Star.
London, England, 1830-11-17 00:00:00

L4l W BBPORTS.

ROLLS COURT, Nov. 18.
JUDGMENT.—THE DECCAN PRIZE MONEY.

ALNXANDILI AND OTHIAII V. TEI DOLE or DIBLIANGTON AND

OTHICIL
His Honour the Master of the Rolls pee judgment this morning
in this important ease. The plaindfrs, the Messrs, Almada, a
house of great eminence in India, claimed by their bin to be Gadded
blr'iue of three deeds of assignment frost the late Marquis of
Hastings, to certain property which the Marquis would be modeled
to, tatter the warrant of the King for the distribution of the mite
tummy taken in the war between the Pindsrees. and caftan a/laths
Mahraus states. The defendants, with the excepdaa of gar T.
Hisbp, insisted that nothing passed to the *WIG in Teepees to the
three deeds of assignment, the subject of those deals being
liia
able in respect to the situation in which the peeped, meet attll
the
of the execution of the deeds. Sir Thomas Hislop conteaded that the
Marquis of Hastings had no property whatever in the subject of the
deeds. The first question to be considered in the !opinion of the Court
was, whether the prise money attributed by the Ring's warrant to the
Marquis of Hastings was or not the subject of arrangement in a Court
of Equity. His Honour did not consider it material obsdiss It was
the subject of sediment in a Court of Law, because the simmat of the
64th of George 111. declared that all pia mosey was to bins 1, the
captors, in such shares as the Kin, by some general tits, essu
direst, or as his Majesty mi; think to direct, its partkehr
case, by warrant nudes his manual Ina Court of Mgt isp sham
could be no doubt that the su ject of capture was aisiguable: The sob.
pet of capture might be termed a rated espetation, but If it Tem net so
according to the established rules of a Court of Equity, it ermild be Is.
unless there be With that
Wirchbletook it out of the general cestended rfungsra
ease that the property in question was sakes out of general tuls.
First, it was said that prise money was in the nature of military pay, and
therefor* could not be assignable. The Court was dear that it could

not be looked at in that view, since military pay was that which the
person employed was given by the crown as a compensation for the du-
ties he had dischargM towards it. Prise money could not be looked
at in that light ; it was an extraordinary bounty conferred by the
crown, and must be considered either as a reward for past services, or
as an excitement to future exertions. Another argument urged was,
that even if the principle of military pay did not apply, yet still
the property could not be conaidered as assignable, the Marquis of
Hastings being consulted by the government as to the mode of its
distribution. This proposition the court did not consider made out.
It was true, as a general principle, that the policy of the laws
could not permit a man entitled to share in the prise to
be the party consulted as to its distribution; but the diet of that
policy, if applied to the present case, would not be to render it un-
assignable, but would destroy the right of the party In the subject
altogether. The distinctions taken at the bar, in his honour's mind,
were far too subtle. and be felt no hesitation in declaring the share
of the Marquis of Meetings in the prise money was assignable in a
Court of Equity. With respect, however, to the share of Sir Tho-
mas Hislop, another view must be taken : he insisted that the mat-
quis bad nothing so assign. Sir Thomas Hislop's cams' bad, how.
ever, in the mind of the court, overlooked part of the one. which
would throw great dill:aides in their way. How could it be said,
under the King's warrant of IRO, that the Marquis of Hastin
bad nothing to assign, and that Sir T. Hislop was entitled to the
whole property P It was clear the Marquis of Hastings was entitled to
something. The claim of Sir Thomas was much too greend, and it bad
never occurred to his counsel to contend, that if he was not entitled to
the whole he was to part. nor had they ever hinted at the ascertainment
of his demand in this court. The minute made by the Lords of the Tres.
sury was fatal to Sir T. Hislop's demand, for it said, that wherever
the principle of actual capture could be applied, It was due to the cap-
tors that it should be applied ; that it was a principle the Down ought
I rather to extend than to- limit; and that that principle was applle
# poor Ito the booty taken at Poonah, Maiddpore, and N .Wherever
the principle of actual capture could not be the division of
booty ought to be extended to all the army em in the operations
of the war,and the minute recommended the to pat the booty
which Sir Thomas Hislop claimed to trustees—the Duke of Wellington
and Mr. Arbuthnot, who were appointed to that °See, and were to
make out a proper scheme for its distribution, which was to be sub.
mitred to his Majesty for his approvaL It had been contended, that
when once his Majesty had signified his approval of the scheme, that
that approval was binding upon him. The Court could not admit the
validity of that argument, his Majesty having the sole power of die.
tributing this fund, was fully at liberty, at any time, upon further
consideration, to revoke that approbation. The King, however, in
this we, had not departed from the scheme laid down by the trusties.
and upon that principle the warrant had issued. Taking the whole of
the case together, the Court was of opinion that Sir Thomas Hislop
bad no possible claim under the warrant of 1823, and it must therefore
pronounce a decree. declaring the plant/fib entitled to the benefit of their
deeds of assignment from the Marquis of Hastings. The effect, there.
fore, of his Honour's decision will be to give to the Messrs. Alexander,
a right to so much of the prise-money as will pay their demand upon the
late Marquis of Hastings.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 16.
CRIMINAL zarroanavrow.--Tus auto v. ADEN MINT.
- _

The A7rrontraw.Clittznat. moved foe a rale to slam; cause why
a criminal information should not be filed against C. F. Ailey, Cha-
tham:l for the publication of a libel on John Fame, Seq. M.P. for
Oxfordshire.

The AT TOINZY-13IIIEBAL stated, that application was made on
the affidavit of lir. lane, by which it appeared, that during the eke.
tics fa Oxfordshire last summer, a placard was published, with the
most offensive matters, injurious to the character of Mr. Fem.
—The Attorney.Oeneral said it was memory be should explain
the contents of the placard, by adverting to several imems. The
affidavit stated that r. Fans and Mr. Alward Mild married
two sisters I Mr. Fane had a daughter meeeisd to a gemlentan at the
bar, who died last year, and the objest of the libel was le se the at-
tendon of the freeholders of Oxiseaddre to a meet ellismitre impute-
tics east on Mr. JeddreU. Mr. Fame, seen eta the dm& eras bar-
rimer alluded to, received a lieontekleg a womb to the
following purport ;—" We the emexpected dientli of a
gentleman at the bar, cossested with Mr. Fess, is likely to kW
to light a can of a seem onemordinery Wow% relative to the
marriage of the deceased Pardwar. The adodnal offence spoken
of has been carried on far yeses pest." Mr. Fame stated that
he had no knowledge of way repeat to Aids the paragraph al.
luded, and he found it bed been avid bp suns persons as the
foundation of further Arnim vie IdmielL He received soon
after a letter from an Wields') wile Aped Wulf on Oxfordshire
Freeholder. It alluded to asindeleue repels oloombiodl to the pre.
judiee of Mr. Fans, and called upon him to ell isle hie character
Atnthe charge of hawks misdated with Ms. Edward Joddrel.
tsrtriter went on to say that Mr. Fans was Mod to investigate the
charge and defend iimelf. Mr. Fano, in his oillovit, mated that be
bad never heard the report &Hada to, and being anxious to dis-
cover the anther of the letter, be publiebed an advertisement in a
London paper throwing the writer that be would meet him and
give him Information on the subject. The advertisement did
net predate any discovery, but Mr. Fare received another letter
bowing the same signature, (Al Oxfordebbe Freebolder),~ in
whisk he was informed that be would be disgraced if he
ohne* dues the investipdon of the charge. At the election
for Oxibeddlime the writer endeavoured to carry his threat into exam.
Lion. Fin beam bed placards were sent from landon, and circulated
among the shams. The placards reiterated the report in the letters
of the Ozfesdaire Freeholder, end called upon the electors to de.
mend a full account and explanation of Mr. Fan's doodad in the
circumstances stated against im. " Let him deny," said the pla-
card, "that he is on terms of intimacy with once= of the worst
of crimes." Having found out the printer of the is London,
it wag ascertained that he had been employed y Mr. Adey, and
from the words contained in the letters and the Osage, there was
every reason to believe Mr. A&Py was the author of the libel. The
Attorney-General thought the CAOlt would me sufficient ground for
granting this application.
I Lord TUTIERDZIG—TIIIIIII a rule to chew cause.