mercer, a clerk the Prerogative Court of
asDteetiqrdu,
sal eifyna'tmserudi
yownitutohosnktehnpeti,afacamen,di i n
Canterbury, produce;; the will, dated the 6th January,
1671 (the w:2,1 of the first Lord Leigh.) (An examined
copy Was then put in.) He likewise prodaced letters of
administration of Christopher Leigh, dated the 14th
April, 1673 !, also the will (a copy of which was likewise
Put ito of Constance, the widow of Christopher Leigh,
dated 24th May, 1692: also a surrogates' warrant for
letters of administration to the goods of Thomas, the son
of Christopher Leigh, granted to Thomas Taylor the 29th
December, 1698 ; likewise the will of Thomas Lord Leigh,
dated the 26th October, 1710; and a codicil, dated sth
February following also the will of EdArird, the third
Lard Leigh, dated 26th July, 1737: likewise the will of
Sir Robert Cotton, dated the 30th October, 1710: also
the will of Charles Leigh, dated ,he sth ofJune, 1704.
Sir George Naylor, from the. Heralds' Office, pro uced
the book of the visitatioA of the county of Warwick, in
which the pedigree ef the Leigh family was inserted.
The signature of the second Baron Leigh. was attached to
the pedigive. The Visitation was ins::te in the year 1688.
Ivir, Mortimer, who was the adik to the late Mr. Hill,
of the second Baron, and itad no doubt that the signature
,curoents in the hand.writing
sitid that be had seen many de
was his.

lhe LORD C.:a.tweELLOIC decided that this could not be
receiied ac evidence.

On tile suggestion of Lord REDESDALE and the Earl of
-.ipiunz, it having been proved that it was the duty a the
signature
pwearss otnh
ettg' he
no u
itnoeok:igt
al ea
tureof inquisitionth eptaor
tsyeew thath o it
the document was received. theme it bore,
Sir George Naylor likewise produced the visitation of
Salop and Cheshire, in which the pedigree of Sir Robert
Cotton, of Combermere was inserted, dated 1663.
A bill, filed in Chancery in 1-434., for the purpose of
perpetuating evidence, was lunze produced, in a c;immission
of lunacy which was issw.:ll, against Edward Lord Leigh.
After some furthig remarks from Sir J'ABIES SCARLETT
and Mr. An,w., the further considera!:ion of the case was
postpot* to, 'buvsday se'nnight.
-

•
_l4.7ice LEOPOLD, entertained the Duchess of
'CENT and a select: party at dinner on Sunday, at Marlbo-
rough House. Among the company present were, Prince
and Princess ESTERHAZY, the Bavarian Minister, tl
Marquis and Marchioness of LANSDOWNE, Marquis of
CLEVELAND, Count and Countess MUNSTER, Earl and
Countess JERSEY, Earl and Countess TANKERYILLE, Earl
and Countess MoELEY, Earl DUDLEY, Viscount and
Viscountess ANSON, Dowager Viscountess ANSON, Sir
JonN and Lady SHELLEY, and Mr. and Mra. BARING..
His Royal Highness gave his second grand entertainment
last evening.
HARBOUR DuEs.--Yesterday our harbour
dues were let for the year at 19,190/., being a rise of 6SOI.
upon the rent of last year.—The tolls on the bridges were
let at an advance of 400/...... Glasgow Courier.